

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.

Madison Tang, CODEPINK China campaign coordinator, madison@codepink.org
Carley Towne, CODEPINK Co-Director, carley@codepink.org
CODEPINK, a women-led peace organization, calls on Congress to reject President Biden's record-high FY 2022 military budget of $753 billion, a $ 13 billion increase over the Trump administration's previous spendthrift military budget. In supporting a minimum 10% reduction in Pentagon spending, CODEPINK noted the annual savings could eradicate hunger and homelessness each year in the United States.
CODEPINK, a women-led peace organization, calls on Congress to reject President Biden's record-high FY 2022 military budget of $753 billion, a $ 13 billion increase over the Trump administration's previous spendthrift military budget. In supporting a minimum 10% reduction in Pentagon spending, CODEPINK noted the annual savings could eradicate hunger and homelessness each year in the United States.
"To spend nearly a trillion dollars to prepare for war pulls back the curtain on the Biden administration's professed interest in lifting people out of poverty," says Carley Towne, CODEPINK co-director. "While millions of Americans are steeped in debt, living paycheck to paycheck, facing eviction and struggling to pay medical bills amidst an ongoing health pandemic and recession, the Administration hurls taxpayer dollars at an increasingly privatized for-profit war industry."
Biden's budget includes upwards of $30 billion for new nuclear weapons slated to cost $1.7 trillion over the next decades, billions for the F-35 fighter jet, a boondoggle with an eventual $1-2 trillion price tag, $17.4 billion for an unnecessary Space Force and at least $51.5 billion annually to maintain over 800 overseas bases and establish new ones in the Indo-Pacific, where the Biden administration's pivot to Asia sets us on a reckless and dangerous course toward war with China.
President Biden's final Pentagon budget request signals alarming continuity with the Trump Administration which, over the course of four years, increased the Pentagon budget by $133 billion with bipartisan Congressional approval.
In light of the Biden Administration's announcement that the United States will be withdrawing troops from Afghanistan by September 2021, the Pentagon budget should reflect a corresponding $50 billion reduction.
Instead, Biden's proposed Pentagon budget of $753 would provide the Department of Defense with more money than the Departments of State, Justice, Education, Transportation, Health and Human Services, and the Environmental Protection Agency combined.
At the same time that Biden is set to withdraw U.S. troops from Afghanistan, Biden and Congress are using China as the justification for this massive increase in military spending by framing China as a danger to the U.S. and its allies. Biden's proposed Pentagon budget identifies China as a "top challenge," and Secretary of Defense Austin has stated, "China is our pacing threat." In reality, the inflated threat of China's military pales in comparison to the United States military: the U.S. has over 800 overseas military bases, hundreds of which surround the borders of China; China currently has only one official overseas military base, located in Djibouti.
"This same tactic of threat inflation led us to the U.S.'s catastrophic invasion of Iraq in 2003. The consequences of that intervention were not only horrific overseas but also proved deadly and harmful for Arab, Middle Eastern, Muslim, and Muslim-perceived communities," said Madison Tang, coordinator of CODEPINK's China Is Not Our Enemy campaign. "Today, we are already seeing the consequences of this escalation of war with China in the form of Sinophobic violence that targets Asians and Asian Americans of various ethnicities across the U.S. Anti-Asian violence has increased 194% in the first quarter of 2021 compared to 2020, according to the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism. This pattern of heightened xenophobia and scapegoating of a minority group as a corollary to U.S. imperialist wars is not new, and must be challenged."
"This push for rearmament, including hundreds of new land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles and submarine mounted tactical nuclear weapons, comes amid concern the Biden administration's heated anti-China rhetoric and policies could plunge us into a nuclear war," said Marcy Winograd, coordinator of CODEPINK Congress, a campaign to mobilize co-sponsors for progressive foreign policy legislation. "There is no law of gravity, however, that compels President Biden or Congress to continue funding the drive for nuclear rearmament or global omnicide."
At the end of the day, the Federal budget is up to Congress to decide, not the President. We call on Congress to reduce the Pentagon budget by at least 10% and instead invest in what will truly make us safe: universal healthcare, good jobs, and addressing the climate crisis.
Act Now:
It's now more important than ever to contact your representatives and send them the CODEPINK guide to Pentagon budget cuts to demand that they show their support to reduce the Pentagon budget and invest in human needs!
Additional Quotes and Reactions on Biden's Proposed Pentagon Budget from the International Community:
"The way the US budget overemphasizes the military hurts the American people and the world. A tiny fraction of the money that President Biden is proposing for the military budget would save the lives of millions of children in Yemen. Wouldn't that be a better investment in the future than more bombs, warships and nuclear weapons?" - Aisha Jumaan, President, Yemen Relief and Reconstruction Foundation
"This enormous Pentagon budget will only lead to more military conflicts, more bloodshed, more grief. We saw enough of that in Afghanistan for the last 20 years. It's time to invest in peace." - Basir Bita, local activist in Kabul Afghanistan
"There are many places where the U.S. could and should spend more money. At least it can start by paying for some of the huge damages it has caused to the people in this country and abroad in the last several centuries. Increasing the military budget, however, only makes everything worse." - Dr. Xu, Professor of Economics at John Jay College, CUNY, former Professor of Economics at Renmin University of China, and Chinese citizen
"An increase in the US defense budget will mean the deployment and/or testing of US weapons in South Korea, which endangers the lives of residents near US bases. US military buildup has led to a perpetual arms race including nuclear weapons and nuclear threats in Northeast Asia. The deployment of the US THAAD missile defense system in South Korea in 2017 has raised tension in the region and is opposed by many South Koreans. Villagers near the new THAAD base have been protesting everyday against the illegal deployment. I join in the call to the Biden administration to reduce the US defense budget and invest in human security: Withdraw tension-raising weapon systems from Korea and end the more than 70-year-old Korean War with a peace agreement." - YouKyoung Ko, a consultant for Women's International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF) and women-led Korea Peace Now! Campaign, and a standing committee member of the Korea Peace Appeal Campaign.
"The United States military continues to negatively impact the lives of people who have never consented to the U.S. military presence, particularly in island nations in the Asia Pacific region such as Hawaii, Okinawa, and the Marianas. The military presence places the people of these nations in mortal danger of annihilation, as was demonstrated in 2018 via the false ballistic missile alert in Hawaii, proving that the U.S. military is incapable of protecting us. Furthermore, the military creates a burden in numerous other ways, such as through crime, pollution, and economic deprivation." - Robert Kajiwara, founder of the Peace for Okinawa Coalition
"We, members of the International Women's Network against Militarism, unequivocally oppose the proposed Biden Pentagon budget. Spending nearly 50% of the US discretionary budget (more than the next 10 countries combined) demonstrates the destructive priorities of a society committed more to world military domination than care of its people and the natural environment. Increased militarization in the US and abroad will only create more insecurities, fear, and destruction--both at home and abroad especially in places of massive US military presence such as Okinawa and Guam. We urge the Biden-Harris administration to withdraw the current proposal and formulate one that will ensure full healthcare, quality education, and environmental protection," -International Women's Network Against Militarism
CODEPINK is a women-led grassroots organization working to end U.S. wars and militarism, support peace and human rights initiatives, and redirect our tax dollars into healthcare, education, green jobs and other life-affirming programs.
(818) 275-7232"Can't follow the law when a judge says fund the program, but have to follow the rules exactly when they say don't help poor people afford food," one lawyer said.
As the Trump administration continued its illegal freeze on food assistance, the US Department of Agriculture sent a warning to grocery stores not to provide discounts to the more than 42 million Americans affected.
Several grocery chains and food delivery apps have announced in recent days that they would provide substantial discounts to those whose Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits have been delayed. More than 1 in 8 Americans rely on the program, and 39% of them are children.
But on Sunday, Catherine Rampell, a reporter at the Washington Post published an email from the USDA that was sent to grocery stores around the country, telling them they were prohibited from offering special discounts to those at greater risk of food insecurity due to the cuts.
"You must offer eligible foods at the same prices and on the same terms and conditions to SNAP-EBT customers as other customers, except that sales tax cannot be charged on SNAP purchases," the email said. "You cannot treat SNAP-EBT customers differently from any other customer. Offering discounts or services only to SNAP-eligible customers is a SNAP violation unless you have a SNAP equal treatment waiver."
The email referred to SNAP's "Equal Treatment Rule," which prohibits stores from discriminating against SNAP recipients by charging them higher prices or treating them more favorably than other customers by offering them specialized sales or incentives.
Rampell said she was "aware of at least two stores that had offered struggling customers a discount, then withdrew it after receiving this email."
She added that it was "understandable why grocery stores might be scared off" because "a store caught violating the prohibition could be denied the ability to accept SNAP benefits in the future. In low-income areas where the SNAP shutdown will have the biggest impact, getting thrown off SNAP could mean a store is no longer financially viable."
While the rule prohibits special treatment in either direction, legal analyst Jeffrey Evan Gold argues that it was a "perverted interpretation of a rule that stops grocers from price gouging SNAP recipients... charging them more when they use food stamps."
The government also notably allows retailers to request waivers for programs that incentivize SNAP recipients to purchase healthy food.
Others pointed out that SNAP is currently not paying out to Americans because President Donald Trump is defying multiple federal court rulings issued Friday, requiring him to tap a $6 billion contingency fund to ensure benefit payments go out. Both courts, in Massachusetts and Rhode Island, have said his administration's refusal to pay out benefits is against the law.
One labor movement lawyer summed up the administration's position on social media: "Can't follow the law when a judge says fund the program, but have to follow the rules exactly when they say don't help poor people afford food."
"You need to understand that he actually believes it is illegal to criticize him," wrote Sen. Chris Murphy.
After failing to use the government's might to bully Jimmy Kimmel off the air earlier this fall, President Donald Trump is once again threatening to bring the force of law down on comedians for the egregious crime of making fun of him.
This time, his target was NBC late-night host Seth Meyers, whom the president said, in a Truth Social post Saturday, "may be the least talented person to 'perform' live in the history of television."
On Thursday, the comedian hosted a segment mocking Trump's bizarre distaste for the electromagnetic catapults aboard Navy ships, which the president said he may sign an executive order to replace with older (and less efficient) steam-powered ones.
Trump did not take kindly to Meyers' barbs: "On and on he went, a truly deranged lunatic. Why does NBC waste its time and money on a guy like this??? - NO TALENT, NO RATINGS, 100% ANTI TRUMP, WHICH IS PROBABLY ILLEGAL!!!"
It is, of course, not "illegal" for a late-night comedian, or any other news reporter or commentator, for that matter, to be "anti-Trump." But it's not the first time the president has made such a suggestion. Amid the backlash against Kimmel's firing in September, Trump asserted that networks that give him "bad publicity or press" should have their licenses taken away.
"I read someplace that the networks were 97% against me... I mean, they’re getting a license, I would think maybe their license should be taken away,” Trump said. "All they do is hit Trump. They’re licensed. They’re not allowed to do that.”
His FCC director, Brendan Carr, used a similar logic to justify his pressure campaign to get Kimmel booted by ABC, which he said could be punished for airing what he determined was "distorted” content.
Before Kimmel, Carr suggested in April that Comcast may be violating its broadcast licenses after MSNBC declined to air a White House press briefing in which the administration defended its wrongful deportation of Salvadoran immigrant Kilmar Abrego Garcia.
"You need to understand that he actually believes it is illegal to criticize him," wrote Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on social media following Trump's tirade against Meyers. "Why? Because Trump believes he—not the people—decides the law. This is why we are in the middle of, not on the verge of, a totalitarian takeover."
"An ICE officer may ignore evidence of American citizenship—including a birth certificate—if the app says the person is an alien," said the ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee.
Immigration agents are using facial recognition software as "definitive" evidence to determine immigration status and is collecting data from US citizens without their consent. In some cases, agents may detain US citizens, including ones who can provide their birth certificates, if the app says they are in the country illegally.
These are a few of the findings from a series of articles published this past week by 404 Media, which has obtained documents and video evidence showing that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents are using a smartphone app in the field during immigration stops, scanning the faces of people on the street to verify their citizenship.
The report found that agents frequently conduct stops that "seem to have little justification beyond the color of someone’s skin... then look up more information on that person, including their identity and potentially their immigration status."
While it is not clear what application the agencies are using, 404 previously reported that ICE is using an app called Mobile Fortify that allows ICE to simply point a camera at a person on the street. The photos are then compared with a bank of more than 200 million images and dozens of government databases to determine info about the person, including their name, date of birth, nationality, and information about their immigration status.
On Friday, 404 published an internal document from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) which stated that "ICE does not provide the opportunity for individuals to decline or consent to the collection and use of biometric data/photograph collection." The document also states that the image of any face that agents scan, including those of US citizens, will be stored for 15 years.
The outlet identified several videos that have been posted to social media of immigration officials using the technology.
In one, taken in Chicago, armed agents in sunglasses and face coverings are shown accosting a pair of Hispanic teenagers on bicycles, asking where they are from. The 16-year-old boy who filmed the encounter said he is "from here"—an American citizen—but that he only has a school ID on him. The officer tells the boy he'll be allowed to leave if he'll "do a facial." The other officer then snaps a photo of him with a phone camera and asks his name.
In another video, also in Chicago, agents are shown surrounding a driver, who declines to show his ID. Without asking, one officer points his phone at the man. "I’m an American citizen, so leave me alone,” the driver says. "Alright, we just got to verify that,” the officer responds.
Even if the people approached in these videos had produced identification proving their citizenship, there's no guarantee that agents would have accepted it, especially if the app gave them information to the contrary.
On Wednesday, ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee, Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), told 404 that ICE agents will even trust the app's results over a person's government documents.
“ICE officials have told us that an apparent biometric match by Mobile Fortify is a ‘definitive’ determination of a person’s status and that an ICE officer may ignore evidence of American citizenship—including a birth certificate—if the app says the person is an alien,” he said.
This is despite the fact that, as Nathan Freed Wessler, deputy director of the ACLU's Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, told 404, “face recognition technology is notoriously unreliable, frequently generating false matches and resulting in a number of known wrongful arrests across the country."
Thompson said: "ICE using a mobile biometrics app in ways its developers at CBP never intended or tested is a frightening, repugnant, and unconstitutional attack on Americans’ rights and freedoms.”
According to an investigation published in October by ProPublica, more than 170 US citizens have been detained by immigration agents, often in squalid conditions, since President Donald Trump returned to office in January. In many of these cases, these individuals have been detained because agents wrongly claimed the documents proving their citizenship are false.
During a press conference this week, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem denied this reality, stating that "no American citizens have been arrested or detained" as part of Trump's "mass deportation" crusade.
"We focus on those who are here illegally," she said.
But as DHS's internal document explains, facial recognition software is necessary in the first place because "ICE agents do not know an individual's citizenship at the time of the initial encounter."
David Bier, the director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute, explains that the use of such technology suggests that ICE's operations are not "highly targeted raids," as it likes to portray, but instead "random fishing expeditions."