

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.

From business leaders to recreationists, conservation groups to desert residents, almost 16,000 people have joined together in sending letters of support for permanent protection of some of the California Desert's most spectacular landscapes, recreation areas, and wildlife habitat.
Their calls to the Obama Administration to permanently safeguard these areas culminate the day before Senator Feinstein, Obama Administration officials, and other leaders host a community meeting on the proposed Mojave Trails, Sand to Snow, and Castle Mountains National Monuments. The hearing will be Tuesday, October 13 at the Wildlands Conservancy in Whitewater, California.
"More than 20 years ago the California Desert Protection Act raised the profile of California's magnificent deserts. We now have an opportunity to continue the vision of permanently protecting the austere grandeur and unique wildlife of our desert," said Joan Taylor, vice chair of the Sierra Club's California/Nevada Desert Committee. "People from across state, across the country, and even around the world come to experience the wonder of the California Desert. It's time to put Mojave Trails, Sand to Snow and Castle Mountains national monuments on the map."
This most recent tidal wave of public comments adds to those from elected officials, business owners, veterans, faith leaders and others who have banded together to push permanent California desert protections over the finish line after nearly a decade of public meetings and local input. Within the proposed monument areas are irreplaceable historic, cultural and natural wonders-- from Historic Route 66 and American Indian petroglyphs, to the threatened desert tortoise and the headwaters of the Santa Ana River.
"The California desert is home to some of the most treasured and imperiled plants and animals in America, including the threatened desert tortoise and desert bighorn sheep. The habitat and wildlife corridors here are irreplaceable, and it is essential that this unique part of our country be protected, especially in the face of a changing climate," said Kim Delfino, Defenders of Wildlife Director of California Programs.
"These rugged, beautiful California landscapes and the awesome plants and animals that live there will greatly benefit from the protections national monument status will give them, especially as climate change advances," said Ileene Anderson, a scientist with the Center for Biological Diversity.
Designation of these areas as national monuments would protect the desert's natural beauty and enhance recreation opportunities; it would also be a boon to the local economy. Already Death Valley and Joshua Tree national parks and other protected public desert lands contribute millions of dollars to the economy every year.
"The designation of the Sand to Snow, Mojave Trails and Castle Mountains National Monuments protect outstanding recreational opportunities, core habitat for iconic desert wildlife like bighorn sheep and desert tortoise and a tapestry of public lands which preserve important wildlife corridors between the national parks, Bureau of Land Management and Forest Service managed lands," said Seth Shteir, Desert Program Manager for the National Parks Conservation Association. "The new monuments will also raise the profile of the California desert as a destination for tourism."
The Sierra Club is the most enduring and influential grassroots environmental organization in the United States. We amplify the power of our 3.8 million members and supporters to defend everyone's right to a healthy world.
(415) 977-5500"Voters are responding to candidates willing to directly challenge concentrated power, rising costs, political corruption, and the growing disconnect between working people and political establishments in both parties,” said the head of Our Revolution.
After a strong night for progressive candidates in Democratic primaries across the country on Tuesday, things are continuing to look up for Maine's presumptive Democratic Senate nominee, Graham Platner, as he seeks to unseat Republican Sen. Susan Collins.
A poll out Wednesday from the independent firm Pan Atlantic Research showed the 41-year-old former Marine leading the incumbent senator by a clear margin of 48%-41% in November's general election among likely voters.
It's a three-point jump in Platner's favor since the last Pan Atlantic poll in March, where he led with 44% of the vote to Collins' 40%. According to the New York Times' poll aggregator, it's the seventh straight poll to show Platner with a clear lead.
Wednesday's poll showed Platner having striking success with women and independent voters, where he leads Collins by margins of 19 points and 13 points, respectively.
But crucially, Platner is also tied with Collins among non-college-educated voters, who broke hard for President Donald Trump in 2024, even as former Vice President Kamala Harris ultimately carried the state.
Platner's continued momentum—on a platform built around Medicare for All, tax hikes for billionaires, and an end to reckless and costly overseas military engagements—comes alongside a series of election results that Joseph Geevarghese, the executive director of the left-wing advocacy group Our Revolution, said demonstrated that populist economic messaging from working-class candidates can galvanize voters.
“The throughline across many of these races is that voters are responding to candidates willing to directly challenge concentrated power, rising costs, political corruption, and the growing disconnect between working people and political establishments in both parties,” Geevarghese said.
"What’s notable is that this energy is manifesting in very different political terrains—from deep blue urban districts to tougher working-class and red-to-blue areas," he continued. "Whether it’s Bob Brooks speaking to economic frustration in Pennsylvania, Chris Rabb unapologetically confronting establishment politics and endless war, or Ruwa Romman building a grassroots organizing operation in Georgia, these campaigns reflect a growing appetite for candidates rooted in economic populism, movement politics, and multiracial working-class organizing.”
“You, as a citizen, get one vote," said Sen. Bernie Sanders. "They, as oligarchs, get to buy the candidates.”
Two progressive lawmakers on Wednesday unveiled new legislation aimed at stomping out the existence of so-called Super PACs, the dark money groups that allow corporations and ultra-wealthy individuals to to spend limitless sums of money on US elections.
The Abolish Super PACs Act, introduced by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.), would cap Super PAC donations from individuals at $5,000 in an effort to end billionaires' outsize influence over the US political process.
According to a fact sheet summarizing the bill shared with Common Dreams, the legislation is necessary to close the "judicially created loophole" that resulted from the 2010 US Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United v. FEC, which allowed "staggering sums of money" to be spent in every election since.
"At a time when billionaire oligarchs and corporations are spending billions of dollars to buy elections and erode democracy," the document argues, "we must put an end to the corrupting influence of money in politics and ensure that American elections are decided by the people, not just the top 1%."
In justifying the bill, Sanders pointed to the unprecedented sums of money Tesla CEO Elon Musk spent to elect President Donald Trump in 2024, and to the projected record amounts being spent by billionaire-funded Super PACs in the 2026 midterm elections.
"You, as a citizen, get one vote," Sanders explained. "They, as oligarchs, get to buy the candidates. That’s not democracy. If we’re going to create a government that works for all, and not just the 1%, we have to end Citizens United, get super PACs out of elections, and move to public financing of elections."
Lee, who has in the past been the target of big spending from dark money groups, including those associated with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), decried Super PACs for allowing "limitless money to flow into our elections and influence every aspect of our lives."
"Our government is now undeniably held in the hands of the powerful and the wealthy few," she said. "I'm proud to be the lead sponsor of the Abolish Super PACs Act in the House to put democracy back in the hands of the people."
Joseph Geevarghese, executive director of Our Revolution, praised the Abolish Super PACs Act as essential to ending what he described as the "auction" of US democracy.
"Unlimited outside spending and billionaire-funded super PACs are one of the root causes of political corruption and public distrust in government," Geevarghese said. "If Democrats want to truly become the party of working people and seriously tackle affordability, corporate greed, and economic inequality, we have to break the grip wealthy interests and corporate money have over our political system."
The average household has already paid an additional $291 for gas since the war began and could spend $1,450 by year's end.
Americans' travel plans for this Memorial Day weekend have gotten a lot more expensive as a result of President Donald Trump's war with Iran.
A tracker released on Wednesday by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) projects that Americans will collectively spend an extra $3.5 billion on gas over the holiday weekend due to the global rise in oil costs.
The costs of gas have risen sharply, to above $4.50 per gallon across the US on average, as a result of Iran's restriction of travel through the Strait of Hormuz in retaliation for the war that the US and Israel launched at the end of February.
“Americans were already struggling with the high cost of living before this war started,” said Carl Davis, research director at ITEP. “The fact that their summer travel plans just got a whole lot more expensive isn’t going to help with that.”
Using publicly available data and price forecasts from the US Energy Information Administration, the Federal Highway Administration, and the US Census Bureau, ITEP determined that as a result of the war, Americans have paid about $39.6 billion in additional gas costs in less than three months since the war began.
It is projected that if current conditions continue, the total cost would be about $193 billion by the end of the year.
The average household has already paid an additional $291 for gas since the war began and could spend $1,450 by year's end. However, the cost varies by region, and the tool allows users to estimate their household's added cost based on where they live and how many family members they have.
The tracker only accounts for increased gasoline prices. It does not include price hikes caused by the war on other essentials, such as home utilities and food. Federal data released earlier this month showed that inflation has surged to its highest level since May 2023.
It also does not account for the amount of taxpayer dollars spent on the war. Pentagon officials said that it had cost $25 billion in April, though other independent estimates have placed the total cost much higher.
As Trump flails in response to rising prices, which have driven his approval ratings to their lowest low of his second term, he has proposed suspending federal gas taxes. Lawmakers in both parties have introduced bills that would temporarily suspend the tax, which adds an extra 18.4 cents per gallon of gasoline and 24.4 cents per gallon of diesel.
However, ITEP argued that these proposals would be "ineffective as they offer very little relief to families" and that they "also run the risk of straining public budgets at a time when governments at all levels are facing some of the same higher costs as the public brought on by this war."