

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.

Christine Mbithi
Email: christine.mbithi@350.org
Today at COP26, more than 20 countries and institutions, including the United States, Canada, Mali and Costa Rica, launched a joint statement committing to end direct international public finance for unabated coal, oil and gas by the end of 2022 and prioritize clean energy finance. After a wave of commitments to end international coal finance this year, this is the first international political commitment that also addresses public finance for oil and gas. If implemented effectively this initiative could directly shift more than USD 15 billion a year of preferential, government-backed support out of fossil fuels and into clean energy -- and much more if initial signatories are successful in convincing their peers to join.
Shifting public finance for energy out of all fossil fuels and into clean energy is an urgent task. The International Energy Agency (IEA) says that to limit global warming to 1.5degC, 2021 needs to mark the end of new investments in not just coal, but also new oil and gas supply.
Yet, new research by Oil Change International and Friends of the Earth US shows that between 2018 and 2020, G20 countries' international public finance institutions and Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) still backed at least $188 billion in fossil fuels abroad. This was 2.5 times more than G20 and MDB support for renewable energy, which averaged $26 billion per year. Public finance for clean energy has stagnated since 2014, despite the need for it to grow exponentially to ensure universal access to clean energy and to stay below the 1.5degC limit. The IEA finds that annual public and private investments into clean energy should reach nearly $4 trillion by 2030.
The joint statement unites some of the largest historic providers of public finance for fossil fuels -- Canada, the United States, the UK and the European Investment Bank (EIB). However, other large financiers have yet to join them.
Laggards include Japan ($10.9 bn/yr), Korea ($10.6 bn/yr), and China ($7.6 bn/yr), which are the largest providers of international public fossil fuel finance in the G20 and together account for 46% of G20 and MDB finance for fossil fuels. Italy ($2.8 bn/yr) and Spain ($1.9 bn/yr), some of the biggest EU fossil fuel financiers, are also missing.
But campaigners hope that the joint statement can help raise pressure on these countries that are lagging behind, similar to the momentum in place on ending coal finance. On the same morning of the statement launch, activists took to the streets of Glasgow in inflatable Pikachus to urge Japan to stop funding fossil fuels.
The EIB has signed the statement and the civil society coalition, Big Shift Global, is urging the other MDBs to also get on board, including the World Bank Group, the African Development Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the Asian Development Bank, and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. Collectively the MDBs still provided at least $6.3 billion each year to fossil fuel projects between 2018 and 2020. Earlier this week the MDBs provided an update on their joint Paris alignment efforts in which they confirmed their framework will have no exclusions for oil and gas projects.
The combination of big polluters and low-income countries signing the statement is positive, and challenges the assumption that developing country signatories want or need investments in fossil fuels to achieve their development objectives. Alongside fulfilling their stated goal of "prioritizing support fully towards the clean energy transition", campaigners remind signatories that the ability of this initiative to support a just and 1.5degC-aligned global energy transition will also hinge on avoiding loopholes allowing for a dash for gas, acting on debt relief, increasing grant-based climate finance, and securing a growing number of signatories to the statement.
Quotes:
Tasneem Essop, Executive Director, Climate Action Network International, said:
"Shutting fossil fuels down is critical for tackling the climate crisis. This announcement is a step in the right direction but must be scaled up with more governments and public finance institutions, including the Multilateral Development Banks, committing to end finance for fossil fuels. This public money needs to be urgently redirected into a just energy transition that ensures clean universal energy access for communities in the global South and support for communities and coal, oil and gas workers without saddling countries with any further debt."
Laurie van der Burg, Global Public Finance Campaigns co-Manager at Oil Change International, said:
"The signatories of today's statement are doing what's most logical in a climate emergency: stop adding fuel to the fire and shift dirty finance to climate action. Only this way can we avoid the worst climate crisis scenarios. We need to see much more of this to help deliver and exceed climate finance promises and support real solutions that meet community needs - particularly in the Global South. Other countries and institutions must follow suit."
Kate DeAngelis, International Finance Program Manager, Friends of the Earth US, said:
"Last year at this time I would not have thought we would see countries commit to ending billions of dollars in support for international fossil fuel projects. While this is welcome progress, countries, especially the US, must hold firm to these commitments, shutting off the spigot to fossil fuel companies like Pemex and Exxon. Laggards like Japan and Korea must also step up and join this commitment to enhance its efficacy."
Lidy Nacpil, Asian's Peoples Movement for Debt and Development, said:
"We have been calling for an end to public financing of fossil fuels for so long, governments should have responded earlier. The world has no more space or time left to accommodate the expansion of fossil fuel energy. Instead governments must act immediately and decisively for a swift and just transition to 100% renewable and democratic energy systems. There should be no exceptions, no reliance on unproven and unreliable carbon capture and storage technologies that hide the lack of ambition and justify some level of continued GHG emissions. Governments must also compel the private sector to stop funding new fossil fuel projects. We call on all countries, public financial institutions, and private financiers to commit and disclose concrete plans to end all support and financing, direct and indirect, for all fossil fuels -- coal, gas and oil. Anything less will not be enough to limit global temperature rise to 1.5degC."
Ayumi Fukakusa, Friends of the Earth Japan, said:
"While world leaders commit to phasing out fossil fuel financing, Japan is the second largest public financier for fossil fuel and even still supports new coal projects both domestically and internationally. Japan, again failed to show its leadership for climate action. In addition to that, right before the COP26 started, a Japanese public financier decided to finance the LNG Canada project. The associate Coastal GasLink Pipeline is quite controversial. Next to being completely incompatible with climate goals, a UN Committee called out the lack of "Free prior, and informed consent (FPIC)" for the project. This is unacceptable."
Joojin Kim, Solutions for Our Climate, said:
"While the commitment represents a step forward in the global response to climate change, it is disappointing to find that major fossil fuel financing countries like South Korea have not joined the announcement. When it comes to public financing of fossil fuels, Asian economies like South Korea and Japan are among the largest contributors in the world. The world must know that the amount of fossil fuel public financing provided by these countries is several times (in the case of South Korea, thirteen times) higher than the amount they have provided for coal power project financing. These nations should immediately end public fossil fuel financing, instead of contributing to the build up of stranded assets around the world."
Daniel Willis, climate campaigner at Global Justice Now, said:
"This joint statement is welcome and necessary progress in the struggle to shift public finances away from fossil fuels, but that should not distract us from the challenges ahead. Just last week, MPs in the UK condemned the British development bank CDC Group's failure to stop funding gas infrastructure. When it comes to the climate crisis, every investment in fossil fuel infrastructure is like pouring petrol on a house fire. Hopefully we will now see the UK government get its own house in order by ending trade and development finance for gas power and rescinding licenses for North Sea oil exploration."
Paul Cook, Head of Advocacy, Tearfund, said:
"There is no room for new fossil fuels if we are to deliver climate justice for millions of the most vulnerable people around the world. This announcement is another nail in the coffin for the fossil fuel era as we seek to build a cleaner, safer and fairer world. We now urgently need others to join this commitment and go further by phasing out fossil fuels at home and abroad."
Dean Bhebhe, African Climate Reality Project, said:
"The African Development Bank and other Development Financial Institutions need to prioritize the development and implementation of a fossil fuel finance exclusion policy that will not fund, provide financial services, or capacity support to any coal, gas, or oil project or related infrastructure project that is carbon intensive on the African continent by 2022. At the least, establish an immediate ban on any new fossil fuel projects and publish a roadmap for phasing out all fossil fuel development financing to advance the just transition in line with the Paris Agreement. The policy should guide a managed and equitable phase-out, taking into account principles of equity and justice for those most affected. We need real climate action now."
Bronwen Tucker, Canada Lead at Oil Change International, said:
"This is one of the only climate commitments from Trudeau that has concretely addressed the oil and gas sector, and hopefully the beginning of many more. It means Canada will face lower risk of economic shocks from our overexposure to this sunsetting industry and that this influential financial support can be redirected to just transition and renewable energy globally instead. Today's announcement is a credit to the climate movement and Indigenous land defenders that have been pushing Trudeau to take real climate action since the day he took office. But the federal government should also hear loud and clear that they must keep their election promise and extend this commitment to cover Export Development Canada's closely related domestic finance for oil and gas as well."
Nick Bryer, European Campaigns Director, 350.org, said:
"Every cent that goes into fossil fuels is taking us further in the wrong direction. It's shocking that public money is still going into coal, oil and gas, when we so desperately need to keep fossil fuels in the ground, and invest in real solutions instead. It's hypocritical for any country to call themselves a climate champion if they're still helping to bankroll the fossil fuel industry."
Jon Sward, Environment Project Manager, Bretton Woods Project, said:
"The statement is an important first step in building international consensus that ending finance for fossil fuels and increasing support for a just energy transition in low- and middle-income countries are key aspects of achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement. It is disappointing that the World Bank - and many of its MDB counterparts - has chosen not to sign on to the statement. The UK, US, and other government signatories to the statement must continue to push for the World Bank and other international financial institutions to end support for fossil fuels while scaling up their support for clean energy systems that ensure a just transition for workers and communities."
Robin Mace-Snaith, Policy Lead - Climate and Energy, CAFOD, said:
"This statement is a start, but we urgently need more countries on board. Public finance shouldn't be anywhere near fossil fuels if we want any chance of keeping within 1.5degC. We challenge all signatories to ensure that the limited and clearly defined circumstances they reference are not just loopholes to continue supporting the fossil fuel sector. What's needed is a just energy transition, bringing electricity to the over 750 million people without and ensuring no community is left behind as a result. For many communities on the frontline of climate change, time has already run out, we must consign all fossil fuels to history now."
Lisa Fischer, Programme Leader Climate Neutral Energy Systems, E3G, said:
"This statement is a powerful signal to policy makers and investors alike that high climate and investment risks are an inherent part of oil and gas finance, and that no investment in new oil and gas supply is needed. It shows growing confidence that employment and revenue opportunities are strongest in the clean energy sector. Every cent of public finance should be used to open these opportunities for nations across the globe."
Maria Marta Di Paola - Research area director, Fundacion Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (FARN), said:
"While Global North countries and institutions are signing pledges on climate finance, they are still investing millions in extractive projects in Global South countries. For example, between 2016 and 2020, 88% of the World Bank Group investments in the energy sector in Argentina went to fossil fuels and the rest to renewables.
Global North countries should play a lead role in the transition to zero carbon economies coping with the singularities and needs of the Global South. This statement could be a clear sign of the risk associated with relying on fossil fuels to develop in the Global South."
Lucile Dufour, Senior Policy Advisor, International Institute for Sustainable Development, said:
"Shortly after the world's largest economies have ruled out overseas finance for coal, this statement shows that a much bigger shift is underway: one that could soon mark the end of not just coal, but also oil and gas finance. The science is clear that public support must be directed towards clean energy to avoid locking countries into high-carbon pathways, imperiling economies, and the global climate. Signatories should deliver boldly on their commitment and continue building momentum after COP26, to ensure other governments and institutions follow suit."
Katharina Rall, Senior Environment Researcher, Human Rights Watch said:
"This commitment to end international public finance for fossil fuels by 2022, if followed by effective implementation, will be an important step toward governments meeting their human rights obligations to address the climate crisis. All governments need to urgently end all support for fossil fuels and ensure a just transition to affordable clean energy to help prevent catastrophic climate impacts on human rights. Countries that choose not to sign on--including Japan, South Korea, Italy -- are signaling a lack of regard for their human rights obligations and for the rights of communities around the world already facing a mounting toll from climate impacts."
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.
"Americans want real accountability and reform, and there is no version in Congress that reins in ICE and addresses the abuses we are witnessing," said the head of America's Voice.
With US senators returning to Capitol Hill on Monday after a Memorial Day recess, Republicans are working to get a second budget reconciliation package to President Donald Trump's desk—and critics of his mass deportation campaign continue to push back against giving immigration enforcement agencies $72 billion.
Much of that money would go to the US Department of Homeland Security and two of its agencies, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Trump's deportation agenda notably got over $170 billion in last year's budget reconciliation package, dubbed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.
Since Trump signed that legislation last summer, he has deployed federal agents to various communities across the country, including Chicago and the Twin Cities, where they were documented violating the rights of US citizens and immigrants alike—even killing Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Minneapolis.
Immigrants who have been caught up in such operations have often been held in "inhumane conditions" at detention centers. For example, according to a lawsuit filed last week, a tent encampment at the Fort Bliss military base in El Paso, Texas "has become notorious for flagrant human rights abuses that people endure during their detention—they are confined to windowless enclosures in tents and suffer egregious physical abuse by guards; abhorrent medical and mental health care, including for people with chronic conditions like cancer and HIV; indiscriminate use of solitary confinement to punish and silence victims of guard abuse; and other flagrant constitutional violations, including exposure to measles, tuberculosis, and other diseases."
"Not even a year in, there already have been three reported deaths at Camp East Montana," the complaint notes. "In one case, a man was beaten to death after asking for his asthma medication—a death the medical examiner later ruled a homicide. A fourth man died shortly after being released from Camp East Montana, where he had been denied the chemotherapy that he needed to treat his cancer."
Overall, from Trump's return to office early last year to late April, ICE has reported more than 50 detainee deaths. An Associated Press investigation published last week found that at least 10 of them, all men, died by suicide.
"Not another dime for ICE—not while children are locked in trailer prisons, detainees are on hunger strike, and protesters are being pepper-sprayed for demanding basic decency," Vanessa Cárdenas, executive director of the group America's Voice, said in a Monday statement.
As her group detailed:
Detainees at Delaney Hall in Newark, New Jersey are on a hunger and labor strike, now in its fifth day, citing reported infestations, inadequate medical care, and no air conditioning, with protests outside met by masked ICE agents deploying pepper spray and tasers. At the Desert View Annex in Adelanto, California, at least 20 detainees launched a hunger strike citing a lack of medical care, unsafe drinking water, and mold. At Dilley, Texas, more than 6,300 children have been detained since the start of Trump's second term in facilities described by those inside as a trailer prison, with lights on 24 hours a day and children as young as two months old among those held. Meanwhile, DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin has threatened to halt processing of international travelers at Newark Airport amid the ongoing dispute with New Jersey officials over conditions at Delaney Hall.
Following protests on Friday and Saturday nights at Delaney Hall, Newark Mayor Ras Baraka imposed a curfew from 9:00 pm to 6:00 am ET. Multiple people who did not comply with it on Sunday night were arrested.
CBS News reported that as the curfew took effect, "a warning was issued to the protesters who had gathered outside the zone. Thirteen minutes later, state police in riot gear rushed toward the crowd. Officers on horses came in from the other side, surrounding the crowd and herding them away into a standoff."
Discussing the New Jersey demonstrations during an interview on Fox News, Mullin claimed that "they're not just exercising their First Amendment" rights; "these are violent protesters that are there to injure everybody—that's even bystanders."
A DHS spokesperson said in a Monday statement to Fox News Digital that "RIOTERS WILL NOT SLOW US DOWN."
"The perimeter around Delaney Hall is FULLY closed... No rioters breached the perimeter last night. Our ICE operations continue undeterred," the spokesperson added. "ANYONE who attempts to obstruct law enforcement or disrupt our operations will be prosecuted and face justice."
Meanwhile, the Communications Workers of America (CWA), District 1, directed attention to those inside the facility, saying in a Monday statement that it "stands in full solidarity with the people detained at Delaney Hall in Newark who have laid down their labor and refused their meals to demand dignity, safety, and freedom."
As CWA District 1 detailed:
Make no mistake: This is a labor struggle. The people held inside Delaney Hall are forced to cook meals, clean the floors, and keep the facility running—for as little as one dollar a day. These workers are on strike to protest the unconscionable conditions they are forced to endure and the basic due process they are entitled to, but have been denied.
While the private contractors who operate these detention centers bank millions, the workers who sustain them are denied the most basic protection and respect. When workers in those conditions organize, withhold their labor, and act together to demand better, they are doing what working people have always done to win justice. We recognize a strike when we see one.
The labor movement was built on the principle that no person should be exploited, silenced, or treated as less than human because of who they are or where they come from. The demands coming from inside Delaney Hall—an end to medical neglect, an end to exploitative labor, the release of the elderly, the young, and the sick, and the restoration of basic due process—are the same demands for dignity, equity, and justice that animate our own fight every day. An injury to one is an injury to all.
We honor the courage of the strikers and of the families and community members standing watch outside the facility, and we defend their right to peaceful protest. And we condemn in the strongest terms the escalation and violence by ICE and state police against people peacefully exercising their constitutional rights.
Cárdenas of America's Voice called out Trump, Mullin, and Stephen Miller, the president's White House deputy chief of staff for policy and homeland security adviser, who is infamous for pushing the family separation policy during his first term.
"The Trump-Miller mass purge machine is running unchecked, and Mullin isn't bringing accountability," Cárdenas said Monday. "Instead, this administration continues draining resources from real public safety, separating American-born children from their parents, and spending millions on masked agents while American families are unable to make ends meet."
"The Senate has a clear choice to make: Side with the chaos and cruelty or listen to the American people," she continued. "Poll after poll reveals that the public resoundingly rejects masked and armed agents inflicting random violence against immigrants and Americans alike."
"Americans want real accountability and reform, and there is no version in Congress that reins in ICE and addresses the abuses we are witnessing," she stressed. "This administration has made clear that reform is not on the table. Congress should not give them another dime to prove it."
Both chambers of Congress are narrowly controlled by Republicans, but efforts by Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) to advance immigration enforcement legislation have been hampered by Trump's controversial $1.776 billion slush fund for insurrectionists. However, as of Monday, after losses in court, the Trump administration is backing off its push for the fund for now, meaning the bill may soon move forward on Capitol Hill.
"I can't think of a less appropriate time to pour another $72 billion into ICE and CBP—especially without requiring meaningful reforms or accountability measures," Bridget Moix, a leader at Quaker organizations including Friends Committee on National Legislation, FCNL Education Fund, and Friends Place on Capitol Hill, wrote Friday for Religion News Service.
"As Quakers, we reject the false choice between security and human dignity," Moix added. "True safety cannot be built through fear, cruelty, or unchecked power. Lasting security comes from thriving communities, functioning institutions, economic opportunity, and respect for human rights."
The journalist confronted newly installed executive editor Nick Bilton over the recent firings of two reporters and two top executives.
Veteran "60 Minutes" correspondent Scott Pelley took aim at the qualifications and intentions of CBS News' right-wing editor-in-chief, Bari Weiss, on Monday at an explosive staff meeting that was meant to introduce employees of the 57-year-old news show to its newly appointed executive producer days after several journalists were fired in what Pelley referred to as "Black Thursday."
Weiss, a former New York Times opinion columnist who first gained notoriety for campaigning against pro-Palestinian professors at Columbia University and went on to rail against "woke" progressives and "cancel culture," appointed tech journalist Nick Bilton to lead the program last week after firing two executives and two top correspondents.
Bilton opened the meeting by reading some prepared remarks, but Pelley quickly cut in to tell the new producer that he had "many questions" about the dismissals of reporters Cecilia Vega and Sharyn Alfonsi, executive producer Tanya Simon, and executive editor Draggan Mihailovich.
"I guess you wandered in expecting to read a statement off?" Pelley asked Bilton, his voice reportedly "shaking in anger" at times. "What was wrong with Sharyn Alfonsi?"
Alfonsi and Vega won a prestigious journalism award for a story on President Donald Trump's deal with El Salvador to send immigrants to the country's notorious Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT), the abuse detainees have suffered there, and the fact that many of those deported to the prison have not been convicted of crimes and have been falsely accused of being members of violent gangs.
The story was pulled from the air last December after Weiss complained that it hadn't covered the Trump administration's perspective, garnering accusations of censorship, and eventually aired with some editing.
Pelley suggested on Monday that such decisions revealed Weiss' intentions for the broadcast as a whole.
“She’s murdering ’60 Minutes.’ She does not love this place. She was brought in to kill it—and she’s doing exactly that,” Pelley told Bilton. “She has no qualifications for her job; you have slender qualifications for this job."
"The changes that she’s made at the ‘Evening News’ have been catastrophic," he added, "so why should we expect that any of this is going to be any better?”
'CBS Evening News' has had declining viewership, "often below 4 million viewers a night," according to NPR, with the broadcast "flagging" since Weiss installed Tony Dokoupil as anchor.
Media critics have warned that Weiss appears to be "running the Trump playbook" at CBS, as Sophia Tesfaye wrote at Salon last week: "Take an institution that still commands public trust, install loyalists with no relevant experience in positions of authority, fire the people who push back, dress the whole operation in the language of reform—fairness, innovation, a new direction—and you dare anyone to prove that what you’re really doing is building a protection racket."
Weiss took the helm of CBS after parent company Paramount's merger with Skydance, owned by the son of tech billionaire and Trump backer Larry Ellison.
Charles Forelle, the managing editor of CBS News and a close associate of Weiss, repeatedly attempted to steer Monday's meeting away from Pelley's criticism of Bilton and the new direction "60 Minutes" appears to be taking, saying at one point that Pelley's line of questioning was "not actually productive."
"It's working for me," replied Pelley.
After Pelley said the network's leadership had been "cruel" in firing veteran journalists from the show, Forelle accused him of being "rude."
"I'm not being rude," he shot back. "You know what was rude? Black Thursday. That was the absolute definition of rudeness. Telling Tanya Simon she had to be out of here at 5:00. Sending Draggon Mihailovich to HR to get fired, because no one could look him in the eye. Not talking about Sharyn Alfonsi's contract. Not talking about Cecilia Vega's contract. Just calling them up and telling them they were fired. That's rude."
"This is a conversation," Pelley added. "That is rude, and you were part of that."
Alfonsi's contract with "60 Minutes" was not renewed; Vega was dismissed despite her contract not being up until 2027. The two journalists spoke out about their firings, with Alfonsi saying, "Journalists willing to challenge authority are being pushed aside in favor of those who will not."
Vega said that "in recent months, my producing teams and I have experienced efforts to insert political bias into our stories."
"60 Minutes" employees applauded Pelley on Monday after Bilton left the meeting, and observers praised the veteran journalist for defending the show and the work of its staffers.
"Scott Pelley told the truth today," said Marc Elias, founder of Democracy Docket. "We need independent media the right wing can't buy."
"If Trump and Republicans are truly abandoning this corrupt scheme, they should have zero problem banning it in law," said US Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.
President Donald Trump is reportedly dropping his effort to get Congress to sign off on creating a $1.8 billion slush fund for political allies amid furious public backlash.
A source described as a senior Trump administration official told Axios on Monday that the fund is "dead for now" after two federal judges last week weighed in against it, with one blocking any funds from being dispersed.
One source told Axios that the fund—which was set up to pay out allies who were allegedly unfairly prosecuted during former President Joe Biden's tenure, including potentially hundreds of rioters who violently stormed the US Capitol on January 6, 2021—had "become a distraction" that was threatening the president's broader legislative agenda.
"The president believes government was weaponized against people—it wasn't just him," the source claimed. "But this isn't the time and vehicle for it."
According to NOTUS politics reporter Reese Gorman, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) "helped convince" Trump to drop the fund for now during a conversation on Monday.
"The fund received significant backlash from Hill Republicans," reported Gorman, "and a number of House Republicans were looking for ways to stop this fund from happening."
The decision to drop the fund came as Democratic lawmakers have been lining legislation and amendments to derail it.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said on Monday that his caucus wasn't satisfied just with killing the current Trump slush fund, but wanted to bar him from trying to create another one in the future.
"If Trump and Republicans are truly abandoning this corrupt scheme, they should have zero problem banning it in law," Schumer wrote in a social media post. "This week, Senate Democrats will push legislation to ban this slush fund and ensure no president can ever do this again. Trump’s word is nowhere near enough."
Schumer's comments were echoed by Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), who also cast doubt on whether Trump had truly dropped his scheme.
"I don’t trust Trump’s word, and neither do the American people," wrote Coons. "I'm looking forward to working with my Senate Democratic colleagues to permanently ban this slush fund. If Republicans in Congress are as opposed to this fund as they claim, they should have no problem joining us."
The press office of California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a likely 2028 presidential candidate who last week proposed a 100% tax on any California residents who received money from the Trump fund, celebrated its apparent demise.
"Days after Gavin Newsom challenged Trump’s J6 criminal slush fund and proposed a 100% tax on profits, Axios reports Trump pulled the plug," the press office wrote. "Bullies fold when you hit back!"
Sens. Elisa Slotkin (D-Mich.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), and Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) on Monday introduced a new bill called the "Drain the Slush Fund Act," which would bar taxpayer money from being paid to the "president, his associates, individuals convicted of crimes, or those involved in the January 6, 2021 insurrection."
In announcing the legislation, Slotkin said the fund was the latest example of Trump using the government "as a piggy bank for himself and his allies."
"This so-called... anti-weaponization fund is an unprecedented misuse of taxpayer money, and it must be stopped," said Slotkin. "Our bill does just that. Democrats, Republicans, and Independents are crying out for the president to focus on the economy and lowering their costs."
In the House of Representatives, Rep. Tom Suozzi (D-NY) teamed with Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) introduced similar legislation aimed at blocking the fund.
"Congress must call out what we know is morally wrong," Suozzi wrote in a social media post announcing the legislation. "The checks and balances of our democracy and the will of the American public hold us accountable to that standard."
Lisa Gilbert, co-president of Public Citizen, said that the reported decision to drop the fund was good news, but warned against overlooking other toxic policies being pushed by the president and his GOP allies in a new budget reconciliation package.
"As important as taking out this disgusting policy is," said Gilbert, "we must not let it be an excuse to green light the massive increases to [US Immigration and Customs Enforcement] funding embedded in the reconciliation bill."
Legal advocacy group Democracy Forward, which has filed lawsuits aimed at blocking the fund's implementation, said it would continue pressing its case until it was sure that the president's plan was truly dead.
"Until the administration fully abandons the scheme, it's beyond dispute that it will not recur, and our clients’ harm is remedied, we will be in court challenging it," said Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward. "We look forward to the government’s response to the courts and to our filings, and to prevailing on behalf of our clients."