

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.

Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) together with Sen. Merkley (D-Ore.), Sen. Markey (D- Mass.) and Rep. Barragan (D-Calif.) introduced legislation to close tax loopholes and eliminate other federal subsidies for the oil, gas, and coal industries.
Right now, American taxpayers are on the hook for about $15 billion in direct federal subsidies to the fossil fuel industry. In 2019 alone, the oil, gas, and coal companies that receive these handouts spent $190 million lobbying Congress - for an over 11,000 percent return on investment. At a time when climate change is already causing devastating harm around the world, it makes no sense for Congress to continue giving away taxpayer money to the hugely profitable and highly polluting fossil fuel industry.
"It's past time we end the billions of taxpayer subsidies to fossil-fuel companies," said Rep. Omar."Our focus right now needs to be on getting the American people through this difficult, unprecedented time, not providing giveaways to polluters. Taxpayers provide $15 billion in direct federal subsidies to the fossil fuel industry every year. That ends with this bill. I'm proud to be leading the fight for a greener future with my colleagues."
"At a time when we are dealing with the coronavirus pandemic and an economic decline, it is absurd to provide billions of taxpayer subsidies that pad fossil-fuel companies' already-enormous profits," said Senator Sanders. "Big Oil made more than $2 trillion in profits over the last two decades. We need more safe, healthy, good paying jobs--not more corporate polluter giveaways."
The End Polluter Welfare Act would end these absurd corporate giveaways by abolishing dozens of tax loopholes, subsidies, and other special interest giveaways littered throughout the federal tax code, ending energy resource giveaways to polluters on lands and waters owned by the American people, and prohibiting taxpayer-funded fossil fuel research and development - saving taxpayers up to $150 billion over the next ten years. The bill would also stop the Trump administration from taking coronavirus relief funding away from struggling businesses to bail out fossil fuel corporations.
In addition to ending domestic polluter welfare, this bill would end federal support for international oil, gas, and coal projects as a step toward fulfilling our responsibility to help the international community move away from dirty fossil fuels to clean sources of power. It would also guarantee the continued solvency of the Black Lung Disability Fund to ensure continued medical care for tens of thousands of working-class Americans who worked hard for decades to provide energy for the nation.
"It is ridiculous that the federal government continues to hand out massive giveaways to antiquated fossil fuel industries that are not only financially risky, but are also destroying our planet," said Senator Merkley. "And it's even worse when working families and small businesses are barely hanging on. Enough. It's time to put the health of the American people and our economy above the wish lists of powerful special interests, close these loopholes, and put an end to taxpayer subsidies for fossil fuels."
"We should be providing support for workers and those affected by Trump's criminally-negligent response to the pandemic--not bailing out the fossil fuel industry and propping up its profit margins," said Senator Markey. "Trump is only trying to add to these decades-long payouts for polluters, when we should be directing our resources to keeping people safe."
"In the midst of a global pandemic, a climate crisis and a nationwide call for racial justice, The Trump Administration is prioritizing corporate polluters over people," said Rep. Barragan."Policies like the End Polluter Welfare Act, and the ReWIND Act within it, are important steps to refocus the work of our government back to the people in their time of need."
Original cosponsors in the House include Reps. Ayanna Pressley, Mark Takano, Jesus "Chuy" Garcia, Grace Napolitano, Joseph Kennedy, Early Blumenauer, Rashida Tlaib, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and Jimmy Gomez.
The End Polluter Welfare Act is also endorsed by Alaska Wilderness League Action Alaska's Big Village Network, Build A Movement 2020, Center for Biological DiversityClimate Hawks Vote, Data for Progress, Democratic National Committee Environment and Climate Crisis Council, Earth Action, Inc., Earthworks, ecoAmerica, Food & Water Action, Friends of the Earth, Global Witness, Greenpeace USA, International Marine Mammal Project of Earth Island Institute, National Children's Campaign, Ocean Conservation Research, Oil Change U.S., Oxfam America, Progressive Democrats of America, Sierra Club, Stand.earth, Sunrise Movement, SustainUS, Texas Campaign for the Environment, and Turtle Island Restoration Network.
"Big Oil is already looking to exploit the coronavirus for even deeper giveaways from taxpayers. Today more than ever we need to protect people and the planet, not polluters and their profits. We thank Representative Omar and Senator Sanders for leading this important effort," said Lukas Ross, Program Manager at Friends of the Earth.
"Alaska has suffered from an economy primarily based on non-renewable mineral resource extraction, and the cancellation of contractually obligated royalties. It's a disaster," said Nikos Pasos, Alaska's Big Village Network.
"Build A Movement 2020 is a cross-partisan alliance of Americans who call for the passage of the End Polluter Welfare Act as soon as possible. We must would abolish fossil fuel subsidies by ending tax breaks and special financing so that fossil fuel corporations pay their fair share and stop ripping off the American public," said Dr. Paul Zeitz, Executive Director, Build A Movement 2020.
"It's long past time to stop subsidizing the planet- and people-harming practices of the fossil fuel industry. Our energy and resources must be put toward supporting the American people through the pandemic, and building the future we want to live in, not propping up the old economy that is so destructive and unsustainable," said Michelle Deatrick, Chair, DNC Climate Council.
"The End Polluter Welfare Act is a vital part of the move off fossil fuels. It's fundamentally absurd that we continue to subsidize the fossil fuel industry at the exact moment we need to ramp down the extraction and burning of coal, oil, and gas," said Mitch Jones, Policy Director at Food & Water Action. "We look forward to working with Representatives Omar and Barragan as wells as Senators Sanders, Merkley, and Markey to pass this legislation and cut off the flow of public dollars to corporate polluters," said Mitch Jones, Food & Water Action.
"The fossil fuels industry must change to avoid the worst effects of global warming, which is already upon us. This legislation is a giant step towards reining in the pollution from oil and gas development, and we wholeheartedly endorse it," said Mark J. Palmer, International Marine Mammal Project of Earth Island Institute.
"Subsidizing fossil fuel development right now is exactly the opposite direction we need to be heading. I became abundantly clear last March when oil future went seriously negative that the industry is collapsing, and is only propped up by a ponzi operation that should not involve our tax dollars," said Michael Stocker, Ocean Conservation Research.
"The End Polluter Welfare Act is critically needed legislation at a pivotal moment. We must stop propping up oil, gas, and coal with public money and invest in the people and communities most impacted by systemic oppression, COVID-19, and the climate crisis. We commend Reps. Omar and Barragan and Sens. Sanders, Markey, and Merkley for leading this bill, and we look forward to working with Congress to phase out harmful fossil fuel subsidies, prevent bailouts of big polluters, and invest in a sustainable future for workers and communities." said Collin Rees, Senior Campaigner at Oil Change International.
"During this pandemic, fossil fuel companies have already succeeded in rolling back environmental regulations, bending lending rules for loan programs, and taking advantage of misplaced tax breaks, all while laying off thousands of workers. Fossil fuel companies have been bailed out and propped up long enough at the expense of American taxpayers, communities and workers. It is time for Congress to roll it back. We thank Sens. Sanders, Merkley, Markey and Reps. Omar Barragan, and their co-sponsors in Congress for their leadership in eliminating these harmful giveaways to fossil fuel companies, and we endorse the End Polluter Welfare Act," said Daniel Mule, Senior Policy Advisor for Tax and Extractive Industries at Oxfam America.
"Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) wholeheartedly supports the End Polluter Welfare Act. We applaud Representative Omar, Representative Barragan, Senator Sanders and Senator Markey for standing up against Fossil Fuel corporations, demanding an end to tens-of-billions of dollars in subsidies to oil, gas, and coal companies, and protecting the interests of the American people and the planet," said Alan Minsky, Progressive Democrats of America.
"For too long, fossil fuel companies have subjected our communities to unacceptable pollution, and our tax dollars have paid them to do it. We applaud Senator Sanders and Representative Omar's proposed legislation, which works to put an end to taxpayer-funded handouts for corporate polluters," said Kelly Martin, Director of the Sierra Club's Beyond Dirty Fuels campaign.
"The fossil fuel industry should be paying up for fueling the climate crisis and causing horrific human rights abuses globally. Instead they are profiting from the COVID-19 crisis and being bailed out by the federal government. The End Polluters Welfare Act prioritizes people over polluters. Thank you Rep. Omar for your leadership on climate justice," said Swetha Saseedhar, SustainUS.
"We need to stop subsidizing polluters who are worsening our health and shift towards a clean economy with well-paid and safe jobs. The lives and health of too many Texans and other Americans are at risk now," said Robin Schneider, Texas Campaign for the Environment.
Read the bill summary here.
Read a section-by-section summary here.
Read the legislative text here.
Rep. Ilhan Omar represents Minnesota's 5th Congressional District in the U.S. House of Representatives, which includes Minneapolis and surrounding suburbs.
(202) 225-4755The report shows how a landmark civil rights law "is being cynically misused to squash political dissent and speech that advocates for the human rights of Palestinians," said one AAUP leader.
Under both the Biden and Trump administrations, pro-Israel and far-right advocacy groups have driven a surge of federal civil rights investigations conflating true antisemitism with university professors and students' criticism of the US-backed Israeli government and its genocidal assault on the Gaza Strip.
That's according to Discriminating Against Dissent: The Weaponization of Civil Rights Law to Repress Campus Speech on Palestine, a report published this week by the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) and the Middle East Studies Association (MESA).
"Our members, because of their expertise on the region, have long borne the brunt of allegations that falsely equate criticism of Israel with antisemitism," MESA president Aslı Bâli said in a statement. "Complaints like these penalize scholars for teaching basic facts about the region."
The report begins: "Over the past two years, the United States government has taken unprecedented steps to suppress campus speech—including scholarship, advocacy, and protest—opposing the state of Israel's genocidal war against the Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip. This crackdown has paved the way for profound transformations in US colleges and universities."
"A long-standing 'Palestine exception' to the First Amendment now threatens to give way to a new reality: Palestine is less an exception to academic freedom than it is a pretext for erasing the norm altogether, as part of an authoritarian assault on the autonomy of higher education and on the very idea of racial and gender equity," the document warns.
The analysis comes as President Donald Trump continues his sweeping attack, aiming to shut down the Department of Education, deport foreign students critical of Israel, and bully campus leaders into signing an "extortion agreement" for federal funding.
"In effect, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is no longer being used to address racial discrimination in higher education," Bâli told the Guardian, which first reported on the findings. "Instead, Title VI has been repurposed as part of the administration's broader effort to remake higher education in line with its right-wing political and cultural agenda."
AAUP and MESA found that "more investigations were opened in the last two months of 2023 (25) than in all previous years combined (24). Investigations broke record numbers in 2024 (39) and are on track to do so again in 2025 (38, as of September 30)."
"All but one of the 102 antisemitism complaint letters we have analyzed focus on speech critical of Israel; of these, 79% contain allegations of antisemitism that simply describe criticisms of Israel or Zionism with no reference to Jews or Judaism; at least 50% of complaints consist solely of such criticism," the document states.
The report highlights that "the Biden administration opened more antisemitism probes against colleges and universities (65) than for all other types of racial harassment combined (38)," and "the Trump administration appears to have halted racial harassment investigations altogether."
The federal probes "are producing a new system of government surveillance and monitoring of campus speech," the report notes, with over 20 schools agreeing to share internal data on discrimination complaints with the government.
Examining Trump's Task Force to Combat Antisemitism, the researchers found that the Department of Education "has continued to open very high numbers of antisemitism probes even as its staff has been slashed by the Trump administration," and "in its high-profile campaigns against prestigious universities, the task force has systematically ignored the procedural requirements of Title VI, unlawfully cutting off vast sums of funding before any meaningful investigation, let alone findings."
For at least 78% of the complaints examined by AAUP and MESA, pro-Israel and right-wing advocacy organizations—including those without any campus presence—served as complainants or represented them. Such groups have also been involved with private lawsuits intended to redefine antisemitism as including criticism of Israel and restrict such criticism at universities.
"Antisemitism lawsuits surged after October 7, 2023 (two filed before that date, 26 since)," according to the analysis. "No court has yet made a final judgment in favor of plaintiffs. In nine cases, Title VI claims have been dismissed, including on free speech grounds; nine lawsuits have settled, some of which resulted in even more draconian policy changes on campuses than government investigations."
AAUP general counsel Veena Dubal said that "the findings in this report underscore how the Civil Rights Act of 1964—which passed in response to years of nonviolent civil disobedience against racial injustice—is being cynically misused to squash political dissent and speech that advocates for the human rights of Palestinians."
"This is a perverse outcome," Dubal declared, as AAUP prepares for Friday protests pressuring leaders at over 100 institutions to reject the president's "Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education" and make schooling more affordable.
As AAUP president Todd Wolfson said in a statement about the day of action earlier this week, "From attacks on academic freedom in the classroom to the defunding of lifesaving scientific research to surveilling and arresting peaceful student protesters, Trump's higher education policies have been catastrophic for our communities and our democracy."
"We're excited to help build a coalition of students and workers united in fighting back for a higher education system that is accessible and affordable for all and serves the common good," he added. Other supporting groups include Campus Climate Network, College Democrats of America, Gen-Z for Change, Indivisible, Jewish Voice for Peace, March for Our Lives, and Sunrise Movement.
"Big Tech is building a mountain of speculative infrastructure," warned one critic. "Now it wants the US government to prop up the bubble before it bursts."
Tech giant OpenAI generated significant backlash this week after one of its top executives floated potential loan guarantees from the US government to help fund its massive infrastructure buildout.
In a Wednesday interview with The Wall Street Journal, OpenAI chief financial officer Sarah Friar suggested that the federal government could get involved in infrastructure development for artificial intelligence by offering a "guarantee," which she said could "drop the cost of the financing" and increase the amount of debt her firm could take on.
When asked if she was specifically talking about a "federal backstop for chip investment," she replied, "Exactly."
Hours after the interview, Friar walked back her remarks and insisted that "OpenAI is not seeking a government backstop for our infrastructure commitments," while adding that she was "making the point that American strength in technology will come from building real industrial capacity, which requires the private sector and government playing their part."
Despite Friar's walk-back, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman said during a podcast interview with economist Tyler Cowen that released on Thursday that he believed the government ultimately could be a backstop to the artificial intelligence industry.
"When something gets sufficiently huge... the federal government is kind of the insurer of last resort, as we've seen in various financial crises," he said. "Given the magnitude of what I expect AI's economic impact to look like, I do think the government ends up as the insurer of last resort."
Friar and Altman's remarks about government backstops for OpenAI loans drew the immediate ire of Robert Weissman, co-president of consumer advocacy organization Public Citizen, who expressed concerns that the tech industry may have already opened up talks about loan guarantees with President Donald Trump's administration.
"Given the Trump regime’s eagerness to shower taxpayer subsidies and benefits on favored corporations, it is entirely possible that OpenAI and the White House are concocting a scheme to siphon taxpayer money into OpenAI’s coffers, perhaps with some tribute paid to Trump and his family." Weissman said. "Perhaps not so coincidentally, OpenAI President Greg Brockman was among the attendees at a dinner for donors to Trump’s White House ballroom, though neither he nor OpenAI have been reported to be actual donors."
JB Branch, Public Citizen’s Big Tech accountability advocate, said even suggesting government backstops for OpenAI showed that the company and its executives were "completely out of touch with reality," and he argued it was no coincidence that Friar floated the possibility of federal loan guarantees at a time when many analysts have been questioning whether the AI industry is an unsustainable financial bubble.
"The truth is simple: the AI bubble is swelling, and OpenAI knows it," he said. "Big Tech is building a mountain of speculative infrastructure without real-world demands or proven productivity-enhancing use cases to justify it. Now it wants the US government to prop up the bubble before it bursts. This is an escape plan for an industry that has overpromised and underdelivered."
An MIT Media Lab report found in September that while AI use has doubled in workplaces since 2023, 95% of organizations that have invested in the technology have seen "no measurable return on their investment."
Concerns about an AI bubble intensified earlier this week when investor Michael Burry, who famously made a fortune by short-selling the US housing market ahead of the 2008 financial crisis, revealed that his firm was making bets against Nvidia and Palantir, two of the biggest players in the AI industry.
This has led to some AI industry players to complain that markets and governments are undervaluing their products.
During her Wednesday WSJ interview, for instance, Friar complained that "I don’t think there’s enough exuberance about AI, when I think about the actual practical implications and what it can do for individual."
Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang, meanwhile, told the Financial Times that China was going to beat the US in the race to develop high-powered artificial intelligence because the Chinese government offers more energy subsidies to AI and doesn't put as much regulation on AI development.
Huang also complained that "we need more optimism" about the AI industry in the US.
Investment researcher Ross Hendricks, however, dismissed Huang's warning about China winning the AI battle, and he accused the Nvidia CEO of seeking special government favors.
"This is nothing more than Jensen Huang foaming the runway for a federal AI bailout in coordination with OpenAI's latest plea in the WSJ," he commented in a post on X. "These grifters simply can't be happy making billions from one of the greatest investment manias of all time. They'll do everything possible to loot taxpayers to prevent it from popping."
"Congress needs to assert its constitutional power to prohibit use of military force," stressed one of the war powers resolution's co-sponsors.
As the Trump administration argues that it can continue its extrajudicial assassination spree of alleged drug runners on the high seas without congressional approval, the US Senate is set to vote Thursday afternoon on a bipartisan war powers resolution that would block military action against Venezuela absent lawmakers' assent—as required by law.
Last month, Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Rand Paul (R-Ky.), and Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) introduced a resolution to block US military "hostilities within or against Venezuela that have not been authorized by Congress," citing the War Powers Resolution of 1973 and Congress' sole ability to declare war under the Constitution.
Posting on X ahead of Thursday's vote, Schiff said that the measure's co-sponsors "are forcing a bipartisan vote to block the administration from dragging this country into war in South America."
"Congress needs to assert its constitutional power to prohibit use of military force," he added.
Trump has PUBLICLY threatened land strikes in Venezuela—after already killing at least 66 unknown people on boats in the Caribbean—unnecessarily putting the U.S. at risk of war. Here’s what @schiff.senate.gov, Senator Paul, and I are doing about it:youtube.com/shorts/TQKsF...
[image or embed]
— Senator Tim Kaine (@kaine.senate.gov) November 6, 2025 at 8:29 AM
Matt Duss, executive vice president of the Center for International Policy, a Washington, DC-based think tank, said Thursday that President Donald Trump "talks about himself as a historic peacemaker while continuing to order reckless military strikes and threatening to invade countries around the world."
"His actions violate both the Constitution and his own promises to be an anti-war president," he added.
This is the second time Kaine and Schiff have tried to introduce a Venezuela war powers resolution. Last month, Democratic Sen. John Fetterman joined his GOP colleagues in voting down a similar measure. Paul joined Democrats and Independent Sens. Bernie Sanders (Vt.) and Angus King (Maine) in voting for the legislation.
Since September 2, Trump has overseen 16 reported attacks on vessels allegedly transporting drugs in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean off the coast of South America, killing at least 67 people. Venezuelan and Colombian officials, as well as relatives of some of the slain men, assert that some victims were fishers and condemned the attacks as war crimes.
Trump—who deployed an armada of warships and thousands of troops off the coast of Venezuela—has also approved covert CIA action and, along with senior administration officials, threatened to attack targets on land inside the oil-rich country, which has long been subjected to US meddling, regime change, and deadly sanctions. Late last month, the government of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro said that his country’s security forces captured a group of CIA-aligned mercenaries engaged in a "false-flag attack" against the nation.
The War Powers Resolution of 1973—also known as the War Powers Act—was enacted during the Nixon administration at the tail end of the US war on Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos to empower Congress to check the president’s war-making authority. The law requires the president to report any military action to Congress within 48 hours and mandates that lawmakers must approve troop deployments after 60 days.
That 60-day door closed on Monday. However, according to The Washington Post, Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel T. Elliott Gaiser told lawmakers this week that Trump is not bound by the War Powers Resolution, as the administration does not believe that the boat strikes legally meet the definition of "hostilities" because the victims of the attacks aren't fighting back.
The dubious argument that acts of US military aggression aren't hostilities isn't new—the Obama administration asserted similar immunity from the War Powers Resolution when it decided to attack Libya in 2011, leading to the ouster of longtime leader Muammar Gaddafi and over a decade of enduring conflict and division.
As Brian Finucane, a former State Department legal adviser who is now a senior official at the International Crisis Group, wrote for Just Security this week:
There are many flaws with the Trump administration’s reported interpretation of hostilities. As indicated in the legislative history, Congress understood the term “hostilities” to apply broadly, more broadly than “armed conflict.” The Obama administration’s prior attempt to restrictively interpret the term garnered strong bipartisan congressional opposition...
That the Trump administration would resort to creative lawyering to circumvent the limits of the War Powers Resolution is hardly a surprise... It nonetheless is yet another legal abuse and arrogation of power by the executive. And it is a power grab in the service of killing people outside the law based solely on the president’s own say-so.
"Congress needs to push back against this attempt by the White House to further encroach upon its constitutional prerogatives on the use of military force," Finucane added. "The legislative branch should reject the executive’s strained legal interpretation of the War Powers Resolution, including possibly in legislation. Congress should also continue efforts to halt these killings at sea and block an unlawful attack on Venezuela."