SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
amy klobuchar
'Sign the Damn Bill!' Anger at Trump Grows as US Housing Prices Hit All-Time High
US Sen. Amy Klouchar said that the housing bill has "been sitting on President Trump’s desk long enough."
Jul 09, 2026
With President Donald Trump still refusing to sign bipartisan legislation aimed at lowering the cost of housing, fresh outrage erupted Thursday as new data shows buying a home in the US has never been more expensive.
The National Association of Realtors (NAR) on Thursday released its monthly report on home sales showing that the median sales price of existing homes grew to $440,600, a record high.
Lawrence Yun, chief economist at the NAR, said that housing supply remains a major barrier to making owning a home more affordable.
"Progress on long-term housing affordability could be hampered if inventory growth continues to stall," said Yun. "Without consistent gains in inventory, home prices can accelerate. It is critical to introduce more supply to the market to widen the opportunity for homeownership."
The 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, which passed with overwhelming bipartisan support in the US Congress last month, was designed specifically to address the housing shortage in the US.
Among other things, the bill prohibits large Wall Street investors from buying up new single-family homes, streamlines environmental reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and creates a $200 million annual competitive grant program to benefit communities that have demonstrated success in expanding their housing supplies.
Trump, however, refused to sign the legislation, insisting that it be paired with the SAVE America Act, a voter suppression bill that will curb ballot access but Republicans in Congress do not currently have enough power to pass.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who co-wrote the housing bill alongside Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC), took to social media on Thursday and pointed to a poll showing that the legislation has overwhelming support throughout the country.
"The American people have a message for President Trump," Warren wrote. "Sign the damn bill."
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) also took a shot at the president for dragging his feet on the legislation.
"Over two weeks ago, Congress passed the ROAD to Housing Act with overwhelming bipartisan support," Klobuchar wrote. "It will pave the way for more housing, make it easier to build, and help more Americans find a place to call home. It’s been sitting on President Trump’s desk long enough. Sign the bill."
Rep. Chris Pappas (D-NH), currently a candidate for the US Senate running in New Hampshire, urged Trump to finally take action.
"It's never been more expensive to buy a home," wrote Pappas. "I helped pass a bipartisan housing bill to bring down home prices, and I'm calling on the President to get it over the finish line."
Trump's illegal war of choice with Iran has also not helped the housing affordability crisis, as it has led to an inflation spike that has left the Federal Reserve with little room to lower interest rates without risking further price acceleration.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Democrats Should Embrace a Deal That Brings Trump's Iran War to an End
Too many congressional Democrats are demonstrating their own hypocrisy in claiming that they oppose the war while actively undermining efforts to end it.
Jun 24, 2026
Many of the criticisms being leveled against the Memorandum of Understanding between the United States and Iran—namely, that it is not that great a deal—are accurate and worthy of attention. But under the disastrous set of circumstances resulting from the US-Israeli war on Iran, it is probably the best deal that can be realistically hoped for, given that Iran clearly has the upper hand. Unfortunately, that has not stopped some Washington politicians, including many prominent Democrats, from attempting to undermine it.
Iran has suffered enormously in terms of damage to its military and civilian infrastructure and the killing of many in its clerical, political, and military leadership, among many other thousands of deaths. In response, the regime has demonstrated an effective new form of asymmetrical warfare, in which relatively cheap drones can continue to inflict an enormous amount of damage on US assets in the region, as well as on the military and civilian infrastructure of US allies, even when more than 90 percent of such projectiles are successfully intercepted via more costly technologies.
The United States cannot win this war against Iran.
The deal outlined in the Memorandum of Understanding is decidedly of greater benefit to Iran than the terms agreed upon in the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)—an agreement primarily negotiated by the Obama Administration and signed by six other nations with the support of the United Nations and the European Union. That deal was unilaterally broken off by President Donald Trump during his first term.
Trump’s new Memorandum of Understanding with Iran calls for Iran’s enriched uranium to be blended down inside the country rather than removed to another location. In addition, as much as $24 billion in frozen Iranian assets will be released, although Trump has repeatedly criticized the JCPOA for unfreezing billions in Iranian assets. And, unlike the JCPOA, this deal lifts sanctions prior to Iran’s implementing the nuclear provisions.
The Trump Administration emphasizes that its agreement forces Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and commits Iran to not developing a nuclear weapon. However, both of these were already the case prior to Trump’s launch of the war four months ago on February 28.
For Republicans who attacked President Barack Obama for the JCPOA to now defend Trump’s Memorandum of Understanding is beyond hypocrisy. But many Congressional Democrats are demonstrating their own hypocrisy in claiming that they oppose the war while actively undermining efforts to end it.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York, referred to the agreement as “the art of surrender.” Senator John Hickenlooper, Democrat of Colorado, deemed it “despicable.” Senator Cory Booker, Democrat of New Jersey, said it was a deal in which Iran gets all the benefits. Former Clinton Administration National Security Advisor Susan Rice dubbed it a “jaw-dropping, horrific surrender.” Senator Adam Schiff, Democrat of California, said it was “a thorough capitulation.” Representative Seth Moulton, Democrat of Massachusetts, similarly claimed it was “basically a surrender document.” And Senator Richard Blumenthal, Democrat of Connecticut, also called the agreement as an “unconditional surrender” by the United States, insisting it would be “dead on arrival in the Senate”—even though, since it is not a formal treaty, it does not require ratification or any other action on Capitol Hill.
Under international law, countries that engage in aggressive war are generally held liable for the damages inflicted upon the country they attack. The costs to Iranian society of the US-Israeli bombing has been estimated to be nearly $300 billion. The Memorandum of Understanding does not call for reparations, but it does make reference to a reconstruction fund in that amount, apparently led by Arab Gulf states; payments will likely be in the form of loans with a decent return on investment for those Gulf states. It is not US tax dollars that are being spent. It is not money that Trump is giving to Iran.
This has not stopped some Democratic leaders in Congress from claiming this is somehow a taxpayer-funded cash grant to the Iranian regime. Schumer insists the agreement would force the United States to “send Iran $300 billion when economic needs are severe here at home.” Senator Amy Klobuchar, Democrat of Minnesota, falsely claimed these funds could be used to “end homelessness, fund cancer research for forty years, and give every child free pre-K for over seven years. Instead, Trump is sending it to Iran.” Blumenthal even claimed that Iran would be able to spend the money on supporting Hezbollah and other extremist Iranian allies, and rebuild its nuclear program. However, the investments would more likely actually be directed towards specific civilian infrastructure development projects under the supervision of the donor countries and private investors.
Misrepresenting arms control agreements is a time-honored tactic used by militarists. During the Cold War, these agreements frequently prompted rightwing claims that arms control locked in Soviet nuclear superiority. Trump himself insisted that the JCPOA, rather than make it physically impossible for Iran to develop a weapon, would have enabled them to do the opposite and destroy Israel and attack the United States.
By falsely claiming that the United States would pay Iran $300 billion, Schumer (who also opposed the JCPOA) and other Democrats are essentially trying to mobilize popular opposition to the ending of the conflict.
The big question: What is the alternative?
A return to a war on Iran that brings retaliatory attacks on a half-dozen Middle Eastern nations? The continued devastating Israeli bombardment of Lebanon? The indefinite closure of the Strait of Hormuz and its disastrous global economic impact, particularly on families worldwide living under the poverty line?
Some Democrats recognize this reality. “There is no good way out of a bad war,” noted Senator Chris Van Hollen, Democrat of Maryland. “When you're in a hole, stop digging.” Similarly, Senator Chris Murphy, Democrat of Connecticut, observed, “It’s a disaster, but it’s probably a necessary disaster.”
But the Democratic politicians who are joining rightwing Republicans in claims of “surrender” are assisting in the creation of a climate that might indeed lead the hawkish Trump Administration to break off the current agreement and return to war.
In many respects, this is nothing new. Democrats played an important role in working to undermine Obama’s efforts to negotiate a nuclear agreement with Iran, in discouraging President Joe Biden from returning to the deal, and in promoting a war in Iran that Trump finally brought to fruition in recent months.
Those of us interested in peace and security, however, should not encourage these actions. It is easy to criticize the agreement as a means of underscoring the tragedy of this reckless and illegal war, and to further discredit Trump as we approach the midterm elections. We must resist the understandable temptation to forward the memes, cartoons, and late-night jokes critical of the deal on our personal listservs and social media.
Doing so simply reinforces the efforts by Republican hawks, rightwing Zionists, and others who seek perpetual war. The unfortunate reality is that the implementation of the Memorandum of Understanding is probably the best hope at this point to end—or at least suspend—this tragic conflict.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Kristi Noem Repeatedly Refuses to Apologize to Alex Pretti's Parents at Senate Hearing
"Kristi Noem is brutally unqualified," said one journalist. "Never should have been in spitting distance as head of homeland security/ICE."
Mar 03, 2026
As the US Department of Homeland Security remains partially shut down, DHS chief Kristi Noem testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday and repeatedly refused to apologize to the family of Alex Pretti, who was recently killed by immigration agents in Minnesota.
"Two of my constituents, Renee Good and Alex Pretti, were killed," Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), who is running for governor, said while questioning Noem about Operation Metro Surge, for which the secretary and President Donald Trump sent thousands of immigration agents to the Twin Cities in January.
Border Patrol agent Jesus Ochoa and Customs and Border Protection officer Raymundo Gutierrez fatally shot Pretti, a Department of Veterans Affairs nurse, just weeks after Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officer Jonathan Ross similarly killed Good. Their deaths fueled the congressional funding fight that has led to the ongoing shutdown.
"They should be alive today," Klobuchar said of the two 37-year-old US citizens. "In fact, in one month, in the city of Minneapolis, when you look at the three fatalities that were results of shooting, two of three were committed by federal agents."
After highlighting the various rights that DHS agents trampled on in Minneapolis and Saint Paul, and questioning Noem about the current footprint—roughly 500 more agents than the number before the surge that the administration claims has ended—Klobuchar turned to the secretary's attempts to smear both Good and Pretti as domestic terrorists.
"When I spoke to Alex's parents, they told me that you calling him a domestic terrorist, this was directly from them, the day after he was killed, a nurse in our VA, Alex, one of the most hurtful things they could ever imagine was said by you about their son," said Klobuchar. "Do you have anything you want to say to Alex Pretti's parents?"
Noem responded, "We were relying, in the hours after that incident that was so horrific, on information we were getting from the ground, from our agents."
When Klobuchar jumped in, reiterating the question and extending it to Good's relatives, Noem claimed: "That's what I'm doing right now... I can't even imagine what they have gone through, in the loss of their son, in the loss of their family members. It's absolutely tragic."
Noem's comments about the two victims, and her broader handling of the DHS invasions of the Twin Cities and other US communities as part of Trump's mass deportation agenda, have sparked calls for her resignation, firing, or impeachment.
Before the surge in Minnesota, the administration launched Operation Midway Blitz, targeting immigrants in Chicago and its suburbs. Earlier in Tuesday's hearing, Sen Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), noted to Noem that during the invasion of his state, "one of your Border Patrol agents shot Marimar Martinez five times after ramming her car."
"You and your agency rushed to brand these victims as, quote, domestic terrorists," Durbin continued. "We have ample video evidence and eyewitness testimony proving you were wrong. Your statements cause immeasurable pain to these families. Let me give you an opportunity to do the right thing. Do you retract these statements identifying these individuals as domestic terrorists?"
The secretary responded: "When we have these situations happen, we always offer our condolences to those families, and I offer mine as well. These are tragic situations, and I can't imagine what these families go through in losing a loved one. What I will say is we always work to provide the American people with as much information as possible—that we're relying on reports from the ground and from agents that are there, and working to be transparent, and will continue to do all that we can to provide the accurate information and the facts to people as we can."
While going back and forth, Durbin also asked Noem: "Is it so hard to say you were wrong?" and "When you fail, do you admit it publicly?"
She claimed: "Absolutely. We always know that there's room for improvement."
Martinez, a 30-year-old US citizen, survived, and has since testified on Capitol Hill about what she endured. However, an ICE agent did fatally shoot Silverio Villegas González, a 38-year-old immigrant, in the suburb Franklin Park during the Illinois operation. As with the other cases, video footage of his killing contradicted the DHS narrative about it.
Sharing a clip of the DHS secretary's exchange with Durbin on social media, writer and editor Keith Murphy declared that "Kristi Noem is brutally unqualified. Never should have been in spitting distance as head of Homeland Security/ICE."
"But this is what Trump wanted," Murphy continued, also pointing to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, US Attorney General Pam Bondi, and Federal Bureau of Investigation Director Kash Patel.
"The worst of the worst," Murphy concluded. "A generational clown car."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Minneapolis Mass Shooting Exposes Trump-GOP Lies on Crime and Gun Violence, Critics Say
"Trump will send the military into DC to pick up litter and arrest homeless people, but won't do a damn thing to end the gun violence epidemic killing our kids," said one healthcare advocate.
Aug 27, 2025
Another horrific mass shooting that left multiple children dead and injured has once again ignited a wave of fury at Republican lawmakers who refuse to take action to stop gun violence.
Two children—ages 8 and 10—were killed when a shooter fired through the windows of a church at the Annunciation Catholic School in Minneapolis on Wednesday morning. Another 17 people, including 14 more children, were also injured in the attack before the shooter died of a self-inflicted gunshot wound.
Minneapolis police say the shooter carried out the attack, which is now being investigated as an act of domestic terrorism, using three weapons: a rifle, a shotgun, and a pistol.
According to the Gun Violence Archive, not even eight months into 2025, there have already been 286 mass shootings—defined as cases in which four or more people are shot or killed—in the United States just this year, averaging more than one per day.
Gun violence is the number-one killer of children in the US, causing more deaths each year than car accidents, poisonings, and cancer. The victims of the shooting in Minneapolis join the more than 800 children killed and more than 2,200 injured by firearms this year.
Like dozens of mass shootings before it, Wednesday's deadly attack has stoked calls in Minnesota and around the country from Democratic lawmakers and gun control advocates for stricter gun laws, which have been repeatedly shot down by Republicans in Congress.
"We need better laws on the books nationally," said Minnesota's Democratic senator, Amy Klobuchar. "When you have so much access to guns right now and so many guns out there on the streets, you're going to continue to see these kinds of mass shootings."
"Don't just say this is about thoughts and prayers right now," said Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey. "These kids were literally praying. It was the first week of school. They were in a church."
"They should be able to go to school or church in peace without the fear or risk of violence, and their parents should have the same kind of assurance," Frey said. "These are the sort of basic assurances that every family should have every step of the day, regardless of where they are in our country."
Congress has not passed a significant piece of gun legislation since 2022, when it passed the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act in the wake of the horrific school shooting in Uvalde, Texas.
That law, which was supported by just 15 Republicans, introduced some modest reforms—including extended background checks for firearm purchasers under 21, funding for state red flag laws, and the closure of gun purchasing loopholes.
However, then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) only agreed to negotiate the bill if Democrats abandoned more ambitious reforms, such as bans on high-capacity magazines and universal background checks.
Since its passage, even this watered-down piece of legislation has been fought aggressively by Republican lawmakers backed by the gun industry's lobbying arm, the National Rifle Association, who have attempted to have it repealed.
Earlier this year, President Donald Trump ordered Attorney General Pam Bondi to present an action plan to reverse any law that the Department of Justice determines has "impinged on the Second Amendment rights of our citizens."
Through executive orders, Trump has rolled back efforts under the Biden administration to regulate ghost guns and enhance background checks.
The administration has also choked off more than $800 million in grants to local gun violence prevention groups and pushed for "concealed carry reciprocity" legislation, which would require all states to honor concealed carry permits issued by other states.
Instead of stricter gun control measures, Trump has personally advocated for schools to arm teachers and focus on improving mental healthcare—even as he's rolled back rules ensuring Americans have access to that care.
"Until we have more elected officials willing to place gun safety over allegiance to the gun lobby, more and more families will face unbearable suffering from random acts of violence," said Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) on Wednesday. "Congress could—and should—pass stricter gun safety laws, but continues to cave to the gun lobby."
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) added: "The United States continues to be the only country where school shootings are a regular occurrence. We must stop this epidemic of gun violence and finally put the lives of our kids first."
Other advocates noted the contrast between Trump's response to the imaginary "crime wave" in Washington, DC, where he has initiated a militarized takeover, and his lack of interest in fighting America's endless wave of gun violence.
"Guns are the leading cause of death for kids in the US," said Melanie D'Arrigo, the executive director of the Campaign for New York Health. "Trump will send the military into DC to pick up litter and arrest homeless people, but won't do a damn thing to end the gun violence epidemic killing our kids."
Charles Idelson, a former communications director for National Nurses United, said: "If Trump wants to pretend he is 'fighting crimes,' stop protecting the pro-gun violence cabal."
Update: This report, which originally referred to the shooter as a "gunman" has been corrected to accurately reflect new information about the gender identity of the shooter, who has been identified as Robin Westman, a transgender woman.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Senate Parliamentarian Blocks Republican Attacks on SNAP, CFPB in Reconciliation Bill
"We will be fighting this bill every single day until Republicans bring it to the floor," said Sen. Jeff Merkley.
Jun 21, 2025
Democratic senators on Saturday applauded the news that several of the Republican Party's proposals in President Donald Trump's domestic spending bill must be struck from the legislation—potentially protecting millions of Americans from cuts to crucial nutrition assistance and the elimination of federal consumer protections.
"As much as Senate Republicans would prefer to throw out the rule book and advance their conservative 'families lose and billionaires win' agenda, this process has rules and Democrats are making sure those rules are enforced," said Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee.
Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough ruled late Friday that a measure pushing some of the cost of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program onto the states should be struck from the bill, along with a provision barring undocumented immigrants from receiving SNAP benefits.
MacDonough has been analyzing the legislation to ensure its provisions comply with the Byrd Rule. The rule requires that measures included in reconciliation bills, which can be passed with a simple majority rather than a 60-vote threshold, are directly related to budget matters.
Republicans have pushed the SNAP provision to partially cover the cost of extending massive tax cuts for corporations and the wealthiest Americans.
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), ranking member of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, said MacDonough had "made clear that Senate Republicans cannot use their partisan budget to shift major nutrition assistance to the states that would have inevitably led to major cuts."
Klobuchar called on Republicans to work with the Democratic Party "to lower costs for Americans and pass a bipartisan Farm Bill that works for all farmers and rural America."
The Republican who chairs Klobuchar's committee, Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.) suggested Republicans would look for other ways to cut nutrition assistance that more than 40 million Americans—including 8% of Boozman's own constituents—rely on.
If Republicans fail to strip out provisions that are rejected by MacDonough, the GOP could be forced to find at least 60 votes to support the budget bill.
Earlier this week, MacDonough rejected a provision put forward by Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) that would cap the funding of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) at 0% of the Federal Reserve's total operating budget—effectively gutting the agency that has returned tens of billions of dollars to Americans who have been defrauded by banks and other corporations.
"The Senate parliamentarian has begun providing guidance that certain provisions in the Republicans' 'One Big, Beautiful Betrayal' will be subject to the Byrd Rule—ultimately meaning they will need to be stripped from the bill or altered to comply with the rules of reconciliation," said Merkley. "We will be fighting this bill every single day until Republicans bring it to the floor."
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who pushed for the creation of the CFPB, said Scott's proposal was "a reckless, dangerous attack on consumers and would lead to more Americans being tricked and trapped by giant financial institutions and put the stability of our entire financial system at risk—all to hand out tax breaks to billionaires."
"Democrats fought back, and we will keep fighting back against this ugly bill," said Warren.
Also rejected by MacDonough were a provision aimed at reducing the pay of Federal Reserve staff and one that would repeal emissions standards for vehicles starting in 2027.
On Saturday MacDonough was still considering a measure that would block states from regulating artificial intelligence for a decade.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Intolerable,' Says Watchdog as FEC Promises Decision on Deepfake Rules By 'Early Summer'
"The comments from the FEC chair should sound the alarm for Congress and state legislators: You cannot count on the FEC to defend us from deepfakes," said one advocate. "It's up to you.”
Jan 18, 2024
Federal Election Commission Chairman Sean Cooksey pushed back on criticism this week that his agency is not taking necessary steps to stop political campaigns from using artificial intelligence-generated "deepfake" images in election ads—but a leading advocate said Thursday that Cooksey's defense sent one clear message: Americans can't "count on the FEC to defend us from deepfakes."
After Robert Weissman, president of the consumer advocacy watchdog Public Citizen, said this week that the FEC "hasn't managed to use its existing authority to head off the problem," Cooksey, a Republican, told The Washington Post that the commission is "working on" the issue.
The top elections regulator said the FEC is "diligently reviewing the thousands of public comments submitted" regarding a proposed ban on the use of AI to deliberately misrepresent politicians' words and actions in campaign ads by producing "deepfake" videos, audio clips, and images.
Deepfakes have already been used by the campaigns of former Republican President Donald Trump, who is running for reelection and won his party's Iowa caucus this week, and GOP presidential candidate Ron DeSantis.
"There's no reason for the Federal Election Commission to stand idly by and risk fraud and fakery overwhelming election integrity."
Despite this, Cooksey told The Post that the FEC "will resolve the AI rulemaking by early summer"—after many state primaries are over.
"The FEC's slow-walking of the political deepfake issue threatens our democracy," Weissman said Thursday. "The schedule described by FEC Chair Cooksey means that, even if the agency decides to proceed with a rulemaking on deepfakes, it's not likely to have a rule out in time for the 2024 election. That's intolerable."
"There's no reason for the Federal Election Commission to stand idly by and risk fraud and fakery overwhelming election integrity," added Weissman. "However, there's still time for the agency to expedite its action and get a clear rule in place. It must do so."
Public Citizen submitted multiple petitions to the FEC last year before the commission finally announced in August that it would consider establishing new rules barring campaigns from using deepfakes, making it clear that laws prohibiting candidates from deceiving voters in ads also apply to AI.
Federal lawmakers including Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) have proposed legislation to ban deepfakes, but party leaders have not yet pushed for a vote on specific bills. The Democratic National Committee has also called on the FEC to take swift action on Public Citizen's petition, but the Republican National Committee has claimed the FEC does not have the authority to regulate AI in campaign ads.
Cooksey's latest remarks, said Weissman on Thursday, "should sound the alarm for Congress and state legislators" who have so far not succeeded in passing legislation to codify a ban on deepfakes in federal law.
"You cannot count on the FEC to defend us from deepfakes," said Weissman, addressing lawmakers. "It's up to you."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Our Democracy Demands It': Rights Groups Cheer as Dems Revive Freedom to Vote Act
"We are in dangerous territory," warned one activist. "We must enshrine our democratic freedoms in federal legislation that would blunt the multipronged attacks on our democracy."
Jul 18, 2023
Democracy defenders on Tuesday applauded as Democratic leaders from both chambers of Congress came together to reintroduce the Freedom to Vote Act, which aims to improve voter access and electoral administration, boost election integrity, and increase civic participation and empowerment.
"Today’s introduction of the Freedom to Vote Act is the first step to injecting a renewed commitment to democratic principles," said Christine Wood and Allison Pulliam, co-directors of the Declaration for American Democracy coalition. "We believe every eligible voter should have their vote counted, every candidate should be able to run without caving in to big influence and big money, and every elected official should be beholden to constituents first."
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) joined the bill's sponsors—Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and Rep. John Sarbanes (D-Md.)—and other Democrats for a Tuesday press conference, during which they condemned MAGA Republicans' attacks on U.S. democracy.
"These attacks demand a federal response," said Klobuchar. "The Freedom to Vote Act will set basic national standards to make sure all Americans can cast their ballots in the way that works best for them, regardless of what ZIP code they live in. This bill will ensure Americans can request a mail-in ballot and have access to drop boxes, have at least two weeks of early voting, and can register to vote on Election Day."
"It's past time for Congress to act and protect Americans' freedom to vote."
While the bill is unlikely to reach the desk of President Joe Biden—who is running for reelection—during this term, given the GOP-controlled House and divided Senate hamstrung by the filibuster, campaigners echoed Democrats' assertions of the need for the bill's reforms.
"It has been 10 years since the U.S. Supreme Court gutted voting rights, and two years since a president attempted to overturn the will of voters to remain in power," noted Public Citizen executive vice president Lisa Gilbert—calling out former President Donald Trump, who is seeking the GOP's 2024 nomination despite inciting the January 6, 2021 insurrection.
"Between the Shelby v. Holder decision and extremists in Congress and state houses—supported by wealthy interests who don't want democracy—we are in dangerous territory," Gilbert warned. "We must enshrine our democratic freedoms in federal legislation that would blunt the multipronged attacks on our democracy."
Stand Up America founder and president Sean Eldridge agreed, declaring that "it's past time for Congress to act and protect Americans' freedom to vote. As MAGA Republicans continue to erect barriers to the ballot box, particularly for communities of color, we need national standards to ensure voting access for every American, no matter where they live."
Cliff Albright, co-founder and executive director of Black Voters Matter, said that "the reintroduction of the Freedom to Vote Act is essential to overcoming the obstacles of new voter suppression laws we see taking shape every day in states like Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, and Georgia. In addition to the wave of voter suppression laws seen in 2021 and 2022, this year has seen hundreds of additional voter suppression bills attempted, and at least 11 states have passed such restrictions."
"Just yesterday, lawmakers in Alabama voted to advance a new congressional map that does not include a second majority-Black district, completely ignoring the U.S. Supreme Court's recent ruling that mandates the state's maps must include this majority-Black district," he pointed out. "The fight for our rights is playing out on the state level and continues to permeate our daily lives in the South. That is why national legislation that is pro-voter and anti-corruption is absolutely necessary at this moment in history."
A coalition of climate and environmental groups—Clean Water Action, Climate Hawks Vote, Earthjustice, Endangered Species Coalition, Greenpeace USA, Interfaith Power & Light, League of Conservation Voters, National Wildlife Federation, Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, Union of Concerned Scientists, and WE ACT for Environmental Justice—also celebrated the bill's reintroduction.
"While we recognize that our democracy has never truly worked for all Americans, the Freedom to Vote Act will help move us closer to the mountaintop, where every American has equitable access to the ballot, and a brighter light will shine on the fossil fuel billionaires and corporations who pour big money into anti-environmental politicians and misleading ads hampering our ability to combat the climate crisis," the coalition said.
Trevor Potter, president of Campaign Legal Center and a Republican former chairman of the Federal Election Commission, highlighted that "the aims of the Freedom to Vote Act—prohibiting partisan gerrymandering, protecting the freedom to vote, and increasing the transparency of money spent in federal elections—are supported by a significant majority of Americans, regardless of party."
While opposition to the Freedom to Vote Act has mostly come from GOP lawmakers, some Democrats have helped block it. Early last year, Democratic right-wing Sen. Joe Manchin (W.Va.), who is suspected of considering a 2024 presidential run, and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (Ariz.), who switched from Democrat to Independent in December, teamed up with Republicans to kill a proposed change to the Senate filibuster that would have cleared the way for passing a voting rights package.
At the time, lawmakers were fighting to pass a megabill that included not only the Freedom to Vote Act but also the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, legislation named for a late Democratic congressman and civil rights icon. Some campaigners also emphasized the importance of the latter on Tuesday.
"Along with the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act's protections against racial discrimination, the Freedom to Vote Act has the best solutions available to strengthen our democracy for all," asserted Michael Waldman, president and CEO of the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law. "Congress must advance the Freedom to Vote Act. Our democracy demands it."
Leslie Proll, senior director of the voting rights program at the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, similarly stressed the importance of both bills.
"We urge both chambers of Congress to pass the Freedom to Vote Act so we can build a multiracial democracy that works for all of us," said Proll. "We also look forward to Congress reintroducing and passing the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act to restore and strengthen the Voting Rights Act."
Common Cause interim co-president Marilyn Carpinteyro on Tuesday sent a letter to all members of Congress on behalf of her group and its more than 1.5 million members and supporters "in strong support of the Freedom to Vote Act and in strong opposition to the 'American Confidence in Elections' (ACE) Act," which was introduced by House Republicans earlier this month.
"The ACE Act is a giant step backward and would silence the voices of everyday Americans by putting up barriers to voting and by allowing millions of dollars more in secret money to infiltrate our political system," Carpinteyro wrote. "To strengthen free and fair elections and help get big, secret money out of politics, Congress must instead pass the Freedom to Vote Act."
Keep ReadingShow Less
FEC Urged Again to Act on AI-Generated Deepfakes, 'A Clear and Present Threat to Our Democracy'
"A deceptive deepfake could swing the election results in 2024," the president of Public Citizen warned.
Jul 13, 2023
After recent election cycles dominated by fake news and the "Big Lie," members of Congress and advocacy groups are urging the Federal Election Commission to act on a new disinformation threat: deepfakes.
Advocacy group Public Citizen delivered a second petition to the commission Thursday asking it to issue rules and regulations for governing the spread of false, artificial-intelligence-generated soundbites, images, or videos in the 2024 race.
" Artificial intelligence poses a clear and present threat to our democracy," Public Citizen president Robert Weissman said in a statement. "A deceptive deepfake could swing the election results in 2024. Or a tidal wave of deepfakes could leave voters completely at a loss to determine what's real from what's fake, an impossible circumstance for a functioning democracy."
"What Americans will see on TV throughout the 2024 election cycle is doctored footage of candidates saying or doing things that may well be entirely fabricated."
A deepfake is an AI-generated image, audio, or video that can convincingly stand in for reality. For example, the Republican presidential primary campaign of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis recently spread a false image of rival candidate former President Donald Trump hugging former White House Coronavirus Task Force chief Anthony Fauci.
Advocates and experts worry that more and more of these images will proliferate as the 2024 race heats up. While now deepfakes have clear flaws that can be identified after careful study, these may become less clear as the technology improves, confusing ordinary viewers and potentially even digital technology experts.
"The integrity of our elections―already imperiled by those who refuse to accept election results that are not in their favor―will now be under constant siege from AI-generated 'deepfakes' in campaign ads," Craig Holman, a government affairs lobbyist for Public Citizen, said in a statement. "What Americans will see on TV throughout the 2024 election cycle is doctored footage of candidates saying or doing things that may well be entirely fabricated."
In particular, Public Citizen warned that a fraudulent image or video could go viral shortly before voters head to the polls in November.
To try and avoid this, the group first petitioned the Federal Election Commission (FEC) in May to "clarify when and how 52 U.S.C. §30124 ('Fraudulent misrepresentation of campaign authority') applies to deliberately deceptive AI campaign ads."
The FEC, however, refused. In a deadlocked 3-3 vote, it rejected the petition without even opening it to public comment, a move Public Citizen said was "highly irregular."
The two arguments offered by the FEC for its actions were that it did not have the authority to regulate deepfakes and that the original petition did not cite the regulation it wanted updated.
In its second petition, Public Citizen addressed both of these issues. It argued that 52 U.S.C. §30124 bars federal candidates or their representatives from "fraudulently misrepresenting themselves as speaking or acting for or on behalf of another candidate or political party on a matter damaging to the other candidate or party."
Deepfakes are precisely this type of fraudulent misrepresentation, Public Citizen wrote:
Specifically, by falsely putting words into another candidate's mouth, or showing the candidate taking action they did not, the deepfake would fraudulently speak or act "for" that candidate in a way deliberately intended to damage him or her. This is precisely what the statute aims to proscribe. The key point is that the deepfake purports to show a candidate speaking or acting in a way they did not. The deepfake misrepresents the identity of the true speaker, which is an opposing candidate or campaign. The deepfaker misrepresents themselves as speaking for the deepfaked candidate. The deepfake is fraudulent because the deepfaked candidate in fact did not say or do what is depicted by the deepfake and because the deepfake aims to deceive the public. And this fraudulent misrepresentation aims to damage the campaign of the deepfaked candidate.
Public Citizen said Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Sens. Ben Ray Luján and Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) would also circulate support letters in the House and Senate and ask the FEC to regulate deepfakes.
"Should the FEC fail to take immediate action on this issue, Americans will experience an unprecedented onslaught of misinformation and disinformation in the 2024 election cycle," Lisa Gilbert, executive vice president of Public Citizen, said in a statement. "All we are asking for is honesty―a request that should be readily bipartisan."
Keep ReadingShow Less
New Antitrust Summer Campaign Aims to 'Beat Out Big Tech's Lobbyist Machine'
"If we can make enough noise to break through the lobbyist facade, we can get these bills to the floor in the next few weeks, and we will win."
Jun 08, 2022
A leading digital rights group on Wednesday kicked off a new campaign aimed at boosting federal legislation that would crack down on Big Tech monopolies.
"This and next week are do-or-die for the most significant antitrust reforms in a generation."
Fight for the Future's (FFF) "Antitrust Summer" campaign is betting that grassroots organizing can help win passage of S. 2992 and S. 2710, respectively the American Innovation and Choice Online Act (AICOA) and the Open App Markets Act (OAMA).
"Powerful tech companies have gained way too much control over our lives. Facebook, Google, Apple, and Amazon drown us in ads, algorithmically amplify hate and extremism, copy and kill their competitors, and limit free speech," Fight for the Future said.
"But this isn't our destiny," the group continued. "The internet is capable of so much more. Big Tech monopolists get away with harming us and our democracy simply because they can."
If passed, the AICOA, which was introduced by Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and eight bipartisan colleagues, would prohibit major tech platforms from "self-preferencing," or favoring their own products and services over those of their competitors.
Meanwhile, OAMA--introduced by Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and co-sponsored by 10 senators from both parties--would empower app developers to directly reach customers without using online stores run by tech giants, prohibit major online sellers from requiring specific in-app payments, and establish privacy and security protections for consumers.
Big Tech and other corporate interests including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce strongly oppose both measures.
Related Content
Big Tech Mounting Big-Money Fight to Defeat to Corporate Antitrust Bill
"This and next week are do-or-die for the most significant antitrust reforms in a generation," said FFF. "AICOA and OAMA are bipartisan. We believe that if they hit the floor, they will pass--overwhelmingly."
"Tech lobbyists know this, so they're pulling out all the stops to spook Senate Democrats and delay the vote," the group continued. "If we can make enough noise to break through the lobbyist facade, we can get these bills to the floor in the next few weeks, and we will win."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Warren Demands Big Pharma End 'Corporate Price Gouging'
Recent price hikes, says a letter led by the senator, "appear to be an example of pharmaceutical companies taking advantage of their abusive market power to expand already large profits."
Mar 02, 2022
U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren and a dozen of her colleagues in Congress took aim at Big Pharma on Tuesday over "troubling price increases for brand-name drugs in January 2022."
The lawmakers' letter to Stephen J. Ubl, president and CEO of the industry trade group Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), highlights the findings of two new analyses and declares that "Congress and the public deserve an explanation for how manufacturers have made these seemingly inexplicable pricing decisions."
Warren (D-Mass.) tweeted Wednesday that the 13 lawmakers are demanding not only answers from the pharmaceutical industry but also an end to "this corporate price gouging."
Findings from the first analysis, conducted by the University of Minnesota's Stephen Schondelmeyer, include that during the first 25 days of this year, "manufacturers increased prices for 72% of all formulations of the 100 top-selling drugs" and "26% of all brand-name drugs had price increases, compared to less than 3% of generic drugs."
While the average increase for brand-name products was 5.1%, manufacturers made "extraordinary" hikes of 10% or more for 118 drugs, with the highest exceeding 60%.
As the letter details:
The second analysis, provided at the request of my staff by the Johns Hopkins Drug Access and Affordability Initiative, reviewed price increases in January 2022 for the 20 drugs with the highest expenditures under the Medicare Part D program. Specifically, the researchers provided my staff with Wholesale Acquisition Costs--list prices--for each of these drugs at the end of January 2022 and compared those to list prices for the same drugs one month earlier.
These list prices--like the Average Wholesale Prices provided by Dr. Schondelmeyer--do not reflect discounts and rebates that some purchasers are able to obtain for these drugs. But as PhRMA has previously found, "commercially insured patients pay undiscounted list prices for one in five brand prescriptions, accounting for half of out-of-pocket spending on brand Medicines." An increase in baseline prices, even if they are partially offset by rebates, will still result in an increase in net costs for providers, taxpayers, and consumers, who often pay cost-sharing based on list prices.
The researchers found that in January, manufacturers rose prices for 16 of the top 20 Medicare Part D drugs, and for nearly half of them the price hike was at least 5%.
"The large, across-the-board price increases of popular, brand-name prescription drugs appear to be an example of pharmaceutical companies taking advantage of their abusive market power to expand already-large profits," the letter states. "And the coordinated and timely price increases ring of political opportunism."
The letter notes that "extraordinary" price hikes of drugs "also have the effect of driving up general inflation." As Common Dreams reported Monday, new polling shows a majority of U.S. voters blame corporate profiteering for rising inflation and support a federal crackdown on major companies.
Responding to the letter, PhRMA spokesperson Brian Newell told Newsweek that "we have said repeatedly that we're eager to work with lawmakers on lowering what patients have to pay for life-saving medicines but cherry-picking data and ignoring the larger problems that exist in our healthcare system won't provide meaningful relief."
Related Content
'Enough Is Enough': Outrage as Big Pharma Hikes Prices on 442 Drugs
Though the House-approved Build Back Better Act included some drug pricing reforms, with the package stalled in the evenly split Senate, Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)--who both signed Warren's letter--introduced a bill to cut drug prices. However, Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) last month blocked Sanders' effort to force a vote on the legislation.
Less than a week after that setback, advocacy groups launched the "Make Meds Affordable" campaign, which calls for President Joe Biden and Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra to allow for the production of generics that would eliminate Big Pharma monopolies.
Warren, who joined the launch, said that "President Biden and Secretary Becerra can end this shameful price gouging by using their existing authorities to lower drug prices and crack down on the monopoly power of giant pharmaceutical companies--and they need to do it now."
Biden, during his State of the Union address Tuesday night, signaled that he still hopes to cut drug prices--saying that insulin prices should be capped at $35 a month and Medicare should be allowed to "negotiate the price of prescription drugs" with manufacturers.
While applauding the remarks, some campaigners also reminded Biden that he "doesn't need to wait for Congress to take immediate action." The president, Social Security Works tweeted Wednesday, "can and must use his executive power to lower drug prices!"
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More Stories
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy