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
james lankford
Senate Dems Demand Explanation After Big Oil Lobbied for 'Giveaways at the Expense of American Families'
The fossil fuel industry spent big to push through a $1 billion provision in the GOP budget bill, which the senators said would allow some oil companies to "pay no federal income taxes whatsoever."
Jun 27, 2025
Four Democratic U.S. senators are demanding an explanation from Big Oil after a $1.1 billion tax loophole was added to the Senate version of the GOP's budget reconciliation megabill.
Letters sent Thursday by Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) called out the CEOs of two oil giants, ConocoPhillips and Ovintiv, which they say "lobbied furiously" for the handout.
The companies, the senators said, "[stand] to benefit tremendously from this provision and ha[ve] spent big to support it—while preserving the many government subsidies for the oil and gas industry already in the tax code."
They asked for the companies to disclose how much they have spent lobbying Republicans for the tax break and how much of a windfall they expect in return.
The provision in question, approved by the Senate Finance Committee last week, would shield many large oil companies from the Inflation Reduction Act's corporate alternative minimum tax, or CAMT. Introduced in 2022, the CAMT requires that companies making more than $1 billion pay 15% of the profits they report to shareholders.
"The rationale for CAMT was simple," the senators said. "For far too long, massive corporations had taken advantage of loopholes in the tax code to avoid paying their fair share, sometimes paying zero federal taxes despite earning billions in profits."
The GOP bill modifies how oil companies are required to report earnings, allowing them to exempt "intangible drilling and development costs," which in turn allows more companies to fall below the $1 billion earnings threshold.
The senators highlighted a 2023 earnings call by Marathon Oil, recently acquired by ConocoPhillips, in which executives said the CAMT was the only income tax they were required to pay.
"If enacted," the senators said, "this provision would reduce or even eliminate tax liabilities for oil and gas companies under CAMT, allowing some to pay no federal income taxes whatsoever."
The letter highlighted lobbying filings by ConocoPhillips and Ovintiv in which they "explicitly prioritize" securing this handout.
Referenced throughout is the aggressive effort to court Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), who wrote the loophole into the Senate bill. According to OpenSecrets, Lankford received more than $546,000 in campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry—his top source of industry donations—between 2019 and 2024.
The senators described the industry's lobbying as "especially insulting" because "Senate Republicans are trying to pay for this handout with cuts to other programs that would end up raising energy prices for everyday Americans."
The GOP bill would eliminate tax breaks for clean energy that incentivize consumers to purchase electric vehicles and make their homes more energy-efficient, including the home energy-efficiency and residential clean energy credits.
Citing data from Rewiring America, the senators estimated that ditching the two credits would cost the average household up to $2,200 per year in savings on utility bills.
The Center for American Progress projects that eliminating electric vehicle credits would increase demand for gasoline, raising prices by 27 to 35 cents per gallon by 2035. Americans will pay the oil and gas industry "an additional $339 billion for gasoline and $75 billion for electricity by 2035," the May report says.
"Congress should not raise energy prices for working families to deliver handouts to Big Oil," the senators said.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Senate GOP Adds $1 Billion Tax 'Giveaway' for Big Oil to Budget Bill
That provision was secured by Senator James Lankford, who has received more than $546,000 in campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry since 2019.
Jun 20, 2025
Senate Republicans have added a provision to their draft of the budget reconciliation package that would exempt domestic oil and gas companies from paying corporate taxes, saving them more than $1 billion over the next decade.
On Wednesday, David Dayen reported in The American Prospect that the Senate Finance Committee's version of the bill, released Monday, "shields domestic onshore oil and gas drillers from the Inflation Reduction Act's corporate alternative minimum tax," or CAMT.
That provision was secured by Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), and the benefits would largely flow to companies based in his home state.
As Dayen wrote, the CAMT is "a fairly clean tax provision as these things go." It currently requires companies that bring in more than $1 billion to pay 15% of the profits they report to shareholders.
However, the Senate Republican draft would modify that calculation to account for "intangible drilling and development costs," which would allow companies to declare lower profits and put many of them below the threshold required to pay the 15% tax.
According to Bloomberg, companies including ConocoPhillips, Ovintiv, and Civitas Resources lobbied in favor of the bill. Lankford, meanwhile, received more than $546,000 in campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry—his top source of industry donations—between 2019 and 2024 according to OpenSecrets.
Big Oil will be rewarded handsomely for its efforts. The provision in the Senate GOP bill is virtually identical to another bill proposed by Lankford, which the nonpartisan Tax Foundation found would hand $1.1 billion in government revenue to the fossil fuel industry over the next 10 years.
"This disastrous piece of legislation includes giveaway after giveaway for the fossil fuel industry, while cutting crucial clean energy programs that help consumers save money on their electric bills," said Alan Zibel, an oil and gas researcher with the consumer rights group Public Citizen.
In addition to this tax loophole, the Senate GOP's bill includes billions of dollars in upfront subsidies to Big Oil and cuts royalties paid by oil and gas companies for drilling on public lands. At the same time, the bill guts subsidies for wind and solar energy, including a tax credit that saved money for consumers who made their homes more energy efficient.
Through its combination of tax breaks and cuts to safety net programs like Medicaid and food stamps, the so-called "Big Beautiful Bill" constitutes a massive transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich. According to an analysis by the Congressional Budget Office last week, it would result in the richest 10% of households bringing in an extra $12,000 a year while the poorest 10% would lose nearly $1,600.
"You have got to be kidding me," tweeted the account for Americans for Tax Fairness in response to the Senate GOP's draft. "Not only does the bill gut Medicaid and SNAP to fund tax breaks for billionaires. Now it gives Big Oil MORE money while they price-gouge us."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Big Oil Doesn't Just Want to Get Rich Wrecking the Climate—They Want Lower Taxes Too
"If this polluter handout is snuck into the GOP tax bill, then cuts to Medicaid and food stamps could well pay for another giveaway to Big Oil," said the co-author of a new report. "That's obscene."
Mar 24, 2025
Having helped install the most fossil fuel-friendly administration of the climate awareness era, Big Oil and their Republican boosters in Congress are now setting their sights on undermining a tax enacted by during the tenure of former President Joe Biden as part of the landmark Inflation Reduction Act.
Alan Zibel, research director at the consumer advocacy watchdog Public Citizen, and Lukas Shankar-Ross, deputy director of Friends of the Earth's Climate and Energy Justice Program, noted in a report published Monday that Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), who chairs the Senate Ethics Committee, earlier this year introduced industry-backed legislation, the Promoting Domestic Energy Production Act, for possible inclusion in Republicans' proposed $4.5 trillion tax giveaway to corporations and the ultrawealthy.
As Common Dreams reported in January, the fossil fuel industry spent an estimated $445 million during the 2024 election cycle to elect President Donald Trump and other GOP candidates who serve their climate-wrecking interests, and it expects much in return.
"Domestic oil and gas companies, including from Lankford's home state of Oklahoma, have warned their investors about the corporate alternative minimum tax," Zibel and Shankar-Ross wrote. "The industry could soon be rewarded with specially tailored tax relief courtesy of their Republican political allies."
As the report explains:
Here's how the tax scheme works: In August 2022, President Joe Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act, which made historic climate investments. To help pay for new spending, the bill included a set of corporate tax increases, the largest of which was the $222 billion corporate alternative minimum tax. This tax is meant to prevent corporations that deliver massive profits to investors from paying nothing or nearly nothing in taxes because of corporate-friendly tax loopholes. Under the corporate minimum tax, if a company reports an average of at least $1 billion in annual income over three years, then it must pay 15% of that reported income in taxes, minus certain deductions.
The report highlights Republican efforts to eliminate the minimum tax, including via legislation introduced by Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) and endorsed by the American Petroleum Institute, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National Association of Manufacturers, National Mining Association, Western Energy Alliance, and industry lobbyists.
The bill introduced by Lankford would enable fossil fuel companies to skirt the minimum tax by allowing them to deduct "intangible" drilling costs, a tactic used as an effective subsidy for more than 120 years. Zibel and Shankar-Ross described the tax dodge as "the oldest and the largest fossil fuel subsidy on the books," and one which "allows all of the costs for drilling an oil or gas well to be deducted immediately in the year they are incurred."
"If individual taxpayers understood the magnitude of the extreme subsidies for Big Oil, they would be shocked."
"It is simply outrageous that the GOP is using its trifecta to create yet another fossil fuel subsidy," Shankar-Ross said in a statement, referring to Republicans' control of the White House and both chambers of Congress. "If this polluter handout is snuck into the GOP tax bill, then cuts to Medicaid and food stamps could well pay for another giveaway to Big Oil. That's obscene."
Zibel asserted that "oil and gas companies are using the political influence they purchased to dodge paying even a minimal part of their fair share."
"If individual taxpayers understood the magnitude of the extreme subsidies for Big Oil, they would be shocked," he added. "The newest effort to bypass even the most modest of tax bills by the industry is shocking, but sadly not surprising."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Senate Dems Block 'Deliberately Misleading' GOP Bill Attacking Reproductive Care
"This bill is the very definition of pernicious: It attacks women's healthcare using false narratives and outright fearmongering," said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.
Jan 22, 2025
U.S. Senate Democrats on Wednesday blocked from a final vote a Republican bill that, according to Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, made clear that under newly sworn-in President Donald Trump, "it will be a golden age, but for the extreme, anti-choice movement."
"This bill is the very definition of pernicious: It attacks women's healthcare using false narratives and outright fearmongering, and adds more legal risk for doctors on something that is already illegal," Schumer (D-N.Y.) said on the chamber's floor before senators voted 52-47 along party lines, short of the 60 votes needed to advance the so-called Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act (S. 6) to a final vote.
Introduced by Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), S. 6 would "prohibit a healthcare practitioner from failing to exercise the proper degree of care in the case of a child who survives an abortion or attempted abortion," under the threat of fines and up to five years in prison. Healthcare professionals and rights advocates have condemned the legislation as deeply misleading.
"So much of the hard-right's anti-choice agenda is pushed, frankly, by people who have little to no understanding of what women go through when they are pregnant," said Schumer. "The scenario targeted by this bill is one of the most heartbreaking moments that a woman could ever encounter, the agonizing choice of having to end care when serious and rare complications arise in pregnancy. And at that moment of agony, this bill cruelly substitutes the judgment of qualified medical professionals, and the wishes of millions of families, and allows ultraright ideology to dictate what they do."
After honoring Cecile Richards, a longtime Planned Parenthood leader who died earlier this week, Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) said Wednesday that "of all the bills that we could be voting on—lowering the cost of healthcare, expanding childcare, helping our families—it's an absolute disgrace that Republicans are spending their first week in power attacking women, criminalizing doctors, and lying about abortion."
"This isn't how abortion works; Republicans know it," stressed Murray, a senior member and former chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. "All babies are already protected under the law, regardless of the circumstance of their birth. Doctors already have a legal obligation to provide appropriate medical care. And we already know this sham bill from Republicans is not going anywhere."
"Last time we voted down this bill, I actually spoke about something Republicans refuse to acknowledge in this debate: the struggles, the struggles of a pregnant woman, who has received tragic news that her baby had a fatal medical condition and would not be able to survive, and who were able to make the choice that was right for their family," she noted. "But now, here we are, already hearing stories of women who were denied that choice by extreme Republican abortion bans."
Wednesday's vote fell on the 52nd anniversary of Roe v. Wade, a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that affirmed abortion rights nationwide—until it was reversed by right-wing justices in 2022, with the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision, which provoked a fresh wave of state-level restrictions on reproductive freedom.
"It's no accident that congressional Republicans used the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, a watershed case for liberty, equality, and bodily autonomy, to vote on a bill that perpetuates myths about abortion care, shames the people who seek that care, and vilifies those who provide it," said Fatima Goss Graves, president and CEO of the National Women's Law Center, in a statement.
"A majority of the electorate continues to support abortion rights and access," she noted. "Americans have seen the results of the Supreme Court's unjust and callous decision to overturn Roe v. Wade—from abortion bans forcing people to travel across state lines to access the care they need to pregnant people being denied care and even dying to an exodus of doctors that is exacerbating the existing maternal health crisis we face—and they reject restrictive abortion policies. That's why anti-abortion advocates must rely on disinformation like this bill to further their extreme agenda."
Alexis McGill Johnson, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, also highlighted the country's sweeping healthcare crisis in her Wednesday statement about Republicans' failed bill.
"This bill is deliberately misleading and offensive to pregnant people, and the doctors and nurses who provide their care," she said. "At a time when we are facing a national abortion access crisis, lawmakers should be focused on how to bring more care to the communities they serve, not spending their time spreading misinformation, criminalizing doctors, and inserting themselves further into medical decisions made by healthcare professionals."
"This bill is not based in any reality of how medical care works," she added, "and it's wrong, irresponsible, and dangerous to suggest otherwise."
As the GOP works to restrict reproductive rights, advocacy groups are determined to fight back. All* Above All marked the Roe anniversary by releasing an Abortion Justice Playbook that the organization's president, Nourbese Flint, said "is our blueprint for a future where abortion access is equitable, universal, and free from discrimination."
Keep ReadingShow Less
2 Baptist Pastors and US Senators Vote for More Killing of Palestinians in Gaza
The vote showed the hypocrisy of the two senators who are pastors of the Christian denomination.
Feb 20, 2024
The February 12, 2024 U.S. Senate vote on $14 billion to Israel shows the depravity of most of the members of the legislative body.
In particular it showed the hypocrisy of the two senators who are pastors of a Christian denominations as well as the shallowness of the few senators who called for a cease-fire and then voted for money to kill more Palestinians. Only three Senators who caucus with the Democrats voted against the funding—Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), and Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.)
Senator Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.) voted for $14 billion for Israel. He is a Baptist preacher from Georgia. For 19 years Warnock was the pastor of Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, Georgia, Martin Luther King Jr.’s former congregation. He is the fifth and youngest person to serve as Ebenezer’s senior pastor since its founding, and he has continued with the position while serving in the Senate.
Would Martin Luther King, Jr. be proud of Ebenezer Church Senior Pastor Warnock? I think not!
Warnock was elected with the help of volunteers who came to Georgia from all over the country… and by funds from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) that wanted desperately for the Democrats to be in charge of the Senate so that Israel super-supporter Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) would become the Senate majority leader. Schumer ties President Joe Biden as the strongest supporter for the state of Israel in the U.S. government. They both have protected the criminal actions of the state of Israel for decades, throughout Biden’s 36 years in the Senate, eight years as vice president, and now three years as president and Schumer’s 25 years in the Senate.
A small group of us caught Senator Warnock outside the door of the private entrance to his office in the Dirksen Senate Office Building on February 12, less than 15 hours before the early morning vote on $14 billion to Israel to continue the Israeli slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza.
In our appeal to his Christian values, we pleaded with him as a pastor, the only pastor in the Senate, to not vote for money for Israel to continue the killing in Gaza. He shook the hands of each in our group, our red-stained hands from our daily protests, symbolizing the blood on the hands of those protecting Israeli crimes in Gaza and the West Bank. Warnock thanked us for our comments but would not say he would call for a cease-fire, and he didn’t say he was voting for the money to Israel and why.
But, as an aside, Warnock mentioned that he was not the only pastor in the Senate. We asked who the other one was?
Warnock replied, “James Lankford,” to which our group gave a collective groan. Lankford is from Oklahoma and is known as an ultra-conservative and is a strong supporter of Israel. He said that Israel is fighting “morally” while Hamas is not. Lankford was for 15 years the director of student ministry for the Baptist Convention of Oklahoma.
During the 2022 Georgia run-off election, Warnock’s 2018 sermon in which he condemned Israel for directing fire at unarmed Palestinian protesters near Israel’s separation fence with the occupied Gaza Strip was dug up by opponent former Sen. Kelly Loeffler.
As an African-American church leader, Warnock certainly knew of Israeli apartheid actions in Gaza and the West Bank. In 2019, he signed a statement published on the website of the National Council of Churches which compared Israeli control of the West Bank to “previous oppressive regimes” such as “apartheid South Africa” and said that the “ever-present physical walls that wall in Palestinians” are “reminiscent of the Berlin Wall.”
The statement was signed by several Christian faith leaders who traveled to Israel and the Palestinian territories in late February and early March of 2019 as part of a joint delegation including representatives of “historic Black denominations of the National Council of Churches” as well as “heads of South African church denominations of the South African Council of Churches.”
Despite his comments that challenged the Israeli apartheid treatment of Palestinians and Israel’s actions in the West Bank and Gaza, Warnock interestingly received campaign donations from the Democratic Majority for Israel (DMFI) and began parroting its agenda, which includes supporting unconditional aid for Israel; condemning the boycott, divestment, and sanctions movement; and strengthening the U.S.-Israel relationship. All of this to get another Democratic Senator so that Chuck Schumer would become the Senate majority leader.
15 hours after our conversation with Pastor Warnock, at 5:00 am in the morning of February 13, the two Christian pastors in the U.S. Senate voted for $14 billion for Israel to continue the killing of massive numbers of Palestinians.
Would Martin Luther King, Jr. be proud of Ebenezer Church Senior Pastor Warnock? I think not!
As Warnock is a pastor in the footsteps and in the church of Martin Luther King Jr., one is quite sure that MLK in heaven is not pleased with Pastor Warnock’s vote for more military funding for Israel and for Ukraine.
One hopes that MLK comes to Warnock in his dreams to give him counsel for any future votes, votes that one would hope would reflect an abhorrence to genocide instead of bowing to Israeli political pressure.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Rights Groups Urge Biden to Stop 'Political Games' and End Cruelty at the Border
"The idea that 5,000 or even 10,000 people might overwhelm us trivializes both what our government is capable of and our nation's capacity to welcome. Those of us living at the border know this," said one El Paso-based advocate.
Jan 28, 2024
Progressives on Saturday urged U.S. President Joe Biden to halt his immigration-related appeals to "a voter who doesn't exist" as he promised voters at a campaign event in South Carolina that he would immediately "shut down the border" between the U.S. and Mexico if Congress passes a bipartisan immigration bill.
Senators are expected to release the legislative text of the bill this week, but Capitol Hill sources have said the bipartisan deal—negotiated chiefly by Sens. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.), and James Lankford (R-Okla.)—would include a new executive authority to halt asylum screenings on days when border crossings by undocumented immigrants reaches 5,000 over the five-day average.
Under the provision, migrants would be expelled indefinitely until crossings decreased to 3,750 per day. A set amount of asylum claims would be granted at official ports of entry, but the standard for migrants making an asylum claim would be raised, making it harder for people—many of whom have been arriving at the border after fleeing violence and poverty—to get approval to stay in the United States.
"A bipartisan bill would be good for America and help fix our broken immigration system and allow speedy access for those who deserve to be here, and Congress needs to get it done," Biden said in South Carolina, a day after the White House released a written statement on the legislation. "It'll also give me as president the emergency authority to shut down the border until it could get back under control. If that bill were the law today, I'd shut down the border right now and fix it quickly."
Immigrant rights advocates were quick to denounce Biden's promise to eliminate asylum protections for thousands of people, while U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said the bill would be "dead on arrival" if it arrives on the House floor and demanded that Biden close the border immediately with his executive authority—something Biden cannot do under federal and international law, said American Immigration Council (AIC) policy director Aaron Reichlin-Melnick.
Although Republicans have insisted on border restrictions in exchange for more military aid for Ukraine and Israel, Oklahoma Republicans passed a resolution condemning Lankford for working with Democrats on the deal.
Johnson complained that the deal would allow "as many as 150,000 illegal crossings each month (1.8 million per year) before any new 'shutdown' authority could be used. At that point, America will have already been surrendered."
"How weak do you have to think the USA is if you're claiming that adding 1.8 million undocumented immigrants a year would "surrender" the nation?" asked Reichlin-Melnick.
Meanwhile, Eleanor Acer, refugee protection director for Human Rights First, warned that former Republican President Donald Trump's anti-migration Title 42 policy already proved to "be a human rights and migration management fiasco."
The U.S. turned away migrants under Title 42 more than 2.8 million times between March 2020—when it was imposed as the coronavirus pandemic began, ostensibly to protect public health—and May 2023. Human Rights First tracked more than 10,000 cases of migrants being kidnapped or physically or sexually assaulted after being expelled under Biden's continuation of Title 42 after he took office. The Kaiser Family Foundation also reported that the policy contributed to the separation of families.
"There are real challenges at the border, and now is the moment that we need our leaders to move forward effective policy solutions that will improve port processing, support communities receiving migrants, and create lawful pathways to citizenship for Dreamers and others," said Deirdre Schifeling, chief political and advocacy officer at the ACLU, on Saturday. "But let's be clear: Cruelty is not a policy solution—and barring people from seeking protection is both callous and unworkable."
"We've already had an expulsion authority before—Title 42—and we know that it did not stop people from coming to the U.S.," added Schifeling. "Instead, we saw record numbers of families and individuals arriving at our border seeking protection, and Title 42 caused tremendous harm to people fleeing danger."
Marisa Limón Garza, executive director of Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center in El Paso, Texas, accused Biden of playing "political games" and demanded that he keep his campaign promises to "restore a humane and orderly asylum and immigration system."
"The idea that 5,000 or even 10,000 people might overwhelm us trivializes both what our government is capable of and our nation's capacity to welcome. Those of us living at the border know this," said Limón Garza. "One's commitment to their children is a powerful force that drives parents and children to seek a better life in the U.S... Here in the Borderland we believe in supporting families and keeping them together, not turning our backs on them or tearing them apart.
“We call on Congress and the Biden administration to reverse course and turn away from the political games that drive us toward these reckless immigration proposals," she added.
Author and historian Dan Berger compared Biden's push for new anti-immigration authority to his enthusiasm for a "tough on crime" approach by the Democratic Party three decades ago.
Biden has "won no one over" with his statements on immigration since Friday, said author and podcaster Kate Willett. "It's cruelty for recreation."
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