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
delia ramirez
House Democrats Probe Use of Trump's NSPM-7 to Target 'Left-Leaning Political Groups'
"We are deeply troubled by public commitments to deploy the full force of the State and Treasury departments against loosely defined 'far-left networks' and their alleged 'enablers.'"
Aug 19, 2026
Dozens of Democrats in the US House of Representatives this week announced a congressional inquiry into the use of a widely decried memo from President Donald Trump to persecute "political dissent" and target "left-leaning political groups."
Democratic Reps. Jim McGovern (Mass.), Ayanna Pressley (Mass.), and Delia Ramirez (Ill.) revealed Tuesday that they, along with over 20 others, wrote to Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent earlier this month to demand answers about the recent "Ministerial on the Resurgence of Political Terrorism" and directives under National Security Presidential Memorandum 7 (NSPM-7).
"Specifically, we are alarmed by the Department of State's new ideologically driven visa restriction policy and the Department of Treasury's pledged financial enforcement mechanisms directed against civil society," they wrote. "These policies dramatically escalate the administration's deliberate and targeted attempts to silence any person, organization, or institution critical of its policies and abuses of power on a global scale."
"We are deeply troubled by public commitments to deploy the full force of the State and Treasury departments against loosely defined 'far-left networks' and their alleged 'enablers' and urge you to immediately reverse course," the lawmakers continued. "Rather than relying on law enforcement data—which consistently identifies right-wing violent extremists and white supremacist organizations as the predominant domestic terrorism threat—this administration has instead taken actions that manufacture an ideological enemy."
The visa policy "bars foreign nationals from entry who 'finance, recruit, incite, or otherwise enable terrorist, violent, and criminal far-left terrorist networks' and defines 'far-left terrorist networks' as those with explicit aims to 'undermine the political foundations of free and self-governing societies,'" the letter details. "This rhetoric and policy embody the core characteristics of fascist statecraft—using the security apparatus of the state to repress and criminalize political opponents and dissenters rather than specific violent acts."
The letter notes the impacts of the administration's policies beyond the United States, warning that "seeking to export an ideological mandate to more than 65 countries creates a dangerous precedent that authoritarian governments will eagerly exploit to delegitimize and criminalize political dissent and justify their own crackdowns on peaceful opposition."
"Foreign nationals fleeing political persecution abroad—including persecution by governments that label peaceful dissidents 'leftist terrorists' to discredit them—may find themselves barred from the United States under the very same vague and subjective standard," the lawmakers wrote. "Expanding transnational intelligence-sharing under this ill-defined and hyper-politicized definition of violent extremism opens the door to transnational repression—including cross-border monitoring and harassment—of international activists, researchers, and political dissidents, as well as potentially any individual within their networks."
"We also risk fracturing critical alliances with governments whose own laws strictly protect political speech, civil liberties, and human rights—protections that these very policies are undermining here at home," the Democrats stressed.
The letter also calls out White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller's description of leftists as "the enemies of civilization" and a "cancer" that can "destroy a society," as well as Bessent's comparison of leftists to the Islamic State and al-Qaeda—when he said that "the unified front between international Marxism and the radical Islamic movement need not share the same ultimate vision to share the same immediate enemy of free and self-governing societies."
Rubio has similarly called leftists "the enemies of civilization" and recently faced criticism for a "McCarthyite" State Department report claiming that the Cuban government has, for decades, "infiltrated the highest reaches of the US government, recruited and cultivated generations of American activists, backed an unprecedented wave of left-wing terrorism on American soil, and carried out one of the most durable and damaging foreign intelligence penetrations in American history." The document is seen as a signal that Trump may deliver on his threat to try to take over the island nation by force.
Keep ReadingShow Less
As Trump Announces New Round of Sanctions Against Cuba, Democrats Warn Country Is Being 'Strangled to Death'
Four members of Congress returned Monday from an oversight trip to Cuba, which they described as a "silent Gaza."
Jul 14, 2026
As the Trump administration announced a new round of sanctions on Cuba's tourism ministry, energy companies, and other entities on Monday, four Democratic members of Congress returned from a trip to the island and described how the oil blockade the US has imposed there for nearly six months "is producing indiscriminate pain for the most vulnerable Cubans."
"As elected lawmakers tasked with oversight of US foreign policy, we traveled to Havana to meet with Cubans of all walks of life and political perspectives to hear about the hardships the Trump administration’s maximum pressure policies are creating for Cuban citizens," said Reps. Delia Ramírez (D-Ill.), Teresa Leger-Fernández (D-NM), Mark Pocan, (D-Wis.), and Maxine Dexter (D-Ore.). “In our meetings with religious leaders, entrepreneurs, civil society organizations, humanitarian groups, medical professionals, and farmers, everybody we heard from... agreed on one thing: that they are being strangled to death under the current executive orders and longstanding economic blockade."
The four Democrats traveled to Cuba last Thursday and spent several days meeting with local leaders, touring the streets of Havana, and speaking with President Miguel Díaz-Canel as the country grapples with the effects of President Donald Trump's January executive order that baselessly claimed Cuba poses an "extraordinary" threat to US national security and threatened tariffs against any country that provides oil to the communist country.
The president had already cut off Cuba's main energy supply by invading Venezuela, abducting its president and charging him with drug trafficking, and taking control of its vast oil reserves.
The lawmakers described how the energy blockade is "contributing to nationwide electrical blackouts—including one during our trip—buildups of trash on street corners; severe shortages of food, medicine, and public transportation; and widening inequality on the island."
Dexter, a physician, noted that Cuba's lauded healthcare system "is buckling under sanctions that the White House has unleashed on the Cuban people. This is creating a humanitarian catastrophe."
“Cuba created a free, universal healthcare system that millions of Cubans and others around the world have come to expect and depend on,” said Dexter. "I will be using all the tools at my disposal to remove the barriers to delivering healthcare to the Cuban people.”
As Common Dreams has reported, the blockade has left hospitals struggling to provide care, with 96,000 people, including 11,000 children, on waitlists for surgeries.
"Over 300 pediatric surgeries per week are compromised by shortages of drugs, oxygen, anesthetics, and consumables," wrote more than 8,000 Italian medical and scientific professionals in an open letter in June.
Leger-Fernández called Trump's policy in Cuba, which has intensified sanctions that have been in place for years, "a siege."
“We’re blocking medical supplies, fuel, and other essential inputs, leading its infant mortality rate to rise nearly 150% in recent years, from 4 to 9.9 per 1,000 live births," said the congresswoman. "I doubt any American wants innocent Cuban babies to die due to our policies.”
Pocan told The Associated Press that one person he spoke to in Cuba called the crisis a "silent Gaza."
“There may not be bombings, but there are certainly conditions that prevent people from going about their daily lives," said Pocan. "They can’t go to work, they can’t preserve their food, they can’t access medical supplies, or live as they did before."
Since imposing the blockade, Trump has repeatedly expressed a desire to take over the island by force and has doubled down on claims that Cuba poses a national security threat to the US.
On Sunday, United Nations Ambassador Michael Waltz claimed in a Fox News interview that China and Russia are "collecting information around our military bases in Cuba." In May, an anonymous White House official told Axios that Cubans were “discussing plans” to launch drones at the US—even as the reporting acknowledged the country was thought to be preparing defensive, not offensive, capabilities.
As the members of Congress returned to the US and reported on the suffering they witnessed in Cuba on Monday, the administration announced a new round of sanctions on the country's Ministry of Tourism, energy firms, a state-owned financial services company, a major foreign trade firm, and a maritime transportation company. Foreign banks, insurers, and companies will be exposed to potential penalties if they work with the entities under the sanctions.
The Trump administration, said Cuban Foreign Affairs Minister Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla, "continues to intensify the war against the people of Cuba, their living conditions, and their sources of livelihood."
"The announcement on July 13 of additional coercive measures is a clear manifestation of the criminal and genocidal intent with which US rulers are determined to punish the entire population of the country," he said.
The sanctions demonstrated the Trump administration's "zeal to strangle our economy," added Díaz-Canel. "They reinforce the aggression in search of greater harm to the people. We are facing a genocidal design plan."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Stop Making Excuses,' Says Ramirez as Dem Colleagues Anonymously Grumble About Lebanon War Powers Vote
"The fact that 'Democratic leadership' hides behind blind quotes is evidence they know how unpopular their opposition is," said one foreign policy critic.
Jun 03, 2026
Rep. Delia Ramirez called on her fellow Democrats to "stop making excuses and act" to stop a war in Lebanon, as many refuse to go on the record about whether they'll support a war powers resolution that would halt US military participation in Israel's escalating occupation of the country.
Axios reported on Wednesday that some Democrats are "fuming" about having to take a vote on a resolution introduced by Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), which would require the US to end unauthorized military cooperation with Israel in Lebanon within seven days of being passed. The resolution would need Republican support to pass the GOP-controlled House.
Israel's assault on Lebanon, which began in March, has resulted in the deaths of more than 3,500 people. With forced evacuation orders that have led to the expulsion of more than 1.2 million people from their homes, Israel has systematically razed dozens of villages across the south of the country where leaders have expanded their military "combat zone" further north to the Zahrani River.
"Every day that we do not act to stop the assault on Lebanon, we enable another genocide," Ramirez (D-Ill.) said. "The War Powers Resolution is targeted to end Netanyahu and Trump's war crimes."
Anti-war activists supporting Tlaib’s measure—which has 17 Democratic cosponsors—have described it as a way to force Democratic legislators skittish about their party’s growing anger toward Israel to go on the record about where they stand on the country's actions in Lebanon.
One unnamed House Democrat told Axios that "people are not happy" that Tlaib "is making people take this vote."
Citing multiple unnamed sources, the outlet reported that the top Democrats on the House Foreign Affairs, Armed Services and Intelligence Committees—Reps. Greg Meeks (D-NY), Adam Smith (D-Wash.), and Jim Himes (D-Conn.)—are also "on the fence." Another unnamed House Democrat was quoted as saying that their hesitation will likely make others in the party reluctant to jump on board.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) said of the two-page resolution that he hadn't "taken a look at it yet."
Axios quotes other anonymous Democrats—one of whom said they are “probably a ‘no’” and another who angrily remarked that the resolution “does nothing to advance a solution.”
The outlet described Democrats’ hesitation as stemming in part from the fact that “there is no indication the US is planning imminent, large-scale ground operations in Lebanon.”
But anti-war groups demanding passage of the resolution have made the point that even without boots on the ground, the US is still intimately involved in Israel's decision-making, with President Donald Trump reportedly giving the "green light" on major operations: These have included Israel's decision to invade Lebanon in March as well as its assault on Beirut in April which killed over 250 people and tanked US negotiations with Iran.
A policy roundup published Tuesday by the Institute for Middle East Understanding, urging the House to pass the resolution, said "Israel is using US-provided weapons and bulldozers to flatten the southern part of the country and to potentially permanently displace 600,000 people. Israel has already used bulldozers, likely provided by the US, to destroy homes and infrastructure in the area."
Aside from continuing to provide direct military aid to Israel, the US is also closely involved in intelligence sharing and coordination that has led to Israeli strikes on specific targets. In a letter sent to Adm. Bradley Cooper last month, some senators raised the possibility that, without approval from Congress, these actions could violate the War Powers Act.
In an email sent to Democratic staffers Tuesday, obtained by Common Dreams, the anti-war group Just Foreign Policy said that Trump's reported intervention to tell Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to call off strikes on Beirut earlier this week was the latest example demonstrating "how Trump is engaged in an unprecedented, high-level command and coordination over the Israeli offensive in Lebanon" in violation of the War Powers Resolution of 1973.
The email also pointed out that "a ceasefire in Lebanon is key to peace with Iran" because "Iranian officials have made clear that a full ceasefire in Lebanon is a necessary precondition for diplomacy with the US to advance."
Note the sources who oppose it
"numerous lawmakers and aides"
"one senior House Democrat"
"Dem leadership"
"second senior House Democrat"
"another House Democrat"
"a fourth House Democrat"
ALL anonymous.
Everyone FOR it put their name on their quotes. What does this tell you? https://t.co/XIIHkvF2hF
— Adam Johnson (@adamjohnsonCHI) June 3, 2026
Polling from the Arab American Institute in April found that by about a two-to-one margin, American voters believe the US should do more to pressure Israel to stop bombing and leave southern Lebanon. Sixty-five percent of Democrats said the US should pressure Israel to accept a ceasefire, while just 17% said no and 18% were unsure.
Adam Johnson, a journalist and prominent US foreign policy critic, noted on social media that while Ramirez and Tlaib went on the record to voice their support for the measure, the Democrats in opposition were doing so under a shroud of anonymity.
"The fact that 'Democratic leadership' hides behind blind quotes is evidence they know how unpopular their opposition is," he said.
"If...leadership has objections to the Lebanon war powers resolution, then they can openly come out against it," he added. "Instead they're laundering their 'reservations' through anonymous leaks. Curious!"
While the Axios report portrays Tlaib as the cause of a rift in the Democratic Party, Johnson emphasized that "Tlaib's bill is the overwhelming majority position among Dems by almost 4-to-1," adding that "the 'division' is between Dem voters and pro-Israel party leaders."
Janet Abou-Elias, a researcher at the Democratizing Foreign Policy Project at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, said that the Democrats "hedging" on the war powers vote were still taking a side.
"You'd be going on record enabling an unauthorized war that has killed over 3,433 Lebanese people," she said. "US weapons. US intelligence. Zero congressional approval."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Unlawful, Deeply Destabilizing, and Catastrophic': Dems Warn Trump Against Cuba Attack
Dozens of House Democrats wrote that the US "must not respond to a crisis it is creating with policies that deepen suffering."
May 14, 2026
A group of more than 30 Democratic lawmakers in the US House is imploring the Trump administration to abandon any plans for a military assault on Cuba and end the decades-old blockade that has deprived the island nation of fuel and sparked a grave humanitarian crisis.
In a letter dated May 12 and addressed to top Trump administration officials, Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) and other House Democrats wrote that the US "must not respond to a crisis it is creating with policies that deepen suffering, undermine the rule of law, and repeat the gravest failures of its past."
The members of Congress demanded that the Trump administration immediately end its use of the notorious Guantanamo Bay military prison for migrant detention, lift all "coercive economic measures" currently strangling Cuba, and "abandon reported plans for US military action against Cuba."
"Such action," the lawmakers warned, "would be unlawful, deeply destabilizing, and catastrophic for the Cuban population, while further increasing displacement, exacerbating mass suffering, and undermining US interests in the region."
"It must be unequivocally rejected," they added.
Through sanctions and unlawful threats of military action, the Trump administration is deepening the humanitarian crisis in Cuba. At the same time, they are once again threatening to use the Guantanamo Base, a prison with a history of dehumanizing and abusing people, to detain… pic.twitter.com/cXbCFfds4W
— Congresswoman Delia C. Ramirez (@repdeliaramirez) May 13, 2026
The House Democrats' letter was released shortly before Cuba's energy minister said the country has "absolutely no fuel" and "absolutely no diesel," blaming the oil blockade that the Trump administration imposed earlier this year after kidnapping the president of Venezuela—previously Cuba's primary supplier of oil.
"This dramatic worsening has a single cause: the genocidal energy blockade to which the United States subjects our country, threatening irrational tariffs against any nation that supplies us with fuel," Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel wrote Wednesday on social media. "What the spokespeople of the U.S. regime try to portray to the world as the direct consequence of poor management by the Cuban government is, in reality, the result of a perverse plan aimed at driving the people’s shortages and hardships to extreme levels."
US President Donald Trump has said publicly that his next military target is Cuba, which he has threatened to "take" by force.
Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla, Cuba's foreign affairs minister, posted the House Democrats' letter to social media on Thursday, writing that "the government that claims to defend democracy should listen to the majority voices that oppose the current escalation of threats, aggressions, tightening of the blockade, and energy siege against our country."
Last month, nearly every Republican senator and one Democrat—Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania—voted down a legislative effort to prevent Trump from launching an attack on Cuba without congressional authorization.
Keep ReadingShow Less
To End 'New Gilded Age,' House Progressives Unveil Bill to Raise Federal Minimum Wage to $25 Per Hour
"We need an economy that reflects the realities of 2026, not one stuck over a decade ago," said the newly sworn-in Rep. Analilia Mejía, who helped lead the campaign to raise wages in her home state of New Jersey.
Apr 28, 2026
A pair of progressive Democrats unveiled a bill on Tuesday that would raise the federal minimum wage to $25 per hour, considered the bare minimum a single adult needs to meet the cost of living in much of the US.
The Living Wage For All Act is the first bill to be introduced by the newly sworn-in Rep. Analilia Mejía (D-NJ), who won a special election earlier this month after helping to lead the fight for a $15 minimum wage in her home state of New Jersey.
Citing data from MIT's Living Wage Calculator, the Living Wage For All campaign backing the legislation argues that $25/hour is needed for a single adult in most parts of the country to afford basic necessities like housing, food, and healthcare.
As the cost of living has skyrocketed over the past decade and a half, the federal minimum wage has remained frozen at $7.25 and hour since 2009.
"This is unacceptable," Mejía said. "We need an economy that reflects the realities of 2026, not one stuck over a decade ago."
The bill is cosponsored by Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.), the daughter of Guatemalan immigrants who, she said, worked multiple minimum-wage jobs just to get by.
“I remember being in the fourth grade, and my mom talked about her job, and she was getting paid $4.75 an hour,” the 42-year-old congresswoman said during a press conference on Capitol Hill Tuesday. “Yet the federal minimum wage is barely $7.25, many years later.”
"Today, as we think about companies reporting record high earnings, working people are still struggling to survive," she said. "People are working full-time jobs and still cannot afford to live."
A USA TODAY survey from January found that around 40% of workers say their paychecks have not grown enough to meet the rising cost of living, which has been further exacerbated by spiking inflation caused by President Donald Trump's erratic tariff regime and war in Iran. Another survey conducted by Resume Now in April found that about half of workers fear their wages will never catch up to the cost of living.
While some states and cities have gradually raised their minimum wages above the federal level and have seen modest declines in poverty as a result, none have been raised to the point of being considered a living wage.
The bill introduced by Mejía and Ramirez would similarly phase in its increase to the federal minimum wage over more than a decade, with larger employers leading the transition.
Companies with more than $1 billion gross revenue or more than 500 employees would be scheduled to increase their minimum pay to $25/hour by 2031, while smaller employers would be on a longer timeline to reach $25/hour by 2038.
To ensure wages don’t lag again in the following years, the bill also requires the minimum wage to automatically grow each year to reach the equivalent of two-thirds the national median hourly wage. It also eliminates the subminimum wage, which is paid to tipped workers, youth workers, and workers with disabilities.
The bill is almost certainly dead on arrival in a Republican-controlled Congress. Even if Democrats retake both chambers come November, it would likely face an uphill battle to pass.
In 2021, the last time Democrats had a governing trifecta, eight centrist members of the Democratic caucus killed an amendment by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) to include a $15/hour minimum wage in then-President Joe Biden's post-Covid budget reconciliation package, the American Rescue Plan.
But as Democrats seek to address rising fears about America's "affordability" crisis, Saru Jayaraman, the president of One Fair Wage, said politics are starting "to catch up to reality."
"Across the country—from California to the Midwest to the East Coast—workers are organizing for $25 and $30 because that is what it takes to live," she said. "The polling shows this is not just popular, it is necessary."
“We cannot talk about affordability without talking about what people are paid,” added Stuart Appelbaum, the president of the Retail, Wholesale, and Department Store Union.
More than 20 Democrats have signed onto the bill as cosponsors, including Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar (D-Texas) and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.).
The effort is being spearheaded by the Living Wage For All Coalition, a national collective of labor unions, civil rights groups, and other economic justice organizations that are simultaneously pushing legislation to adopt a living wage in states like New York, Illinois, and Maryland, and municipalities such as Los Angeles and Washington, DC.
April Verrett, the international president of the Service Employees International Union, which has more than 2 million members across North America, said that “the introduction of the Living Wage for All Act is a powerful testament to the worker-led movement that is forcing a new baseline for livable wages.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Memorializing Children Massacred in Minab, Progressive Lawmakers Demand 'Not One More Bomb' Be Dropped on Iran
"Our dollars are advancing the pain of our global neighbors," said Rep. Delia Ramirez. "We here today are saying 'enough.'"
Mar 18, 2026
The lawn outside the US Capitol building was strewn with colorful backpacks and children's shoes on Wednesday afternoon as progressive members of Congress called for an end to President Donald Trump's "illegal" war with Iran.
They were there to memorialize the 168 children, mostly girls aged 7-12, who were killed when the United States bombed an elementary school in Minab on February 28 in the opening salvo of a war that has gone on to claim the lives of more than 2,000 people, including more than 300 children, according to reports from Iranian and Lebanese health authorities.
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) said each backpack and pair of shoes represented "an Iranian child who should still be with us today... but they were struck down by a Tomahawk missile."
Van Hollen described it as a consequence of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's crusade against what he's derided as "stupid rules of engagement."
"Those rules of engagement are designed to prevent civilian harm," the senator said. "They're designed to prevent a war crime."
The lawmakers described Trump's attack on Iran as a "war of choice" and an act of aggression that violated international law.
"There was no imminent threat" from Iran, said Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.). "There is certainly no plan for this war, and most importantly, there is no authorization from Congress."
Shortly after the war was launched, War Powers Resolutions seeking to rein in Trump's ability to use force without authorization narrowly failed in both the House and the Senate, with a handful of Democrats joining Republicans to kill the measure.
The White House is reportedly preparing to ask Congress for an additional $50 billion in supplemental funding to cover the cost of the Iran war on top of the more than $990 billion Congress has already authorized in last summer's GOP budget bill and the latest funding package.
Most Democrats have taken a firm line against more funding, which would require seven of their votes to pass the 60-vote threshold in the Senate, though some pro-war Democrats have signaled a willingness to fund the war, according to reporting earlier this month.
"Civilians in Iran aren't the only ones who are paying the price," said Rep. Sarah Jacobs (D-Calif.). "Our service members and the American people are too."
She noted that 13 members of the US military have been killed since the war was launched less than two weeks ago, saying, "I fear that this number will grow."
Based on Pentagon estimates provided to Congress earlier this month, the war is projected to have already cost US taxpayers more than $24 billion as of Wednesday.
Jacobs said she would oppose "any defense supplemental package" because "every dollar Congress spends on this war without ever authorizing it tells this president and every future president that they can drag this country into any conflict they want and dare us to defund the troops."
"From Palestine to Iran, our bombs are killing women, they're killing children... our dollars are advancing the pain of our global neighbors," said Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) "We here today are saying 'enough.'"
She called for Congress to pass her Block the Bombs Act, which would cut off "offensive" US military funding to Israel, and to pass a war powers resolution limiting Trump's authority to continue striking Iran.
"Not one more dollar for a war with Iran," Ramirez said. "Not one more excuse, not one more bomb."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Markey Applauded for Proposal to Make Wealthiest Americans Pay Investment Tax
One advocate called the bill an "important step forward in reducing historic, extreme, and democracy-destabilizing levels of economic inequality in America."
Mar 17, 2026
In a move cheered by economic justice advocates, US Sen. Ed Markey on Tuesday introduced the Senate version of the bicameral Equal Tax Act, a bill that would "create equal tax rates for all forms of income for individuals with incomes over $1 million."
"The wealthiest individuals in our society use loopholes and tax dodging schemes to avoid paying their fair share," Markey (D-Mass.) said in an introduction to the bill. "They get away with it because our tax code rewards wealth over work—giving breaks to those that trade stocks over those that punch clocks."
The legislation—which was first introduced in the House of Representatives last year by Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.)—seeks to make the tax code more fair by making billionaires and multimillionaires pay income tax on passive investments, as if they earned their money through labor, by raising the top marginal rate from the current 20% to 37%.
Right now, billionaires can pay less in taxes on their stock trades than teachers or nurses that educate our children and care for us in emergencies. My Equal Tax Act would stop rewarding wealth more than work by making the ultra-wealthy pay taxes like millions of working people.
[image or embed]
— Senator Ed Markey (@markey.senate.gov) March 17, 2026 at 2:54 PM
Specifically, the Equal Tax Act would:
- Limit the lower preferential tax rate for long-term capital gains and dividends to incomes under $1 million;
- End the stepped-up basis loophole and disrupt the “buy, borrow, die” strategy used by the wealthy to avoid taxation by treating capital gains as realized at the time of gift or death, with exclusion allowances of up to $1 million in gains;
- Enact a lifetime limit of $1 million on the use of like-kind exchanges on real estate gains; and
- Limit the pass-through deduction to incomes under $1 million.
Markey's office said Tuesday that, if passed, the Equal Tax Act would raise an estimated $300 billion in revenue over 10 years.
"Teachers, nurses, and millions of working people are the ones who keep our country running, but our tax code rewards wealth over work,” said Markey. “The Equal Tax Act brings fairness to our tax code by requiring millionaires and billionaires to pay taxes on investment income the same way working people pay taxes on income from their labor."
Ramirez noted how plutocrats like President Donald Trump and tech titans Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and Mark Zuckerberg "have extorted tax benefits from the American people."
"For far too long, they have exploited an unfair tax system that makes the rich richer at the expense of working families," the congresswoman added. "It is time we ensure that the ultrawealthy pay their fair share. I am excited to work with Sen. Markey in the bicameral introduction of the Equal Tax Act to build a fairer tax system that ensures working families have everything they need to thrive."
Morris Pearl, chair of the fair taxation advocacy group Patriotic Millionaires, said in a statement, “For decades, we have been playing a game of economic Jenga where we pull from the bottom and the middle, load it all on top, and then wonder why the whole thing is about to fall down."
"We end up with an unfair system that allows for oligarchic wealth to concentrate in the hands of a few individuals," Pearl continued. "That’s because right now in America, our tax code makes people who have jobs and work for a living pay far higher tax rates than people who make money from investments or inheritances."
"The money that investors like me make passively from our wealth should not be taxed any less than the money millions of Americans make through their sweat," he asserted. "By closing major loopholes, the Equal Tax Act would ensure that the ultrarich pay income taxes just like all Americans who work for a living and have taxes deducted from their paychecks every week."
"The Patriotic Millionaires are thrilled to see Sen. Markey take this important step forward in reducing historic, extreme, and democracy-destabilizing levels of economic inequality in America," Pearl added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
After Another Boat Bombing, House Progressives Demand End to 'Donroe Doctrine'
"We need to finally leave the Monroe Doctrine behind and pursue a foreign policy grounded in mutual respect and shared prosperity," said Rep. Nydia Velázquez, introducing the New Good Neighbor Act with Rep. Delia Ramirez.
Feb 10, 2026
With the death toll from President Donald Trump's boat bombings of alleged drug traffickers now at 130 after a Monday strike, a pair of progressive congresswomen on Tuesday called for ending the Monroe Doctrine and establishing a "New Good Neighbor" policy toward Latin America and the Caribbean.
In 1823, then-President James Monroe "declared the Western Hemisphere off limits to powerful countries in Europe," NPR noted last month. "Fast forward, and President Trump is reviving the Monroe Doctrine to justify intervening in places like Venezuela, and threatening further action in other parts of Latin America and Greenland."
Trump's version of the policy has been dubbed the "Donroe Doctrine." After US forces boarded the Aquila II, a Venezuela-linked oil tanker, in the Indian Ocean, David Adler, co-general coordinator of Progressive International, said Monday that "the Donroe Doctrine is not simply a vision for the hemisphere. It is a doctrine of global domination."
In response to the president's recent actions—from his boat bombings and pardon of convicted drug trafficker and former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández, to his oil blockade of Venezuela and raid that overthrew the South American country's president, Nicolás Maduro—US Reps. Nydia Velázquez (D-NY) and Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) introduced the New Good Neighbor Act.
"This administration's aggressive stance toward Latin America makes this resolution critical," said Velázquez in a statement. "Their 'Donroe Doctrine' is simply a more grotesque version of the interventionist policies that have failed us for two centuries."
"The United States and Latin America face shared challenges in drug trafficking, migration, and climate change," she continued. "We can only solve these through real partnership, not coercion. We need to finally leave the Monroe Doctrine behind and pursue a foreign policy grounded in mutual respect and shared prosperity."
Ramirez similarly said that "for more than 200 years, the United States has used the Monroe Doctrine to justify a paternalistic, damaging approach to relations with Latin America and the Caribbean. As a result, the legacy of our nation's foreign policy in those regions is political instability, deep poverty, extreme migration, and colonialism. It is well past time we change our approach."
"We must recognize our interconnectedness and admit that the Monroe Doctrine undermines the partnership needed to confront the complex challenges of this century," she argued. "We must become better neighbors. That is why I am proud to join Congresswoman Nydia Velázquez to develop an approach to foreign policy that advances our collective interests and builds a stronger coalition throughout the Americas and the rest of the world."
The original Good Neighbor Policy was adopted by former President Franklin D. Roosevelt in the 1930s, in an attempt at reverse US imperialism in Latin America. The aim was to curb military interventions, center respect for national sovereignty, and prioritize diplomacy and trade.
As the sponsors' offices summarized, the new resolution calls for:
- The Department of State to formally confirm that the Monroe Doctrine is no longer a part of United States policy toward Latin America and the Caribbean;
- The federal government to develop a "New Good Neighbor" policy in place of the Monroe Doctrine;
- Developing a new approach to promoting economic development;
- The termination of all unilateral economic sanctions imposed through executive orders, and working with Congress to terminate all unilateral sanctions, such as the Cuba embargo, mandated by law;
- New legislation to trigger the suspension of assistance to a government whenever there is an extraconstitutional transfer of power;
- Prompt declassification of all United States government archives that relate to past coups d’état, dictatorships, and periods in the history of Latin American and Caribbean countries characterized by a high rate of human rights crimes perpetrated by security forces;
- Collaboration with Latin American and Caribbean governments on a far-reaching reform to the Organization of American States; and
- Supporting democratic reforms to the International Monetary Fund, World Bank, Inter-American Development Bank, and other international financial institutions.
The measure isn't likely to advance in a Republican-controlled Congress that has failed to pass various war powers resolutions that would rein in Trump's boat strikes and aggression toward Venezuela, but it offers Democrats an opportunity to make their foreign policy positions clear going into the midterms—in which Velázquez, who is 72, has decided not to seek reelection.
So far, it is backed by Democratic Reps. Greg Casar (Texas), Yvette Clarke (NY), Jesús "Chuy" García (Ill.), Sylvia García (Texas), Adelita Grijalva (Ariz.), Eleanor Holmes Norton (DC), Jonathan Jackson (Ill.), Pramila Jayapal (Wash.), Hank Johnson (Ga.), Summer Lee (Pa.), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Ilhan Omar (Minn.), Mark Pocan (Wis.), Jan Schakowsky (Ill.), Lateefah Simon (Calif.), and Rashida Tlaib (Mich.). Like Velázquez, Chuy García and Schakowsky are also retiring after this term.
Leaders from organizations including the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR), the United Methodist Church's board, and We Are CASA also backed the bill and commended the sponsors for, as Cavan Kharrazian of Demand Progress, put it "advancing a new framework for US engagement in the region grounded in mutual respect, sovereignty, and cooperation rather than coercion or threats."
Alex Main, CEPR's director of international policy, stressed that "Trump is waging a new offensive against Latin America and the Caribbean—conducting illegal and unprovoked military attacks and extrajudicial killings and brazenly intervening in other countries' domestic affairs in an undisguised effort to exert control over the region's resources and politics."
"But while Trump’s actions are especially egregious, they are just the latest chapter of a centuries-old story of US military political and economic interference that has subverted democracy and fueled instability and human rights crimes across the hemisphere," Main continued. "It is in the interest of the US to reject this doctrine of unilateral domination and chart a new course for US-Latin American relations—to treat our Latin American siblings as vecinos, not vassals."
Sharing yet another brief black-and-white video on social media, US Southern Command on Monday announced a "lethal kinetic strike on a vessel" allegedly "transiting along known narco-trafficking routes in the Eastern Pacific." SOUTHCOM added that "two narco-terrorists were killed and one survived the strike," which prompted a search for the survivor.
Legal experts and various members of Congress have described the killings as murder on the high seas. Reiterating that position in response to the latest bombing disclosure, Amnesty International USA urged Americans to pressure lawmakers to act.
"US military helpfully publishes evidence of its mass murder of civilians at sea," said Ben Saul, a professor at Australia's University of Sydney and the United Nations special rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism. "Over to you, US Department of Justice, to do your job and bring murder suspects to justice."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Fresh Fury as Schumer, Jeffries Bend on Demand to Unmask ICE Agents in Funding Talks
"Schumer needs to get the hell out," said Rep. Delia Ramirez. "He continues to demonstrate to us that he can't meet the moment."
Feb 05, 2026
Democratic leaders in Congress are already backing down on one of their key demands in the fight to reform the federal immigration agencies terrorizing Minnesota and other parts of the country.
On Wednesday, Democrats laid out a list of 10 "guardrails" they said they wanted to see put in place to protect the public from abuses by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents, before agreeing to a new round of funding for their parent agency, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
The list called to "prohibit ICE and immigration agents from wearing face coverings" to conceal their identities, which Democratic leaders have stressed as a key reform for weeks.
But during a press conference on Wednesday, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) raised many eyebrows when they introduced a heap of caveats to their demand.
“I think there’s agreement that no masks should be deployed in an arbitrary and capricious fashion, as has been the case, horrifying the American people,” Jeffries said.
Schumer added that agents “need identification and no masks, except in extraordinary and unusual circumstances.”
When a HuffPost reporter attempted to ask Schumer if the party had changed its position on masks, Schumer sidestepped the question. But other top Democrats clarified that they were looking at certain exceptions.
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said that while masks should generally be "prohibited by law" as a part of everyday enforcement, there are "sometimes safety reasons why you may need a mask."
Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), who went against the majority of the party earlier this week to vote for two weeks of DHS funding to keep the government open, said they were discussing when to implement "narrow exceptions" with members of law enforcement and suggested that "dealing with a cartel" could be one of them.
Of course, the Trump administration has often asserted that all the immigrants they target are dangerous criminals—"the worst of the worst"—including cartel members, even when this is not the case, raising questions about who might be in charge of determining when masks are necessary.
Critics have been underwhelmed by many of the other demands on the list as well.
Journalist and commentator Adam Johnson said it was a collection of “mostly cosmetic, pointless, unenforceable, or actively harmful ‘reforms,’” with some—including the requirement for judicial warrants and a ban on racial profiling—already being mandated by the Constitution but flouted by agents regardless.
He described it as outrageous that Democrats were demanding "zero reduction in DHS’ obscene budget which... tripled, just 12 months ago."
Civil rights lawyer Alec Karakatsanis, the founder of the group Civil Rights Corps, called the list "one of the great political failures of our time" and said "it must be immediately denounced by all people of goodwill."
Meanwhile, Axios reported on Thursday that many rank-and-file members of the Democratic caucus are fuming over party leadership's refusal earlier this week to use the threat of a government shutdown to force reforms.
Rep. Pramila Jayapal, the CPC's chair emerita, pondered "'What are we going to get in 10 days that we didn't get?'"
"Every time that we are winning, we seem to somehow sabotage [it]," said Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.), a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC).
She noted that House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has already ruled out several Democratic demands, including the requirement of judicial warrants.
ICE agents do not need a warrant to make arrests, but the Fourth Amendment prohibits them from entering private residences without a judicial warrant. An internal memo last month advised agents to ignore that law. Johnson said this week that requiring federal agents to obtain judicial warrants is "a road we cannot and should not go down.”
Other Democrats anonymously expressed their distrust in Schumer, who has caved in other hugely consequential fights in the second Trump era, most recently regarding the extension of Affordable Care Act subsidies during last fall’s record-breaking government shutdown, which left tens of millions of Americans facing doubled health insurance premiums.
"The main feeling among members is a lack of trust in his strength and ability to strike a hard bargain," one anonymous Democrat said.
Another said, “All those spending bills, that is the most leverage,” adding that “many folks in the [House] Democratic caucus wish that we had more confidence in Schumer’s ability to navigate a good, tough deal.”
Sixty votes will be required for a deal to pass the Senate, meaning at least seven Democrats will need to join Republicans for DHS to receive full funding and avoid shutting down on February 14.
While this still gives Democrats some leverage to push demands, Ramirez said previous fights give her zero confidence in Schumer's willingness to hold the line.
"I'm gonna continue to tell you that Schumer needs to get the hell out over and over and over until he does," Ramirez said. "He continues to demonstrate to us that he can't meet the moment."
Keep ReadingShow Less
House Progressives Unveil 'Defund the Oligarchs, Fund the People' Resolution
"Trump promised to lower costs for families on day one, but a year since he took office, grocery, housing, and healthcare costs are out of control," said Rep. Rashida Tlaib. "It's time to tax the rich."
Jan 30, 2026
As President Donald Trump continues to serve billionaires over working people and degrade the US economy, a trio of progressive congresswomen on Friday introduced the Defund the Oligarchs, Fund the People Resolution.
"Trump promised to lower costs for families on day one, but a year since he took office, grocery, housing, and healthcare costs are out of control," said Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), who is leading the measure with Congresswomen Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.). Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.) is an original co-sponsor.
Tlaib took aim at Trump and Republicans who control both chambers of Congress for forcing through their so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act last year: "He signed into law the largest cuts to healthcare and food assistance in the history of our country, all to give trillions of dollars in tax breaks to his rich donors and their massive corporations."
"Meanwhile, 60% of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck, and CEOs are making 281 times more than their average worker," she stressed. "It's time to tax the rich, defund the oligarchy, and invest those funds in the needs of working families."
"Every dollar that gets plundered by billionaires through tax breaks, corporate giveaways, and political favoritism is a dollar that is taken away from healthcare, housing, education, and good jobs."
The resolution declares that "the United States was created to be a democracy, founded on the principle that all people are created equal, governed not by kings or corporate masters but by themselves as free citizens," and "the gravest threat to democracy and individual freedoms is the alliance of private wealth and authoritarian government."
At various moments over the past 250 years, Americans have "sounded the alarm" over oligarchy and the federal government "has vigorously combated excessive concentrations of power and wealth," the measure notes. However, in recent decades, the government "has forfeited its role safeguarding democracy."
The resolution highlights that the combined wealth of the country's 900 billionaires exceeds that of the 67,000,000 households in the poorest 50%, as working people contend with stagnant wages and struggle to afford everything from healthcare to housing. Trump notably said during a Thursday Cabinet meeting that "I don't want to drive housing prices down, I want to drive housing prices up for people that own their homes. And they can be assured that's what's going to happen."
While many measures introduced by progressives don't even receive votes in the GOP-controlled Congress, this one is especially unlikely to go anywhere, given that it explicitly calls out not only the superrich donors who use their money to control the US political system but also the president, whom many lawmakers in his party are afraid to criticize.
Blasting "the quid pro quo" between Trump and the ultrawealthy oligarchs and corporations, the resolution emphasizes that they "are corrupting United States politics through billions in open and hidden campaign contributions and by exploiting their monopoly control in key sectors of the economy, and especially over media, information, and emerging digital technologies."
"Trump has permitted pay-to-play schemes to become endemic, as oligarchs leverage political contributions to win hundreds of billions in taxpayer-funded federal subsidies, tax breaks, regulatory rollbacks, and government contracts despite exploiting workers and polluting communities," it continues, specifically pointing to spending by the fossil fuel, tech, and cryptocurrency industries.
"Public funds belong to the people of the United States and should be invested in education, healthcare, housing, clean energy, and infrastructure, not used to enrich the wealthiest individuals and most powerful corporations," the resolution argues. It also expresses concern about a decline in union membership that "has diminished the ability of the labor movement" to continue its "significant historical role in counteracting corporate power, reducing inequality, and ensuring the political system is responsive to the interests of ordinary Americans, not just wealthy elites."
The resolution includes various demands for the president and Congress. It says that Trump "must not reward oligarchs and billionaire-controlled corporations with lucrative, publicly funded contracts, loans, and grants" when they engage in corrupt scheming, fail to fairly compete in open markets, and break federal laws.
It also says that the president and Congress must:
- Act with all deliberate speed to protect election integrity;
- Break up all concentrations of economic and political power;
- Drastically reduce levels of economic inequality and concentrations of inherited wealth;
- Reform the Supreme Court;
- Support the dramatic expansion of unions;
- Explore ways to promote alternative, noncorporate forms of ownership; and
- Use public money to fund programs that raise the standard of living.
"While working families have to choose between paying rent, buying groceries, or keeping the heat on, billionaires are just getting richer," said Jayapal. "We must rein in corporate power by breaking up monopolies and reforming campaign finance laws."
"It's time to make billionaires pay their fair share of taxes and reinvest those funds to provide for our communities—housing, healthcare, and education," she continued. "Our resolution calls for a political and economic system that benefits working families, not one that enriches the ultrawealthy."
The resolution comes just months before the midterm elections and amid pressure on Democrats to prove they can offer a true alternative to Trump's government full of loyalists, weak labor market, persistently high inflation, and tax giveaways to the rich—including Elon Musk, a former presidential adviser and the richest person on the planet.
Some of that pressure has come from the grassroots group Our Revolution, which is backing the resolution alongside organizations including Americans for Tax Fairness, Climate and Community Institute, MoveOn, National Nurses United, Patriotic Millionaires, People's Action, Public Citizen, RootsAction, and Social Security Works.
"Every dollar that gets plundered by billionaires through tax breaks, corporate giveaways, and political favoritism is a dollar that is taken away from healthcare, housing, education, and good jobs. That is not just corruption, it is a betrayal of who government is supposed to serve, and it is why so many people feel that democracy is not working for them," said Our Revolution executive director Joseph Geevarghese.
"The truth is, none of the policies working families are fighting for can ever fully materialize as long as corporate money and billionaire influence are writing the rules," he added. "Lawmakers cannot keep pretending to serve both the corporate class and working families at the same time. If we want real progress on wages, healthcare, housing, and climate, cutting off corporate corruption and reinvesting in our communities has to be part of how we govern, not just something we talk about during elections."
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
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