

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.

Days ahead of COP26 next week in Glasgow, and in coordination with youth-led actions for a Fossil Free Future, thousands of people rallied outside Federal Reserve branches across the country to send a clear message to President Biden: appoint a climate champion to Chair the Federal Reserve who will account for climate risk immediately.
Demands of today's Fossil Free Federal Reserve actions and the overall campaign are:
(1) President Biden: appoint a real climate leader to Chair the Federal Reserve;
(2) The Federal Reserve:
- END BANK FOSSIL FINANCE: Use existing regulatory and supervisory tools to begin limiting and phasing down the financing of emissions
- DIVEST AND INVEST: Align Fed spending and asset purchases with the Paris Climate Agreement's goal of limiting temperature rise to 1.5degC
- PUSH BANKS TO INVEST: Encourage and support bank investment aimed at limiting global temperature rise to 1.5degC, with an emphasis on lending to low-income communities and communities of color.
(3) Congress: expand The Fed's mandate to eliminate racial, gender, and class disparities in jobs, wages, and wealth;
Today's actions for a Fossil Free Federal Reserve come a week after the U.S. Treasury Climate Risk report failed to live up to the bar of action; the day after Congress announced subpoenas of Big Oil for their climate deception following testimony in a Congressional Hearing; and following the fossil fuel divestment movement milestone of over 1400 institutions representing nearly $40 trillion in assets.

New York, NY; Photo credit: Erik McGregor
As fossil fuel companies -- backed by banks like Chase, BlackRock, and Citi, and insurers like Liberty Mutual -- attempt to ram through toxic and unnecessary tar sands, oil, and gas and brazenly lie about the reality of the climate crisis, climate leaders across the U.S. are mobilizing to end these decades of planetary destruction by targeting the U.S. central bank, the Federal Reserve, to steer our economy off high-risk fossil fuels.
Thousands took action at Federal Reserve branches across the US, including:

Denver, CO; Photo credit: Christian O'Rourke

Chicago, IL; Photo credit: Shirley Ni
Now, organizers are turning their attention to COP26, along with President Biden's impending nomination of the next Federal Reserve Chair. Over 40,000 people have signed a petition urging Biden to appoint a climate champion as Fed Chair.

San Francisco, CA; Photo credit: Brooke Anderson (Movement Photographer)
Brooke Harper, 350.org, said: "The Federal Reserve has a mandate to protect our economy, and steer investments away from high-risk fossil fuels. That's why we're taking action in coordination with a global youth-led mobilization at Fed branches across the country demanding a Fossil Free Federal Reserve. Ahead of COP26, if President Biden wants to be a real climate champion, he'll nominate a Federal Reserve Chair -- like Lael Brainard -- who will take climate risk seriously."
Rachel Rivera, member of New York Communities for Change, said: "The Fed, Citibank and other banks must stop funding fossil fuels. My family lost everything in Sandy. We're still hurting. On today's anniversary, just before Glasgow, I'm here to say New Yorkers demand a better future and these Wall Street giants should do the right thing and stop torching our planet."
Nik, they/them/sila, Program Manager & Youth Climate Organizer, 350 Bay Area, said: "October 29th -- just days away from the start of COP 26 -- the entire Bay Area is mobilizing to demand environmental justice. Our targets are the systems of oppression that still keep us from achieving emissions reductions, breathable air, drinkable water and land back. Institutions like the Federal Reserve, Blackrock, and the vast dirty banking system are so entrenched in our corrupt political system that protesting them is essentially protesting the status quo of US politics and policies. We demand the system change or be felled."
Micah Parkin, Executive Director of 350 Colorado, said: "The world's scientists have made it abundantly clear in the recent IPCC 6th Assessment that the world must transition beyond fossil fuels rapidly - largely in the next decade, to avoid a terrible escalation of climate disasters, which are already hurting Colorado's people and economy," said "So we are joining other organizations nationwide in calling on the Federal Reserve and other banking regulators and policymakers to stop financing the fossil fuel companies fueling the climate crisis."
Lisa Glassco, Charlottesville 350, said: "The Fed needs to require banks to consider climate change risks when giving loans. Suggesting they do so is not enough."
Sara Greenwald, 350 Bay Area, said: "We're following the money, all the way from fossil fuel investors to the fossil fuel bank to the Fed Reserve that has the power to reroute the money pipeline to the work we need to do."
Rita Fitzjarrell and Ken Denson, 350 STL, said: "We won't sit back and wait for someone else to do the work. We are hitting the streets in front of the St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank Plaza, and after our #FossilFreeFed rally, the Fed will know our demands: no more fossil fuel investments."
Larry Coble, 350 Chicago, President of the Board of Directors, said: "In Chicago, climate justice groups are targeting institutions like the Federal Reserve and Chase bank that continue to prop up the fossil fuel industry, despite increasingly deadly climate events caused by the industry's pollution. We're calling on the Fed and dirty-energy backers to end fossil-fuel financing, align Fed spending and asset purchases with the Paris Climate Agreement, and encourage bank investment and lending in Black, Indigenous, and communities of color."
Martha Barker, 350-Austin organizer of Day of Action at the San Antonio Federal Reserve Bank, said: "Texas is the 7th largest carbon emitter in the world -- right after Japan and before Brazil. The fossil fuel industry makes massive contributions to their allies in the Texas legislature, preventing the urgently needed transition to renewable energy. We need the Fed to stop banks' investing in the energy of the past and make the essential investments in the future of clean energy and in communities of color who continue to be severely damaged by fossil fuel pollution."
350 is building a future that's just, prosperous, equitable and safe from the effects of the climate crisis. We're an international movement of ordinary people working to end the age of fossil fuels and build a world of community-led renewable energy for all.
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."