March, 31 2021, 12:00am EDT
Senate War Room Launches Hall of Shame Awarding Republican Senators Top Spots for Historic Obstruction of Biden Nominees
Those named to the "Senate Obstructionist Hall of Shame" not only voted against most—if not all—of President Biden’s slate of qualified Cabinet nominees, but also worked to actively obstruct the confirmation process Amid a global pandemic, unprecedented unemployment and poverty, and rising national and cyber security threats, these senators slowed down the confirmation of top health and national security roles The only Senator to have voted against every single Cabinet secretary, Josh Hawley (R-MO), takes the top spot in the "Senate Obstructionist Hall of Shame," with Senators Ted Cruz, Rick Scott, Tom Cotton, Rand Paul, John Barrasso, and Steve Daines following Accountable Senate War Room: "Senate Republicans failed to sink a single Cabinet nominee, and are left with little to show for months of obstruction. More importantly, the American people saw right through these bad-faith efforts to the truth: Republican senators care more about their special interest donors’ bottom line than the American people."
WASHINGTON
Today, Accountable Senate War Room unveiled the "Senate Obstructionist Hall of Shame" to call out the top Republican senators who, for months, delayed and obstructed President Biden's Cabinet nominees from being confirmed. Although their efforts ultimately failed with Biden's Cabinet on the verge of being fully-formed, these senators should be held accountable for their bad-faith tactics and called out for prioritizing special interest donors over American workers and families.
"From early on, Republican senators made it clear that they were going to do everything in their power to prevent the new administration from getting to work, even if that meant breaking with the long-standing tradition of ensuring the new administration's Cabinet is swiftly confirmed," said Mairead Lynn, spokesperson for Accountable Senate War Room. "Senate Republicans failed to sink a single Cabinet nominee, and are left with little to show for months of obstruction. More importantly, the American people saw right through these bad-faith efforts to the truth: Republican senators care more about their special interest donors' bottom line than the American people."
Members of the "Senate Obstructionist Hall of Shame" include:
- Senator Josh Hawley: Hawley made a household name for himself after attempting to overthrow a democratically-held election when his preferred candidate didn't win, helping incite a violent insurrection at the U.S. Capitol that left five dead. The obstruction didn't stop there: Hawley would go on to vote against 19 of Biden's Cabinet level nominees, and was at the center of efforts to prevent a quick confirmation of Alejandro Mayorkas for Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) -- the department responsible for stopping future insurrectionist attacks against our country.
- Senator Ted Cruz: Cruz joined his colleague in spreading false information regarding the 2020 election that helped incite the violent insurrection, and still voted to overturn a democratically-held election to appease his right-wing base. He continued obstructing President Biden's Cabinet by voting against 18 of Biden's qualified nominees, most notably Alejandro Mayorkas and Xavier Becerra. Cruz stood behind Trump's unqualified and conflicted nominees, but drew the line at Biden's slate of change-making nominees who would hold his special interest allies accountable.
- Senator Rick Scott: Another key Senator who helped incite the insurrection, Scott's obstruction didn't stop there. He was one of the senators who, from the beginning, hinted at what was to come, refusing to answer whether Biden's Cabinet picks deserved floor votes in the Senate. He voted against 18 of Biden's crisis-tested nominees, and took special aim at Neera Tanden, whom he called a "terrible choice" and a "big-government, big-spending radical liberal." Accountable Senate War Room discovered a disturbing trend: Republican senators tended to use harsher language when referring to President Biden's nominees of color, often painting them as extreme and "radical."
- Senator Tom Cotton: Cotton came out swinging against Biden's Cabinet before Inauguration Day, giving a glimpse into what was to come from him and his colleagues. He voted against 17 of Biden's nominees, taking particular aim at Xavier Becerra for secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS). Cotton called on his fellow senators to join him in opposing the nominee in a letter -- an offer they did not take him up on -- and even used his own campaign funds to launch false and misleading attack ads against Becerra. These efforts failed as Becerra was confirmed with bipartisan support.
- Senator Rand Paul: Paul voted against 14 of Biden's qualified and crisis-tested nominees. Early on, Paul took aim at Xavier Becerra in a slew of false and misleading attacks against the nominee's personal political beliefs, using Fox News to propagate these lies and COVID-19 conspiracy theories. He was also particularly disrespectful to Rachel Levine, the nominee for under secretary of HHS and the first transgender person nominated to serve in a presidential Cabinet, in a slew of false and "harmful misinterpretations" against the transgender community.
- Senator John Barrasso: Voting against 12 of Biden's nominees, Barrasso couldn't even stay true to his own words from just four years ago when he said "the President coming in for his first term ought to be able to have the Cabinet. He won the election. He ought to have who he wants surrounding him." Barrasso's change of heart was immediate, as one of the first senators to promise a tough confirmation battle. Most notably, Barrasso took aim at Deb Haaland, Biden's nominee for Interior secretary, whose confirmation he worked to sink both leading up to and during her hearings. Referring to her as "radical" on more than one occasion, Barrasso's disdain for Haaland was not well hidden, even getting aggressive with her during her confirmation hearing in a line of questioning that garnered national attention.
- Senator Steve Daines: Daines voted against 11 of Biden's nominees and took a similar interest in sinking Deb Haaland's confirmation for Interior secretary. Before a hearing was even scheduled, Daines' opposition to Haaland was fierce. He opposed the nominee in a statement where he referred to her as "radical" - deemed a racist, sexist "dog-whistle" by the Billings Gazette Editorial Board - and threatened to block her confirmation. During her hearing, he was equally hostile and condescending, using his time to air personal grievances from past comments Haaland had made about him and his colleagues.
Learn more about these senators' obstruction and what the Senate War Room did to hold them accountable here.
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.
LATEST NEWS
Amazon Won't Display Tariff Costs After Trump Whines to Bezos
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said all companies should be "displaying how much tariffs contribute to the total price of products."
Apr 29, 2025
Amazon said Tuesday that it would not display tariff costs next to products on its website after U.S. President Donald Trump called the e-commerce giant's billionaire founder, Jeff Bezos, to complain about the reported plan.
Citing an unnamed person familiar with Amazon's supposed plan, Punchbowl Newsreported that "the shopping site will display how much of an item's cost is derived from tariffs—right next to the product's total listed price."
Many Amazon products come from China. While U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent claimed Sunday that "there is a path" to a tariff deal with the Chinese government, Trump has recently caused global economic alarm by hitting the country with a 145% tax and imposing a 10% minimum for other nations.
According toCNN, which spoke with two senior White House officials on Tuesday, Trump's call to Bezos "came shortly after one of the senior officials phoned the president to inform him of the story" from Punchbowl.
"Of course he was pissed," one officials said of Trump. "Why should a multibillion-dollar company pass off costs to consumers?"
Asked about how the call with Bezos went, Trump told reporters: "Great. Jeff Bezos was very nice. He was terrific. He solved the problem very quickly, and he did the right thing, and he's a good guy."
Earlier Tuesday, during a briefing, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt called Amazon's reported plan "a hostile and political act," and said that "this is another reason why Americans should buy American."
Leavitt also asked why Amazon didn't have such displays during the Biden administration and held up a printed version of a 2021 Reutersreport about the company's "compliance with the Chinese government edict" to stop allowing customer ratings and reviews in China, allegedly prompted by negative feedback left on a collection President Xi Jinping's speeches and writings.
Asked whether Bezos is "still a Trump supporter," Leavitt said that she "will not speak to" the president's relationship with him.
As CNBCdetailed Tuesday:
Less than two hours after the press briefing, an Amazon spokesperson told CNBC that the company was only ever considering listing tariff charges on some products for Amazon Haul, its budget-focused shopping section.
"The team that runs our ultra low cost Amazon Haul store has considered listing import charges on certain products," the spokesperson said. "This was never a consideration for the main Amazon site and nothing has been implemented on any Amazon properties."
But in a follow-up statement an hour after that one, the spokesperson clarified that the plan to show tariff surcharges was "never approved" and is "not going to happen."
In response to Bloomberg also reporting on Amazon's claim that tariff displays were never under consideration for the company's main site, U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick wrote on social media Tuesday, "Good move."
Before Amazon publicly killed any plans for showing consumers the costs from Trump's import taxes, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said on the chamber's floor Tuesday that companies should be "displaying how much tariffs contribute to the total price of products."
"I urge more companies, particularly national retailers that compete with Amazon, to adopt this practice. If Amazon has the courage to display why prices are going up because of tariffs, so should all of our other national retailers who compete with them. And I am calling on them to do it now," he said.
Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar (D-Texas) on Tuesday framed the whole incident as an example of how "Trump has created a government by and for the billionaires," declaring: "If anyone ever doubted that Trump, and Musk, and Bezos, and the billionaires are all [on] one team, just look at what happened at Amazon today. Bezos immediately caved and walked back a plan to tell Americans how much Trump's tariffs are costing them."
Casar also claimed Bezos wants "big tax cuts and sweatheart deals," and pointed to Amazon's Prime Video paying $40 million to license a documentary about the life of First Lady Melania Trump. In addition to the film agreement, Bezos has come under fire for Amazon's $1 million donation to the president's inauguration fund.
As the owner of
The Washington Post, Bezos—the world's second-richest person, after Trump adviser Elon Musk—also faced intense criticism for blocking the newspaper's planned endorsement of the president's 2024 Democratic challenger, Kamala Harris, and demanding its opinion page advocate for "personal liberties and free markets."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Medicare for All, Says Sanders, Would Show American People 'Government Is Listening to Them'
"The goal of the current administration and their billionaire buddies is to pile on endless cuts," said one nurse and union leader. "Even on our hardest days, we won't stop fighting for Medicare for All."
Apr 29, 2025
On Tuesday, Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Democratic Reps. Pramila Jayapal of Washington and Debbie Dingell of Michigan reintroduced the Medicare for All Act, re-upping the legislative quest to enact a single-payer healthcare system even as the bill faces little chance of advancing in the GOP-controlled House of Representatives or Senate.
Hundreds of nurses, healthcare providers, and workers from across the country joined the lawmakers for a press conference focused on the bill's reintroduction in front of the Capitol on Tuesday.
"We have the radical idea of putting healthcare dollars into healthcare, not into profiteering or bureaucracy," said Sanders during the press conference. "A simple healthcare system, which is what we are talking about, substantially reduces administrative costs, but it would also make life a lot easier, not just for patients, but for nurses" and other healthcare providers, he continued.
"So let us stand together," Sanders told the crowd. "Let us do what the American people want and let us transform this country. And when we pass Medicare for All, it's not only about improving healthcare for all our people—it's doing something else. It's telling the American people that, finally, the American government is listening to them."
Under Medicare for All, the government would pay for all healthcare services, including dental, vision, prescription drugs, and other care.
"It is a travesty when 85 million people are uninsured or underinsured and millions more are drowning in medical debt in the richest nation on Earth," said Jayapal in a statement on Tuesday.
In 2020, a study in the peer-reviewed medical journal The Lancet found that a single-payer program like Medicare for All would save Americans more than $450 billion and would likely prevent 68,000 deaths every year. That same year, the Congressional Budget Office found that a single-payer system that resembles Medicare for All would yield some $650 billion in savings in 2030.
Members of National Nurses United (NNU), the nation's largest union of registered nurses, were also at the press conference on Tuesday.
In a statement, the group highlighted that the bill comes at a critical time, given GOP-led threats to programs like Medicaid.
"The goal of the current administration and their billionaire buddies is to pile on endless cuts and attacks so that we become too demoralized and overwhelmed to move forward," said Bonnie Castillo, registered nurse and executive director of NNU. "Even on our hardest days, we won't stop fighting for Medicare for All."
Per Sanders' office, the legislation has 104 co-sponsors in the House and 16 in the Senate, which is an increase from the previous Congress.
A poll from Gallup released in 2023 found that 7 in 10 Democrats support a government-run healthcare system. The poll also found that across the political spectrum, 57% of respondents believe the government should ensure all people have healthcare coverage.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Advocates Warn GOP Just Unveiled 'Most Dangerous Higher Ed Bill in US History'
"This is the boldest attempt we've seen in recent history to segregate higher education along racial and class lines," said the Debt Collective.
Apr 29, 2025
At a markup session held by a U.S. House committee on the Republican Party's recently unveiled higher education reform bill Tuesday, one Democratic lawmaker had a succinct description for the legislation.
"This bill is a dream-killer," said Rep. Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.) of the so-called Student Success and Taxpayer Savings Plan, which was introduced by Education and Workforce Committee Chairman Tim Walberg (R-Mich.) as part of an effort to find $330 billion in education programs to offset President Donald Trump's tax plan.
Tasked with helping to make $4.5 trillion in tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans possible, Walberg on Monday proposed changes to the Pell Grant program, which has provided financial aid to more than 80 million low-income students since it began in 1972. The bill would allocate more funding to the program but would also reduce the number of students who are eligible for the grants, changing the definition of a "full-time" student to one enrolled in at least 30 semester hours each academic year—up from 12 hours. Students would be cut off from the financial assistance entirely if they are enrolled less than six hours per semester.
David Baime, senior vice president for government relations for the American Association of Community Colleges, suggested the legislation doesn't account for the realities faced by many students who benefit from Pell Grants.
"These students are almost always working a substantial number of hours each week and often have family responsibilities. Pell Grants help them meet the cost of tuition and required fees," Baime toldInside Higher Ed. "We commend the committee for identifying substantial additional resources to help finance Pell, but it should not come at the cost of undermining the ability of low-income working students to enroll at a community college."
The draft bill would also end subsidized loans, which don't accrue interest when a student is still in college and gives borrowers a six-month grace period after graduation, starting in July 2026. More than 30 million borrowers currently have subsidized loans.
The proposal would also reduce the number of student loan repayment options from those offered by the Biden administration to just two, with borrowers given the option for a fixed monthly amount paid over a certain period of time or an income-based plan.
At the markup session on Tuesday, Bonamici pointed to her own experience of paying for college and law school "through a combination of grants and loans and work study and food stamps," and noted that her Republican colleagues on the committee also "graduated from college."
"And more than half of them have gone on to earn advanced degrees," said the congresswoman. "And yet those same individuals who benefited so much from accessing higher education are supporting a bill that will prevent others from doing so."
“In a time when higher ed is being attacked, this bill is another assault,” @RepBonamici calls out committee leaders for wanting to gut financial aid.
“With this bill, they will be taking that opportunity [of higher ed] away from others. This bill is a dream killer.” pic.twitter.com/UjTYvnOEKv
— Student Borrower Protection Center (@theSBPC) April 29, 2025
Democrats on the committee also spoke out against provisions that would cap loans a student can take out for graduate programs at $100,000; the Grad PLUS program has allowed students to borrow up to the cost of attendance.
The Parent PLUS program, which has been found to provide crucial help to Black families accessing higher education, would also be restricted.
"Black students, brown students, first-generation college students, first-generation Americans, will not have access to college," said Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.).
“We cannot take away access to loans, and not replace it with anything else, not make the system better. We know the outcome here—Black, brown, and poor students will not figure it out. Instead, only elite students from the 1% will continue to access education.”@RepSummerLee🙇 pic.twitter.com/oGbRH154Ed
— Student Borrower Protection Center (@theSBPC) April 29, 2025
As the Student Borrower Protection Center (SBPC) warned last week, eliminating the Grad PLUS program without also lowering the cost of graduate programs would "subject millions of future borrowers to an unregulated and predatory private student loan market, while doing little to reduce overall student debt and the need to borrow."
Aissa Canchola Bañez, policy director for SBPC, told The Hill that the draft bill is "an attack on students and working families with student loan debt."
"We've seen an array of really problematic proposals that are on the table for congressional Republicans," Canchola Bañez said. "Many of these would cause massive spikes for families with monthly student loan payments."
With the proposal, which Republicans hope to pass through reconciliation with a simple majority, the party would be "restructuring higher education for the worse," said the Debt Collective.
"It's the most dangerous higher ed bill in U.S. history," said the student loan borrowers union. "It strips the Department of Education of virtually every authority to cancel student debt. Eliminates every repayment program. Abolishes subsidized loans."
"This is the boldest attempt we've seen in recent history to segregate higher education along racial and class lines," the group added. "We have to push back."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular