

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.

For the first time in history, over 400 public financial institutions from around the world gathered to discuss policies that, if adopted, would ensure a just and sustainable transition to a better future for all. In the context of the COVID-19 crisis, all participating banks agreed to work to align with the Paris Agreement, the sustainable development goals and biodiversity goals. But they fell short to demonstrate how these principles would translate into concrete and measurable commitments. Approximately $2 trillion in public money should now be being put into real actions to address the health, economic and planetary crises the world faces, but campaigners are critical about the outcomes of the Finance in Common Summit (FiC) and warn that this was yet another wasted opportunity.
Taking place 11-12 November 2020, the summit shed light on the crucial role of Public Development Banks (PDBs) in enacting sustainable recovery measures that will have a long-term impact on the planet and communities. A joint statement signed by over 320 civil society organisations called on PDBs to devote their considerable financial resources and influence towards building a just, equitable, inclusive and sustainable future for all. But the clear lack of concrete time-bound pledges made the FiC commitments well below the level of ambition that was expected from public development banks.
"With their public mandate, development banks have a great responsibility in making sure that investments directly benefit communities. We urge them to stop funding fossil fuel projects, and place human rights, racial and climate justice at the core of their actions. They must seize the opportunity to lead the way and initiate a deep and rapid shift in the way they operate, in line with a Just Recovery for all. But they are choosing to lag behind. Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals, limiting global warming to 1.5degC, protecting communities and ensuring climate justice should be the key drivers of action for all sectors of our society over the coming decade," says Clemence Dubois, France Team Leader at 350.org.
The Finance in Common Summit is one step of many. One month from now, on December 12th, the Paris Agreement will be celebrating its 5th anniversary. The past five years have not seen enough climate action. G20 nations are still providing three times as much money each year to fossil fuels as they are to clean energy, and this has not changed despite their public commitments under the Paris climate deal. This occasion should be a moment to speed up action towards truly implementing its goals, including to align financial flows with "pathways to low greenhouse gas emissions and climate resilient development."
In the leadup to COP26, where finance will be a key topic, civil society groups call on financial institutions to lead the way and increase their support for a just transition away from fossil fuels. They must increase the share of finance dedicated to climate action to assist countries in accelerating their own low-carbon development pathways, commit to fully align with the Paris Agreement, and support other financial institutions in their efforts to implement similar commitments.
"Getting public finance institutions out of fossil fuels is an urgent task. This is the time for these publicly funded entities to make the right call and make sure that the resources available will be spent to create the future we need. We have a historic chance to drive real, transformative change and build back better in line with climate and sustainable goals. Real leadership from public banks would send a strong political signal towards the private sector to help build momentum towards a successful COP26 in 2021. With a rampant climate crisis and so much at stake for people's jobs and health, simply paying lip service to the need for a just recovery and a low-carbon transition won't cut it," says May Boeve, 350.org Executive Director.
##
NOTE:
During the week, civil society groups organized actions in Nigeria, Brazil, Philippines and France calling on development banks to stop funding fossil fuel projects.
Photos and videos are available HERE.
QUOTE SHEET
Landry Ninteretse, 350.org Africa Team Leader:
"As concerned citizens of Africa, we are firm that the future the world needs is one that no longer burns fossil fuels for energy generation. It is totally unacceptable that public financial institutions continue to fund fossil fuel projects while millions hardest hit by the climate and pandemic crisis are struggling to get appropriate healthcare, social protection and economic assistance. Development banks need to lead the way and direct public money to a truly healthy, equitable, sustainable and just recovery. That would be a first and solid step towards building real resilience for the people and the planet."
Chuck Baclagon, 350.org Asia Finance Campaigner:
"While leaders and power brokers in the financial sector meet, in Asia, we are now just beginning to pick up the pieces left by the strongest storm this year, Super Typhoon Goni, in the middle of a pandemic. Public financial institutions are given the responsibility to chart a future that ensures Asia can thrive justly and sustainably, by shifting the financial flows away from fossil fuels to one that prioritizes access to a low-carbon economy and healthcare. They must commit with a clear timeframe to end support for fossil-fuel projects and ensure that the money goes towards building sustainable, healthy, and resilient societies."
Ilan Zugman, 350.org Latin America Interim Managing Director:
"Many Latin American countries are among those that have had proportionally more deaths and greater economic losses because of Covid-19. However, scientists warn that these damages will appear mild when compared to those that the climate crisis may cause, if the planet reaches the worst scenarios of global warming. Latin America's economic recovery only makes sense if it is accompanied by measures to reduce emissions and build climate resilience in our countries, which is why development banks must make comprehensive and urgent commitments to zero their funding for fossil industry projects. Taxpayer money needs to stimulate job creation in sectors that benefit the most vulnerable families, such as clean energy, urban mobility and public health."
Eri Watanabe, 350.org Japan Finance Campaigner:
"Prime Minister Suga's recent pledge of "carbon neutrality" in 2050 will be meaningless if Japan's public financial institutions continue to support fossil fuel projects. To slow the warming of the Earth, JICA, JBIC and NEXI should stop funding coal fired power plants in Bangladesh, Indonesia and Vietnam in the name of "international cooperations". They must instead support sustainable sources of energy for the communities in developing countries who suffer the most from the dual crises of COVID-19 and the climate change."
Fenton Lutunatabua, 350.org Pacific Managing Director:
"The Pacific is fighting for their homes, and their lives, to turn the tide against climate change. Public development banks globally must join this fight in solidarity by committing to a Just Recovery from COVID-19, and stopping investments in the fossil fuel industry, the greatest source of carbon emissions. There is no time to lose. These institutions must effect policies that will divest from carbon-polluting industries and instead support renewable energy solutions so that all people can continue to thrive."
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.
"The American people are crying out for an end to US tax dollars subsidizing Israel's military."
After House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries blew what one organizer called “a real opportunity... to show he’s listening” to the Democratic Party’s base by opposing an amendment to end US military aid to Israel, the head of the Congressional Progressive Caucus on Tuesday urged colleagues to support the measure.
As Common Dreams reported earlier Tuesday, Jeffries (D-NY) announced in a "dear colleague" letter that he would oppose Rep. Thomas Massie's (R-Ky.) amendment to a national security spending bill that would eliminate the $3.3 billion in annual foreign military financing provided to Israel’s military under a memorandum of understanding signed by then-President Barack Obama in 2016.
The US has also given billions of dollars in additional armed aid to Israel since it began waging its US-backed war on Gaza after the Hamas-led attack of October 7, 2023.
The minority leader called the amendment "overly broad" and said it would limit the US' ability to "confront Hamas."
Jeffries' letter came "just weeks after his fundraising committee received the largest earmarked disbursement in the history of AIPAC's political action committee," Sludge's Donald Shaw reported Tuesday, referring to the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee, the congressman's single-largest campaign donor.
Massie's effort comes just weeks after the Republican-controlled House of Representatives blocked a separate amendment introduced by the Kentucky Republican and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) to remove a provision of the proposed $1.15 trillion National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for 2027 that would establish a formal “United States–Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative," which critics argue deepens military integration between the two allies under the guise of reducing aid.
Responding to Jeffries' letter, Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) Chair Greg Casar (D-Texas) sent one of his own, contending that "the American people are crying out for an end to US tax dollars subsidizing Israel’s military."
"At a time when millions are struggling to make ends meet, we are sending billions of dollars to a military that has killed tens of thousands of civilians in Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon, destabilized the region, and helped lead us into war with Iran," Casar noted.
"Over the weekend, the Israeli military detained a member of Congress attempting to conduct oversight in the West Bank," his letter continues, referencing a recent incident involving Khanna. "We cannot continue to subsidize this."
Israel's war on Gaza alone has left more than 250,000 Palestinians dead or wounded (including people who are missing and presumed dead and buried beneath rubble) and around 2 million others forcibly displaced, starved, or sickened. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant, his former defense minister, are wanted by the International Criminal Court for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity, while the International Court of Justice is weighing a genocide case filed against Israel by South Africa and formally backed by nearly 20 nations.
United Nations experts; Israeli and international scholars, jurists, and human rights groups; and US lawmakers including Casar are among those who have concluded that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.
"At its best, the Progressive Caucus’ role is to be an independent voice and lead on important issues of peace and human rights," Casar's letter asserts. "After the Israeli government has killed more than 70,000 people in Gaza and helped lead the United States into a destabilizing, deadly war with Iran, we are called to act."
"The Democratic Party needs a new approach to Israel and Palestine," Casar stressed. "When Democrats retake the majority in November, I hope the Progressive Caucus can help lead our party toward a position that secures safety, dignity, and self-determination for Palestinian and Israeli civilians alike."
Both Casar and the CPC are supporters of the Block the Bombs Act, first introduced in May 2025 by Rep. Delia C. Ramirez (D-Ill.) and now backed by more than 60 lawmakers. The CPC has also endorsed Massie's amendment.
US public opposition to Israel has grown alongside the death toll in Gaza. More than half of Democratic voters surveyed for an Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll published last week said they believe Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. An August 2025 Quinnipiac poll found that 60% of respondents opposed additional military aid to Israel, while just 32% supported it. Opposition was especially high among Democrats (75%) and independents (66%).
Noting these figures, the progressive grassroots group RootsAction said Tuesday that "Jeffries has turned his back on nearly 75% of Democrats who say they want military aid to Israel to be halted" and "has chosen instead to side with the Democratic Party old guard—the same dominant faction that lost twice to [President] Donald Trump."
"Jeffries’s stance is morally unconscionable and politically myopic," RootsAction added. "For nearly three years, Israel has committed genocide in Gaza in full view of the world. Polling has shown that the Democratic Party leadership’s inability to distance itself from the onslaught in Gaza cost its candidates many votes in 2024. This pattern will repeat if the party is unable to change its stance."
Later on Tuesday, US senators voted 50-46 almost entirely along party lines to block debate on the 2027 NDAA over the illegal US-Israeli war of choice on Iran and proposed US-Israeli military integration.
"Rewarding an official who is actively executing the White House's war on an independent press with the keys to the intelligence community would be a catastrophic mistake."
A coalition of progressive groups is pressuring Senate Democrats to oppose President Donald Trump's nomination of Jay Clayton III to lead America's spy agencies over his role in helping the administration use the legal system to attack journalists.
Over the weekend, The New York Times reported that Clayton, who currently serves as the US attorney for Manhattan, had issued subpoenas to four of its journalists after they'd reported on security concerns related to the luxury jet gifted by the Qatari government, which Trump has begun to use in place of Air Force One against the wishes of the Secret Service.
The US Department of Justice said in a statement that the goal of the investigation was to prosecute leakers who spoke to the press about the plane's lacking security features. According to the Times, the FBI requested that it hold off publishing the story and reveal the names of its anonymous sources, which it refused to do.
A top newsroom lawyer for the Times described the subpoenas as "an attempt to prevent the public from knowing what is happening in their country by intimidating journalists from doing their jobs.”
On Monday, the group Demand Progress and nearly three dozen other progressive advocacy groups sent a letter to Democrats on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, as well as Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (NY) and Whip Dick Durbin (Ill.).
It urged them to oppose the nomination of Clayton to serve as director of national intelligence, a role previously held by Tulsi Gabbard, who resigned in May.
"The committee need not speculate how Clayton would exercise the enormous powers of the federal government: He is demonstrating it now," the coalition wrote. "A federal prosecutor who will weaponize the grand jury process against reporters—and their sources—to punish disclosures unwelcome to the president has shown the Senate the precise instinct that is disqualifying in a director of national intelligence."
"Rewarding an official who is actively executing the White House's war on an independent press with the keys to the intelligence community would be a catastrophic mistake," the letter continued.
The coalition emphasized that Clayton, whose confirmation hearing in the Senate is scheduled for Wednesday, has no experience in intelligence work, having spent most of his career as a corporate lawyer on Wall Street. He was tapped to lead the Securities and Exchange Commission during Trump's first term and then to serve as US attorney for the Southern District of New York in his second.
"More troublingly," it said, "Clayton has spent his time in this position weaponizing his authority on behalf of the president, particularly by politicizing high-profile investigations."
As Trump came under fire for his relationship with the late child sex criminal Jeffrey Epstein, Clayton was assigned to "take the lead" of a Department of Justice probe that selectively targeted a list of the president's enemies.
Clayton also oversaw the process of redacting files related to Epstein before their release to the public, which was met with criticism for including identifying information of abuse survivors, including nude photos, while blacking out the names of Trump and other prominent individuals despite a mandate from Congress.
The letter also notes Clayton's amplifying of Trump's debunked theories of election fraud in California as part of efforts to restrict mail-in voting, as well as his defense of Trump's $1.8 billion "slush fund," which a judge ruled this week constituted an improper act of self-dealing.
"We are living with the serious consequences of unqualified Trump loyalists, blindly pursuing the "MAGA" agenda at agencies like the Departments of Defense, Homeland Security, Education, Health and Human Services, and more," the letter concludes. "Adding the [intelligence community] to this list—especially in light of Clayton's shocking willingness to weaponize federal power to satisfy the president's political grievances... will have devastating consequences for our national security and the civil liberties of Americans."
A coalition of conservation groups sued the Trump administration in federal court on Tuesday over its move to rescind the regulatory definition of "harm" in the Endangered Species Act so that extractive industries can degrade crucial habitats.
"Since 1973, the ESA has served as the nation's most effective conservation law, saving numerous imperiled species from extinction and moving them toward recovery," states the complaint, filed in the District of Washington state. It argues that the rescission "defies the text and purpose of the statute, 50 years of administrative policy, and US Supreme Court precedent."'
The coalition is made up of the Center for Biological Diversity, Columbia Riverkeeper, Conservation Law Foundation, Conservation Northwest, Friends of the Wild Swan, Oregon Wild, Sierra Club, Swan View Coalition, and WildEarth Guardians, and is represented by Earthjustice.
"Preventing harm to wildlife by protecting where they live, eat, and sleep is a basic foundation of the Endangered Species Act," said Earthjustice attorney Kristen Boyles in a statement, also stressing that the decision conflicts with not only the ESA but also decades of legal precedent. "Now more than ever, imperiled fish, birds, and wildlife need protection to survive and recover."
Ben Greuel, wildlife campaign manager at Sierra Club, warned that "without the habitat protections offered by the harm rule, countless species would be forced onto a path towards extinction."
For example, "roads built for logging and other human access destroy grizzly bear habitat and the bear's ability to safely use its habitat," said Swan View Coalition chair Keith Hammer. "Weakening the harm rule will allow industry to devastate the habitat grizzly bears and many other wildlife species depend on for their survival."
Noah Greenwald, endangered species co-director at the Center for Biological Diversity, pointed to not only grizzlies but also some of the other specific species that could be impacted by the administration's decision.
"It's beyond tragic that as the world's scientists warn us of an extinction crisis threatening to unravel our shared future, the Trump administration is yanking basic protections from our most endangered wildlife," Greenwald said. "There's just no way to protect endangered animals like spotted owls, Florida panthers, or grizzly bears without protecting the places they live."
In fact, as Oregon Wild staff attorney John Persell, noted, "habitat loss is the leading driver of extinction."
"This gutting of the Endangered Species Act is part of a broader assault on our bedrock environmental values," Persell also emphasized. "From public lands to wildlife to clean air and drinking water, the Trump administration is determined to waste, loot, and pollute America's natural heritage."
Separately, the group Defenders of Wildlife sent a letter to the departments of Commerce and the Interior about its intent to sue over the ESA rescission, which was published in the Federal Register on Tuesday by their respective agencies, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Fish and Wildlife Service.
"The law has been clear for decades," said Jane Davenport, senior attorney at Defenders of Wildlife. "Rescinding this definition is wholly out of bounds and misaligned with the vast majority of Americans who support protecting and recovering endangered species."
"We will use the full force of the law to fight back and prevent industry from unfettered destruction of critical forests, streams, deserts, oceans, and coastlines," Davenport pledged.
The rescission came just a day after President Donald Trump signed proclamations dramatically shrinking the size of two national monuments in Utah, Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante.
As with Trump's repeated attacks on the ESA, his targeting of the two monuments dates back to his first administration.
Taylor McKinnon, Southwest director at the Center for Biological Diversity, said Monday that "gutting Utah’s national monuments to enrich polluting extractive corporations shows Trump's extreme disdain for Americans' shared natural heritage. It's a national embarrassment. These monuments protect some of America's most iconic landscapes and rich biodiversity. We'll fight like hell to safeguard their future."