

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.

In response to news that TansCanada will be filing a lawsuit under NAFTA in response to the Obama Administration's rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline, 350.org issued the following reactions:
Bill McKibben, 350.org co-founder:
In response to news that TansCanada will be filing a lawsuit under NAFTA in response to the Obama Administration's rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline, 350.org issued the following reactions:
Bill McKibben, 350.org co-founder:
"This isn't going to get the pipeline built, and it is going to remind Americans how many of our rights these agreements give away. The idea that some trade agreement should force us to overheat the planet's atmosphere is, quite simply, insane. But the oil industry is so used to always winning that I fear this kind of tantrum is predictable. Corporate power is truly out of control."
Jason Kowalski, 350.org Policy Director:
"This won't actually help build the pipeline, too late for that. It's just a greedy and desperate move by TransCanada to try and salvage some of the money they wasted on this ridiculous boondoggle.
The suit is a reminder that we shouldn't be signing new trade agreements like the Trans Pacific Partnership that allow corporations to sue governments that try and keep fossil fuels in the ground.
TransCanada is wrong about the State Department's analysis of the pipeline. The Department was clear that under a low oil price scenario like the one we're currently facing the pipeline would significantly increase emissions. You can't transport 800,000 barrels a day of the dirtiest fuel on the planet and not have a climate impact.
The Obama Administration was completely justified in rejecting the pipeline on climate grounds. They should now extend the same climate test applied to Keystone XL to all future infrastructure projects rather than taking each on a case by case basis. That would send a clear signal to industry and investors that business as usual is no longer acceptable.
The fight against Keystone XL fired up the climate movement like never before. We're more than happy to keep thrashing it out with the likes of TransCanada-it will only bring more people into the struggle to keep fossil fuels in the ground."
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.
As its workers fight for a living wage and for the company to address hundreds of labor violation complaints, Starbucks Workers United says it's prepared for the "biggest and longest" strike in the company's history.
As hundreds of Starbucks workers go on strike across the US to protest the company's unfair labor practices, its union is telling customers to boycott the company in hopes of pressuring it to return to the bargaining table to negotiate its first union contract.
“As of today, Starbucks workers across the country are officially ON STRIKE,” said Starbucks Workers United, the union representing nearly 10,000 baristas, on social media Thursday. “We’re prepared for this to become the biggest and longest [unfair labor practices] strike in Starbucks history.”
The union implored customers: "DON'T BUY STARBUCKS for the duration of our open-ended ULP strike!"
The strike comes after negotiations between the union and the company stalled out in April. Last week, 92% of union baristas voted to authorize a strike as the company's lucrative holiday season began. They are hoping to turn the company’s annual “Red Cup Day,” during which it gives out free reusable cups to customers, into a “Red Cup Rebellion.”
The union says three of its core demands remain unmet. It has called for the company to address "rampant" understaffing, which it says has led to longer wait times for customers and overwhelmed staff, while simultaneously leaving workers without enough hours to afford the cost of living.
It also seeks higher take-home pay for workers. Starting baristas make just over $15 per hour, which data from MIT shows is not enough to afford the cost of living in any US state when working 40 hours a week. According to the union, most Starbucks workers receive fewer than 20 hours of work per week, rendering them ineligible for benefits.
The union has drawn a contrast between its workers' pay, which averages less than $15,000 a year, and that of CEO Brian Niccol, who raked in a total compensation package of $96 million in just four months after taking over last year.
"Too many of us rely on SNAP or Medicaid just to get by, and most baristas still don’t earn a livable wage. In a majority of states, starting pay is just $15.25 an hour—and even then, we’re not getting the 20 hours a week we need to qualify for benefits," said Jasmine Leli, a barista and strike captain from Buffalo, New York, where the first Starbucks store in the nation voted to unionize back in 2021.
The company has gone nearly four years without recognizing it. While it claims to have engaged with the union in "good faith," the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has found Starbucks guilty of over 500 labor law violations, making it the worst violator in modern history.
These have included illegal firings and disciplinary actions against union organizers, the illegal withholding of wages and benefits, threats to close stores that unionize, and illegal surveillance of employees. More than 700 unfair labor practice charges made against the company remain unresolved, including 125 of them filed since January.
According to an estimate from the Strategic Organizing Center, Starbucks' union-busting had cost the company more than $240 million through February 2024. That money was lost in the form of legal fees and payments to consultants, as well as productivity lost due to anti-union store closures and captive audience meetings.
“Things have only gone backwards at Starbucks under Niccol’s leadership," Leli said. "But a fair union contract and the resolution of hundreds of unfair labor practice charges are essential to the company’s turnaround."
The union has argued that in order to meet their demands for a fair contract, it would cost less than a single day's sales.
The strike begins just days after 85 US lawmakers—led by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.)—sent letters demanding that the company stop union-busting and negotiate a fair deal with its employees.
"Starbucks is not a poor company," the Senate letter said to Niccol. "Last year, Starbucks made over $3.6 billion in profit and paid out nearly $5 billion in stock buybacks and dividends. In fact, in the first three quarters of the year, Starbucks made $1.7 billion in profit and paid out over $2 billion in dividends. Last year, you made $95 million in compensation for the four months you worked in 2024, roughly 6,666 times more than what your average worker was paid for the entire year."
"Despite that extravagant spending on executives and shareholders, Starbucks refuses to reach an agreement with its own workers even though you are less than one average day’s sales apart from a contract," it continued. "Starbucks must reverse course from its current posture, resolve its existing labor disputes, and bargain a fair contract in good faith with these employees."
The strike will begin at 65 stores across more than 40 US cities, with rallies scheduled in New York, Philadelphia, Chicago, Columbus, and Anaheim, among other locations. The union said the strike is "open-ended," with no set end date, and that baristas across more than 550 unionized stores across the country are prepared to join in.
“If Starbucks keeps stonewalling a fair contract and refusing to end union-busting, they’ll see their business grind to a halt,” said Michelle Eisen, a spokesperson for Starbucks Workers United, who has worked as a barista for 15 years. “'No contract, no coffee' is more than a tagline—it’s a pledge to interrupt Starbucks’ operations and profits until a fair union contract and an end to unfair labor practices are won."
"The wealthy and powerful operate with a set of rules totally unrecognizable to the rest of us."
Although Democrats in the US House of Representatives have used newly unearthed emails from the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein as a cudgel against President Donald Trump, many observers have noted that the full trove of messages also implicates multiple members of the American ruling class as complicit in a criminal conspiracy.
In particular, the emails reveal that Epstein maintained friendly ties with several people with enormous influence in US politics even after he served a prison sentence for soliciting a minor.
Among the prominent elites who maintained contact with Epstein were Larry Summers, former president of Harvard University and director of the National Economic Council under President Barack Obama; right-wing billionaire Peter Thiel, whose financing helped launch Vice President JD Vance's political career; right-wing podcaster and former Trump administration official Steve Bannon; and Kathryn Ruemmler, former Obama White House counsel and current attorney for investment banking giant Goldman Sachs.
Writing on Bluesky, political scientist Ed Burmila argued that the true scandal surrounding Epstein isn't just about one person, but a "crisis of elite impunity" in which the rich and powerful will brush off the crimes committed by their peers, even if they involve the serial sexual abuse of underage girls.
"The crisis of elite impunity that is ruining our society cannot be more clearly or convincingly demonstrated than with the fact that all of these people wrote all this stuff into an email and hit send," he said. "Some of these people are lawyers; the rest are intimately (phrasing) familiar with courtrooms and lawyers in their professional lives. They didn't put this stuff in writing because they're naive or ignorant; they did it because they have no fear of consequences. None at all."
Burmila's argument was echoed by commentator David Kurtz, who wrote at Talking Points Memo that reading the Epstein emails left him "astonished not so much by the chumminess he enjoyed with elites even after he’d served time for soliciting prostitution with a minor but by their flagrantness, their casual disregard, and their indifference to consequence."
Kurtz argued that this level of ruling-class impunity symptomatic of the deep rot inside American political, legal, and academic institutions.
"It is the same impunity that got us Trump," he wrote. "Like Epstein, Trump built a career on a transactional chumminess, mutual self-indulgence, and an alarmingly high tolerance level for misbehavior by the layers of political, business, media, and cultural elites surrounding him."
Leah Greenberg, co-director of Indivisible, shared Kurtz's essay on her Bluesky account and declared the Epstein scandal "a story about total elite impunity, how the wealthy and powerful operate with a set of rules totally unrecognizable to the rest of us."
MSNBC host Chris Hayes also thought the Epstein emails showed American elites in an unflattering light, and he observed on Bluesky that many of Epstein's correspondents showered him with "fawning and flattery," even though he comes across as "a pompous, sub-literate lech."
"Lots of people say: that’s because he’s blackmailing them, but I don’t think he’s blackmailing Kathy Ruemmler!" Hayes wrote. "I don’t think that’s what explains it. I think the banal answer is: he’s very rich and powerful and good at networking and this is how people act around very rich and powerful people."
Although Epstein was only ever criminally convicted on one charge of soliciting a minor in 2008, he was subsequently indicted in 2019 on charges of engaging in a broad sex-trafficking conspiracy involving dozens of teenage girls. Epstein would die in prison before he could face trial for these charges, and law enforcement officials would subsequently claim that he took his own life.
Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's longtime accomplice, is currently serving a 20-year prison sentence for her role in helping Epstein groom and abuse underage victims.
"While President Trump claimed that he would bring down prices, the reality is that Americans have seen their costs soar even higher since he took office."
Democrats on the congressional Joint Economic Committee released a report Thursday detailing how much more the average American family in every US state is having to spend monthly to cover the rising costs of food, shelter, energy, and other necessities under the leadership of President Donald Trump.
The panel released its report on the same day the Trump administration was supposed to publish the October Consumer Price Index (CPI) data. The closely watched CPI report was delayed by the shutdown, and the Trump White House said Wednesday that it's likely the figures will never be released.
Deploying the same methodology that Republicans used to track cost increases under former President Joe Biden, JEC Democrats found that the average US family is spending roughly $700 more per month on basic items since Trump took office in January, pledging to bring prices "way down."
"While President Trump claimed that he would bring down prices, the reality is that Americans have seen their costs soar even higher since he took office," said Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-NH), the JEC's ranking member. "As families across the country spend more to pay their bills and put food on the table, Democrats and Republicans should be working together to lower costs. Instead, President Trump is pushing ahead with reckless tariffs that continue to fuel inflation and drive prices up even higher."
In some states—including Alaska, California, and Colorado—average families are spending over $1,000 more per month to maintain their living standards as costs continue to rise, in part due to Trump's erratic tariff regime.
The report's findings run directly counter to Trump's triumphant rhetoric on inflation and the US economy more broadly.
CNN's Daniel Dale noted earlier this week that Trump has been on a "lying spree about inflation," falsely claiming that "every price is down" and that "everybody knows that it's far less expensive under Trump than it was under Sleepy Joe Biden."
"None of that is true," Dale wrote. "Prices are up during this administration. Average prices were 1.7% higher in September than they were in January, according to the most recent figures from the federal Consumer Price Index, and 3% higher than they were in September 2024. There has been inflation every month of the term, and far more products have gotten costlier than cheaper."
"Inflation not only very much continues to exist but has been accelerating since the spring," Dale added. "As of September, the year-over-year inflation rate had increased for five consecutive months."