

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.

Today, Congressman Jamaal Bowman, Ed.D. (NY-16) introduced legislation titled the "Babies Over Billionaires Act" which would tax the unrealized capital gains of the top 0.01% of taxpayers with over $100 million in assets.
Today, Congressman Jamaal Bowman, Ed.D. (NY-16) introduced legislation titled the "Babies Over Billionaires Act" which would tax the unrealized capital gains of the top 0.01% of taxpayers with over $100 million in assets.
"Since the pandemic began, everyday people have borne the brunt of negative public health and economic outcomes. COVID-19 has taken nearly one million lives in the United States alone, forced people to decide between paying rent or buying food, and otherwise upended the livelihoods of millions, especially our youth," said Congressman Jamaal Bowman, Ed.D. (NY-16). "Meanwhile, American billionaires have shamelessly increased their collective wealth by more than $2 trillion. As a society it's time we center the people's needs who account for most of the American population, instead of roughly 700 billionaires who have swindled us all."
"Policy reflects our priorities, and for decades, the United States has chosen to invest in the personal wealth of billionaires while failing to invest in the tangible needs of our children and our communities. Working class people are taxed more than billionaires at times and often have their income more harshly scrutinized, all while struggling to keep up with the rising costs of basic needs like food and housing. At the same time, the tax code privileges billionaires who hide their wealth in an effort to avoid paying their fair share in taxes. The IRS also lacks the resources and capacity needed to audit and tax the ultra wealthy, while consistently auditing and taxing working families more. This bill would direct more resources towards the IRS to audit and tax people whose income requires more than reviewing just a W-2 or 1099 form, people like billionaires. By auditing and taxing the 700 richest people in our country the wealthy will finally pay their fair share. As a result more taxpayers funds would be made available for children-centered programs in the U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. We must invest in our youth's future and critical social safety nets - the wealthy are more than capable of funding that effort!"
"Billionaires should pay their fair share of taxes - just like everyday workers, just like a grocery clerk, a teacher, a police officer, or a nurse," said Congressman Danny K. Davis (Il-7). "Equitable taxation is a critical step to providing much-needed federal investment to strengthen children and families."
"Billionaires and working families have had extremely different experiences in the last two years," said Congresswoman Susan Wild (PA-7). "This bill will address the inequities in our tax code that keep the ultra-wealthy from paying their fair share and will invest the revenue raised in those who deserve it most: our children and hardworking families."
"America has a two-tier tax system: one system for the millionaires and billionaires, and one system for everyone else. That unfair system is a primary driver of the economic divisions slowly tearing America apart," said Congressman Bill Pascrell (NJ-9), a senior member of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee and lead sponsor of legislation to close the infamous stepped-up basis and carried interest loopholes. "This legislation is another sharp tool to rebalance our unfair two-tier tax system and finally begin making those at the top pay their rightful share. Measures like this are essential to rebuilding public confidence in our nation. I thank Rep. Bowman for his aggressive work to make our tax system fair again."
It's time the tax code works for working families and not just wealthy people. The Babies Over Billionaires Act proposes income tax reform for the ultra-wealthy that would disproportionately impact the roughly 700 billionaires in the country to raise more than $1 trillion over ten years.
Specifically, the Babies Over Billionaires Act will:
* Annually tax 30% of unrealized gains of ultra-millionaires from publicly traded capital assets at the prevailing long-term capital gains rate;
* Tax 50% of unrealized gains of private capital assets at the prevailing long-term capital gains rate every 5 years;
* Mandate the IRS annually audit filers reporting in excess of $100 million in assets to crack down on rampant tax abuse by the wealthy.
* Invest the revenue raised by this tax in programs run by the Department of Education and HHS that support families and children.
Co-leads of the legislation include Representatives Bill Pascrell, Danny K. Davis, and Susan Wild.
Co-sponsors of the legislation include Representatives Eleanor Holmes Norton and Bonnie Watson Coleman.
Sponsoring organizations and people include: the American Federation of Teachers, Patriotic Millionaires, Economic Security Project Action, National Latino Farmers & Ranchers Trade Association, Progressive Change Campaign Committee, National Black Justice Coalition, Americans for Democratic Action (ADA), Coalition on Human Needs, MomsRising, Missionary Oblates of Mary Immaculate JPIC, People's Action, Jobs with Justice, RootsAction.org, Family Values @ Work Action, Public Citizen, National Asso. for Hispanic Elderly, Main Street Alliance, NETWORK Lobby for Catholic Social Justice, Family Values@Work, Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, RESULTS, Oxfam America, National Coalition for the Homeless, Indivisible, MoveOn and American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employee
Click here for a one-page summary of the Babies Over Billionaires Act.
Click here for a section-by-section of the Babies Over Billionaires Act.
Click here for full bill text of the Babies over Billionaires Act.
"The existing income tax is badly broken as applied to most billionaires and mega-millionaires, who are typically able to escape all tax on the majority of their true income or the returns to their invested wealth. This bill would fix the income tax by ending the ways in which billionaires and mega-millionaires currently escape tax. The bill uses an innovative phased mark-to-market methodology to spread out the taxation of investment gains over time so as to minimize valuation problems and volatility," said David Gamage, Law Professor at University of Indiana.
"Basic fairness and sound tax policy more broadly indicate that we need to do better at taxing the income of the extremely wealthy. This bill introduces two important innovations. First, the bill only taxes a portion of the capital gains of billionaires, which helps deal with fluctuations in asset value. Second, the bill taxes privately held assets, but less regularly than public assets. This will prevent gamesmanship between asset categories while also not imposing too great an administrative burden," said Darien Shanske, Law Professor at UC Davis.
"This legislation makes a simple yet profound statement: our tax system must start benefiting babies and their working parents, and stop coddling billionaires and their yachts. This bill will close one of the worst tax loopholes so that billionaires and other ultrarich people will be taxed annually on their investment gains--just like workers are taxed every year on their wages. Rep. Bowman's bill makes the tax system fairer while raising lots of needed revenue from the ones best able to supply it," said Frank Clemente, Executive Director, Americans for Tax Fairness.
"For too long, our tax system has made it possible for the super rich to extract wealth from white, Black and Brown working people, while not paying their fair share for the services we all use. This has created exploding white billionaire wealth and struggling Black and Brown working families. It's time we start using the tax code to build wealth for working people," said Mandla Deskins, Take on Wall Street at Americans for Financial Reform.
"Too many American families are struggling--living paycheck to paycheck or not making ends meet, particularly with rising costs, while doing their best to keep their loved ones healthy and helping their kids stay safe and engaged at school. The past two years have challenged us in so many ways, and the American family has stepped up each time. Yet at the same time, American billionaires are making a killing during COVID-19, managing to accumulate more than $1.7 trillion in new wealth during the pandemic and, in some cases, paying as little as nothing in federal taxes.
No one should be profiting off a pandemic while shirking their responsibilities to pay their fair share, especially at the expense of our youth. Rep. Jamaal Bowman's Babies Over Billionaires Act is just a commonsense rebalancing of the tax code by rewarding work instead of extreme wealth and prioritizing investments that benefit our nation's future generations," said Randi Weingarten, President of the American Federation of Teachers.
"While the country suffered during the COVID crisis, the wealth of the billionaire class surged by $2 trillion, and these wealth gains have gone largely untaxed. [Rep.] Bowman's bill addresses head-on this tax injustice by making sure billionaires pay their fair share and pay it timely. The proposed tax will raise more than $1T over the next 10 years solely from billionaires, making it possible to keep funding the expansion of the child tax credit that cut child poverty in half in 2021," said Emmanuel Saez, Economics Professor at UC Berkeley.
"While ordinary workers have to pay taxes year after year, billionaires can defer taxation for decades and sometimes forever. Congressman Bowman's bill is a common-sense solution to this unjustifiable situation," said Gabriel Zucman, Economics Professor at UC Berkeley.
"Our current tax code is ill-equipped to handle the realities of modern wealth. As a result, billionaire wealth in America has skyrocketed while many pay virtually no taxes. Their ability to choose when to pay taxes on their capital gains gives them an enormous advantage over people who pay taxes on every paycheck. It's time to require the richest people in this country to pay taxes every year just like Americans who work for a living. The Babies over Billionaires Act is exactly what this country needs - it would fix one of the fundamental injustices of our tax code and raise hundreds of billions of dollars while costing 99.9% of Americans nothing," said Morris Pearl, the Chair of the Patriotic Millionaires and a former managing director at BlackRock, Inc.
"Rep. Bowman's bill tackles the single biggest inequity in the tax code - the fact that billionaires often pay no tax at all as they accumulate their enormous wealth, while working people have taxes taken out of every paycheck. With President Biden's billionaire minimum tax proposal and this important new legislation, there is growing momentum to fix our broken tax code and plans on the table that are both bold and practical. Rep. Bowman and colleagues should be commended for confronting inequality head on and prioritizing children and families," said Seth Hanlon, Senior Fellow for Tax and Budget Policy at Center for American Progress.
Jamaal Anthony Bowman is an American politician and educator serving as the U.S. representative for New York's 16th congressional district since 2021.
(202) 225-2464Delaware is home to more corporations than people. Human people, that is, as under longstanding state law and the US Supreme Court's infamous 2010 ruling, corporations are people, too.
A judge in Delaware—a state with more registered business entities than people—ruled Monday in favor of a small town that allows corporations to vote in local elections.
Delaware Superior Court Judge Craig Karsnitz ruled that the town of Fenwick Island, population 400, did not violate the state Constitution by permitting business entities—which make up 12% of the town's "population"—to vote in municipal elections, as case plaintiff the ACLU of Delaware had claimed.
"What is a 'person?' When one cuts to the heart of this case, that is the question," Karsnitz wrote to open his 20-page ruling.
‼️‼️Delaware Superior Court upholds a municipal ordinance allowing individuals to cast votes on behalf of LLCs, trusts, and corporations in local elections against a challenge that the ordinance constitutes unlawful vote dilution for real persons under the state constitution. aboutblaw.com/blQg
[image or embed]
— Anthony Michael Kreis (@anthonymkreis.bsky.social) May 27, 2026 at 1:46 PM
"According to the law, a person is anyone or anything that can initiate and be subject to legal proceedings. By this conception, any adult, corporation, or institution is a person, but a minor is not a person, a fetus is not a person, and a humanoid robot... is not a person," the ruling continues. "This highlights that legal personhood is dependent solely on legal recognition."
The judge noted that in 2008, the Delaware General Assembly amended Fenwick Island's charter "to expand its voter registration rolls to allow individuals to cast votes on behalf of trusts, limited liability companies, partnerships, and corporations that own property in Fenwick."
"Today, the overwhelming majority of legal entity property owners in Fenwick registered to vote, and on whose behalf votes are cast, are trusts," Karsnitz added.
"I appreciate that Plaintiff may disagree with Delaware’s policy of authorizing certain municipalities to allow voting on behalf of entity property owners," the judge wrote.
"Visions of faceless large corporations, or even HAL, controlling a small town are frightening and the stuff of science fiction," he continued," referring to the malevolent artificial intelligence-powered computer in Stanley Kubrick's 1968 film version of Arthur C. Clarke's 2001: A Space Odyssey. "However, Plaintiff has not demonstrated that this policy violates the principle of one person/entity/one vote."
"Plaintiff points to no other persuasive independent authority than the Elections Clause of the Delaware Constitution itself," Karsnitz concluded. "And matters of policy are appropriately left to legislative bodies, not the courts."
Fenwick Island Mayor Natalie Magdeburger told Reuters earlier this year that "a property owner who pays taxes and is subject to our ordinances should have a say in who represents them on our Town Council."
Meanwhile, the ACLU of Delaware contends that "with over 2 million business entities incorporated in Delaware–roughly double the amount of actual people living in the state–the people of Delaware risk having their voices drowned out when towns like Fenwick Island allow corporate voting."
Karsnitz's ruling does not mention Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the 2010 US Supreme Court decision affirming that political spending by corporations, nonprofit organizations, labor unions, and other groups is a form of free speech protected by the 1st Amendment that government cannot restrict. The decision ushered in the era of super PACs—which can raise unlimited amounts of money to spend on campaigns—and secret spending on elections with so-called “dark money.”
While Delaware's corporate personhood laws long predate Citizens United, numerous critics of Monday's ruling referred to the case, including the progressive legal advocacy group Demand Justice.
"Corporations aren't people," the group asserted on X. "They don't have kids in local schools, they don't drink the water, they can’t be jailed for crimes, and they shouldn't get a vote."
Some compared Hawaii, where Democratic Gov. Josh Green recently signed legislation clarifying that corporations are not people, with Delaware.
"Hawaii made a move to rein in Citizens United," writer Van Dennis posted on X, "and Delaware responded, "The fuck you are."
"The 'no more foreign wars' president just threatened to attack yet another country," said one critic.
President Donald Trump on Wednesday threatened to "blow up" Oman if the US ally works with Iran to reopen and jointly manage the Strait of Hormuz.
Responding to reporting by Iranian state media that Iran and Oman were negotiating an agreement to jointly manage the Strait of Hormuz—through which around 20% of the world's oil was shipped before the illegal US-Israeli war of choice on Iran—Trump said that "nobody's gonna control" the vital waterway.
"We're gonna watch over it, but nobody's gonna control it," the president continued. "That's part of the negotiation that we have."
Donald Trump: "Oman will behave just like everybody else, or we'll have to blow them up."The "no more foreign wars" president just threatened to attack yet another country.
[image or embed]
— Home of the Brave (@ofthebraveusa.bsky.social) May 27, 2026 at 10:15 AM
"It's international waters, and Oman will behave just like everybody else, or we'll have to blow them up," Trump added. "They understand that; they'll be fine."
The US State Department posted a captioned video of Trump's remarks, removing all doubt about whether he indeed threatened an ally with which the United States has had a strategically important partnership for generations.
A defense cooperation agreement signed in 1980 allows US forces to use Omani military bases, including facilities used for logistics, surveillance, and regional operations. The two countries periodically hold joint military exercises and cooperate on counterterrorism and maritime security—especially regarding threats to Gulf shipping lanes.
The countries have also had a free trade agreement in effect since 2009, and the president's business organization is currently building Trump International Oman, a controversial $500 million luxury hotel, golf course, villa, and resort development near the capital, Muscat.
In which Biff forgets about the Trump golf course and hotel grift he is running in Oman
[image or embed]
— Tom Hearden (@followtheh.bsky.social) May 27, 2026 at 10:20 AM
Oman has also been a trusted mediator between the US and countries including Iran. Omani Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi publicly said that a deal to avert the Iran War was "within our reach" as Trump ordered bombing to commence.
Trump's remarks suggested that US and Iranian negotiators are not as close to a deal to end the 88-day war—in which US and Israeli forces have killed thousands of Iranians and global energy prices have soared—as the president has claimed.
"We should be the party that says 'Donald Trump, end this war, we're going to support the negotiation'—and then we're not going to get into these wars in the future."
Congressman Ro Khanna on Tuesday suggested Democratic voters who believe the party lacks "principles," as a number of respondents said in a new poll, have understandable questions about what Democrats stands for, as he denounced recent comments from several lawmakers who have attacked President Donald Trump for not being hawkish enough when it comes to the war he started in Iran.
"People want a Democratic Party that's going to stand for things, that stands as the party that's anti-war," Khanna told Chris Hayes on MS NOW.
“And we should be the party that says, ‘Donald Trump, end this war, we’re going to support the negotiation’—and then we’re going to not get into these wars in the future,” he added.
Khanna accused his colleagues of sending the message: “Donald Trump, go blow up more things! Why aren’t you destroying more of Iran?”
“I’m not one of those Democrats,” said the congressman, who introduced a war powers resolution with Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) to stop Trump from launching unauthorized strikes against Iran. “I’m one of the people saying, ‘Yes, let’s get a negotiated settlement. Let’s work toward ending this war.’”
“The Democrats should be for ending this war and be against more of these foreign interventions,” said Khanna. “The last thing we want is to goad Donald Trump into getting us into more conflict there.”
"We should be the party that says 'Donald Trump, end this war, we're going to support the negotiation' — and then we're not going to get into these wars in the future"
@RoKhanna to @ChrisLHayes on some Dems attacking Trump from the right over Iran dealpic.twitter.com/Rxbd7e1iJ6
— Just Foreign Policy (@justfp) May 27, 2026
As examples of what Khanna is talking about, influential Democrats including Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) and Sens. Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) have spent the last several days provoking the president over Iran, and by complaining that the deal to end the war isn't tough enough on the country, which the US and Israel began preemptively attacking in February in violation of international law.
More than 3,400 people have been killed in Iran since the war started, while Israel has expanded hostilities to Lebanon, killing more than 3,000 people. The casualties in Iran have included about 150 people, mostly children, who were killed in an attack on a girls' school when the war started; Amnesty International has called for the US to be held to account for the bombing. A number of other schools have also been attacked, as well as medical facilities.
Despite the carnage—as well as the economic impact of war, which Iran swiftly responded to by effectively closing the Strait of Hormuz, a key oil shipping route, and sending oil prices skyrocketing—Booker on Sunday debuted what Just Foreign Policy executive director Erik Sperling called "Democrat neocon talking points" regarding reports of an impending peace deal.
The senator said reports of the deal—including the reopening of the strait, a lift of US sanctions allowing Iran to sell oil freely, and an apparent agreement to hold formal talks on Iran's nuclear program later—had him "outraged."
"The president said he went into this to deal with the nuclear program. This does not deal with that," said Booker, adding that the easing of sanctions of Iran would allow them to get "billions more" dollars.
"Giving Iran more money, as he has said, will allow them to do things like fuel their terrorist proxies," the senator added.
His comments were followed by Wasserman Schultz's interview on the same network Tuesday, when she said she was "concerned and frustrated over, again, another potential deal, a negotiation for a negotiation, where we're going to unfreeze Iranian assets" and allowing Iran to "rebuild their ballistic missile program."
Another Democrat comes out to the right of Trump, criticizing US-Iran negotiated deal to end the war:
"We're going to unfreeze Iranian assets and give them billions of dollars to be able to control proxies again?"
Rep. Wasserman-Schultz, former DNC chair https://t.co/D7plRDK0Nk pic.twitter.com/gq50DoaDqp
— Erik Sperling (@ErikSperling) May 26, 2026
Booker has taken more than $800,000 from pro-Israel groups including the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, while Wasserman Schultz has taken more than $1.4 million.
Murphy also condemned the reported deal on social media Sunday, saying that Trump "hasn’t accomplished ANY of his constantly shifting goals."
"Iran still has its ballistic missile and drone program," he said. "They still have a navy that can close the strait. A hardline regime is still in charge."
Jeet Heer of The Nation said that because the war on Iran "is immensely unpopular... prominent Democrats want to outflank Trump by being more hawkish."
Historian and analyst Stephen Wertheim credited Khanna with articulating "what the vast majority of Democrats believe, but too few of their leaders say and mean."
A March poll by Pew Research Center found that nearly 90% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents said the Trump administration had made the wrong decision going to war against Iran.
Khanna also spoke to Fox News over the weekend, saying he would support all efforts by Trump to negotiate a peace deal with Iran and expressing approval of the president's apparent rejection of the "Lindsay Graham wing of the party," referring to the South Carolina Republican, an outspoken advocate for military intervention in Iran and elsewhere.
Khanna's comments, said Sperling, represented "what decent, pro-diplomacy messaging looks like."