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
jared golden
22 Democrats Join GOP to Block Lebanon War Powers Resolution, Enabling Netanyahu's Sabotage of US-Iran Ceasefire
"The United States is not a bystander to these war crimes. It's an active participant," said the resolutions sponsor Rep. Rashida Tlaib.
Jun 30, 2026
Nearly two dozen Democrats joined almost every Republican on Tuesday to vote down a war powers resolution that would have halted US military participation in Israel's assault on Lebanon, which is threatening to derail President Donald Trump's peace negotiations with Iran.
"More than 1.3 million people have already been forced to leave their homes or be killed, with the Israeli military telling them they will not be allowed to return," said the resolution's sponsor, Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), on the House floor Tuesday. "Eighty-one Lebanese neighborhoods have been violently depopulated and demolished—erased from the map entirely."
Along with Republican Reps. Thomas Massie (Ky.) and Lauren Boebert (Colo.), the resolution received support from 187 Democrats on Tuesday, more than double the number who supported a similar resolution introduced by Tlaib earlier this month.
Despite top House Democrats, including Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (NY) and Foreign Affairs Committee Ranking Member Gregory Meeks (NY), giving rhetorical backing to the resolution this time around, The Intercept reported that they did not formally whip the vote.
Twenty-two Democratic hawks joined the GOP to vote against ending cooperation with Israel's war, which has killed more than 4,000 people since March.
Among them were a clique of Democrats who have signed on to the centrist "Promise to America" aimed at countering the momentum of progressive and democratic socialist candidates within the party—including Reps. Donald Davis (NC), Laura Gillen (NY), Vicente Gonzalez (Texas), Josh Gottheimer (NJ), Adam Gray (Calif.), Susie Lee (Nev.), and Tom Suozzi (NY).
Others include favorites of the America Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), including Reps. George Latimer (NY), Henry Cuellar (Texas), Jared Golden (Maine), and Brad Schneider (Ill.), who have each received over a million dollars from it and other pro-Israel lobbying groups over their careers, according to FEC reports reviewed by Track AIPAC.
Other Democratic opponents include Reps. Steny Hoyer (Md.), Greg Landsman (Ohio), Jared Moskowitz (Fla.), Donald Norcross (NJ), Jimmy Panetta (Calif.), Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (Wash.), Brad Sherman (Calif.), Darren Soto (Fla.), Norma Torres (Calif.), Juan Vargas (Calif.), and Marc Veasey (Texas), many of whom have also received extensive support from the lobby.
As voting began on Tuesday afternoon, Lebanese-American journalist Rania Khalek said that "how people vote on this is a big indicator of who is bought and paid for by the war machine and Israel lobby."
In a comment to Axios, the staunch pro-Israel centrist Golden justified his vote against the measure by claiming that "to the best of my knowledge, we're not engaged in a conflict with Lebanon."
Latimer made a similar statement on social media, claiming that the resolution was only good for "messaging" since the US did not have any active troops in Lebanon.
But Tlaib argued on the House floor that "the United States is not a bystander to these war crimes. It's an active participant."
"The United States is currently engaged in illegal and unauthorized hostilities supporting the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in violation of the War Powers Act," she said. "The Trump administration is providing intelligence, coordinating strikes, demonstrating overt command over the Israeli military decisions, including greenlighting specific Israeli attacks and operations."
Other supporters of the resolution emphasized that ending Israel's occupation of Lebanon is a precondition for ending Trump's war with Iran.
"Ending Israeli military action in Lebanon is a key part of ensuring that the negotiation process with Iran continues and peace prevails in the Middle East," said Rep. Betty McCullom (D-Minn.).
The memorandum of understanding signed by the US and Iran earlier this month states that, for peace to be achieved, it must be implemented on "all fronts," including in Lebanon.
Iranian negotiators have repeatedly emphasized that they will not allow Trump to pull back from the war he's desperate to end unless Israel fully withdraws troops from Lebanon, which Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has emphatically refused to do.
Janet Abou-Elias, a researcher at the Democratizing Foreign Policy Project at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, told Common Dreams earlier this month that without US military participation, Israel could likely continue its occupation “only for a limited period of time."
Just Foreign Policy, an anti-war group that has agitated for the passage of Tlaib's war powers resolution, lambasted the 22 Democrats who voted against it.
"These 22 fringe House Democratic hawks revealed today that they don't actually want the Iran War to end," the group wrote in a post to social media. "By failing to end US participation in the Israeli war in Lebanon, they are undermining a peace deal."
Noting that the closure of the Strait of Hormuz has caused oil prices to spike and inflation to ripple across the economy, the group said these Democrats were "keeping prices high for Americans."
Just Foreign Policy's executive director Erik Sperling told The Intercept that although the resolution did not pass, the vote signaled that things were moving in the right direction.
“Democrats have been pretty unified about speaking out against the killing of innocents and all of the harm by the Iran War, but there has been less vocal outrage about the mass killing and occupation in Lebanon,” Sperling said. “This is just an important signal that Democrats are aware of the way the Lebanon war is a humanitarian crisis and is the key roadblock to ending this war and delivering the peace that Americans are demanding.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
'He's Just a Bad Person': Lone Democrat Jared Golden Joins GOP to Block Iran War Powers Resolution
"Those holding out in support of Trump’s war should be forced to answer how much pain will they ask their constituents to endure for a war that is wrong morally, strategically, and politically.”
May 15, 2026
Maine Democratic Congressman Jared Golden was the target of fresh ire late Thursday after casting his party's sole vote against a war powers resolution in the US House aimed at curbing President Donald Trump's disastrous war against Iran.
Though Golden, who is not seeking reelection this year, was an original cosponsor of the resolution (H.Con.Res.75) offered by fellow Democratic Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) back in March, he became the deciding vote in the 212-212 tie when it finally hit the floor—even as two Republicans broke with their party for the first time to support such a measure.
As The Washington Post notes, the resolution was "proposed early in the war by a faction of pro-Israel Democrats—Golden among them—as a compromise intended to win some Republican backing." While it did win three Republican votes in the end, it was Golden who helped sink it.
When first introduced in March, Gottheimer's resolution was seen as an effort by corporate-friendly Democrats to thwart a more aggressive version put forth by progressive members in the House just days after Trump launched the attack. The text of the resolution plainly "directs the President to remove the use of United States Armed Forces from hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran or any part of its government or military, including potential ground forces in a combat role or used for occupation, by not later than the date that is 30 days after [February 28, 2026], unless explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or specific authorization for use of military force against Iran."
Enactment would have put Trump's ongoing military operations against Iran in direct violation of the resolution.
"Jared Golden was the only Democrat to vote NO. If he voted yes, it would have passed," said Jonathan Cohn, political director of Progressive Mass, an advocacy group based in New England. "He isn't even running again. He's just a bad person who wants more people to die and wants a job lobbying for defense contractors."
While Golden had announced ahead of the vote he would be a "no" on the resolution, there was a time during the vote that four Republicans had entered "Yes" votes in favor. That number later changed back to three as it became increasingly clear how tight the vote would be.
"There weren't enough Democratic votes to kill it, that was why they held the vote open past the deadline until they were able to pressure one republican to flip from 'yes' to 'no,'" said Erik Sperling, executive director of Just Foreign Policy, who tracked the vote closely. "It's in the video."
Vulnerable GOP members of both chambers are starting to turn against Iran war
House joins Senate with narrowest defeat since war began (49-50, 212-212)
House WPR nearly passed but pro-war @HouseGOP pressured someone to change their vote last second to protect the war effort
⬇️ https://t.co/IW8AxPt8oM pic.twitter.com/87GGFAmr3i
— Erik Sperling (@ErikSperling) May 14, 2026
Golden defended his vote against the resolution by saying, "unfortunately its proposed 30-day deadline lacks any real meaning now that we are more than 70 days into this conflict," which is a stretch of logic—one critic called it "nonsensical rationale"—when the point of the War Powers Act is to put the president in violation—or alignment—of what Congress has authorized by law.
Ryan Costello, policy director for the National American Iranian Council (NIAC), noted that with Republican Reps. Tom Barrett of Michigan and Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania voted with every Democrat except Golden to pass the resolution. GOP support for Trump's war of choice is beginning to crack under the pressure of soaring gasoline prices and the other economic pain the conflict has unleashed. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.)—who has been a leading and consistent voice against the war—was the third Republican "yes" vote
“Two more swing Republicans in toss-up districts moved in line with the vast majority of Americans who want this war to end, just as President Trump is considering authorizing another phase of the war that would fail to solve the standoff with Iran and deepen the financial insecurity facing ordinary Americans,” said Costello. "The House of Representatives is now split down the middle, with more Representatives who have voted for Iran war powers resolutions since the war began than haven’t."
Earlier this week, three Republicans in the Senate joined with every member of the Democratic caucus except Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) on a war powers resolution that failed in a razor-thin 49-50 vote.
“Just a single vote flipping in the House and two votes in the Senate changes a narrow defeat on war powers into a victory,” added Costello. “There are lots of vulnerable lawmakers who could flip with gas prices continuing to soar and the President’s Iran strategy floundering. Those holding out in support of Trump’s war should be forced to answer how much pain will they ask their constituents to endure for a war that is wrong morally, strategically, and politically.”
In his statement on Wednesday, Golden said he would support what he described as a "clean" war powers resolution introduced by Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY), which is set to come to a vote as soon as next week.
“I have said since the start of this conflict that the War Powers Act of 1973 grants the president only 60 days to conduct military operations without an explicit authorization from Congress,” Golden said. “President Trump, like all his predecessors, has refused to recognize the limitations of the War Powers Act, but to me the law is clear. His window for unilateral military engagement has closed. Hostilities, including the use of the US fleet to impose a blockade of Iranian ports, cannot legally continue unless the president seeks, and wins, Congressional approval.”
The expected vote, which will be the next in a series of efforts to check Trump's war, will put to the test the "rotating villain" theory, which proffers that the powers that be coordinate behind the scenes to make sure there is always a lawmaker willing to throw themselves on a political grenade to make sure certain legislation opposed by leadership in either party does not pass.
"In this case, Golden isn't really a 'rotating' villain," said Just Foreign Policy's Nathan Thompson, "because he's voted against every single Iran War Powers Resolution that's been brought to the floor so far.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Lone Democrat—Jared Golden—Helps GOP Tank Another Iran War Powers Resolution
"It is deeply disappointing that Rep. Golden joined Republicans in opposing efforts to stop further escalation," said one peace advocate. "Democratic leadership’s handling of this moment is also concerning."
Apr 16, 2026
With the decisive support of one Democrat—Rep. Jared Golden of Maine—the Republican-controlled House of Representatives on Thursday voted down a war powers resolution aimed at ending President Donald Trump's illegal assault on Iran, over six weeks after it began.
The final vote was 213-214, with Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) joining nearly every House Democrat in supporting the resolution, which would have forced Trump to withdraw American troops from hostilities in Iran absent congressional authorization. Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio) voted present and Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) didn't vote, despite criticizing the war and telling reporters last month that she would "most likely" support the Democratic resolution.
In the lead-up to Thursday's vote, Democratic leaders—including the resolution's chief sponsor, Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York—faced backlash for slowwalking the legislative effort to end the war even as it appeared that momentum was on their side. Earlier this month, the House Democratic leadership opted to punt the war powers vote until after spring recess, during which the Trump administration and Iran's government reached a tenuous ceasefire deal.
Three of the four House Democrats who voted against an Iran war powers resolution in early March flipped their votes on Thursday: Reps. Henry Cuellar of Texas, Greg Landsman of Ohio, and Juan Vargas of California. Golden, who also voted against the earlier resolution, is not running for reelection.
"While we are encouraged to see growing support," said Demand Progress senior policy adviser Cavan Kharrazian, "it is deeply disappointing that Rep. Golden joined Republicans in opposing efforts to stop further escalation, casting a decisive vote against the resolution."
"Democratic leadership’s handling of this moment is also concerning," said Kharrazian. "They previously declined to force a war powers vote before a critical period of escalation before recess, citing a lack of votes. Now they have moved forward under less favorable conditions, including during sensitive ceasefire negotiations, but still without the votes they previously claimed were necessary before proceeding, and with a changed balance in the House. That inconsistency raises a serious question about what is driving leadership’s priorities: strategy or politics."
"We urge members of Congress, Democrats and Republicans alike, to support sustained diplomatic efforts to resolve this conflict," Kharrazian added. "The American people overwhelmingly reject this war and want a diplomatic end to it.”
The House voted marked the sixth time an Iran-related war powers resolution has failed in the House or Senate since Trump started bombing on February 28.
Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) said Thursday that he supported the war powers effort on Thursday because "Trump’s war of choice was not authorized by Congress, was started without a plan or an exit strategy, and has achieved none of the contradictory objectives used to justify it."
"Trump’s war in Iran is deeply unpopular," Pocan added, "and it’s time to end what never should have started."
Ryan Costello, policy director with the National Iranian American Council, said in a statement that "the narrow defeat of a resolution to definitively end the war on Iran is another tragic missed opportunity, but the gap between public opposition to the war and votes to end it is narrowing."
"All but one House Democrat voted unanimously in support of the resolution but were joined by just one Republican," said Costello. "Golden will need to answer to his Maine constituents, many of whom are veterans and pro-peace Americans who question why Washington so consistently sends brave servicemembers into ill-advised, disastrous wars of choice that kill civilians and sabotage the global economy. So too do all of the Republicans who chose again not to use their power to convince President Trump to take an off-ramp and end this disastrous war that puts Benjamin Netanyahu’s dreams, not the American people and American security, first."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Competing Dem War Powers Resolution Would Give Trump a Monthlong Free Pass in Iran
"The American people are firmly against this war and will see straight through this ruse," said one campaigner.
Mar 03, 2026
As the House of Representatives faces mounting pressure to pass Congressmen Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie's war powers resolution to end the US-Israeli assault on Iran, six right-wing Democrats on Tuesday introduced a competing bill that would give President Donald Trump a green light to keep waging war in the Middle East for the next month.
Khanna (D-Calif.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) have been pushing for their H.Con.Res.38 since shortly before Trump bombed Iranian nuclear facilities last June. Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Saturday attack has ramped up demands for Congress to pass that resolution, along with S.J.Res.59, introduced last year by Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.).
Those resolutions, expected to receive votes this week, were already facing uphill battles in both Republican-controlled chambers, and all-but-certain vetoes if they ever made it to Trump, whose administration claims "Operation Epic Fury" is about preventing a nuclear-armed Iran, while critics around the world accuse him and Netanyahu of engaging in an illegal regime change war.
At least six US service members and hundreds of Iranians are now dead. Despite the rising death toll, the Democrats behind the new proposal—Reps. Jim Costa (Calif.), Henry Cuellar (Texas), Jared Golden (Maine), Josh Gottheimer (NJ), Greg Landsman (Ohio), and Jimmy Panetta (Calif.)—made clear that they oppose a swift end to the conflict.
"There is a concern that the Khanna-Massie war powers resolution currently requires the immediate withdrawal of US forces, even while Iran is actively targeting American troops, assets, embassies, and our allies across the region," they said in a statement. "It is vital that we allow for a safe transition, that protects our service members, embassies, and allies, not a potentially precarious withdrawal."
While proposing a 30-day window for ending the conflict—absent an authorization for the use of military force or a formal declaration of war from Congress—the six Democrats also said that "an open-ended commitment by the administration and the recent implication from the secretary of defense that ground troops may be engaged are both unacceptable."
Politico called the new measure "a sign of how some Democrats are struggling to reconcile their opposition to the Trump administration's military action with a desire to appear hawkish on national security—even in a largely symbolic capacity."
The outlet also noted that when asked about the latest proposal during a Tuesday news conference, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) said that "our focus is on the resolution that will be on the floor this week."
"We'll continue to make the strongest possible case," Jeffries added. "There is going to be very strong Democratic support for the war powers resolution across the ideological spectrum."
Cavan Kharrazian, a senior policy adviser at the grassroots group Demand Progress, was far more critical, declaring that "of course Democrats who raced to applaud Trump's illegal war in Iran, and in one case was pardoned by him, would draft a pro-war war powers resolution meant to sabotage the real war powers resolution receiving a vote this week."
"This Trojan horse resolution attempts to give Trump a free pass to continue waging an unauthorized war in Iran for a whole month—exactly the amount of time that Trump has said he expects the war to last," he warned. "The American people are firmly against this war and will see straight through this ruse."
"Representatives need to ignore this bad-faith distraction," Kharrazian argued, "and vote for the bipartisan Khanna-Massie resolution that will actually stop this illegal war and bring our troops home."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Federal Agent Tells Maine ICE Observer She's Going in 'Nice Little Database' for 'Domestic Terrorists'
"Ironically these kinds of threats do more to radicalize opposition to ICE," said one observer.
Jan 23, 2026
A masked federal immigration enforcement agent was caught on camera this week telling a legal observer in Maine that she was being put in a database for purported "domestic terrorists."
At the start of a video that spread across social media on Friday, the masked agent appears to be scanning a license plate number before walking toward the woman recording him.
The woman informs the agent that it's legal for her to record and then asks him why he's trying to gather information on her.
"Because we have a nice little database, and now you're considered a domestic terrorist," the agent responds.
At this point the woman starts laughing incredulously at him.
"For videotaping you?!" she asks him. "Are you crazy?!"
ICE agent in Portland, Maine tells legal observer she is a domestic terrorist for peacefully recording him, adds her to "nice little database" pic.twitter.com/6miHpXUdT7
— Nathan Bernard (@nathanTbernard) January 23, 2026
Democrats on the US House Homeland Security Committee were quick to denounce the actions of the agent on the video.
"Big government Republicans have unleashed a secret police state on peaceful American citizens," they wrote in a social media post. "This should shake every American to their core."
Other critics, however, noted that it isn't just Republicans who have been supporting the right-wing police state. Seven US House Democrats, including Rep. Jared Golden (D-Maine), voted with the vast majority of Republicans on Thursday to give US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) an additional $10 billion.
"Corporate Democrats are complicit with the full breakdown of our constitutional rights," commented Sunrise Movement.
Greg Krieg, media director at political consulting firm Slingshot Strategies, took particular aim at Golden for shoveling more money to ICE despite documented evidence of agents violating Americans' civil liberties.
"Thank you Jared Golden, special man who understands Maine better than anyone on the planet, for telling us how much people actually like this horseshit," he wrote sarcastically.
Nico Perrino, executive vice president of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, said the agent's behavior crossed a line that should be condemned by Americans of all political persuasions.
"I hope the vast majority of freedom-loving Americans are uncomfortable with the idea," he wrote, "that masked police are now telling people engaged in First Amendment-protected activity that they are 'domestic terrorists' who will be added to a secret government database."
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, predicted that federal agents' aggressive taunts against legal observers would backfire politically against the Trump administration.
"Ironically these kinds of threats do more to radicalize opposition to ICE tactics than they do to stop people from recording ICE," he observed.
Isaac Saul, founder of Tangle News, also thought the optics of the Maine video were terrible for Republicans.
"It's hard to overstate how unpopular this crap is with normie Americans," Saul wrote. "On top of the gross civil rights violations, that Trump is letting these goons loose in Maine, a state where Democrats could actually pick up a Senate seat in nine months, it's political malpractice."
Keep ReadingShow Less
11 House Democrats Help GOP Pass 'Disastrous' Pro-Polluter Permitting Bill
"The SPEED Act protects corporate interests, not the public, and it should be rejected by any senator who claims to stand with the people," said one campaigner.
Dec 18, 2025
Eleven Democrats on Thursday voted with nearly all Republicans in the US House of Representatives to advance a permitting reform bill that climate and frontline organizations warn is a "disastrous" attack on a landmark environmental protection law.
Democratic Reps. Jim Costa (Calif.), Henry Cuellar (Texas), Don Davis (NC), Chris Deluzio (Pa.), Lizzie Fletcher (Texas), Jared Golden (Maine), Vicente Gonzalez (Texas), Adam Gray (Calif.), John Mannion (NY), Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (Wash.), and Marc Veasey (Texas) voted with all Republicans present expect Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.) to pass the bill.
The Standardizing Permitting and Expediting Economic Development (SPEED) Act, spearheaded by Golden and House Committee on Natural Resources Chair Bruce Westerman (R-Ark.), would amend the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which "is often called the 'Magna Carta' of federal environmental laws."
In a statement after the vote, Food & Water Watch legal director Tarah Heinzen said that "for decades, NEPA has ensured logical decision-making and community involvement when the federal government considers projects that could harm people and the environment. The SPEED Act would eviscerate NEPA's protections."
The group detailed key ways in which the SPEED Act attacks NEPA:
- Drastically limiting NEPA's scope of review: Removes many actions from NEPA review altogether, potentially allowing factory farms and coal plants to build and expand without any environmental review or public input;
- Limiting agency accountability: Creates unreasonably short deadlines to challenge inadequate reviews, and limits courts’ ability to stop unlawful projects; and
- Putting polluter profits above science and the environment: Turns NEPA on its head by requiring agencies to prioritize corporate interests over the public interest and limiting their ability to consider the best science.
"Today's absurd House vote is yet another handout to corporate polluters at the expense of everyday people who have to live with the real-world impacts of toxic pollution from dirty industries like fossil fuels and factory farms," Heinzen argued. "This nonsense must be dead on arrival in the Senate."
Other campaigners also looked to the upper chamber after the vote. Erik Schlenker-Goodrich, executive director of the Western Environmental Law Center, said that "renewable energy and climate advocates in the Senate must hold the line against the SPEED Act's evisceration of our bedrock environmental and community protection law."
Allie Rosenbluth, Oil Change International's US campaign manager, stressed that "our senators must stand up against the SPEED Act's attempts to undermine democratic decision-making, pollute our communities, and threaten our collective future."
For a Better Bayou's James Hiatt similarly said that "the SPEED Act protects corporate interests, not the public, and it should be rejected by any senator who claims to stand with the people."
Anthony Karefa Rogers-Wright, co-coordinator of Black Alliance for Peace's Climate, Environment, and Militarism Initiative, warned that the bill "represents yet another assault on the health of frontline, Black, Brown, Indigenous, and poor white communities that have been designated as sacrifice zones by big polluters who bribe lawmakers with big money to continue a culture of extract, slash, burn, and emit at the expense of oppressed and marginalized peoples."
"Rather than speeding up the approval of dirty projects, Congress should increase funding for federal agencies and grassroots organizations accountable to frontline communities to carry out legally defensible and accurate environmental analyses," he continued, pointing to the Environmental Justice for All Act, previously led by the late Democratic Congressmen Raúl Grijalva (Ariz.) and Donald McEachin (Va.).
Mar Zepeda Salazar, legislative director at Climate Justice Alliance, also pointed to that alternative: "The SPEED Act fast-tracks harmful fossil fuel and polluting projects, not the community-led clean energy solutions families and Indigenous peoples across the country have long called for. Instead of pushing the SPEED Act—a bill that would strip away what few legal protections communities still have, weaken safeguards for clean air, land, and water near new industrial development, and sidestep meaningful consultation with federally recognized tribal nations—Congress should be advancing real, community-driven permitting reform."
"Examples include the Environmental Justice for All Act, which lays out meaningful public engagement, strong public health protections, respect for tribal sovereignty and consultation obligations, and serious investments in agencies and staff," she said.
Representatives from the Institute for Policy Studies, Sacred Places Institute for Indigenous Peoples, and Unitarian Universalists for Social Justice also spoke out against what David Watkins, director of government affairs for the Climate and Energy Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, condemned as "a sizable holiday gift basket for Big Oil and Gas." He, too, urged the Senate to "reject this retrograde legislation and stand up to the deep-pocketed, polluting industries lobbying for it."
Lauren Pagel, policy director at Earthworks, pointed out that passing the SPEED Act wasn't the only way in which the House on Thursday "chose corporate interests over people, Indigenous Peoples' rights, and our environment." It also passed the Mining Regulatory Clarity Act, which "will remove already-scarce protections for natural resources and sacred cultural sites in US mining law."
"Today's House votes are a step backwards for our nation, but we continue to stand firm for the rights of the people and places on the frontlines of oil, gas, and mining," Pagel said. "Communities and ecosystems shouldn't pay the price while corporations rush to profit off extraction—with a helping hand from our elected officials."
Along with those two pieces of legislation, Public Citizen pointed to the House's approval of the Power Plant Reliability Act and Reliable Power Act earlier this week. David Arkush, director of the consumer advocacy group's Climate Program, said that the bills advancing through Congress "under the guise of 'bipartisan permitting reform' are blatant handouts to the fossil fuel and mining industries."
"We need real action to lower energy bills for American families and combat the climate crisis," Arkush asserted, calling on congressional Republicans and President Donald Trump "to fast-track a buildout of renewable energy, storage, and transmission—an approach that would not just make energy more affordable and sustainable, but create US jobs and bolster competitiveness with China, which is rapidly outpacing the US on the energy technologies of the future."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Labor Leaders Cheer House Vote to Undo 'Single-Largest Act of Union Busting in American History'
"President Trump betrayed workers," said the head of the AFL-CIO. "Working people delivered a rare bipartisan majority to stop the administration's unprecedented attacks on our freedoms."
Dec 11, 2025
US labor leaders on Thursday celebrated the House of Representatives' bipartisan vote in favor of a bill that would reverse President Donald Trump's attack on the collective bargaining rights of 1 million federal workers.
Trump's sweeping assault on federal workers has included March and August executive orders targeting their rights under the guise of protecting national security. In response, Congressmen Jared Golden (D-Maine) and Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) spearheaded the fight for the Protect America’s Workforce Act. They recently collected enough signatures to force the 231-195 vote, in which 20 Republicans joined all Democrats present to send the bill to the Senate.
"The right to be heard in one's workplace may appear basic, but it carries great weight—it ensures that the people who serve our nation have a seat at the table when decisions shape their work and their mission," Fitzpatrick said after the vote.
"This bill moves us closer to restoring that fundamental protection for nearly 1 million federal employees, many of them veterans," he added. "I will always fight for our workers, and I call on the Senate to help ensure these protections are fully reinstated."
American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) president Liz Shuler joined union leaders in applauding the lower chamber on Thursday and calling on the Senate to follow suit. She said in a statement that "President Trump betrayed workers when he tried to rip away our collective bargaining rights. In these increasingly polarized times, working people delivered a rare bipartisan majority to stop the administration's unprecedented attacks on our freedoms."
"We commend the Republicans and Democrats who stood with workers and voted to reverse the single-largest act of union busting in American history," she continued. "Americans trust unions more than either political party. As we turn to the Senate—where the bill already has bipartisan support—working people are calling on the politicians we elected to stand with us, even if it means standing up to the union-busting boss in the White House."
Everett Kelley, national president of the American Federation of Government Employees, the largest federal workers union, similarly praised the members of Congress who "demonstrated their support for the nonpartisan civil service, for the dedicated employees who serve our country with honor and distinction, and for the critical role that collective bargaining has in fostering a safe, protective, and collaborative workplace."
"This vote marks an historic achievement for the House's bipartisan pro-labor majority, courageously led by Reps. Jared Golden of Maine and Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania," he said. "We need to build on this seismic victory in the House and get immediate action in the Senate—and also ensure that any future budget bills similarly protect collective bargaining rights for the largely unseen civil servants who keep our government running."
American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees president Lee Saunders also applauded the House's passage of "a bill that strengthens federal workers' freedoms on the job so they can continue to keep our nation safe, healthy, and strong."
"This bill not only provides workers' critical protections from an administration that has spent the past year relentlessly attacking them," he noted, "but it also ensures that our communities are served by the most qualified public service workers—not just those with the best political connections."
Randy Erwin, the head of the National Federation of Federal Employees, declared that "this is an incredible testament to the strength of federal employees and the longstanding support for their fundamental right to organize and join a union."
"The president cannot unilaterally strip working people of their constitutional freedom of association. In bipartisan fashion, Congress has asserted their authority to hold the president accountable for the biggest attack on workers that this country has ever seen," he added, thanking the House supporters and pledging to work with "senators from both parties to ensure this bill is signed into law."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Conservative Dem Golden Won't Seek Reelection After Saying Democracy Would Be 'Fine' Under Trump Last Year
“He’s apparently quitting now because democracy isn’t ‘just fine,'” said one Maine professor.
Nov 05, 2025
US Rep. Jared Golden, a centrist Democrat from Maine who has backed President Donald Trump's policies on issues such as trade and immigration, announced on Wednesday that he would not be seeking another term in office.
In an editorial published by the Bangor Daily News, Golden said that he decided against running for office again because he had "grown tired of the increasing incivility and plain nastiness that are now common from some elements of our American community—behavior that, too often, our political leaders exhibit themselves."
Golden—the former Blue Dog Coalition co-chair with a history of voting with Republicans on various climate, military, and student debt relief policies—also said that he has become worried about political violence in the US that has targeted both lawmakers and activists in recent years.
"Last year we saw attempts against Donald Trump’s life, and more recently we witnessed the firebombing of Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro’s home, the assassination of Democratic lawmakers in Minnesota, and the horrific murder of Charlie Kirk," he explained. "These have made me reconsider the experiences of my own family, including all of us sitting in a hotel room on Thanksgiving last year after yet another threat against our home. There have been enough of those over the years to demand my attention."
Golden also emphasized that he was not worried about losing the next election, but had instead concluded that "what I could accomplish in this increasingly unproductive Congress pales in comparison to what I could do in that time as a husband, a father, and a son."
Maine State Auditor Matt Dunlap, who announced earlier this year that he would challenge Golden for the Democratic nomination in Maine's 2nd Congressional District, put out a statement on Wednesday before Golden announced that he would not seek another turn claiming that Democrats' sweeping wins in Tuesday's elections showed that US voters wanted representatives who would more assertively stand up to the president.
"Across the country, voters rejected fear and division," Dunlap said. "They’re not ‘okay with’ another Trump presidency like Jared Golden is. Golden was wrong to cave on the continuing resolution instead of protecting affordable healthcare."
The remark about Golden being "okay with" Trump is a reference to an editorial he published last year in which he said that Trump would win the 2024 election and that "democracy will be just fine" regardless.
Michael Socolow, a media historian at the University of Maine, noted the contrast between Golden's editorial last year in which he brushed aside concerns about a second Trump term, and his editorial this year lamenting how a lack of civility and threats of political violence had snuffed out his desire to have a career in politics.
"I wonder if he regrets his op-ed saying 'Democracy will be just fine' if Donald Trump won the 2024 election?" he wondered. "He's apparently quitting now because democracy isn't 'just fine.'"
While Golden was one of the most conservative Democrats in the US House, he also represented a district that has voted for Trump in three consecutive elections, and his retirement will likely make it harder for Democrats to keep the seat from flipping to Republicans in the 2026 midterm elections.
J. Miles Coleman, an associate editor at Sabato's Crystal Ball, wrote on X that Golden's retirement moves his district from a "toss-up" election to a "leans Republican" election next year.
Former Maine Gov. Paul LePage, a MAGA favorite and ardent Trump supporter, confirmed last month that he planned to run for Golden's seat.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Maine Progressive Matt Dunlap Launches Bid for Jared Golden's US House Seat
"I’m running because Mainers deserve a fighter who won’t cave to Donald Trump. Jared Golden said Trump is ‘OK’ and that we’ll be ‘just fine’ but Mainers are being hurt by his policies."
Oct 06, 2025
Maine Auditor Matt Dunlap on Monday launched a Democratic primary campaign against US Rep. Jared Golden, citing the incumbent congressman's frequent siding with President Donald Trump and Republicans and promising a "People's Agenda" that centers working-class needs.
"I’m running because Mainers deserve a fighter who won’t cave to Donald Trump," Dunlap, who is also a former Maine secretary of state, said in a statement announcing his candidacy. "Jared Golden said Trump is ‘OK’ and that we’ll be ‘just fine’ but Mainers are being hurt by his policies."
"Golden has repeatedly sided with Trump, even when it means that healthcare costs will skyrocket for thousands of Mainers," Dunlap added. "When I’m in Congress, I’ll stand up for Maine, and I’ll fight for affordable healthcare, a lower cost of living, and higher wages for hardworking people.”
Dunlap's platform—which includes Medicare for All and universal childcare—stands in stark contrast with Golden's record as the sole House Democrat to vote against unemployment benefits, child tax credits, and affordable healthcare in the American Rescue Plan pandemic relief package signed by former President Joe Biden in 2021.
Golden was also the only House Democrat who voted for Republicans' government funding bill last month, blaming "hardball politics driven by the demands far-left groups" for the ongoing government shutdown.
Taking aim at both Golden and former Gov. Paul LePage, the likely Republican nominee, Dunlap said in his first campaign ad that "we can do better than bad and worse."
The ad also highlights Dunlap's purported accessibility, a sore spot among voters who accuse Golden of dodging his constituents by refusing to hold town hall meetings.
Dunlap faces a steep uphill battle in a district that Trump won by 9.6% in 2024.
“If Matt Dunlap thinks this district will choose him over Paul LePage, he’s got another thing coming,” Golden said in response to Monday's announcement.
LePage campaign spokesperson Brent Littlefield welcomed Dunlap's entry into the race, saying the progressive candidate "sees what we see, Jared Golden is hiding."
"From Aroostook to Oxford and every county in between, Maine people say they never see Jared Golden in their towns or communities," he added.
Dunlap already has a history of clashing with Trump. During his first term, the president appointed the then-secretary of state to a bipartisan panel tasked with investigating alleged voter fraud. Dunlap sued the commission to obtain files he said were being withheld from him. A judge ruled in his favor; Trump subsequently shut down the commission.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Help Protect Federal Workers From Trump's Union-Busting Attacks
Only months after courting union voters with pro-worker campaign rhetoric, President Trump is on track to become the most anti-union president in modern American history.
Oct 05, 2025
During a 2024 campaign stop in Detroit, President Donald Trump energized the crowd by proclaiming: “I will protect what is ours. I will protect our workers. I will protect our jobs.” Then, asking the audience to look around at empty buildings and remember how they’ve been ripped off, Trump continued, “These pro-worker policies are among the many reasons I’ve been overwhelmingly endorsed by the rank-and-file membership of the Teamsters.”
Only months after courting union voters with pro-worker campaign rhetoric, President Trump is on track to become the most anti-union president in modern American history.
The President’s record is clear: Trump’s first Supreme Court appointee, Neil Gorsuch, cast the deciding vote in Janus v AFSCME, a “right-to-work” ruling Trump praised for allowing workers to opt out of union dues while freeriding off the benefits of collective bargaining provided by dues-paying members. The president’s two labor secretaries, Eugene Scalia and Lori Chavez-DeRemer, have vigorously peeled away protective regulations for workers. And following the unprecedented firing without cause of Gwen Wilcox, a member of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), the federal agency that addresses unfair labor practices and safeguards workers’ rights remains paralyzed by its inability to reach a quorum.
But what sets President Trump apart is his targeting of public sector unions.
In early April, Representatives Jared Golden (D-Maine) and Ryan Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) introduced bipartisan legislation, “The Protect America’s Workforce Act” (H.R. 2250), to overturn Trump’s executive order and restore all terminated collective bargaining agreements.
During his first term, President Trump issued executive orders targeting federal employee unions, aimed at “weakening their ability to bargain contracts and curtailing the amount of time union representatives can spend helping members with their complaints,” according to Andrea Hsu of NPR’s "Morning Edition." Union officials complained that their ability to file grievances was almost nonexistent.
The president then kicked off his second term with an anti-union executive order, called “Restoring Accountability to Policy-Influencing Positions Within the Federal Workforce,” that allows the reclassification of as many as 10,000 workers, making them at-will employees and stripping union protections. But to this point, no traditional “Schedule F” employees have been reclassified.
Perhaps that’s because President Trump has found an easier path to union busting.
In March, the President cited national security concerns as he directed 22 federal agencies to disregard collective bargaining contracts covering 950,000 federal employees. In late August, he signed a second order “stripping union rights” from 440,000 “employees at six additional agencies,” according to the New York Times. These employees represent the overwhelming majority of unionized federal workers.
Public sector unions have been a bulwark against declining labor power over the past half-century. While private sector unionization has withered to 5.9% (from 35% in the 1950s), unions still represent 32.2% of public employees, according to the latest Bureau of Labor Statistics report. But in only a few months, President Trump has removed union protections from more than a million federal workers, representing over 15% of the 7 million public-sector union members nationwide.
If the president’s moves survive legal challenges, he will be the single biggest union buster in American history, according to data from the Economic Policy Institute.
But there is hope.
In early April, Representatives Jared Golden (D-Maine) and Ryan Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) introduced bipartisan legislation, “The Protect America’s Workforce Act” (H.R. 2250), to overturn Trump’s executive order and restore all terminated collective bargaining agreements. A companion bill that includes a repeal of the most recent executive order has since been introduced in the Senate.
The bill’s authors need 218 signatures to force a vote against the will of House leadership. As of September 17, it has 216 signatures, including 213 Democrats and 3 Republicans, according to the American Federation of Government Employees.
If passed in the House and Senate, the bill becomes law and overrides Trump’s union-busting executive orders, even if the courts uphold them. The president could then sign the bill into law or veto it and send the legislation back to Congress where an override requires a two-thirds majority in each chamber.
In either case, it remains possible to protect the collective bargaining rights of federal employees. So, call your representatives. Flood their inboxes. Let them know that we intend to stand up for our federal civil servants.
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