

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.
Today, Accountable.US President Kyle Herrig was joined by Chair Raul M. Grijalva and Representative Sharice Davids, as well as Corley Kenna, head of Patagonia's global communications and public relations, in a press call to discuss the opposition to Congresswoman Haaland, President Biden's pick for Interior secretary, by Republican senators tied to the oil industry. Congressman Grijalva, as the Chair of the Natural Resources Committee, shared his experience working closely with Rep. Haaland and highlighted the need for a strong advocate for all voices, public lands, wildlife, and environmentalism at Interior. Congresswoman Davids was sworn in alongside Rep. Haaland in 2018 as the first two Native women elected to the House, and offered her insight as the Vice Chair of the Congressional Native American Caucus on the need to confirm Rep. Haaland. Corley Kenna explained why Patagonia is supporting Haaland and called out the oil and gas industry for distorting the truth on their environmental and economic impact.
"It's hard to overstate how significant Congresswoman Haaland's confirmation as Interior secretary would be. She would be the first Native person to serve in a Presidential Cabinet in our country's history, and for the first time, give a voice to the 574 federally recognized tribal nations at the federal level... Senate Republicans need to stop fighting for Big Oil and instead fight for the people they were elected to represent. They must work with Democrats to quickly confirm Haaland and let her get to work tackling the climate crisis that threatens us all." said Accountable.US President Kyle Herrig.
"Let's be clear: Deb Haaland's confirmation is going to be historic, and it will happen. The opposition to her confirmation from some senators is nothing new. Republican Senators have experienced various stages of denial and avoidance to delay and undermine an adequate national and federal response to addressing the consequential issue of climate change. Representative Haaland is going to do something about it, and they know it. I think as Senators listen to and have the opportunity to hear from Haaland directly, they will understand she brings with her the capacity and ability to do this job well, no question. The department's leadership over the last four years has suffered greatly. Our public lands are a shared asset, and it's time we start acting like that. It's time we start addressing climate change through our actions at the federal level. The opposition to Congresswoman Haaland's confirmation is narrow and guided by money, not the qualifications or historic importance of what the nomination of Deb Haaland will do for this country," said Chair Raul M. Grijalva.
"Long before she was sworn in as a member of Congress, Deb Haaland has been advocating for the environment and for tribal nations. The Department of the Interior is so important, and it should be run by someone who has actually been affected by the department on a personal level, and who will fight for all Americans, not just the wealthy and well-connected. Deb will bring a much-needed voice for tribal communities to the table. She's also a strong environmental champion with a track record for earning bipartisan support from her colleagues in the House. These attacks, waged against her by some of the closest allies to Big Oil, are nothing more than an attempt to protect their special interests' bottom line in Congress. These senators know that she will finally stand up to Big Oil, and this terrifies them," said Congresswoman Sharice Davids.
"Senator Barrasso receives more money from the oil and gas industry than any other sector. More people in Wyoming are employed by the outdoor recreation industry than the oil and gas sector. So when Senator Barrasso says he is opposed to Rep. Haaland's nomination based on job loss, it rings pretty hollow. And Senator Daines, who was reelected just last year after repeatedly promising the people of Montana that he cared deeply about public lands, says he can't support her because she wants to protect public lands! The extractive industries have also been exceptionally effective in confusing communities about the science and realities of what happens when we take from nature. They distort the truth around the often-deadly footprint that their businesses leave behind and the jobs that they create. We need to set the record straight on jobs: The outdoor industry supports 6.1 million jobs - compared with 2.1 million jobs supported by the oil and gas industry," said Patagonia's Corley Kenna.
Prior to her hearing, certain Senate Republicans have already announced their plan to reject Haaland as Interior secretary, and have tried to paint her as "radical." This argument falls flat given the wide range of bipartisan support for her nomination, including Republican Congressman Don Young of Alaska, and her bipartisan track record in the House. The real reason these senators are opposed to Haaland's nomination is because their Big Oil donors demand it. Key members of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources (ENR) are deep inside the pockets of Big Oil, including Ranking Member John Barrasso (R-WY), who has taken over $1.17 million from the oil and gas industry. Steve Daines, one of Haaland's most vocal opponents, has taken nearly $1.2 million, and said the quiet part out loud by admitting to opposing her confirmation because she'd be bad for the oil, gas, and coal industry. This morning, Accountable.US released a report showing how the oil and gas industry bankrolls Senate Republicans on the ENR Committee and in turn does their bidding in Congress.
Climate scientists project that we only have a few years left to take action on climate change or risk irreversible damage to the environment. We need an Interior secretary in place to get to work tackling the climate crisis and undoing the four years of damage caused by the Trump administration and their catering to the oil industry. It's time for an Interior secretary who will put people and public lands over special interests, and who will finally bring a voice to the Native communities who for too long have been ignored by the government. Congresswoman Haaland is our chance to do that, and Senate Republicans need to put the people they were elected to represent before their special interest donors. Senate Republicans must work with Democrats to quickly confirm Haaland and let her get to work tackling the climate crisis that threatens our very existence.
Nonpartisan 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 advance the interests of all American people, not just the rich and powerful.
Trump claimed on social media that a diplomatic agreement would be signed on Sunday, but Iran's Foreign Ministry pushed back on that timeline.
President Donald Trump claimed Saturday that the US and Iran are on track to sign a diplomatic agreement this weekend, but added that "we have the ultimate alternative" if the process doesn't "work out."
"The 'ultimate alternative' sounds a lot like a nuclear threat," Sina Toossi, a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy, wrote in response to the president's Truth Social post. "Not the first time Trump has hinted at it."
The agreement Trump referenced is believed to be "memorandum of understanding" that's expected be fleshed out in "technical talks" that could begin next week, according to Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, who is mediating the negotiations.
"We are closer to a peace deal than ever before," Sharif wrote on social media, echoing Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, who said on Friday that "the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding has never been closer."
"Pending its finalization, the media should refrain from entering speculation about its content," Araghchi added. "In line with our responsible and transparent approach, all details will be shared with the public in due course."
On Saturday, a spokesperson for the Iranian Foreign Ministry cast doubt on the timeline put forth by Trump and Sharif.
"We will have to wait and see about the exact date of the signing of the memorandum of understanding, although it will not be tomorrow,” said Esmaeil Baqaei, as reported by Iranian state media. “The possibility of this happening in the coming days cannot be ruled out. However, due to the hesitation of the other side, we must be cautious in making any comments about this process.”
In his Truth Social post on Saturday, Trump declared that the Strait of Hormuz will be "OPEN TO ALL" immediately after the deal is signed—a condition that Iran has not confirmed.
"We look forward to working with Iran, and the entire Middle East, long into the future," Trump added. "Hopefully, this process will all work out quickly, easily, and smoothly. If it doesn’t, we have the ultimate alternative, hopefully never to be used again!"
Trump has repeatedly issued genocidal threats against Iran since launching the illegal war in late February, openly declaring his intention to target Iran's civilian infrastructure and wipe out its "whole civilization." Experts say such threats, even if they aren't acted on, constitute war crimes under international law.
"The test will be a simple one: Are you sufficiently loyal to the president? If the answer is no, it will result in the denial of lifesaving disaster relief, funding for research into cures, the closure of Head Start offices, and more."
A Trump White House plan to give political appointees more power over federal grant money has sparked alarm among scientists, public health organizations, environmental groups, and others who fear that the proposal amounts to an attempt to subordinate critical funds to the whims of the president and his far-right allies.
More than 300 organizations signed a joint letter on Friday calling on White House budget director Russell Vought, the proposed rule's architect, to extend the public comment period that's set to end on July 13, warning that the "scope and impact of [the Office of Management and Budget's] rule is vast."
"The rule will impact the entirety of government grant-making across the United States," the groups warned. "OMB itself says the revisions suggested would relate to over $179 billion of funds to small entities."
Politico, which exclusively obtained the letter, noted that the "proposed rule has already garnered over 15,000 public comments, with many expressing alarm that the changes could undermine research across fields."
Under Vought's rule, federal agencies would be required to perform "pre-issuance reviews" of federal grants—funds appropriated by Congress—to ensure their distribution is consistent with "applicable law, federal agency priorities, and the national interest."
The rule lays out a number of standards that political appointees at federal agencies must screen for when deciding whether an organization can receive federal grant dollars. For instance, the rule would prohibit the distribution of federal grants to organizations that "promote anti-American values" or support "ideologies that deny the biological reality of sex or the sex binary in humans."
The New York Times reported that the consequences of Vought's rule "could fall hardest on health and science, a field in which [President Donald Trump] has pursued some of the steepest cuts in his second term."
"In exchange for federal assistance, researchers would face limits on the subjects that they can explore, the foreign labs with which they may collaborate and even the conferences at which they can appear," the Times noted. "Dr. Georges C. Benjamin, the chief executive of the American Public Health Association, a professional organization and advocacy group, said the policy could 'devastate innovation, science, and research' in the United States."
"This is an executive power grab that would hand presidential political appointees unchecked control over more than a trillion dollars that Congress appropriated in the interests of all Americans."
Earlier this month, Lawyers for Good Government and the Environmental Protection Network said that "if finalized, the rule would put senior political appointees in charge of approving and canceling individual grants, while stripping recipients of due process rights" while attaching "ideological conditions to nearly every federal dollar, raising First Amendment and equal-protection concerns."
The two organizations published a fact sheet warning that the proposed rule has the potential to halt billions of dollars in funding that communities across the US depend on for "health, public education, scientific research, public safety, and economic development projects."
“This is an executive power grab that would hand presidential political appointees unchecked control over more than a trillion dollars that Congress appropriated in the interests of all Americans,” said Jillian Blanchard, senior vice president for climate change and environmental justice at Lawyers for Good Government. “Conditioning funding for critical programs on ideology and viewpoint discrimination, while erasing basic due-process protections, violates freedoms of speech, equal protection, and eviscerates Congress’ power of the purse.”
Democratic lawmakers have also sounded the alarm about Vought's proposal. Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, said Thursday that she has given her Republican colleagues two opportunities to denounce Vought's rule—and they declined both times.
"Vought continues to attempt to steal from communities across the country. Now, he is trying to set a new political test on grants for a wide swath of the federal government," said DeLauro. "The test will be a simple one: Are you sufficiently loyal to the president? If the answer is no, it will result in the denial of lifesaving disaster relief, funding for research into cures, the closure of Head Start offices, and more. If you are not loyal enough, if you speak out against this administration, the president and his cronies will take away resources Congress provided."
"The future of Colombia must be decided by the Colombian people—not American politicians with their own agenda."
A group of Democratic members of the US Congress on Friday condemned President Donald Trump and Republican lawmakers' attempts to influence the results of Colombia's upcoming presidential runoff, calling it an "insult" to the Colombian people's sovereignty.
"We see actions by US President Donald Trump and other members of Congress to endorse, advocate for, or otherwise tip the scales to a particular candidate as detrimental to the democratic rights of the Colombian people," said the lawmakers, led by Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.). "The future of Colombia must be decided by the Colombian people—not American politicians with their own agenda."
The statement came days after Trump publicly injected himself into Colombia's presidential contest by endorsing far-right candidate Abelardo De La Espriella, a 47-year-old defense lawyer who has pledged to "disembowel the left."
“The results of this Election are very important to the future of Colombia and its relationship to the United States,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post earlier this month. “Because of his tremendous accomplishments in life, and his political support for me, personally, it is my Honor to give Abelardo my Complete and Total Endorsement.”
The US president said that if De la Espriella wins, he "will have the total support and strength of the United States behind him."
The Center for Economic and Policy Research noted that "the implicit threat in Trump’s endorsement of De la Espriella is that Colombians will be punished—through reduced aid, tariffs, sanctions, etc.—if they vote for a political leader not backed by the United States."
Two Republican lawmakers, Rep. María Salazar of Florida and Sen. Bernie Moreno of Ohio, have also endorsed De la Espriella. The New York Times reported that "before Mr. Trump posted his full-throated endorsement of Mr. De La Espriella, Mr. Moreno held a call with reporters in which he said US officials had 'vetted' Mr. De La Espriella and found him to be 'impeccable.'"
De la Espriella will face leftist Sen. Iván Cepeda, an ally of incumbent President Gustavo Petro, in the June 21 presidential runoff.
Petro has criticized his US counterpart for meddling in Colombia's presidential race, urging Trump in a recent social media post to "not intervene in the campaign and allow the people of Colombia to decide freely."
"Whoever wins will maintain the friendship of more than two centuries between Colombia and the US," Petro added.
Earlier this week, Petro planned to meet with New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani during the Colombian leader's trip to the US, but "the Trump administration effectively nixed it in a behind-the-scenes effort," The Washington Post reported.
"The Colombian government quietly called off the event following a meeting between US and Colombian officials in Bogotá in which State Department officials made clear that this week’s engagement was unacceptable, a move Colombian officials interpreted as a threat to arrest Petro on site if he proceeded," the newspaper revealed. "A State Department official told The Washington Post that the visit would violate visa restrictions the US imposed against Petro following his comments last year criticizing US support of Israel’s war in Gaza and imploring US soldiers to disobey presidential orders to kill."