

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.

Dan Beeton
beeton@cepr.net
A new report from the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) finds that the expansion of US sanctions against Cuba beginning in 2017 were likely the primary cause of a major increase in infant mortality in Cuba. The report, by Alexander Main, Joe Sammut, Mark Weisbrot, and Guillaume Long examines the unprecedented increase in Cuba’s infant mortality rate (IMR), which soared by 148 percent from 2018 to 2025. During this time, US unilateral economic coercive measures against Cuba were greatly tightened by President Trump and then largely maintained under President Biden before being tightened even further during the second Trump administration. Had Cuba’s IMR remained stable over the last eight years, then approximately 1,800 deaths of infants would not have occurred.
“The Trump policy of ‘maximum pressure’ on Cuba has killed a lot of babies — and, although we don’t yet have data for the last few months, it’s highly likely that more babies are dying now, and at an even higher rate than last year as a result of the current US fuel blockade targeting Cuba,” CEPR Director of International Policy and report coauthor Alexander Main said. “The question is how many more babies will have to die before the current economic siege against Cuba is lifted.”
The report notes that “In Cuba, where for decades the state has invested substantially in health care services, the IMR was … among the lowest in the Western Hemisphere, and lower than in the US,” but that “Since 2018 … Cuba’s IMR has increased from an annual rate of 4.0 per 1000 live births to a rate of 9.9 as of 2025.”
The paper also notes that Cuba, unlike its neighbors in the region, has not rebounded economically from the COVID-19 pandemic, averaging just 0.4 percent annual per capita GDP growth from 2020 to 2024, versus 3.2 percent for the Latin American and Caribbean region as a whole.
The report looks at the economic and social effects of the hardening of US sanctions since 2017, focusing in particular on the impact on Cuba’s health-care sector. Trump administration pressure on Cuba has included restrictions that have sharply diminished the island’s important tourism sector; severely limited exports of goods to Cuba — including essential medication and medical equipment; cut Cuba’s access to international financial markets by putting the country back on the State Sponsors of Terrorism list; curbed remittances; pressured countries to end their partnerships with Cuba’s medical missions, and notably imposed a recent fuel blockade that prevents Venezuelan oil from reaching the island.
“US sanctions have targeted Cuba’s key sources of export earnings, such as tourism, remittances from Cuban Americans to their family members, and even by putting pressure on other countries to end primary care programs staffed by Cuban doctors. These measures sharply reduced Cuba’s capacity to pay for needed food and medicines,” CEPR International Research Fellow and coauthor Joe Sammut said. “Cutting off medical services exports is doubly cruel as these programs mostly serve marginalized communities in poorer countries, while bringing in foreign currency revenues to Cuba in a mutually beneficial trade. As such the increasing US sanctions have a negative health-care spillover even beyond the island of 10 million people.”
As the report discusses, recent research has shown that unilateral, broad economic sanctions are as deadly as armed conflict, killing some 564,000 people annually, according to a study by CEPR economists Francisco Rodríguez, Silvio Rendón, and Mark Weisbrot published in August in The Lancet Global Health. More than half of these deaths are children under five, and deaths of infants are even more disproportionate, since they are three-quarters of the under-five population.
“The sanctions on Cuba starkly illustrate how these economic sanctions work: they target the civilian population, often with the goal of provoking regime change,” said Mark Weisbrot, CEPR Co-Director. “This can dramatically increase death rates, as shown statistically in the Lancet Global Health study of economic sanctions throughout the world. The increased mortality in Cuba fits this pattern, and the causality is visible.”
The US Senate may vote as early as Tuesday, April 28, on a War Powers Resolution introduced by Senators Tim Kaine, Adam Schiff, and Ruben Gallego to “to prevent [US] Armed Forces from engaging in hostilities [against Cuba] unless authorized by Congress.”
“This legislation pending in Congress right now argues persuasively that the current blockade constitutes a military participation in hostilities that is unlawful according to the US Constitution and law because it has not been authorized by Congress,” Weisbrot said.
“The collective punishment of civilians is prohibited by the Fourth Geneva Convention when there is armed conflict, and can be prosecuted as a war crime. This would appear to be applicable now that the current naval blockade involves the US military.”
The report also describes the vulnerability of newborn babies in Cuba to the impact of blackouts and fuel scarcity — as recently reported by The New York Times. “The blockade has had a particularly dire effect on Cuba’s health-care infrastructure, with frequent power outages interrupting the use of critical equipment for the treatment of patients, including incubators for premature babies, and ventilators to help sick newborns breathe,” Guillaume Long, CEPR Senior Research Fellow and coauthor said.
The report notes: “Given the effects of the US energy blockade, it is highly likely that Cuba’s infant mortality rate has increased significantly since December of 2025, when it had reached 9.9 per 1000 live births. Other key health indicators, such as life expectancy and maternal mortality have also very likely deteriorated since the beginning of the year.”
The Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) was established in 1999 to promote democratic debate on the most important economic and social issues that affect people's lives. In order for citizens to effectively exercise their voices in a democracy, they should be informed about the problems and choices that they face. CEPR is committed to presenting issues in an accurate and understandable manner, so that the public is better prepared to choose among the various policy options.
(202) 293-5380“The lobbying that happens on Capitol Hill should be reported if it’s a foreign country, whether it’s Great Britain, Australia, Turkey, Qatar, or Israel,” said the Kentucky Republican.
As the Israel lobby attempts to end his political career, the Republican Rep. Thomas Massie has introduced a bill that would require lobbyists working for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, commonly known as AIPAC, to register as foreign agents.
The bill, known as the Americans Insist on Political Agent Clarity (AIPAC) Act, would amend the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938 (FARA), which requires those working to influence government policy on behalf of a foreign power to register with the US Department of Justice (DOJ).
Most lobbyists and donors for AIPAC are American, leading the DOJ to classify it as a domestic, rather than foreign, lobbying group. But critics have argued that it engages in extensive coordination with the Israeli government and that groups lobbying for the interests of other countries are treated with stricter scrutiny.
“Today, I introduced a bill called the AIPAC Act… which would make AIPAC subject to the Foreign Agents Registration Act," Massie (R-Ky.) announced on Redacted News Thursday. "For some reason, they’re immune right now, and I think not just the money that’s spent in politics, but the lobbying that happens on Capitol Hill should be reported if it’s a foreign country. Whether it's Great Britain, Australia, Turkey, Qatar, or Israel, it needs to be reported."
Massie has established himself as the leading Republican critic of President Donald Trump in Congress, agitating for transparency from the DOJ on the Jeffrey Epstein files and stridently opposing increased military spending and the president's aggressive overseas wars, including in Iran.
He has also distinguished himself as one of the few Republicans willing to publicly criticize Israel and call for the US to "immediately terminate" military aid in response to its killing of tens of thousands of women and children in Gaza.
His debut of the AIPAC Act comes as he's in the fight of his political life in Kentucky, where pro-Israel lobbying groups have unleashed a flood of money to unseat him in next week's Republican primary.
The United Democracy Project, an AIPAC-affiliated super PAC, has spent about $2.6 million, according to Axios, while the Republican Jewish Coalition has dropped $4 million to support Massie’s opponent, retired Navy SEAL Ed Gallrein. The Christian Zionist group Christians United For Israel has dropped six figures on a campaign to blanket “every available billboard," it said, in Kentucky’s 4th congressional district with anti-Massie messaging.
Trump has also thrown his support behind Gallrein, and two of his senior political advisers, Chris LaCivita and Tony Fabrizio, have raised more than $2 million for their MAGA KY PAC from a trio of top pro-Israel billionaires—hedge fund manager Paul Singer, investor John Paulson, and a group linked to casino mogul Miriam Adelson, according to Axios.
In all, the GOP primary in KY-04 has become the most expensive House primary on record in US history, with more than $25 million spent on advertising in total, surpassing the 2024 Democratic primary in New York's 16th district, where AIPAC and its allies unleashed another torrent of cash and successfully felled the progressive Rep. Jamal Bowman (D).
"[The money] didn't come from regular people. It's come from billionaires, and 95% of it... has come from the Israeli lobby," Massie said of the funds spent to oust him during an appearance on Tucker Carlson's podcast last week. "Their position is more war, it's more strife, it's more bombs, it's more foreign aid, and those are the things that I've been voting against."
Right now, the ad blitz—which has portrayed Massie as disloyal to MAGA—has put the incumbent in a position to lose his race. A Quantus Insights poll earlier this week showed him trailing with 43% of likely voters to Gallrein's 48%.
Massie said: "The real reason that this race is a serious race, and I may lose, is because a foreign lobby has fully funded to the extent that they've never done in any Republican race ever before."
"The far-right Supreme Court hijacked the Constitution to let corporations spend in our elections. But we are not powerless. We can fight back," said US Rep. Greg Casar.
The state of Hawaii has passed a law that poses a direct challenge to the infamous 2010 Citizens United Supreme Court ruling, which opened the door to unlimited corporate spending in US elections.
Democratic Hawaii Gov. Josh Green on Thursday signed into law a bill that takes aim at the court's ruling that corporations are effectively people with full free speech rights who can face no limits on what they can contribute to political organizations.
As explained by More Perfect Union, the law, which is set to take effect next July, classifies corporations as "artificial persons" who do not have a constitutional right to make political donations.
"The bill could limit the influence of super PACs," noted More Perfect Union, "and be a model to challenge the influence of money in politics."
Democratic Hawaii state Sen. Jarrett Keohokalole, a supporter of the law, said on Thursday he was proud that Hawaii has become "the first state in the nation" to take direct action challenging Citizens United.
"As elected leaders, we do not serve artificial entities," Keohokalole said. "We serve the people."
“We do not serve artificial entities. We serve the people.” @SenatorJarrett on Hawaii making history by getting dark and corporate money out of politics. #CitizensUnited pic.twitter.com/Se6HQyvRu8
— American Progress (@amprog) May 14, 2026
US Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas), chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, hailed the law as "big news" that should inspire opponents of limitless corporate political spending across the US.
"The far-right Supreme Court hijacked the Constitution to let corporations spend in our elections," said Casar. "But we are not powerless. We can fight back."
The new law passed despite opposition from Hawaii Attorney General Anne Lopez, who argued that defending it in court could be difficult and expensive.
The law's passage earned praise from campaign finance watchdogs who have long called for overturning Citizens United and reestablishing guardrails for corporate cash in US democracy.
Michael Beckel, who directs the Money in Politics project for the advocacy group Issue One, said the Hawaii law is a "model for the country" that other states should rush to emulate.
"This measure... is among the most innovative and impactful ideas to curb corporate and dark money spending in campaigns since the Supreme Court’s disastrous Citizens United ruling in 2010," Beckel said. "Those looking to bring more transparency and accountability to elections should embrace this powerful proposal and follow Hawaii’s lead."
End Citizens United, the nonprofit campaign finance reform organization dedicated to overturning the 2010 Supreme Court ruling, also pushed other states to look at Hawaii's law as a roadmap for their own legislation.
"Hawaii has provided a blueprint for how to prevent super PACs from spending dark money by passing state law," the group said in a social media post. "Let this win be a testament to the ability states have to put power back in the hands of everyday people by neutralizing the effects of the Citizens United ruling."
Tom Moore, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, praised the Hawaii law in an interview with The Associated Press, calling it "a brave and bold step to get corporate and dark money out of America’s politics" that "will send a powerful message that will be heard loud and clear across the Pacific and across the mainland."
“The EPA has one job, to protect the health and welfare of the American people," said one critic. "But, yet again, the Trump EPA is choosing polluters over people.”
The US Environmental Protection Agency on Thursday proposed postponing enforcement of vehicle emissions standards enacted during the Biden administration, a move that critics warned will worsen air pollution, one of the leading risk factors for premature death in the United States and around the world.
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin proposed delaying Biden-era emission standards for light- and medium-duty vehicles for two years until model year 2029, claiming that implementation of the policy meant to ensure that a majority of new light vehicles sold in 2032 were electric is "unattainable," and that Americans "overwhelmingly rejected" electric vehicles.
“Freedom is the foundation of this nation, and this includes the freedom to choose the car you drive. The American people have been very clear; they do not want EVs forced upon them,” said Zeldin, who took more than $400,000 in Big Oil campaign donations during his tenure in the New York state Legislature and US Congress, and who questions the scientific consensus on climate change.
Zeldin claimed the proposal "is projected to save over $1.7 billion" for US automakers, "providing hundreds of dollars saved per vehicle for American families," and "aims to return EPA regulations to reality, restoring consumer choice, protecting good paying American jobs, and strengthening the nation’s global competitiveness."
It will also kill people. More than 100,000 people die prematurely in the United States each year due to breathing polluted air. According to a 2024 Environmental Protection Network analysis, President Donald Trump’s rollbacks of pollution rules could cause the deaths of nearly 200,000 people in the United States by 2050.
“In its latest unconscionable act, Trump’s EPA looked at a rule intended to protect public health from toxic tailpipe pollutants while saving tens of thousands of lives, and decided it could wait," Public Citizen Climate Program deputy director Deanna Noël said Friday.
"The decision will not just cost lives; it will cost working-class people more money in medical bills, more missed days of work, and more years chained to volatile gas prices," Noël continued.
"Working families are already stretched thin. Everything from groceries to home insurance to gas is getting more expensive, with no end in sight," she added. "Delaying commonsense emissions standards will only make communities sicker and send costs higher. The EPA’s entire reason for existing is to protect public health and the environment. Yet under this administration, it has been weaponized to serve corporate interests over the American public, no matter the cost.”
According to the advocacy group Climate Power, fossil fuel industry interests spent more than $445 million during the 2024 election cycle on campaign donations, lobbying, and other efforts to bolster Trump and other Republican candidates and causes.
Responding to Zeldin's announcement, Natural Resources Defense Council clean vehicles director Kathy Harris said in a statement that “the EPA has one job, to protect the health and welfare of the American people. But, yet again, the Trump EPA is choosing polluters over people."
“Delaying these standards is going to mean more toxic pollutants spewing from tailpipes, and more soot and smog in our cities," she continued. "That means more asthma, more heart attacks, and more lung disease."
“EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin claims to want to provide clean air and clean water, but time after time he is acting to increase pollution," Harris added. "The Trump administration’s war on our health continues unabated.”
EPA’s vehicle rollback would leave children breathing more traffic pollution for years.Delaying Tier 4 standards means more smog, fine particles, and toxic emissions from vehicles that will stay on the road for decades.EPN’s response: www.environmentalprotectionnetwork.org/20260514_tie...
[image or embed]
— Environmental Protection Network (@enviroprotnet.bsky.social) May 14, 2026 at 4:45 PM
Zeldin's proposal is part of a wider Trump administration push to roll back Biden’s efforts to promote electric vehicles, and serves Trump's "drill, baby, drill" energy policy. Last year, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy ordered the cancellation of Biden-era fuel efficiency and emissions standards for cars and light trucks
During Trump’s second term, the EPA has moved to repeal or replace stronger carbon emission limits on fossil-fueled power plants, revoked California’s ability to enact stricter vehicle emissions rules, and signaled plans to overturn the agency’s finding that greenhouse gases are a public health hazard.
The EPA has also revoked the long-standing “endangerment finding” that allowed it to pass climate regulation, stopped counting the monetary value of reducing pollution, weakened water and wetland protections, rolled back regulations limiting so-called “forever chemicals” in drinking water, dramatically cut or eliminated environmental justice programs, reduced enforcement of environmental violations, dismantled advisory and scientific panels, removed all mentions of human-caused climate change from its website, and more.