

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.

On Thursday, Rep. James Clyburn (D-South Carolina) reintroduced the Accessible, Affordable Internet for All Act (AAIA).
On Thursday, Rep. James Clyburn (D-South Carolina) reintroduced the Accessible, Affordable Internet for All Act (AAIA). He first unveiled the legislation last June and the House of Representatives passed it in July as part of the Moving Forward Act.
The AAIA is expected to move in tandem with broader infrastructure proposals emanating from the House and the Biden administration. The lead sponsor of the Senate companion bill is Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota).
The AAIA is the product of a task force Rep. Clyburn organized, working on broadband proposals in coordination with the House Energy and Commerce Committee and Senate counterparts. The effort was spurred by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's prioritization of broadband access and equity as a centerpiece of House Democrats' infrastructure proposals.
Free Press Action Vice President of Policy and General Counsel Matt Wood made the following statement:
"The AAIA passed the House last year in much the same form. This pivotal legislation would have become law then if last year's Senate majority were serious about affordable and universal internet access.
"This landmark broadband package is just as necessary as ever. It builds on the passage of the Emergency Broadband Benefit in the December stimulus bill and the emergency-connectivity fund for remote learning included in the American Rescue Plan passed just this week. The AAIA supplements and extends the funding for both of those vital programs.
"We've learned a lot over the past year, and the pandemic has ended the debate about the value of internet access. We know that broadband is an essential utility during times of national emergency and all other times too -- a service that federal and local governments have an obligation to help provide to those who can't afford the cost of getting connected.
"The bill's affordability measures are crucial, even though the bulk of the spending in an infrastructure bill naturally goes to constructing new networks. The majority of people disconnected today are offline not because they can't find broadband in their neighborhoods but because they can't afford the cost. This affordability gap disproportionately impacts communities of color facing systemic discrimination and economic injustice.
"Beyond its innovative ideas for funding new networks, the AAIA addresses the fact that infrastructure does little good when people don't have choices about what to buy, information about what it truly costs them and the ability to pay that price.
"The legislation also requires the FCC to collect pricing data so we can finally assess what people really pay for broadband, and understand when and where they're priced out of this essential service. It mandates improved transparency and clarity in how service providers communicate those terms of service to their customers. And it includes a host of important investments in digital equity and inclusion while also removing legislative obstacles faced by communities seeking to build and operate their own municipal and cooperative broadband networks.
"These kinds of smart public investments in broadband affordability and choice will ensure that the initial down payment on closing the digital divide in recent COVID relief bills is supported by enough funding and forward thinking to finish the job."
Free Press was created to give people a voice in the crucial decisions that shape our media. We believe that positive social change, racial justice and meaningful engagement in public life require equitable access to technology, diverse and independent ownership of media platforms, and journalism that holds leaders accountable and tells people what's actually happening in their communities.
(202) 265-1490“Inaction from House Democratic leadership is complicity," said an organizer for the National Iranian American Council.
Democratic leadership in Congress has been quick to condemn President Donald Trump after his genocidal threat to wipe out Iranian civilization on Tuesday. But critics are wondering why they didn't take stronger action when they had the opportunity weeks ago.
Trump pledged Tuesday morning that "a whole civilization will die tonight" if Iran refuses to open the Strait of Hormuz—a threat to carry out widespread destruction and mass slaughter across a nation of more than 90 million people.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) referred to the president as "an extremely sick person" and said "each Republican who refuses to join us in voting against this wanton war of choice owns every consequence of whatever the hell this is."
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) joined in, agreeing that "Congress must immediately end this reckless war of choice in Iran before Donald Trump plunges us into World War III" and that "it's time for every single Republican to put patriotic duty over party and stop the madness."
Journalist Adam Johnson, however, noted that Democrats had a chance to “stop the madness” weeks ago, when it seemed they may have had the votes to pass a war powers resolution in the House at the end of March that would have limited Trump’s ability to further strike Iran. But instead, said Johnson, “ranking Member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.) delayed the House War Powers vote until mid-April.”
At the time, Meeks contended that Democrats did not have enough votes to ensure the measure would pass and that he'd bring it to the floor only if it could be guaranteed that Democrats would win.
However, news reports indicated that at least three Republicans—Reps. Thomas Massie (Ky.), Warren Davidson (Ohio), and Nancy Mace (SC) were all likely on board to pass the resolution, as were most or all of the four Democrats who voted against the one that fell just short in February.
Meanwhile, some Democrats whose absences were cited to justify delaying the vote reportedly returned to town in time for one to be held.
Even if there were indeed not enough votes, it was unclear why Meeks believed additional votes would be there over two weeks later.
In the days since Democrats balked at bringing the resolution to the floor, Trump has moved thousands more US troops to the Middle East, and his threats against Iran have grown markedly more extreme.
Over Easter weekend, he threatened on Truth Social to launch attacks against civilian infrastructure, including power plants and bridges, actions that Amnesty International said could amount to war crimes and "would unleash catastrophic harm on millions.” Asked about his comments during the White House Easter celebration, Trump said that if Iran does not open the strait by Tuesday, he is "considering blowing everything up."
He has also reportedly mulled committing ground troops to several operations to occupy parts of Iranian territory in hopes of securing the strait or to carry out a mission to seize Iran's enriched uranium, both of which experts have warned would likely prove catastrophic and put American troops in danger.
In a statement issued Tuesday, Meeks joined the chorus of Democrats condemning Trump's comments, saying that "threatening to destroy Iranian power plants and bridges is not a strategy, it is a war crime."
However, his statement did not mention any plans to re-launch a war powers resolution once Congress returns to session.
Meeks' office did not immediately respond to a request for comment about whether he plans to bring the resolution back to the floor next week or whether he regretted not pushing harder to bring the vote before the recess.
Erik Sperling, the executive director of Just Foreign Policy, described Trump's actions as a predictable result of Meeks and other House Democratic leaders "refusing to hold a vote to have Congress go on record about Trump's impending escalation."
"They knew escalation would entail genocidal war crimes and/or ground troops," he said, "and still let the House stay silent."
Iran has remained steadfast that it will not negotiate a ceasefire unless the US agrees to completely end hostilities, lift sanctions, and compensate Iran for the war's damage.
A former Iranian diplomat briefed on negotiations between Iran and Omani mediators told The New York Times that the plan called on the US Congress to formally end the war and that any compensation would have to be guaranteed by the legislative branch.
According to a CNN poll released last week, disapproval of Trump's war in Iran has risen over the past month, with 66% of Americans saying they somewhat or strongly oppose it and just 34% in approval.
Independent journalist Aída Chávez, who has covered previous attempts by Democrats to drag out war powers votes, said that the party "could position themselves as the ones ending this historically unpopular war."
"They could force war powers vote after war powers vote," she said. "They’re choosing not to."
The National Iranian American Council (NIAC) is planning a press conference with around two dozen other groups outside Jeffries' office in New York on Thursday to protest what it called "a dangerous act of political negligence" by House Democrats, "that continues to leave the illegal US-Israel war on Iran unchecked."
“Inaction from House Democratic leadership is complicity," said Etan Mabourakh, NIAC Action's organizing manager. "Our Iranian American community will not let Democrats repeat previous mistakes out of political fear... we demand leaders with the courage to act boldly and take votes in the House to stop this war now."
But as Trump's threats grow more "unhinged," some in Congress are saying merely reining in his war powers is no longer enough and many Democrats have called for him to be impeached or removed by his Cabinet via the 25th Amendment.
"Yes. We need to assert congressional authority and stop this illegal war in Iran, said Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.). "But, Trump is clearly an unstable warmonger at odds with the will of the people. Removal is the top priority."
"We can still stop this," said one think tank.
As US lawmakers and the international community registered President Donald Trump's threat to commit genocide in Iran on Tuesday, rights advocates demanded action from Trump's Cabinet, congressional leaders, and the country's European allies to take action—while US Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez issued a reminder that the president can be stopped by a lack of action as well, if those in the US military chain of command refuse to carry out his orders.
Trump's threat to wipe out Iran's civilization of 93 million people "merits removal from office," said Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY). "To every individual in the president’s chain of command: You have a duty to refuse illegal orders. That includes carrying out this threat."
Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) also addressed the Joint Chiefs of Staff, whose chairman, Dan Caine, has been joining Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth in briefings recently as Hegseth has made bellicose threats against Iran and portrayed the unprovoked US-Israeli assault as a holy war.
Lieu reminded the top military leaders that the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and federal law prohibit war crimes.
"Obviously eradicating a whole civilization constitutes a war crime. You must disobey that order," said the congressman. "If you commit war crimes, the next administration will prosecute you."
Erik Sperling, executive director of think tank Just Foreign Policy, called on Senate and House Democrats, including those on committees that oversee the armed services and foreign relations, to make Lieu's threat "absolutely clear."
"We can still stop this," said Just Foreign Policy on social media.
Journalist Ryan Grim of Drop Site News added that federal laws prohibiting war crimes "will apply in January 2029," after Trump is out of office.
Since Trump took office for his second term in January 2025, Democratic lawmakers have previously issued reminders to the US military that the UCMJ prohibits service members from carrying out illegal orders, with six House members and senators releasing a video in November—as the Pentagon was continuing its bombings of boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean and threatening to attack Venezuela—to remind them, "You must refuse illegal orders."
Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) was among the lawmakers who participated in the video. On Tuesday the former CIA analyst addressed service members across the military once again, warning that "targeting civilians en masse would be a clear violation of the law of armed conflict as laid out in the Geneva Conventions, as well as the Pentagon's Law of War Manual."
"If [service members] are today or have been asked to do things that violate the law and their training, it puts them in very real legal jeopardy. I know that our service members up and down the chain of command know their duty and the law to refuse illegal orders," said Slotkin. "It’s moments like these that are why we made the video to service members last year. And I hope and believe our troops—especially those in command—will have the moral clarity to push back if they are given clearly illegal orders.
"Would you be able to live with yourself," asked Sen. Chris Murphy, "if you threatened your neighbor's child with murder in order to get your neighbor to behave the way you wanted?"
US Sen. Chris Murphy said Tuesday that President Donald Trump's genocidal threat to wipe Iran off the map doesn't just run afoul of domestic and international legal statutes—it is, the Democratic lawmaker argued, "fundamentally evil."
"This is a war crime, what the president is proposing," Murphy (Conn.) said in a two-minute video posted to social media after Trump threatened to destroy the "whole civilization" of Iran if it doesn't reach a deal with the US to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.
"That is pure evil," the senator said of Trump's threat, which the president issued on his Truth Social platform. "But even if he doesn't go through with it, even if Iran agrees to a deal, this is just not how the human race should operate—compelling others' behavior under the threat of murder of innocent people."
"Would you be able to live with yourself," asked Murphy, "if you threatened your neighbor's child with murder in order to get your neighbor to behave the way you wanted?"
Watch:
In an age of creeping relativism, a universal moral law still exists.
Threatening to end an entire civilization of 90 million people in order to bend a nation’s conduct to your will is grossly morally wrong. It is evil. And we should say this loudly. pic.twitter.com/oRU1rVgLrv
— Chris Murphy 🟧 (@ChrisMurphyCT) April 7, 2026
Trump's threat to escalate his illegal assault by waging total war on Iranian society sparked a wave of condemnations from lawmakers, legal scholars, and human rights advocates who demanded immediate deescalation and a lasting end to the conflict. The threat against the nation of more than 90 million people also prompted growing calls for the US president's removal from office.
But Trump's genocidal remarks were also seen as the most glaring evidence yet of the dire threat the US president and his enablers pose to all of humanity.
"This is a nightmare scenario," said US Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.), one of two Iranian Americans in Congress. "It's apocalyptic."
Rep. Ansari: "Donald Trump is trying to normalize language that essentially threatening genocide, threatening the potential use of nuclear weapons ... how is nobody trying to restrain this madman who is trying to get all of us killed. We have mechanisms to restrain him that are… pic.twitter.com/IVvIYlYvbr
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) April 7, 2026
US Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) said in a statement that "with each passing day, it becomes increasingly apparent that Donald Trump is unstable and a clear and present danger, not just to the American people but to the world."
"He must be removed from office before he causes incalculable and unfathomable harm," Markey added. "His threats cannot be dismissed as mere rhetoric. This is as grave a moment as the world has faced in the nuclear era.”