

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 case you missed it, yesterday evening The Washington Post released a deep-dive into the explicit dangers of the possibility that the Biden administration may not have a single confirmed Cabinet official on the first day of its tenure. This would be the first time that a president enters the office without at least part of his national security team in place since the Cold War.
Americans across the country overwhelmingly voted in support of President-elect Biden and his agenda to put American workers and families ahead of special interests. The historically diverse team of men and women comprising Biden's Cabinet appointees must be ready to hit the ground running on day one to begin the daunting task of cleaning up after Trump's messes, getting the pandemic under control, and rebuilding the economy so that it works for everyone, not just the wealthy and well-connected.
Wednesday's sobering, Trump-motivated attack on the U.S. Capitol is just the latest crisis highlighting the need for a trial-tested, qualified, and quickly-confirmed Cabinet in the interest of national security, public health, and the democratic principles that have been stripped and shaken over the past four years.
Washington Post: Biden in danger of having no confirmed Cabinet secretaries on first day of presidency
By Paul Kane, Karoun Demirjian and Anne Gearan
Jan. 7, 2021 at 8:18 p.m. EST
President-elect Joe Biden's incoming administration is in danger of not having a single Cabinet official confirmed on Inauguration Day, upsetting a tradition going back to the Cold War of ensuring the president enters office with at least part of his national security team in place.
Delays in Congress, caused primarily by runoff elections in Georgia for Senate seats that Democrats flipped this week and the arcane procedures needed to get the new chamber up and running, have sparked deep concern among Biden's top advisers. They are now mapping out contingency plans to install acting secretaries in most, if not all, Cabinet posts, in case Biden's nominees are unable to secure Senate backing by Jan. 20, according to those familiar with discussions.
"The American people rightfully expect the Senate to confirm his crisis-tested, qualified, history-making cabinet nominees as quickly as possible," Ned Price, the national security spokesman for the Biden transition team, said in a statement. "With so much at stake, we can't afford to waste any time when it comes to leading the response to the deadly coronavirus crisis, putting Americans back to work, and protecting our national security."
For decades, Senate Republicans and Democrats have shelved their political differences to ensure a seamless transition between administrations, especially in the departments responsible for safeguarding the country against foreign and domestic threats. At a time when the United States is reeling from a massive cyberespionage campaign of presumed Russian origin, Iran's resumed uranium enrichment, the deadly pandemic and volatile domestic unrest, the need for continuous leadership is considered especially paramount.
To date, the Senate Republican committee chairs -- who will remain in control until Jan. 20 -- have scheduled only one confirmation hearing for a Biden nominee: that of Lloyd J. Austin III, the president-elect's choice for defense secretary. That lags well behind the pace of previous transfers of power between administrations, and many Republicans increasingly believe it will be impossible to expedite things.
The scenario would set up an unprecedented moment in which every Cabinet post would have an acting secretary, with either the top career official in a given federal agency taking the helm or some temporary official appointed by Biden.
The Senate Armed Services Committee said Thursday that it would hold a confirmation hearing for Austin, a retired Army general, on Jan. 19. The panel also announced that it would hold a hearing next week -- while the House and Senate are out of Washington -- to prepare a waiver allowing Austin to serve as the civilian leader of the Defense Department, despite having been retired from active military service for less than the required seven years.
That schedule could allow the Senate to squeeze in Austin's confirmation just in time for Biden's inauguration. But the House must also approve Austin's waiver for him to take office -- and as of yet, that chamber has issued no similar plans for its consideration. The House Armed Services Committee, which has requested to meet with Austin, has not scheduled its hearing either.
Should lawmakers fail to remedy the impasse, Biden will become only the second newly inaugurated president in the past 45 years to not have his choice for secretary of defense in place on the first day, according to Senate records. George H.W. Bush, in 1989, is the only other president not to immediately get his Pentagon chief confirmed, as his initial nominee, John Tower, fell into a bitter confirmation fight that ended in defeat.
The problem is not limited to the Pentagon. In years past, the Senate has scrambled to furnish incoming presidents with some combination of their picks to lead the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security and the intelligence community -- all of whom this year are in danger of being stuck in limbo when Biden takes office.
In the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, secretary of state nominee Antony Blinken's confirmation stalled amid a partisan dispute over whether the candidate has furnished the panel with satisfactory answers to prehearing questionnaires. Blinken submitted his paperwork to the panel on Dec. 31, according to aides familiar with the process, and has yet to meet with the vast majority of the panel's members -- a situation that has given rise to partisan finger-pointing about who is to blame, and insinuations from Democrats that the GOP chairman, Sen. James E. Risch of Idaho, is intentionally drawing out the process.
On the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, there has been similarly little action on Alejandro Mayorkas, the nominee for secretary of homeland security. The process has been complicated to a transfer of power on the GOP side between outgoing Chairman Ron Johnson (Wis.) and ranking Republican Sen. Rob Portman (Ohio).
Despite the confusion, Senate Democrats have argued that the Republican leaders of those panels could make a gesture of good faith by scheduling committee hearings with the nominees. Now that the results of Georgia are known, it is possible that the incoming Democratic chairs could try to take matters into their own hands and call meetings to discuss the pending nominations, with or without the consent of the outgoing GOP chairs.
But until the panels are officially formed and blessed by the full Senate -- which cannot happen until Georgia certifies that Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff won their elections and they are formally seated in Washington -- no committee can report out any nomination to the floor for confirmation.
The Biden transition team has taken pains to ensure that if there are delays, they aren't coming from its end. A senior Biden transition official said that all outstanding financial disclosures for key nominees will be transmitted to the relevant Senate committees by the end of the week.
Yet even in committees that have not hit political or organizational snags, the task of delivering Biden a full national security team has been selectively hampered by the transition team's decision-making process.
Democratic and Republican aides on the Senate Intelligence Committee have expressed total confidence that they will find a way to confirm Avril D. Haines as director of national Intelligence by Inauguration Day. But Biden has yet to name a director for the Central Intelligence Agency, also traditionally considered a priority post.
On President Trump's Inauguration Day in 2017, the Senate convened and confirmed Jim Mattis and John F. Kelly as secretaries of defense and homeland security, and took an initial procedural vote on Mike Pompeo's nomination to be CIA director, easily confirming him three days later. Even that slight delay on Pompeo outraged Republicans who said it endangered national security, led by the late Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).
"Why the hell don't we just go ahead and give the president his national security team when we need it more than any time in recent history?" McCain said Jan. 20 in a speech.
On Jan. 20, 2009, Democrats had cried foul when Republicans declined to confirm Hillary Clinton as secretary of state until the second day of President Barack Obama's administration, despite confirming six other Cabinet nominees on Day One.
The 50-50 split in today's Senate adds an extra layer of complication, as the Republican committee chairs will remain in control of the chamber's panels until Jan. 20, when Vice President-elect Kamala D. Harris is formally sworn in and can break the tie to make Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) the majority leader. The last time a 50-50 Senate hampered the confirmation of a new Cabinet -- for George W. Bush in 2001 -- the two Senate leaders, Republican Trent Lott and Democrat Thomas A. Daschle, hammered out a power-sharing agreement, allowing for early confirmation hearings and a smooth transition.
Aides in both parties acknowledged that the partisan discord of 2021 makes similar comity unlikely. But after Wednesday's riot at the U.S. Capitol, there is increased pressure on Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to ensure as smooth a transition as possible -- and that includes giving Biden his national security team.
Watchdog group Accountable.US recently launched the Accountable Senate War Room to fight back against those lawmakers who seek to overturn the will of the people by standing in the way of the smooth transition of power and the swift approval of nominees to ensure that the government can function and deliver results for the American people.
Accountable.US is a nonpartisan watchdog that exposes corruption in public life and holds government officials and corporate special interests accountable by bringing their influence and misconduct to light. In doing so, we make way for policies that advance the interests of all Americans, not just the rich and powerful.
The US is at risk of losing its measles-eradicated status early next year, according to Scientific American.
US Rep. Pramila Jayapal on Friday demanded that the Trump administration "stop lying and follow the science" as an outbreak of measles in South Carolina grew and officials warned that low vaccination rates in the affected area likely mean the crisis will continue worsening.
Since the outbreak began in October in Spartanburg County, near the state's northern border, the highly infectious disease has sickened at least 129 people. The vast majority of people who have been infected have not been inoculated against measles, which is 97% preventable via the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) shot—which has been erroneously attacked for years by anti-vaccine activists including Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
As President Donald Trump and Kennedy "push deadly anti-vaccine conspiracy theories, measles is making a comeback across America," said Jayapal (D-Wash.) on Friday. "People will die because of this."
At least three people, including two children, have already died this year in US measles outbreaks
More than 1,900 measles cases and 47 outbreaks have been reported across the country in 2025, compared with 285 cases across 16 outbreaks last year.
In South Carolina, more than 250 people have been exposed to the disease in schools, a healthcare facility, and a church, forcing dozens of unvaccinated children to quarantine for 21 days; some were exposed twice and had to be isolated for two separate three-week periods.
“That’s a significant amount of time,” Linda Bell, the state's epidemiologist, said at a recent press conference. “Vaccination continues to be the best way to prevent the disruption that measles is causing to people’s education, to employment.”
But Spartanburg County's ongoing outbreak is being driven by “lower-than-hoped-for vaccination coverage,” Bell said.
Public health experts consider a 95% vaccination rate to be the level at which the spread of measles can be eliminated in a community. Only about 90% of students in the county had all required childhood immunizations. South Carolina allows religious exemptions for school immunization requirements. Many of the schools where students have quarantined have vaccination rates "well below 90%," the New York Times reported.
Across South Carolina, MMR vaccination rates among schoolchildren has fallen significantly since 2020, from 96% to 93.5%.
Kennedy has been a longtime denier of vaccine science. In 2019, his anti-vaccine group, Children's Health Defense, tried to sue New York state over its vaccine requirement, which is one of just five in the country that doesn't allow for nonmedical exemptions.
In April, Kennedy visited a Texas community where two unvaccinated children had died of measles and acknowledged in a social media post that "the most effective way to prevent the spread of measles is the MMR vaccine."
“Vaccination continues to be the best way to prevent the disruption that measles is causing to people’s education, to employment.”
But during his visit he also promoted, without evidence, two therapeutic treatments that one vaccine expert told NPR are "valueless" in treating measles. In 2023 Kennedy told podcaster Joe Rogan that the vaccine was not linked to a decline in deaths.
He has recently continued fueling overall skepticism about immunizations, with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) panel he assembled advising that newborn babies whose mothers test negative for hepatitis B should not receive a dose of a vaccine for the disease—sparking fear among public health experts that major progress in reducing childhood cases of the disease over the past three decades will be reversed.
In November the CDC website was changed to say a link between vaccines and autism—a theory that has long been debunked—cannot be ruled out. Two months earlier, as measles cases surged in another outbreak around the Utah-Arizona border, Trump called for combination children's vaccines like the MMR to be split up into separate shots—a call made decades ago by Dr. Andrew Wakefield, who lost his medical license over his 1988 study that linked autism to the combination vaccine, which was later retracted.
High vaccine rates allowed the US to declare measles eliminated in 2000, but Scientific American reported Thursday that the current measles outbreaks are bringing the US "toward losing its measles-free status by early next year."
The worsening measles outbreak in South Carolina, said Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), "is yet another horrifying consequence of Trump and RFK Jr.'s Make America Sick Agenda."
Republican Gov. Henry McMaster has urged residents to be vaccinated against measles, but said on Thursday, "We are not going to do mandates on people to go get vaccinated."
Andrew Nixon, a spokesperson for the US Health and Human Services Department, also continued to suggest that vaccination is principally a matter of personal liberty rather than public health, telling the New York Times that people in the affected community in South Carolina should talk to their doctors about "what is best for them."
On Thursday, Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee Ranking Member Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said that along with the Republican Party's vote against extending Affordable Care Act subsidies, the Trump administration is raising questions about its push to "Make America Health Again" as it undermines "lifesaving vaccines and spark[s] disease outbreaks."
"The Trump administration," he said, "is endangering the health of the American people."
"If Trump is using this justification to use military force on any individuals he chooses... what’s stopping him from designating anyone within our own borders in a similar fashion and conducting lethal, militarized attacks against them?"
A Democratic senator is raising concerns about President Donald Trump potentially relying on the same rationale he's used to justify military strikes on purported drug trafficking vessels to kill American citizens on US soil.
In an interview with the Intercept, Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) argued that Trump's boat strikes in the Caribbean and the Pacific Ocean have been flatly illegal under both domestic and international law.
Diving into specifics, Duckworth explained that the administration has been justifying its boat-bombing spree by arbitrarily declaring suspected drug traffickers as being part of "designated terrorist organizations," which the senator noted was "not grounded in US statute nor international law, but in solely what Trump says."
Many other legal experts have called the administration's strikes illegal, with some going so far as to call them acts of murder.
Duckworth, a military veteran, also said it was not a stretch to imagine Trump placing terrorist designations on US citizens as well, which would open up the opportunity to carry out lethal strikes against them.
"If Trump is using this justification to use military force on any individuals he chooses—without verified evidence or legal authorization—what’s stopping him from designating anyone within our own borders in a similar fashion and conducting lethal, militarized attacks against them?" Duckworth asked. "This illegal and dangerous misuse of lethal force should worry all Americans, and it can’t be accepted as normal."
Independent journalist Ken Klippenstein reported last week that Attorney General Pam Bondi recently wrote a memo that directed the Department of Justice (DOJ) to compile a list of potential “domestic terrorism” organizations that espouse “extreme viewpoints on immigration, radical gender ideology, and anti-American sentiment.”
The memo expanded upon National Security Presidential Memorandum-7 (NSPM-7), a directive signed by Trump in late September that demanded a “national strategy to investigate and disrupt networks, entities, and organizations that foment political violence so that law enforcement can intervene in criminal conspiracies before they result in violent political acts."
The Intercept revealed that it reached out to the White House, the DOJ, and the US Department of Defense and asked whether the tactics used on purported Caribbean drug traffickers could be deployed on the US citizens that wind up on Bondi's list of extremists. All three entities, reported the Intercept, "have, for more than a month, failed to answer this question."
The DOJ, for instance, responded the Intercept's question about using lethal force against US citizens by saying that "political violence has no place in this country, and this Department of Justice will investigate, identify, and root out any individual or violent extremist group attempting to commit or promote this heinous activity."
Rebecca Ingber, a former State Department lawyer and current professor at Cardozo Law School, told the Intercept that the administration's designation of alleged cartel members as terrorists shows that there appears to be little limit to its conception of the president's power to deploy deadly force at will.
“This is one of the many reasons it is so important that Congress push back on the president’s claim that he can simply label transporting drugs an armed attack on the United States and then claim the authority to summarily execute people on that basis," Ingber explained.
The Intercept noted that the US government "has been killing people—including American citizens, on occasion—around the world with drone strikes" for the past two-and-a-half decades, although the strikes on purported drug boats represent a significant expansion of the use of deadly force.
Nicholas Slayton, contributing editor at Task and Purpose, pointed the finger at former President Barack Obama for pushing the boundaries of drone warfare during his eight years in office.
"Really sucks that Obama administration set a legal precedent for assassinating Americans," he commented on Bluesky.
"The American public is demanding decisive action to end US complicity in the Israeli government’s war crimes by stopping the flow of weapons to Israel."
Jewish Voice for Peace Action on Friday led a coalition of groups demanding that the Democratic Party stop providing arms to the Israeli government.
Speaking outside the Democratic National Committee’s Winter Meeting in Los Angeles, Jewish Voice for Peace Action (JVP Action) held a press conference calling on Democrats to oppose all future weapons shipments to Israel, whose years-long assault on Gaza has, according to one estimate, killed more than 100,000 Palestinian people.
While carrying banners that read, "Stop Arming Israel," speakers at the press conference also called on Democrats to reject money from the American Israeli Political Action Committee (AIPAC), which has consistently funded primary challenges against left-wing critics of Israel.
JVP Action was joined at the press conference by representatives from Health Care 4 US (HC4US), Progressive Democrats of America, the Council on American-Islamic Relations Action (CAIR Action), and the United Teachers of Los Angeles (UTLA) Board of Directors.
Estee Chandler, founder of the Los Angeles chapter of Jewish Voice for Peace, warned Democrats at the press conference that they risked falling out of touch with public opinion if they continued to support giving weapons to Israel.
"The polls are clear,” Chandler said. "The American public is demanding decisive action to end US complicity in the Israeli government’s war crimes by stopping the flow of weapons to Israel, and the Democratic Party refusing to heed that call will continue to come at their own peril."
The press conference came a day after the progressive advocacy group RootsAction and journalist Christopher D. Cook released an "autopsy" report of the Democratic Party's crushing 2024 losses, finding that the party's support for Israel's assault on Gaza contributed to last year's election results.
Chandler also called on Democrats to get behind the Block the Bombs Act, which currently has 58 sponsors, and which she said "would block the transfer of the worst offensive weapons from being sent to Israel, including bombs, tank rounds, and artillery shells that are US-supplied and have been involved in the mass killing of Palestinian civilians and the grossest violations of international law in Gaza."
Although there has technically been a ceasefire in place in Gaza since October, Israeli forces have continued to conduct deadly military operations in the enclave that have killed hundreds of civilians, including dozens of children.
Ricardo Pires, a spokesperson for the United Nations Children’s Fund, said last month that the number of deaths in Gaza in recent weeks has been "staggering" given that they've happened "during an agreed ceasefire."