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
national defense authorization act
Warfare Over Healthcare: My Premium Skyrockets to $2600 Per Month
For the first time in my adult life, I will be uninsured, joining the millions who have navigated this risky reality for years. And for what? Multi-trillion-dollar wars and endless tax breaks for the wealthy.
Nov 25, 2025
Next year, an estimated 5 million people will be priced out of health insurance in the United States. I am one of them. When I went to renew my family’s policy, I was shocked to discover my premium had gone up to $2,600 per month, a price my household of four simply cannot afford. For the first time in my adult life, I will be uninsured, joining the millions who have navigated this risky reality for years. It’s a bitter pill to swallow, especially when health insurance already makes access to healthcare costly with extremely unrealistic deductibles and high out-of-pocket costs. Yet, as a woman in my 40s with a family history of breast cancer, going without coverage is a gamble with my life.
After some number-crunching, we concluded that we could afford to carry insurance for only 2 of the 4 of us. This left us with an inhuman choice: to decide whose lives we value more. This is not just an abstract dilemma that many households are facing; it is necropolitics in action, the state-sanctioned power to decide who lives and dies. This crisis is a direct result of political choices made by those elected to serve the people and their needs. By allowing the Affordable Care Act (ACA) subsidies to expire, our elected officials are acting as death panels, comfortable with making a decision that will kill off tens of thousands of their own constituents. This is not hyperbole; studies show that over 40,000 people in the US die annually due to a lack of healthcare.
However, these domestic necropolitics are merely a symptom of the US’ larger death wish: a war economy that serves weapons manufacturers whose job is to create machines of death and destruction. As a nation, we manage to muster up trillions each year to fund global conflict and destruction while claiming the price of keeping our own alive is too much. Our government’s priorities could not be any clearer. For example, in the recent government shutdown, the National Priorities Project reported that the Senate managed to find bipartisan unity to approve a $32 billion increase for the Pentagon as part of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), passing it with an overwhelming 77-20 vote. Yet, they refused to extend the healthcare subsidies for even a single year, a measure that would have cost roughly $35 billion, a well-worth sum that would keep millions, including myself, from losing their health insurance.
This is not a one-off, though. Congress passes an ever-growing Pentagon budget every year, now set to exceed a trillion dollars. The 2026 NDAA will be voted on in mid-December. Around the same time, there are whispers of a vote on the healthcare subsidies that could save millions of families from our nightmare. However, only one of these bills is certain to pass with little debate, and it is not the one that will save lives.
We live in a system that values war and conflict over the protection of life, and every day they decide that it is okay for more and more of us to die.
To understand the deadly consequences of these priorities, consider that the annual cost of continuing the ACA subsidies is about $30 billion, or roughly $82 million per day. The daily cost of operating a single US aircraft carrier is approximately $8 million. This means that the cost of one carrier for a single day is equivalent to about 10% of the daily cost of providing healthcare subsidies for the entire nation. In other words, the funds spent on one warship for just one day could instead ensure a day of healthcare access for hundreds of thousands of Americans.
The math makes it clear that the US government is not in the business of serving the people and their needs. Instead, our elected officials sit in high places, callously deciding who they are willing to kill off in order protect their personal vested interest, whether it be Palestinians in Gaza, children in Sudan, boaters in Venezuela, migrants seeking a better life, or hard-working families desperately trying to make ends meet in an economy that only serves a few rather than the many. We live in a system that values war and conflict over the protection of life, and every day they decide that it is okay for more and more of us to die. It is necropolitics, all the way down, and we are all on the chopping block. Unless…
To learn more about how to fund the people's needs over war manufacturers' greed, please visit our Cut The Pentagon website for more ways to take action.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Calls for GOP to Ram Through AI Regulation Ban in Must-Pass Military Spending Bill
"If lawmakers are serious about AI governance, they must create strong, enforceable national protections as a regulatory floor—not wipe out state laws so Big Tech can operate without consequence," said one consumer advocate.
Nov 19, 2025
A Republican push to stop state legislatures from regulating artificial intelligence, including chatbots that have been found to pose harm to children, resoundingly failed over the summer, with 99 out of 100 senators voting against the provision in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act—but the previous rejection of the idea isn't stopping President Donald Trump and GOP lawmakers from trying again to impose a moratorium.
On Tuesday, Trump posted on his Truth Social platform that House Republicans should take action against "overregulation by the States" in the AI field.
Claiming that "DEI ideology" in AI models in some states will "undermine this Major Growth 'Engine'" and that "Investment in AI is helping to make the U.S. Economy the 'HOTTEST' in the World"—despite tech industry leaders' warnings that the value of AI investments may have been wildly overestimated and the bubble may be on the cusp of bursting—Trump called on Republicans to include the state regulations ban in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), "or pass a separate Bill."
Also on Tuesday, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) told Punchbowl News that the GOP is considering adding language to the NDAA that would effectively ban state AI regulations, which have been passed in both Democratic- and Republican-led states. Those laws would be nullified if Republicans follow through with the plan.
Since the annual defense spending bill is considered a must-pass package by many lawmakers, inserting amendments related to other legislative goals is a common strategy used in Congress.
Trump previously tried to circumvent Congress' rejection of the moratorium in July, when he announced his AI Action Plan.
Emphasizing that the anti-regulatory effort has been rejected by "an alliance of Democrats, Republicans, social conservatives, parents rights groups, medical professionals, and child online protection groups," the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen on Tuesday called Trump's renewal of the push "highly inappropriate" and said it "would risk stripping away vital civil rights, consumer protection, and safety authority from states without putting any federal guardrails in place."
JB Branch, Big Tech accountability advocate at Public Citizen, said that "AI preemption strips away the safeguards states have enacted to address the very real harms of AI."
"Big Tech and its allies have spent months trying to ban states from protecting their own residents, all while refusing to support any meaningful federal AI safeguards," said Branch. "Congress should reject this maneuver outright. If lawmakers are serious about AI governance, they must create strong, enforceable national protections as a regulatory floor—not wipe out state laws so Big Tech can operate without consequence.”
On Tuesday, the Republican-controlled House Committee on Energy and Commerce held a hearing on "AI Chatbot Advantages and Disadvantages," where one witness, psychologist Marlynn Wei, warned that "AI chatbots endorse users 50% more than humans would on ill-advised behaviors."
In September, several grieving parents testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee that their children had died by suicide after being encouraged to take their own lives by AI chatbots.
At Tuesday's hearing, Ranking Member Frank Pallone (D-NJ) said that "Congress must be sure to allow states to put in place safeguards that protect their residents."
"There is no reason for Congress to stop states from regulating the harms of AI when Congress has not yet passed a similar law," he said.
Rep. Lori Trahan (D-Mass.) also addressed the issue, suggesting it was surprising that the Republican members would bother holding a hearing on the harms of AI when they are planning to strip state lawmakers of their ability to protect their constituents from those harms.
"I'm having real difficulty in reconciling this hearing and all that we've heard about the risks of AI chatbots, especially to our children, with the attempt by the House Republican leadership to ban state-level AI regulations," said Trahan. "Republicans' push for this regressive, unconstitutional, and widely condemned AI policy is real and it's unrelenting."
👀MUST WATCH: @RepLoriTrahan takes down House GOP’s efforts to slip the disastrous AI preemption into the NDAA — wiping out state laws that protect kids, seniors, and veterans. It’s a big handout for Big Tech. pic.twitter.com/8NxdkcDgul
— The Tech Oversight Project (@Tech_Oversight) November 18, 2025
"Let's just say in public what you are pushing in private," she added. "Don't be holding these hearings about the risks of AI chatbots while behind closed doors you kneecap state legislatures from protecting their constituents. I mean, if the AI moratorium is the topic in the speaker's office let's make it so in this hearing room, because the American people deserve to know where you truly stand on AI regulation."
Keep ReadingShow Less
While Ripping Trump Authoritarianism, Over Half of Senate Dems Help GOP Pass $925 Billion Pentagon Bill
"Congress continues to expand military spending while denying investments in the programs that will truly build a safer, healthier future for working- and middle-class families," said Sen. Ed Markey, who voted no.
Oct 10, 2025
Senate Democrats are blasting President Donald Trump's increasingly authoritarian behavior and congressional Republicans for shutting down the US government to preserve devastating healthcare cuts, but over half of them voted with the GOP late Thursday to give nearly $1 trillion to the Pentagon, which has never passed an audit.
The final vote on the Senate's $925 billion version of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 was 77-20, with Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Ted Cruz (R-Texas), and Thom Tillis (R-NC) not voting. The passage tees up talks with leaders in the House of Representatives, where nearly all Republicans and 17 Democrats approved an NDAA last month.
Democratic Sens. Tammy Baldwin (Wis.), Cory Booker (NJ), Maria Cantwell (Wash.) Tammy Duckworth (Ill.), Dick Durbin (Ill.), Andy Kim (NJ), Ed Markey (Mass.), Jeff Merkley (Ore.), Chris Murphy (Conn.), Patty Murray (Wash.), Alex Padilla (Calif.), Brian Schatz (Hawaii), Adam Schiff (Calif.), Tina Smith (Minn.) Chris Van Hollen (Md.), Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), Peter Welch (Vt.), and Ron Wyden (Ore.) opposed the bill alongside Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who caucuses with Democrats, and Rand Paul (R-Ky).
"Yesterday, the Senate voted to give the Pentagon a trillion-dollar spending package while the Trump administration and MAGA Republicans play politics with troop pay and nuclear security and refuse to reopen the federal government," Markey said in a Friday statement. "All the while, they are stealing healthcare from American families to fund tax breaks for CEO billionaires. This isn't a budget that funds America's real security needs."
"The Senate voted to give the Pentagon a trillion-dollar spending package while the Trump administration and MAGA Republicans play politics with troop pay and nuclear security and refuse to reopen the federal government."
"Republicans rail that we need to cut government spending—for food assistance, for healthcare, for environmental protection—yet they are showering their defense contractor cronies with hundreds of billions for wasteful and destabilizing programs like Trump's Golden Dome space-based missile system," Markey continued. "Yet they decry that funding will soon dry up for paying military salaries and for essential nuclear security operations at the National Nuclear Security Administration."
"In their desperation to score cheap political points, Republicans are undermining vital national security missions," he added. "Year after year, Congress continues to expand military spending while denying investments in the programs that will truly build a safer, healthier future for working- and middle-class families. The cost of passing this bill in the form of denied rights and wasteful spending is simply too great."
In posts on Bluesky, journalist Erin Reed called out the Senate Democrats who helped pass the bill, given its attacks on LGBTQ+ Americans and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI)—common targets of congressional Republicans and the Trump administration.
"In 2024, the NDAA became the vehicle for one of the most consequential betrayals of transgender Americans by national Democrats in recent memory, after Democrats allowed provisions targeting trans military family members and dependents to stand when they had control of the Senate and White House," Reed noted.
"This year, history is repeating itself," she said. "Senate Democrats dropped key objections and allowed a vote to proceed on the bill—ultimately passing the Senate version of the bill, complete with anti-trans culture-war riders, an anti-DEI clause, and no limits on the domestic deployment of US troops."
Early Thursday afternoon, Duckworth, a veteran herself, said that she was blocking the NDAA until she secured a hearing to investigate the president's "gross abuse of our military" by sending soldiers into American cities. A few hours later—shortly before a federal judge temporarily blocked Trump's National Guard deployment in her state, Illinois—Duckworth announced that a hearing is planned.
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), one of the Democrats who voted for the NDAA, secured sufficient bipartisan support for his amendment to end the authorizations for use of military force related to the 1991 Gulf War and 2003 invasion of Iraq. The Washington Post reported that "the House bill also includes a similar measure, bringing Congress to the precipice of repealing the laws."
Some other Democrat-proposed amendments weren't successful. According to The Hill:
Amendments that failed to pass included one from Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) who had hoped to block money for President Trump to retrofit a luxury Qatari jet he accepted as an intended replacement for Air Force One.
"Retrofitting this foreign-owned luxury jet to make it fully operational will cost hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars. That's money that shouldn't be wasted," Schumer said.
Still, Schumer ultimately voted for the NDAA—unlike Van Hollen, who proposed blocking Trump and governors from sending National Guard troops to another state if its governor or local leaders don't agree.
"Presidents and governors shouldn't be able to deploy National Guard troops from one state to another if that state's governor objects," the senator said on social media. "That is common sense, and yet Republicans just blocked my amendment to stop this blatant abuse of power. Another shameful abdication of duty."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular