

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.
Karyn Strickler
President and Founder
Vote Climate U.S. PAC is the only website in the country to provide a climate change Voter's Guide for candidates for U.S. House, U.S. Senate, Governors and Statehouses (partial). (Always click the green + button for detailed research.) Like most Voter's Guides, we score incumbents on pivotal climate votes in Congress.
Vote Climate U.S. PAC is the only website in the country to provide a climate change Voter's Guide for candidates for U.S. House, U.S. Senate, Governors and Statehouses (partial). (Always click the green + button for detailed research.) Like most Voter's Guides, we score incumbents on pivotal climate votes in Congress. We also assess a candidate's position: what do candidates say about the issue; leadership: what do they do; and putting a fee on carbon polluters.
In 2022 for the first time, we indicate if a candidate supports Roe v. Wade. We see a strong connection between climate and choice, so while it is not part of our Climate Calculations, we have included support or opposition to Roe v. Wade, the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion, in our national climate change voter's guide.
According to Cook Political Report, every Vote Climate U.S. PAC priority candidate including: John Fetterman (D), Pennsylvania; U.S. Senator Catherine Cortez Masto (D), Nevada; U.S. Senator Raphael Warnock (D), Georgia; U.S. Senator Mark Kelly (D), Arizona and Mandela Barnes (D), Wisconsin, is in a toss-up race.
"Our priority U.S. Senate races are all close and could go either way on Election Day, Tuesday, November 8th. They are all critical for climate-action, reproductive choice and American democracy itself. There is no comparison between our priority candidates and their opponents on climate change. Four of five of the opponents have a Climate Calculation of 7.5 or less and the other one scores 28.75, all failing grades on any scale. Every opponent opposes Roe v. Wade, the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion and many of them are 2020 election deniers. These are the races that we believe will most advance climate action and reproductive choice." said Karyn Strickler, President of Vote Climate U.S. PAC.
In Pennsylvania, John Fetterman's (D) Climate Calculation is 92.5. He understands the importance of action on climate change as a top priority issue. On his official campaign website, Fetterman states, "I believe that climate change is an existential threat, and we need to transition to clean energy as quickly as possible."
In our 2020 Vote Climate U.S. PAC analysis of the partisan divide on Climate Calculations, with U.S. Senate challengers, the Republican mean was 17.7, the Democratic mean was 90.7, with a +73 difference for the Democrats. The partisan divide was worse for incumbents. And that was an improvement from the 2018 party analysis.
Still, Democrats have major room for improvement on the issue. America needs leadership for climate-specific legislation, like a fee on carbon polluters. For example, for a Climate Calculation of 100, candidate John Fetterman would need to take a strong, public position and advocate in favor of a U.S. fee on carbon polluters. His position is unclear. He seems to lean a bit heavily on fossil fuels, saying, "But we must [transition to clean energy] in a way that preserves the union way of life for the thousands of workers currently employed or supported by the natural gas industry in Pennsylvania and the communities where they live." We must get off fossil fuels if we hope to slow climate change. Fetterman supports Roe v. Wade. (See our Voter's Guide Scoring Criteria for Challengers for more information. Both candidates in this race are challengers, so they share the same criteria.)
John Fetterman's (D) Climate Calculation of 92.5 compares to his opponent Mehmet Oz (R) whose overall Climate Calculation is an abysmal 7.5 out of a possible 100. Oz disagrees with the scientific consensus that climate change is real and human-made, from burning fossil fuels. In a Republican forum discussing increasing gas prices, Candidate Oz stated "Actually, we want more than energy independence, we want energy dominance." Candidate Mehmet Oz inaccurately argues that carbon dioxide is not the problem. The singular reason he does not score a zero is because he benefitted from the fact that we could not find public information on his stance on a fee on carbon pollution, giving him a bit higher Climate Calculation than a Climate Zero. He opposes Roe.
In Nevada Catherine Cortez Master (D) has a Climate Calculation of 87.5. In a 2019 press release on climate change innovation, the Senator stated, "We cannot put off solutions to carbon and other greenhouse gas emissions, and we can't ignore the effects of climate change, visible all around us." She consistently votes pro-climate and shows leadership by making climate change a top priority issue. In a 'Medium' blog post the Senator wrote, "...I'm also proud to support the Clean Energy for America Act, which would reduce carbon pollution over the next decade."
As an incumbent U.S. Senator, she received a 100 on her position, 100 on her climate votes, 100 on her leadership, but a 50 on her carbon fee score. She would need to take a strong position, advocating for a fee on carbon polluters for a Climate Calculation of 100. Her position on that issue is unclear. If she clarified that position, she could be Vote Climate U.S. PAC, Climate Hero. She supports Roe. (See Voter's Guide Scoring Criteria for Incumbents for more information.)
Her opponent Adam Paul Laxalt (R) has a Climate Calculation of 28.75 because he does not take a clear position on whether climate change is real and human-made, from burning fossil fuels and he has no known, or an inconsistent position on a U.S. carbon fee. He opposes Roe.
In Georgia, incumbent Senator Raphael Warnock (D) has a Climate Calculation of 81.25. For position, he got a score of 100. For votes, we picked 5 U.S. Senate votes and Senator Warnock received a 100 on votes. But for Vote Climate U.S. PAC, there is more to a Climate Calculation than what they say and how they vote. It's also about what they do, also known as leadership. If incumbents don't make public statements and advocates for action on climate change as a top priority issue, which would earn them a score of 100, but they do still advocate for climate action, they get a 75 on leadership, as Warnock does.
A carbon fee is a fee imposed on fossil fuels intended to dramatically reduce or eliminate the emission of carbon dioxide from those sources. A carbon fee would aid in the switch from fossil fuels to clean, renewable energy and slow climate change and is a policy which Vote Climate U.S. PAC considers the singular, most effective.
For a Climate Calculation of 100, U.S. Senator Raphael Warnock, like many other of our priority candidates, would need to take a strong, public position and advocate in favor of a U.S. fee on carbon polluters. His position is unclear. Senator, your constituents and your country deserve to know where you stand on this issue. As of now we don't know, so Senator Warnock got a 50 which means he has no known or inconsistent position on a U.S. carbon fee. Plus, we need stronger leadership on the issue of climate change.
Warnock's opponent, Herschel Walker (R) has a ridiculously low Climate Calculation of 7.5 because despite all scientific evidence to the contrary, he disagrees with the scientific consensus that climate change is real and human-made, from burning fossil fuels. He has no known, or an inconsistent position on a U.S. carbon fee. He is a 2020 election denier. He not only opposes Roe, but he has been accused of paying for several abortions for his former girlfriends. Right-wingers don't care because he is a vote for them, regardless of his hypocrisy. Let's hope that swing voters care and progressives turn out on Election Day, Tuesday, November 8th.
Our priority candidate in Arizona, Senator Mark Kelly (D) has a Climate Calculation of 82.5. He understands the importance of climate action as a top priority issue. On his campaign website, it states "Mark has seen the planet change from space, and wanting to stop that and protect our state and our planet is part of what inspired him to run. Mark knows that if we harness the power of American ingenuity and determination, we can mitigate the risks of climate change." Senator Mark Kelly has demonstrated leadership by advocating for climate action. In a 2019 Facebook post, Senator Kelly told, "Congress that we need immediate action on climate action." In an October 2021 interview with White Mountain Independent it said, "Regarding energy and climate change, Senator Kelly recognizes the role that traditional fossil fuels play in the production of electricity and the creation of jobs in Arizona. He also sees Arizona's drought and wildfire conditions being made worse by the effects of climate change." We do not know his position on a fee on carbon polluters. He supports Roe. His opponent, Blake Masters (R), has a Climate Calculation of 7.5. He opposes Roe.
In Wisconsin, priority candidate Mandela Barnes (D) Climate Calculation is 92.5. She understands the importance of action on climate change as a top priority issue. On a video on his official campaign website, Candidate Barnes states, "Climate change is already taking a toll on our communities, from our cities to our family farms. We've got once in a generation storms coming every year now. We need bold, powerful action to address climate change that breathes new life into the manufacturing industry." We don't know her position on a fee on carbon. She supports Roe.
Her opponent, Senator Ron Johnson (R) has a Climate Calculation of 6.25. He demonstrates a lack of leadership with public statements, advocacy or votes against climate action. According to a 2016 article by 'Huff Post, Senator Johnson stated, "'Mankind has actually flourished in warmer temperatures... just think the question always is what is the cost versus the benefit of anything we do to try and clean up our environment... I'm highly concerned about the climate alarmists that are going to spend a lot of money and have no impact whatsoever on the climate but have a great deal of harm on our economy." He opposes Roe.
Vote Climate U.S. PAC
2022 Priority Candidates
MUST HOLD
NET GAIN
U.S. Senate Races
Vote Climate U.S. PAC works to elect candidates to get off fossil fuels, transition to clean, renewable, energy and reduce carbon pollution by putting a fee on carbon, in order to slow climate change and related weather extremes.
“Our assessment is that Trump effectively lacks both a coherent plan and the capacity to secure even a temporary agreement,” an Iranian official said.
Iran says it has no plans to negotiate with the US after President Donald Trump said Sunday that "the whole country is going to get blown up" if Iran refuses to make a deal.
Trump claimed that Iranian officials were heading to Islamabad for another round of talks Monday with Vice President JD Vance, his son-in-law Jared Kushner, and Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff.
But Iran’s official IRNA news agency later reported that claims Iran was coming to negotiate were “not true" and described the announcement as “a media game and part of the blame game to pressure Iran.”
The Tasnim News Agency, which is linked to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, reiterated the government’s previous position that it would not negotiate unless Trump lifts his blockade of Iranian ports, which Tehran considers a violation of the ceasefire between the US and Iran.
After Trump said the blockade would continue, Iran again shut down travel through the Strait of Hormuz on Saturday, following a brief reopening Friday following the announcement of a ceasefire between Lebanon and Israel.
IRNA added that negotiators decided not to return because of "Washington’s excessive demands, unrealistic expectations, constant shifts in stance, repeated contradictions, and the ongoing naval blockade."
An unnamed Iranian official familiar with Tehran's internal deliberations told Drop Site News on Sunday that Tehran is prepared for a long war.
He said negotiators would prefer to make a deal with the US that would give Iran the right to enrich uranium, provide sanctions relief, and establish a long-term non-aggression framework.
But the official said Trump’s erratic behavior and maximalist demands—including that Iran surrender all its enriched uranium—are causing Iranian officials to sour on the idea that he could ever be a trustworthy negotiating partner.
“Our assessment is that Trump effectively lacks both a coherent plan and the capacity to secure even a temporary agreement,” the official said. “His decision-making appears to be grounded in Israeli political and security assessments, conveyed to him on a daily basis.”
Trump has expressed a desire to find an off-ramp from the war, which has caused economic upheaval and further tanked his already grim approval rating.
But he has also stood by Israel as it has repeatedly undermined negotiations by continuing its attacks on Lebanon, including after a 10-day ceasefire that began Friday. Iran has portrayed ending these attacks as key to a durable ceasefire agreement with the US.
The official said that during the previous round of talks in Islamabad, which resulted in a two-week ceasefire earlier this month, Iran "clearly stated" to Vance that "public threats" like the one Trump issued to wipe out all of "Iranian civilization" would not be tolerated again.
Even before Trump made more such threats Sunday morning, Iran had not yet agreed to another round of talks. The official said that Iranian negotiators are still open to further discussions, but added that they "need to be meaningful, and their framework should be defined in advance."
“The Islamabad negotiations provided President Trump with an appropriate opportunity to exit the war,” the official added. “Should [Trump] nevertheless choose to continue the conflict, Iran will, for a prolonged period, suspend diplomatic channels and will seek, within the context of the conflict, to impose significantly greater costs on United States interests.”
Mohammed Sani, a political analyst based in Tehran, told Drop Site News that Iran appears prepared to inflict more pain on the US should Trump choose violence.
"We see that the Americans have been bringing in more troops and equipment to prepare to attack, but the Iranians have also not been resting during these two weeks of ceasefire,” he said. “They have been preparing, repairing the underground missile cities, bringing in new air defenses, missiles, and drones. Iran is at a high standard of readiness right now. If there is another round of negotiations sometime later in the future, after another round of American attacks against Iran fail, the Iranian conditions for peace will be much tougher.”
Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, said Sunday that Trump’s apparent belief that he can use threats of mass violence to bully Iran into a favorable deal is pushing Tehran further from the negotiating table.
"Due to poor discipline, Trump ends up prioritizing the optics of victory over actually getting a deal," Parsi said. "Instead of using deescalatory signals from Iran to get closer to a deal, he declares victory and seeks Iran's humiliation, and by that, he undermines his own diplomacy."
"This is a tragic situation, maybe the worst tragic situation we’ve ever had in Shreveport," said the mayor.
This is a developing story… Please check back for updates…
Eight children were killed on Sunday morning in Shreveport, Louisiana, in what authorities described as a domestic disturbance.
Police Chief Wayne Smith reported that the victims were between the ages of 1 and 14 years old. Officials are still gathering information about the spree killing, which they say took place across three different locations. A total of ten people were shot.
"This is an extensive scene, unlike anything most of us have ever seen," Smith said.
Gunshot victims were found at two homes and at the scene of a carjacking. The suspected gunman was shot dead in nearby Bossier City by police during a car chase.
Two adult women were also reportedly shot. One of them has life-threatening injuries after being shot in the head. One of the women is believed to have had a relationship with the suspect, whose name has not yet been released.
Police said some of the children who were killed were also "descendants" of the alleged shooter.
There have been at least 114 mass shootings in the United States in 2026, according to the Gun Violence Archive, a decline from previous years. At least 65 children between ages 0-11 have been killed and 124 injured in gun violence incidents this year.
"This is a tragic situation, maybe the worst tragic situation we’ve ever had in Shreveport," said Mayor Tom Arceneaux. "So, right now we’re going to process the information, and it's in very good hands."
"Whether he means it or not, his saying it is an indelible moral stain on our country," said one law professor.
President Donald Trump on Sunday renewed his threat to carry out a genocidal attack on Iran, pledging to "blow up" the "whole country" of over 90 million people and to demolish critical civilian infrastructure if it does not sign a peace deal by Wednesday.
"If they don't sign the deal, then the whole country is going to get blown up," Trump said, according to Fox News correspondent Trey Yingst, who relayed the comments on air Sunday morning.
Trump also reportedly said that the US was "preparing to hit [Iran] harder than any country has ever been hit before because you cannot let them have a nuclear weapon."
The comments came after Iran once again closed the Strait of Hormuz on Saturday in response to the continued US blockade of Iranian ports, which Iranian officials said violated the terms of the agreement reached between the two countries.
After renewing the blockade, Iranian gunboats fired upon a pair of Indian-flagged ships attempting to travel through the strait Saturday.
In response, Trump issued a furious post on Truth Social Sunday morning, saying that he would send a team of negotiators—Vice President JD Vance, his son-in-law Jared Kushner, and special envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff—to Islamabad on Monday for another round of negotiations.
"We’re offering a very fair and reasonable DEAL, and I hope they take it because, if they don’t, the United States is going to knock out every single Power Plant, and every single Bridge, in Iran," Trump wrote. "NO MORE MR. NICE GUY!"
"They’ll come down fast, they’ll come down easy and, if they don’t take the DEAL, it will be my Honor to do what has to be done, which should have been done to Iran, by other Presidents, for the last 47 years," he continued.
It echoed the similarly genocidal threat made by Trump earlier in April that "a whole civilization will die... never to be brought back again,” if Iran did not agree to a deal, which drew worldwide condemnation and sparked efforts by some members of Congress to pursue impeachment or push for Trump's cabinet to remove him via the 25th Amendment.
Trump has appeared eager to end the war with Iran after it caused economic upheaval and pushed his already dire approval rating even lower. But he has also backed Israel when it sought to undermine key points of the agreement, prompting retaliation from Iran.
The ceasefire announced earlier this month between the US and Iran initially included a halt to the hostilities between Israel and Lebanon. But within hours, Israel unleashed its most punishing set of attacks against Lebanon since the war began in March. Trump then backed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu when he claimed that Lebanon was never part of the deal.
Iran only agreed to open the Strait of Hormuz on Friday after Israel and Lebanon appeared to agree to a 10-day ceasefire. But Israel has already violated that agreement several times, continuing to raze Lebanese villages and fire upon people approaching its newly imposed "yellow line."
In addition to calling for the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, which was open before he launched the war in late February, Trump has demanded that Iran make a deal to hand over all of its enriched uranium, which he refers to as "nuclear dust."
A spokesperson for Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has said such a proposal would violate Iran's sovereignty: "Iran's uranium is Iran's asset. It is our responsibility, our energy, our sovereign right."
An end to the attacks against Lebanon has been described as another central demand from Iran, although officials said the decision to close the strait again on Saturday was in response to Trump's continued blockade of Iranian ports.
International law strictly prohibits indiscriminate attacks on civilian infrastructure with no military objective, including bridges and power plants that are critical to human life.
Trump’s previous threats to bomb Iran "back to the Stone Ages" suggest that the latest threats are less about accomplishing a specific military objective than about inflicting suffering on Iranian society as leverage.
Last time Trump made such a threat, a coalition of more than 200 groups, including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Refugees International, and Oxfam America, wrote in an urgent letter stating that if carried out, such attacks would constitute "a grave atrocity" and that "a threat to wipe out ‘a whole civilization’ may amount to a threat of genocide."
Human Rights Watch said that, if acted upon, "the statement could be indicative of criminal intent if Trump were ever prosecuted by the International Criminal Court.
The last time Trump threatened to unleash an apocalyptic attack on Iran, the threat preceded a deal that, at least in principle, involved the US agreeing to negotiate based on a set of terms laid out by the Iranians. This led many observers to characterize the threats as bluster meant to save face before capitulation rather than a sincere pledge to annihilate Iran.
However, Adil Haque, a law professor at Rutgers and the executive editor at Just Security, said that, "Whether he means it or not, his saying it is an indelible moral stain on our country."