September, 01 2020, 12:00am EDT
WASHINGTON
Today, 145 groups sent a joint letter urging Joe Biden to ban all fossil fuel executives, lobbyists, and representatives from any advisory or official position on his campaign, transition team, cabinet, and administration. The groups ranged from progressive to youth to faith to environmental justice to climate groups and beyond, and cited new polling from Data for Progress and Fossil Free Media showing strong opposition to fossil fuel representatives serving in a Biden administration.
Click here to read the joint letter from 145 groups to the Biden campaign.
"My generation is on the line and Biden will lose significant support from young people, as well as everyone else concerned about climate change, were he to allow any fossil fuel executives, lobbyists, or other representatives onto his campaign or administration in any form. Joe Biden has made a commitment to an aggressive climate plan but no climate action commitment can stand in the face of fossil fuel influence. If Biden truly cares about young people like me, he will ban any fossil fuel representatives from taking part in his team," said Lana Weidgenant, Deputy Director of Partnerships at Zero Hour.
"Joe Biden can't address the climate crisis while listening to people taking checks from the fossil fuel industry like Ernest Moniz, Jason Bordoff, Ken Salazar, and Heather Zichal. Biden must act boldly in collaboration with grassroots leaders fighting for environmental and climate justice--which means ruling out positions for dangerous 'all-of-the-above' boosters whose time has passed," said Collin Rees, Senior Campaigner at Oil Change U.S.
"In a time of cascading crises that will require a just and thoughtful recovery, fossil fuel CEOs have shown they care only about their bottom line. Joe Biden put forward an ambitious plan to advance environmental justice, tackle the climate emergency, and build back better from the crises we face. But personnel is policy. Stacking the White House with fossil fuel industry executives and lobbyists is a Trump move, and Biden should know better. Our movements--and millions of voters--demand a president ready to look fossil fuel CEOs in the eye and tell them their reign is over," said Charlie Jiang, climate campaigner with Greenpeace USA.
"Joe Biden is championing the most aggressive climate and environmental justice plan of any presidential candidate ever. But if he hires fossil fuel representatives, he'll lose any credibility he has built among youth activists, frontline communities, and all of us impacted by the climate crisis. We are under no illusion that the same people who extracted massive wealth by creating this existential problem will have any real interest or ability to solve it," said Kaniela Ing, Climate Justice Director with People's Action.
"A leader cannot stand for the people and not protect the people. This current administration has provided us with the results of said behavior and it has not gone well. The people deserve to be protected over profit. Joe Biden's recent commitment to an aggressive climate plan that includes environmental justice protects the people. After making such a commitment it is expected that it would be fulfilled. The fossil fuel industry has not only done extreme damage to the environment it has also done extreme damage to black, brown, indigenous, and poor communities. We call on the Biden Administration and the DNC to partner with the desires of the suffering by saying no to having fossil fuel representatives in the Biden Administration," said Rev. Michael Malcom of the People's Justice Council.
"Look no farther than Pennsylvania--its citizens who have suffered the health, safety, and economic harms inflicted by shale gas development and its forests and farmlands that have been irreversibly scarred as shale gas infrastructure has metastasized to every part of the state--to see what happens when government and industry become almost indistinguishable from one another. We know all too well that we will not be free of fossil fuels until our government is. Joe Biden can and must be the first fossil fuel-free president," said Karen Feridun, co-founder of the Better Path Coalition in Pennsylvania.
"Biden's pledge to eliminate fossil fuel subsidies is sure to become an empty promise with fossil fuel emissaries whispering in his ear. We do not need a repeat of Obama's all-of-the-above strategy which gave us the largest expansion of oil and gas production in U.S. history," said Karen Grainey, co-director of Center for a Sustainable Coast.
"For forty years the fossil fuel industry has deceived the American public about the consequences of our dependence on oil and gas. They've continued their rapacious march toward disaster while people watch their health and that of their land and water deteriorate. As the earth's ecosystems begin to unravel due to carbon fueled climate change, this industry's only concern is to drain the last drop of profit from a dying planet. Allowing fossil fuel representatives to have a seat at the energy policy table will destroy any credibility the Biden administration might claim on energy and environment leadership. We ask that you stand with integrity and embrace the energy of the future," said Kevin Ionno, chair of the Climate Reality Project of Coastal Georgia.
"As Elizabeth Warren says, personnel is policy. When Bush and Trump were in charge, putting Big Oil executives at the decision-making table was an active policy choice that cost us dearly. We are now out of time with the climate crisis and need people at the table who will support--not slow walk--Biden's ambitious climate proposals in his Build Back Better plan," said Caitlin Lang, spokesperson for the Progressive Change Campaign Committee.
"We've all seen the disastrous policy produced by personnel in the Trump Administration. But it's important for Joe Biden to remember that the same was true for him and President Obama: If you personnel in charge who have been paid millions by the fossil fuel, nuclear and other polluting industries, you will get bad policy too. Real change takes courage, it takes effort, and it takes a change in staffing--anything else is the definition of madness," said Liz Butler, Vice President of Organizing and Strategic Alliances at Friends of the Earth Action.
"We are in a climate emergency. Even as Covid-19 rages on, fossil fuel interests continue to prioritize profits over people, lobbying for financial secrecy, bailouts, and environmental rollbacks. For the sake of our children, and the future of this country and our world, the Biden Administration cannot risk depending on fossil fuel interests to guide decision-making on climate policy," said Fatema Sumar, Vice President of Global Programs, Oxfam America.
"There is an inherent conflict between the interests of our people and the interests of corporate CEOs, and hiring fossil fuel executives to institute an environmental justice plan would be the equivalent of hiring a fox to run the hen house. Communities most hurt most by the climate injustice that fossil fuels have brought down on our world are those same marginalized people who are hurt most by every aspect of our current systems where corporate profits are prioritized over people," said Mohammed Missouri, Executive Director of Jetpac.
"This election is a matter of life or death for our generation, and Joe Biden and Kamala Harris can only win if young people show up to vote for them in historic numbers. It's time for Biden to show young people he will fight for our generation by publicly committing to keep fossil fuel executives, lobbyists, and consultants off his team. We cannot afford this polluting influence in a Biden campaign or administration," said Lauren Maunus, Legislative Manager, Sunrise Movement.
"As fossil-fueled fires burn and super-storms rage, the stakes could not be higher for Vice President Biden to listen to the people--not a handful of fossil fuel executives and frack-happy allies like Ernest Moniz. There's simply no way to fend off climate catastrophe and end environmental racism without tackling fossil fuels, and there's no path to phase out fossil fuel extraction so long as Big Oil has the White House on speed dial," said Brett Hartl, Chief Political Strategist at Center for Biological Diversity Action Fund.
"Thanks to the environment and climate movement's decades of tireless work to make decision-makers act boldly, the Biden-Harris campaign has adopted the strongest climate platform of any presidential ticket in history. However, real progress will be measured by relationship to communities most impacted and investments in the same. Fossil fuel representatives have no place at the table except to hand over their dirty profits to rebuild what they have broken. Any accomodation to fossil fuel executives will undermine the promise of our shared work and throw away our chances of a livable future in the climate decade," said Tamara Toles O'Laughlin of 350 Action.
Oil Change U.S. is dedicated to supporting real climate leadership, exposing the true costs of fossil fuels, and building a just, equitable, and renewable energy future in the United States.
LATEST NEWS
Amazon Won't Display Tariff Costs After Trump Whines to Bezos
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said all companies should be "displaying how much tariffs contribute to the total price of products."
Apr 29, 2025
Amazon said Tuesday that it would not display tariff costs next to products on its website after U.S. President Donald Trump called the e-commerce giant's billionaire founder, Jeff Bezos, to complain about the reported plan.
Citing an unnamed person familiar with Amazon's supposed plan, Punchbowl Newsreported that "the shopping site will display how much of an item's cost is derived from tariffs—right next to the product's total listed price."
Many Amazon products come from China. While U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent claimed Sunday that "there is a path" to a tariff deal with the Chinese government, Trump has recently caused global economic alarm by hitting the country with a 145% tax and imposing a 10% minimum for other nations.
According toCNN, which spoke with two senior White House officials on Tuesday, Trump's call to Bezos "came shortly after one of the senior officials phoned the president to inform him of the story" from Punchbowl.
"Of course he was pissed," one officials said of Trump. "Why should a multibillion-dollar company pass off costs to consumers?"
Asked about how the call with Bezos went, Trump told reporters: "Great. Jeff Bezos was very nice. He was terrific. He solved the problem very quickly, and he did the right thing, and he's a good guy."
Earlier Tuesday, during a briefing, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt called Amazon's reported plan "a hostile and political act," and said that "this is another reason why Americans should buy American."
Leavitt also asked why Amazon didn't have such displays during the Biden administration and held up a printed version of a 2021 Reutersreport about the company's "compliance with the Chinese government edict" to stop allowing customer ratings and reviews in China, allegedly prompted by negative feedback left on a collection President Xi Jinping's speeches and writings.
Asked whether Bezos is "still a Trump supporter," Leavitt said that she "will not speak to" the president's relationship with him.
As CNBCdetailed Tuesday:
Less than two hours after the press briefing, an Amazon spokesperson told CNBC that the company was only ever considering listing tariff charges on some products for Amazon Haul, its budget-focused shopping section.
"The team that runs our ultra low cost Amazon Haul store has considered listing import charges on certain products," the spokesperson said. "This was never a consideration for the main Amazon site and nothing has been implemented on any Amazon properties."
But in a follow-up statement an hour after that one, the spokesperson clarified that the plan to show tariff surcharges was "never approved" and is "not going to happen."
In response to Bloomberg also reporting on Amazon's claim that tariff displays were never under consideration for the company's main site, U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick wrote on social media Tuesday, "Good move."
Before Amazon publicly killed any plans for showing consumers the costs from Trump's import taxes, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said on the chamber's floor Tuesday that companies should be "displaying how much tariffs contribute to the total price of products."
"I urge more companies, particularly national retailers that compete with Amazon, to adopt this practice. If Amazon has the courage to display why prices are going up because of tariffs, so should all of our other national retailers who compete with them. And I am calling on them to do it now," he said.
Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar (D-Texas) on Tuesday framed the whole incident as an example of how "Trump has created a government by and for the billionaires," declaring: "If anyone ever doubted that Trump, and Musk, and Bezos, and the billionaires are all [on] one team, just look at what happened at Amazon today. Bezos immediately caved and walked back a plan to tell Americans how much Trump's tariffs are costing them."
Casar also claimed Bezos wants "big tax cuts and sweatheart deals," and pointed to Amazon's Prime Video paying $40 million to license a documentary about the life of First Lady Melania Trump. In addition to the film agreement, Bezos has come under fire for Amazon's $1 million donation to the president's inauguration fund.
As the owner of
The Washington Post, Bezos—the world's second-richest person, after Trump adviser Elon Musk—also faced intense criticism for blocking the newspaper's planned endorsement of the president's 2024 Democratic challenger, Kamala Harris, and demanding its opinion page advocate for "personal liberties and free markets."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Medicare for All, Says Sanders, Would Show American People 'Government Is Listening to Them'
"The goal of the current administration and their billionaire buddies is to pile on endless cuts," said one nurse and union leader. "Even on our hardest days, we won't stop fighting for Medicare for All."
Apr 29, 2025
On Tuesday, Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Democratic Reps. Pramila Jayapal of Washington and Debbie Dingell of Michigan reintroduced the Medicare for All Act, re-upping the legislative quest to enact a single-payer healthcare system even as the bill faces little chance of advancing in the GOP-controlled House of Representatives or Senate.
Hundreds of nurses, healthcare providers, and workers from across the country joined the lawmakers for a press conference focused on the bill's reintroduction in front of the Capitol on Tuesday.
"We have the radical idea of putting healthcare dollars into healthcare, not into profiteering or bureaucracy," said Sanders during the press conference. "A simple healthcare system, which is what we are talking about, substantially reduces administrative costs, but it would also make life a lot easier, not just for patients, but for nurses" and other healthcare providers, he continued.
"So let us stand together," Sanders told the crowd. "Let us do what the American people want and let us transform this country. And when we pass Medicare for All, it's not only about improving healthcare for all our people—it's doing something else. It's telling the American people that, finally, the American government is listening to them."
Under Medicare for All, the government would pay for all healthcare services, including dental, vision, prescription drugs, and other care.
"It is a travesty when 85 million people are uninsured or underinsured and millions more are drowning in medical debt in the richest nation on Earth," said Jayapal in a statement on Tuesday.
In 2020, a study in the peer-reviewed medical journal The Lancet found that a single-payer program like Medicare for All would save Americans more than $450 billion and would likely prevent 68,000 deaths every year. That same year, the Congressional Budget Office found that a single-payer system that resembles Medicare for All would yield some $650 billion in savings in 2030.
Members of National Nurses United (NNU), the nation's largest union of registered nurses, were also at the press conference on Tuesday.
In a statement, the group highlighted that the bill comes at a critical time, given GOP-led threats to programs like Medicaid.
"The goal of the current administration and their billionaire buddies is to pile on endless cuts and attacks so that we become too demoralized and overwhelmed to move forward," said Bonnie Castillo, registered nurse and executive director of NNU. "Even on our hardest days, we won't stop fighting for Medicare for All."
Per Sanders' office, the legislation has 104 co-sponsors in the House and 16 in the Senate, which is an increase from the previous Congress.
A poll from Gallup released in 2023 found that 7 in 10 Democrats support a government-run healthcare system. The poll also found that across the political spectrum, 57% of respondents believe the government should ensure all people have healthcare coverage.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Advocates Warn GOP Just Unveiled 'Most Dangerous Higher Ed Bill in US History'
"This is the boldest attempt we've seen in recent history to segregate higher education along racial and class lines," said the Debt Collective.
Apr 29, 2025
At a markup session held by a U.S. House committee on the Republican Party's recently unveiled higher education reform bill Tuesday, one Democratic lawmaker had a succinct description for the legislation.
"This bill is a dream-killer," said Rep. Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.) of the so-called Student Success and Taxpayer Savings Plan, which was introduced by Education and Workforce Committee Chairman Tim Walberg (R-Mich.) as part of an effort to find $330 billion in education programs to offset President Donald Trump's tax plan.
Tasked with helping to make $4.5 trillion in tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans possible, Walberg on Monday proposed changes to the Pell Grant program, which has provided financial aid to more than 80 million low-income students since it began in 1972. The bill would allocate more funding to the program but would also reduce the number of students who are eligible for the grants, changing the definition of a "full-time" student to one enrolled in at least 30 semester hours each academic year—up from 12 hours. Students would be cut off from the financial assistance entirely if they are enrolled less than six hours per semester.
David Baime, senior vice president for government relations for the American Association of Community Colleges, suggested the legislation doesn't account for the realities faced by many students who benefit from Pell Grants.
"These students are almost always working a substantial number of hours each week and often have family responsibilities. Pell Grants help them meet the cost of tuition and required fees," Baime toldInside Higher Ed. "We commend the committee for identifying substantial additional resources to help finance Pell, but it should not come at the cost of undermining the ability of low-income working students to enroll at a community college."
The draft bill would also end subsidized loans, which don't accrue interest when a student is still in college and gives borrowers a six-month grace period after graduation, starting in July 2026. More than 30 million borrowers currently have subsidized loans.
The proposal would also reduce the number of student loan repayment options from those offered by the Biden administration to just two, with borrowers given the option for a fixed monthly amount paid over a certain period of time or an income-based plan.
At the markup session on Tuesday, Bonamici pointed to her own experience of paying for college and law school "through a combination of grants and loans and work study and food stamps," and noted that her Republican colleagues on the committee also "graduated from college."
"And more than half of them have gone on to earn advanced degrees," said the congresswoman. "And yet those same individuals who benefited so much from accessing higher education are supporting a bill that will prevent others from doing so."
“In a time when higher ed is being attacked, this bill is another assault,” @RepBonamici calls out committee leaders for wanting to gut financial aid.
“With this bill, they will be taking that opportunity [of higher ed] away from others. This bill is a dream killer.” pic.twitter.com/UjTYvnOEKv
— Student Borrower Protection Center (@theSBPC) April 29, 2025
Democrats on the committee also spoke out against provisions that would cap loans a student can take out for graduate programs at $100,000; the Grad PLUS program has allowed students to borrow up to the cost of attendance.
The Parent PLUS program, which has been found to provide crucial help to Black families accessing higher education, would also be restricted.
"Black students, brown students, first-generation college students, first-generation Americans, will not have access to college," said Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.).
“We cannot take away access to loans, and not replace it with anything else, not make the system better. We know the outcome here—Black, brown, and poor students will not figure it out. Instead, only elite students from the 1% will continue to access education.”@RepSummerLee🙇 pic.twitter.com/oGbRH154Ed
— Student Borrower Protection Center (@theSBPC) April 29, 2025
As the Student Borrower Protection Center (SBPC) warned last week, eliminating the Grad PLUS program without also lowering the cost of graduate programs would "subject millions of future borrowers to an unregulated and predatory private student loan market, while doing little to reduce overall student debt and the need to borrow."
Aissa Canchola Bañez, policy director for SBPC, told The Hill that the draft bill is "an attack on students and working families with student loan debt."
"We've seen an array of really problematic proposals that are on the table for congressional Republicans," Canchola Bañez said. "Many of these would cause massive spikes for families with monthly student loan payments."
With the proposal, which Republicans hope to pass through reconciliation with a simple majority, the party would be "restructuring higher education for the worse," said the Debt Collective.
"It's the most dangerous higher ed bill in U.S. history," said the student loan borrowers union. "It strips the Department of Education of virtually every authority to cancel student debt. Eliminates every repayment program. Abolishes subsidized loans."
"This is the boldest attempt we've seen in recent history to segregate higher education along racial and class lines," the group added. "We have to push back."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular