

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.

Lena Greenberg, lgreenberg@corporateaccountability.org, 646-620-5344
As America's communities continue to face oppressive water rates amidst a haunting pandemic, Rep. Brenda Lawrence and Rep. Ro Khanna introduced federal legislation today that would transform America's water infrastructure and ensure affordable, safe, and clean public water for all in this country. Senator Bernie Sanders introduced a companion bill in the Senate.
The Water Affordability, Transparency, Equity and Reliability (WATER) Act of 2021 is the comprehensive solution to America's escalating water woes. And Americans overwhelmingly support it.
The People's Water Project, a group dedicated to passing the WATER Act, joined 73 U.S. House representatives, 4 U.S. Senators, and a diverse coalition of 540 justice, labor, environmental, and advocacy organizations in endorsing the legislation. The organizations include ACRE, AFSCME, Consumer Reports, Corporate Accountability, Earth Justice, NAACP, Flint Rising, Food & Water Action, Citizens Action Coalition, In the Public Interest, United Steelworkers,The Water Collaborative of Greater New Orleans, and UAW, among others.
"The crisis in Texas illuminated how vital access to running water is for human survival. And the COVID-19 pandemic has put on display the unjust reality of America's water affordability, reliability, and equity crisis. Now, Congress finally has a real solution with the WATER Act of 2021," said Brittany Alston, Deputy Research Director of Action Center on Race & The Economy. "The only way to combat America's water crisis is with this type of bold, reparative change that both challenges corporate power and addresses water affordability, accessibility and quality across the entire country, especially in low-income and BIPOC communities. We thank Representatives Brenda Lawrence and Ro Khanna, Senator Sanders, and every Congressional cosponsor for stepping up for America's families today."
The WATER Act of 2021 creates a WATER Trust Fund that would dedicate $35 billion each year to grant programs and to the Drinking Water and Clean Water State Revolving Fund (SRF) programs. These programs include a specific focus on providing support for rural and small municipalities, Indigenous communities, and low-income Black and brown communities who face disproportionate water issues.
Additionally, the WATER Act can create upwards of 1 million jobs at a time our country needs them most and will require the use of U.S.-made iron and steel on water system projects. It also applies prevailing wage law and encourages union labor to all projects funded by the Drinking Water and Clean Water State Revolving Fund programs.
"We have a moral and ethical obligation to ensure that all people have access to clean and affordable water," said Mary Gutierrez, Founder and Director of Earth Ethics. "For years, pre-COVID 19 and recent natural disasters, we have seen the inequities in the distribution of water, the WATER Act addresses these inequities. The WATER Act ensures that all communities, low-income, BIPOC, have access to clean and affordable water. Let's not forget that we can expect to see additional impacts to our existing infrastructure with increased intensity and frequency of storm events due to climate change. It's time to act now to address our failing infrastructure before more adverse environmental and public health impacts occur."
Over the past 50 years, federal funding for water has declined by more than 80% on a per capita basis. As a result, water rates have skyrocketed and are now unaffordable for millions of households in the U.S. When households are unable to pay these exorbitant bills, states often allow water service shutoffs.
In the face of COVID-19, a disease that has led public health officials to urge frequent at-home hand washing, only 43% of the U.S. population are protected from water shutoffs, and hundreds of local and state moratoria have already expired. As a result, 57% of the U.S. population --186 million people--are at risk of losing their water supply if they cannot keep up with bill payments during an unprecedented economic recession.
"From Flint to Pittsburgh, the private water industry's failures have endangered communities. It's clear that public investment -- not privatization under any name -- is the solution to American's drinking water and wastewater infrastructure crisis. And the WATER Act is just the tool we need," said Alissa Weinman, Associate Campaign Director at Corporate Accountability. "COVID-19 has only exacerbated the long-standing harms of lack of safe water access, particularly for low-income communities, Indigenous communities, and communities of color. In order to truly 'Build Back Better,' the federal government must renew its commitment to the human right to water by robustly funding our nation's water systems."
The WATER Act of 2021 not only responds to water accessibility and affordability, but also to privatization and quality. It details a path for upgrading our water systems to remove highly toxic and hazardous chemicals like lead and per-and polyfluorinated substances (or PFAS) from drinking water while also maintaining public control over these systems instead of handing over control to the private water industry and their Wall Street partners that want to commodify water for profit over public health.
---
Additional quotes from People's Water Project Partners:
"Water is life. We have a sacred duty to heed the cry of the earth and the cry of her most vulnerable people. Supporting the provisions of the WATER Act, including protections specifically aimed at improving water access and affordability in BIPOC communities, is our moral duty," said Blair Nelsen, Executive Director of Waterspirit.
"From the plague of water shutoffs during a pandemic for countless families with unaffordable bills, to the recent heartbreaking scenes across the South of frozen pipes leaving millions without water to drink and bathe, it has become desperately clear that our country is in a water crisis. Grave crises require robust solutions, and this is just what the WATER Act provides," said Wenonah Hauter, Executive Director of Food & Water Action, a leading organizational supporter of the bill. "The WATER Act paves the way to rebuilding our failing water system by addressing maintenance and modernization, cleanliness and safety, affordability and social justice - all in one clean sweep. The time for Congress and the Biden administration to make this critical legislation a priority has very clearly come. Our country can't wait any longer for a functional, safe and affordable water system for every community."
"Privatization of our water systems is a threat to public health, the environment, and democracy," said Donald Cohen, Executive Director of In the Public Interest. "Water is an essential public good, not a market commodity for corporations and wealthy investors. We need direct federal investment in water infrastructure across the country. This is an opportunity for the federal government to prove it works for all of us and not just the wealthy and connected."
On behalf of all the people who are suffering the consequences of a failing for-profit system and are denied the basic right to clean, affordable water, the People's Tribune newspaper supports the Water Act," said Sandy Reid of People's Tribune.
"Access to clean and affordable water is a basic human right. But for far too long, our country has allowed water to become a market commodity," said Toni Preston, Senior Campaigner at SumOfUS. "The Water Act is a necessary piece of legislation that will finally begin to address our country's failing water infrastructure, and ensure that every person in this country has access to clean and affordable water."
"The WATER Act is the first essential step towards social and economic liberation of all people, especially for the poor and marginalized. The 2020 Atlantic hurricane season generated 30 names tropical storms and 13 hurricanes, 6 of which were major hurricanes. This along with the recent winter storms that are pummeling Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi exposes the deep privation and indigence of the nation's water infrastructure. The WATER Act meets the nation's most pressing need for sustained investment into aging and unprepared water systems.," said Jessica Dandridge, Executive Director of The Water Collaborative,New Orleans.
In the U.S. Southwest - Arizona, California, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah - there is less rain and snowfall each year than the amount of water used in homes, businesses, and farms. As aquifers dry up, competition for scarce resources between water utilities, rural communities and agriculture leaves poorer communities at a disadvantage. In the face of climate change, with significant portions of the Southwest already under extreme drought conditions, these challenges threaten to endanger the health, safety and livelihoods of some of the most vulnerable people in our country. Federal investment in public water utilities is a critical necessity as the climate crisis looms, said Mariel Nanasi, Executive Director of New Energy Economy in New Mexico.
Corporate Accountability stops transnational corporations from devastating democracy, trampling human rights, and destroying our planet.
(617) 695-2525While Sen. Susan Collins "brags" that she's secured money for rural hospitals, the funding is a "pittance" compared to the billions in Medicaid cuts she helped push through, said her Democratic challenger in Maine.
Joined by medical professionals, patients, and local healthcare advocates outside a hospital in central Maine that was forced to shut down last year, Democratic US Senate candidate Graham Platner on Wednesday highlighted the human impact of the crisis that he said Sen. Susan Collins is actively making worse by prioritizing "health insurance companies, Big Pharma, and private equity firms" over Mainers—even as the Republican claims to bring crucial funds to the state's struggling rural hospitals.
Platner held a press conference outside the former Northern Light Inland Hospital in Waterville, Maine, which closed last May along with its associated primary care centers.
The closure left roughly 5,000 patients without general practitioners and further away from an emergency department and inpatient care, as well as putting more than 300 local residents out of work.
The hospital system said last May that it was closing Northern Light Inland due to rising operational costs, stagnant or reduced reimbursement rates, and a tight labor market with more competition for a smaller pool of qualified healthcare workers. A hospital official told Maine Public last year that the 48-bed facility was losing more than $1 million per month due to operating costs.
Since Northern Light Inland closed, said Platner, "Waterville Fire and Rescue has tripled its out-of-city ambulance transports," as there is no regular public transportation between Waterville and Augusta, where the nearest hospital is. Patients who were once charged $50 for a ride to the hospital now have to pay $400, the combat veteran and oyster farmer-turned-Senate candidate said, "and a ride that is longer means higher mortality rates."
One former patient of the healthcare center, Kyla Mihalovits, said her family was "thrown into a state of uncertainty regarding our access to healthcare" after Northern Light Inland closed and her primary care provider relocated to Unity, Maine.
"When your community no longer has access to high-quality [healthcare], it doesn't matter if you identify as a Democrat or a Republican or an Independent. You have lost something that your community needs to survive."
"We consider ourselves lucky to get an appointment once a year for our annual checkups. Many of my friends and neighbors lost their doctors and are on excruciatingly long waiting lists," said Mihalovits, adding that she no longer has access to women's healthcare and does not know where she will obtain her first mammogram after she turns 40 this year.
"Because my hospital closed, I no longer have any semblance of continuity of care available for me at this crucial time in my life," she said. "For women, especially since we are very often not listened to, dismissed, or even believed by certain healthcare providers, especially when we see them for the first time, continuity of care is crucial. Because our community hospital closed, it will take years for my family to establish care outside of our community."
Stories like Mihalovits', said Platner, show that "rural healthcare is not collapsing sometime in the future. This isn't some vague thing we talk about that may happen someday. It is happening now, but it is not an accident. No rural hospital closes by chance. It's the outcome of policy, and it is a choice that people in places of political power like Susan Collins have made."
Rural hospitals in Maine are projected to continue closing due to nearly $3 billion in Medicaid cuts that are expected to hit the state over the next 10 years—cuts that were included in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), a law that also included tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy and whose passage Collins helped ensure by casting a decisive vote to send it to the Senate floor.
"Before the bill's passage, nearly half of Maine's rural hospitals were found to be at risk of closing while some, like the one here today, had already shuttered," said Platner. "The One Big Beautiful Bill is doing exactly what the experts warned it would do. It is throwing gasoline on a crisis that was already raging in Maine's rural hospitals."
The Senate candidate emphasized that Collins voted to advance the bill out of committee "one day after a private equity billionaire, Stephen Schwarzman, the chair of [Blackstone], and a man who will personally reap huge profits from the bill, gave $2 million towards her reelection campaign."
Collins frequently emphasizes that she ultimately voted against the OBBBA almost exactly a year ago—after Republican leaders had secured enough votes to pass the legislation without her—but Platner stressed that "her vote was pivotal to advancing it and paving the way for its eventual passage. She knew what she was doing. She was profiting off of her vote."
He also took particular issue with the five-term senator's "bragging" about the Rural Health Transformation Program, a $50 billion fund also included in the OBBBA through which, Collins said in a recent ad, she secured $190 million for Maine rural health systems.
"She likes to brag," said Platner, "that she uses her power to bring money to Maine to help the state, except that the money she brings is a pittance. It is a pittance in comparison to the money sucked out of the state through tax cuts for corporations and billionaires that she happily goes along with. It is a pittance to the money sucked out of our system in the forever wars that we send trillions to year after year that she has always supported. A pittance toward the billions of dollars we continue to send to Israel to fund a genocide in Gaza."
The candidate, who is a proponent of Medicare for All, added that "people see through" Collins' claims that she is a "moderate" Republican.
"The idea that she stands up for the needs of Mainers over that of corporations is really laid bare with something just like the Rural Health Transformation Program," Platner told Common Dreams. "The numbers don't lie. It's very obvious what she's doing. And I am seeing in every single corner of the state and hearing from not just Democrats, but Independents and Republicans, who fundamentally understand that Susan Collins is someone who, for decades now, has represented not their interests, but the interests of those who donate the most money to her. And they're sick and tired of it."
While Collins has boasted that the program included in the OBBBA is helping rural Maine residents, the law is already harming millions of people across the country and making it harder for them to access crucial healthcare a year after it was signed by President Donald Trump. According to Protect Our Care, 3.8 million Americans have lost coverage through Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program since the law was passed. Fifteen million people are projected to lose their healthcare by 2034. More than 1,000 hospitals, clinics, and nursing homes have shut down since the OBBBA was passed, as well as 40 maternity wards.
"When your community no longer has access to high-quality [healthcare], it doesn't matter if you identify as a Democrat or a Republican or an Independent," said Platner. "You have lost something that your community needs to survive and you have lost it because establishment politicians like Susan Collins have for decades fought not for your community, have fought not for the needs of working Mainers, but have fought to protect the profits of health insurance companies, corporations, and private equity, and that must come to an end."
"It should be a no-brainer: Our tax dollars should not fund a genocide," said Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar, who supports an amendment to cut off $3.3 billion in military aid to Israel.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday compared US aid to "welfare" and said he wants it to end, remarks that came as top Democrats in the US House of Representatives expressed opposition to an amendment that would cut off $3.3 billion in American military assistance to Israel.
"I want to stop American aid," Netanyahu said during a televised event in Israel on Tuesday, saying he wants the US aid phaseout to begin this year. "We can finance ourselves."
In recent weeks, amid growing US public backlash against continued military aid to Israel as its military commits atrocities in Gaza and throughout the Middle East, Netanyahu has signaled a desire to "shift the framework" of the US-Israeli relationship "from aid to partnership," as the prime minister put it in a June 1 letter to US Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-Ind.).
"Israel deeply appreciates the financial component of the military aid the United States has generously provided us over the years," Netanyahu wrote in the letter. "The time has now arrived for us to move from aid recipient to partner."
Netanyahu's stated vision aligns with legislative text included in annual US defense policy legislation, which would deepen integration of the American and Israeli militaries. Earlier this week, the Republican-controlled House Rules Committee refused to allow a floor vote on an amendment by Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) that proposed stripping the integration measure from the bill, which is currently moving through Congress.
But the rules panel is allowing a full House vote on a separate Massie-led amendment that would prevent any US State Department or national security appropriations from being "obligated or expended for Israel" in the coming fiscal year. The amendment would specifically cut off the $3.3 billion in assistance Israel is slated to receive via the Foreign Military Financing Program in 2027.
Massie's proposal has spotlighted a consequential rift in the House Democratic caucus, even as an overwhelming majority of Democratic voters support ending US aid to the Israeli government.
Prominent progressives—including Reps. Greg Casar (D-Texas), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), and Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.)—have said they plan to vote yes on the amendment, which could come to a vote next week.
"It should be a no-brainer: Our tax dollars should not fund a genocide," Omar, the deputy chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said Tuesday. "We cannot continue to be complicit in Israel’s crimes against humanity."
But top Democrats, including the ranking members of key committees, are opposed to the Massie amendment, which is unlikely to get through the Republican-controlled House. Few Republicans are expected to support Massie's proposal.
"I don't want Israel to be without what they need," Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY), the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, told Jewish Insider earlier this week, following a closed-door House Democratic caucus meeting.
Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, said he is "against" the Massie proposal because it would cut off "all aid for Israel."
"I don’t think there’s support for it," Smith added, "but we’ll see."
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), who is staunchly pro-Israel and a recipient of AIPAC campaign cash, has not publicly taken a position on the Massie amendment.
The Hill reported that the House Democratic leadership told caucus members during Tuesday's private meeting to "vote according to their conscience" on the amendment, as some members expressed concerns about the proposal's broad scope and the process by which it is being brought to a vote.
Casar, the chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, acknowledged earlier this week that—if passed—the amendment "may cut off both military weapons (~$3.3 billion) and some diplomatic funding (~$50 million)."
“While I would prefer to vote on an amendment that stripped just military funding,” Casar wrote on social media, “I think opposing the billions in military funding is what’s most important here.”
Speaking to MS NOW earlier this week, Casar said that "it's really important for members to recognize that, while a relatively very small amount of diplomatic funding could be implicated on the amendment... virtually all of the money is military financing that the Israeli military has used to buy fighter planes and attack helicopters."
“You’re going to see a growing number of Democrats come out against sending more money for weapons for Netanyahu’s military,” Casar predicted. “In the past, it was just a very, very small number. You could count on maybe one or two hands how many members of Congress would vote against sending the Israeli military money for more weapons.”
"NPR’s reporting that Justice Alito is retiring was early. But it wasn’t wrong."
Following a series of major US Supreme Court decisions, NPR retracted an erroneous report on Tuesday that conservative Justice Samuel Alito was planning to retire.
But while that report turned out to be false, a progressive legal action group is warning that it pointed to something potentially very real: That President Donald Trump could try to push aging right-wing justices like 76-year-old Alito, as well as 78-year-old Justice Clarence Thomas, to retire early so he can replace them with young judges who can cement a right-wing majority for decades.
"NPR’s reporting that Justice Alito is retiring was early. But it wasn’t wrong," said Josh Orton, the president of Demand Justice, and Ezra Levin, the co-executive director of Indivisible, in a statement on Wednesday. "We know that Donald Trump will do whatever he can to hold onto power, and we are prepared for him trying to force Alito, Thomas, or both off the bench this year, while Republicans still control the Senate and can ram through a replacement."
It's not an unfounded fear. It's something Trump has discussed openly.
In April, the president told Fox Business interviewer Maria Bartiromo that he was "prepared" to appoint as many as three justices before his term is up—perhaps alluding to the possibility that the liberal 72-year-old Justice Sonia Sotomayor could die before the next president is inaugurated or that the 71-year-old conservative Chief Justice John Roberts could retire.
"In theory, it's two—you just read the statistics—it could be two, could be three, could be one," Trump said. "I don't know. I'm prepared to do it."
He called Alito—who authored major decisions to gut abortion rights, allow religious businesses to deny contraceptive coverage to employees, and kneecap public sector unions—"one of the great justices of all time," but added, "It’d be nice to say, now I have somebody for 40 years.”
He also invoked the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, whom he said “really hurt herself within the Democrat Party" by refusing to retire when Barack Obama was president. After Ginsburg's death in 2020, Trump replaced her with Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who expanded the court's conservative majority to 6-3.
Trump was asked about possible Supreme Court vacancies again in an interview with Breitbart News on Wednesday after NPR jumped the gun on Alito's retirement. The president suggested he was torn.
“Well I think you know, if you listen to people, there are three potential vacancies for various reasons, so I’m certainly prepared,” he said. “There are a lot of great people out there who would like to have that position.”
While he praised Alito, describing himself as the justice's "single biggest fan," he reiterated that putting “a young conservative judge on the bench for 40 years” is a “very important thing." He said that the idea of replacing either Alito or Thomas was a "mixed blessing."
Rumblings of a concerted push for both Alito and Thomas to pack up can be traced back to 2024, when The Washington Post reported that Trump adviser Mike Davis was championing the idea in conservative legal circles.
But neither man has indicated plans to retire at this moment. And if Thomas, who has sat on the bench since 1991, were to retire before the next Congress is sworn in, he'd be stopping less than two years shy of eclipsing William O. Douglas to become the longest-serving Supreme Court justice.
Demand Justice, however, is betting on long-term political power winning the day. The group said it has invested $3 million "to prepare for a 2026 Supreme Court fight."
This will include pressuring Republican senators to reject Trump's pick—particularly those like Sens. Mitch McConnell (Ky.) and Thom Tillis (NC) who are retiring at the end of this term, Sens. John Cornyn (Texas) and Bill Cassidy (La.) who lost their primaries, and Sens. Susan Collins (Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), who have (at least rhetorically) broken with Trump more frequently than their GOP colleagues.
Orton and Levin said that "Trump will choose his nominee for one reason: loyalty." They said he'd likely pick somebody who'd validate even his most lawless actions even more than the current justices do—including supporting his efforts to overturn an election result, which the court rejected in 2020.
"We’ll be ready to expose them," Orton and Levin said. "And we’ll be ready to fight."