

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
"Trump’s war of choice in Iran is a moral tragedy and economic disaster playing out before our eyes. It is only making the United States and the world less safe," said Sen. Ed Markey.
Senate Republicans on Wednesday once again narrowly stymied a Democrat-led resolution aimed at reining in President Donald Trump's power to wage war against Iran.
Although the war launched by the US and Israel in late February has killed more than 1,700 civilians and sparked a global fuel crisis that has sent prices skyrocketing, that was not enough for 52 Republican senators—every one except libertarian Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)—who voted to back the president even as the war further erodes his approval rating.
The Democratic caucus was similarly unified, with every member voting for the war powers resolution except the pro-Israel hawk Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.).
It was the fourth war powers resolution to fail in the Senate since Trump launched the war on February 28, The last measure in late March fell short by a nearly identical margin.
Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.) called Democrats' continued attempts to check Trump's war powers "exhausting" in comments to reporters on Tuesday. "Doing a war powers resolution just undermines the president. I don’t believe [the Democrats] would do that if the president had a ‘D’ behind his name.”
After more than two weeks of delay, a similar bill will be brought to the floor in the House of Representatives on Thursday. Its sponsor, Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY), the ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said it has a good chance of passing.
But without a similar bill passing the Senate, it would remain a purely symbolic gesture, with no ability to limit Trump's power as he sends thousands more troops to the region immediately after saying the war was "close to over."
"Trump’s war of choice in Iran is a moral tragedy and economic disaster playing out before our eyes. It is only making the United States and the world less safe," said Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) after voting for the war powers resolution. “We have seen thousands of civilian deaths in Iran and Lebanon. More than 100 Iranian schoolgirls were killed by American weapons, and 13 American servicemembers were killed, and hundreds have been injured."
He added, "This dangerous, unnecessary, and expensive war has cost American taxpayers around $50 billion so far, with the Trump administration seeking hundreds of billions of dollars more as part of a $1.5 trillion military budget."
Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), an Army National Guard veteran who sponsored the blocked resolution, suggested in her remarks before the vote that Republicans who opposed the resolution would be putting "Trump’s ego first" ahead of American interests and enabling more "chaos."
The two-week ceasefire agreement is set to expire on April 21. A week later, the war will hit the 60-day mark, after which troops must be withdrawn unless their deployment is approved by Congress, though the White House can request a 30-day extension by citing "national security" concerns.
According to Politico, some Republicans—even those who voted against the war powers resolution on Wednesday—have indicated that the 60-day mark may be a turning point for them.
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC), who is retiring after the next election, said that the administration "has got to start answering questions" about the war's trajectory, especially as it requests tens of billions of dollars in emergency funding.
Duckworth, on the other hand, said she has seen more than enough.
"After one half-assed day of so-called 'negotiations,' he’s whipsawed to his next idea: a dangerous, complex, partial military blockade of the Strait of Hormuz—once again launching a risky new front in this war at our service members’ expense… with no justification, explanation, or even ‘concept of a plan’ of how to get to an end-state," she said.
She added, "As our troops continue to sacrifice whatever is asked of them, we senators need to do the absolute minimum required of us."
"We will not stand by and allow the impact that dismantling the Department of Education would have on the nation's students, parents, borrowers, educators, and communities."
U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders on Thursday led five members of Congress in a warning against the Trump administration's plan to "unilaterally dismantle" the Department of Education and demanded answers from the acting head of the agency about recent moves "to put federal workers on administrative leave, coerce employees into leaving their jobs, provide access to students' sensitive data, and illegally freeze vital funding."
"Over the course of two weeks, the Trump administration issued sweeping executive orders and sought to broadly and illegally freeze federal financial assistance," the lawmakers—Sanders (I-Vt.), Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Va.), and Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.)—wrote in a letter to acting Education Secretary Denise Carter.
"Federal employees have been targeted, in some cases for simply following the law. Elon Musk is attempting to shut down the work of entire agencies while gaining access to some of the federal government's most far-reaching and sensitive data systems. Media reports indicate a similar effort may be underway at the Department of Education," the lawmakers noted.
The letter continues:
The Department [of Education] has been a target of President [Donald] Trump and his unelected advisers since even prior to his inauguration. And recently, the department has put workers on administrative leave for attending trainings promoted by former Secretary Betsy DeVos, once touted among results achieved by the department, and coerced employees into leaving their jobs. Workers at the department—like those across the government—have been made to fear their jobs will be reclassified so that they lose employment protections. Some staff from the entity referred to as the Department of Government Efficiency have reportedly gained access to internal department data systems, including financial aid systems that include personally identifiable information on millions of students. These actions appear to be part of a broader plan to dismantle the federal government until it is unable to function and meet the needs of the American people.
"We will not stand by and allow this to happen to the nation's students, parents, borrowers, educators, and communities," the lawmakers stressed. "Congress created the department to ensure all students in America have equal access to a high-quality education and that their civil rights are protected no matter their ZIP code."
"We urge you to provide information on the steps the department is taking to ensure the continuity of programs that Americans depend on, the ability of the department to effectively administer programs for their intended purposes without waste, fraud, and abuse, and the safeguards in place to protect student data privacy," the legislators added.
Specifically, the letter asks for a list of officials "who have been granted access to personally identifiable or sensitive information," an "explanation of all steps the department has taken to protect" such data, the names of "all individuals placed on administrative leave or terminated" since Trump took office and all department communications to such employees, and confirmation that the department "has not frozen, paused, impeded, blocked, canceled, or terminated any awards or obligations since January 20."
The lawmakers' letter came on the same day that nearly 100 Democratic members of the House of Representatives wrote to Carter requesting a meeting to discuss "reports that the Trump administration has plans to illegally dismantle or drastically reduce" the Department of Education via executive order.
Both letters came ahead of next week's scheduled Senate confirmation hearing for Linda McMahon, a top fundraiser for Trump's campaign whom the president subsequently nominated for education secretary. McMahon—a billionaire who led the Small Business Administration during Trump's first term—is expected to face tough questions from Democratic senators about what one campaigner called her "documented history of enabling sexual abuse of children and sweeping sexual violence under the rug" during her tenure as World Wrestling Entertainment CEO.
The very future of the Department of Education is uncertain, as Trump has repeatedly vowed to abolish the agency, which was established during the administration of President Jimmy Carter in 1979.
"I told Linda, 'Linda, I hope you do a great job and put yourself out of a job,'" Trump quipped earlier this week.
"We do not need to spend almost a trillion dollars on the military, while half a million Americans are homeless and children go hungry," said Sen. Bernie Sanders.
The United States Senate overwhelmingly passed an $895 billion military funding bill on Wednesday as critics blasted what many called misplaced spending priorities and highly controversial provisions that ban gender-affirming health coverage for children of active-duty service members and prohibit the Pentagon from citing casualty figures issued by the Gaza Ministry of Health.
Senators voted 85-14 for the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for fiscal year 2025. The following senators voted against the legislation: Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Mike Braun (R-Ind.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.). Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio), the vice president-elect, did not vote on the bill.
"We do not need to spend almost a trillion dollars on the military, while half a million Americans are homeless and children go hungry," Sanders explained earlier this month.
The peace group CodePink said it was "disappointed" by the Senate's passage of the NDAA, "which allocates nearly $1 trillion in taxpayer dollars to weapons and warfare while essential services like healthcare, education, food, and housing remain underfunded."
"Half of the budget will go directly to the pockets of private military companies in the form of contracts and weapons deals," the group continued. "On top of the massive topline and the large allocation to private companies, the Pentagon has never been able to pass an audit. Much like every Pentagon budget before, this money will be largely unaccounted for, with very little transparency."
"This budget is a huge slap in the face to working-class families who are struggling to make ends meet," CodePink added.
An amendment introduced on Monday by Baldwin and co-sponsored by two dozen of her Democratic colleagues "to remove language that would strip away service members' parental rights to access medically necessary healthcare for their transgender children" failed to pass.
Speaking on the Senate floor on Tuesday, Baldwin said that Congress has "broken" its commitment to the troops "because some Republicans decided that gutting the rights of our service members to score cheap political points was more worthy."
"We're talking about parents who are serving our country in uniform, having the right to consult their family's doctor and get the healthcare they want and need for their transgender children," she added. "Some folks poisoned this bill and turned their backs on those in service and the people that we represent."
Olivia Hunt, director of federal policy at Advocates for Trans Equality, said in a statement Wednesday that "every military family deserves respect and access to essential healthcare—free from the interference of political agendas."
Hunt continued:
Denying lifesaving, medically necessary care to trans members of military families creates profound hardships, forcing service members to make impossible choices between their duty and the health and well-being of their loved ones. Politicizing access to evidence-based healthcare undermines the principles of fairness, dignity, and respect that our nation aspires to. No one should have to choose between their duty and protecting their family.
By passing this harmful legislation, the Senate has failed our service members and their families. This decision prioritizes political gamesmanship over the dignity, rights, and well-being of those who serve our nation and sets a dangerous precedent of governmental overreach into decisions that should remain between doctors and families.
Some advocates including Hunt want President Joe Biden to veto the bill.
"If signed by the president, the passage of the NDAA will mark the first piece of federal legislation to restrict access to medically necessary healthcare for transgender adolescents," Hunt added. "It would be heartbreaking for an administration that has sought to advance the rights of LGBTQI+ Americans more than any other to date, to enact a law that would endanger countless trans youth. We urge President Biden to take a strong stance for trans youth and their families and veto this bill."
Congress has passed the NDAA, which contained a provision banning the coverage of gender affirming care for the children of active duty military. This is the first anti-LGBTQ bill to pass congress in almost 3 decades but certainly won't be the last. This will be Biden's legacy.
— Alejandra Caraballo ( @esqueer.net) December 18, 2024 at 10:02 AM
Human Rights Campaign president Kelley Robinson said that "President Biden has the power to put a stop to this cruelty."
"He should make good on his promises to protect LGBTQ+ Americans, defend military service members and their families, and ensure this country's politics reflect the best of who we are," Robinson added. "President Biden must veto this bill."
The NDAA also contains a provision prohibiting the Department of Defense from officially citing "fatality figures that are derived by United States-designated terrorist organizations" or governmental entities or organizations that rely upon such data. Critics say the measure is meant to censor the truth about Israel's 14-month assault on Gaza, which has left more than 162,000 Palestinians dead, maimed, or missing. Various United Nations agencies, international charities and rights groups, and even the Israeli military and U.S. State Department have cited Gaza Health Ministry casualty figures, which have been deemed accurate—and likely an undercount—by experts around the world, including Israeli military intelligence and U.S. officials.
"In other words," Security Policy Reform Institute co-founder Stephen Semler said of the provision, "it's effectively a ban on talking about deaths in Gaza."