More stories

  • in

    Fired USAid workers and HIV activists hold ‘die-in’ to protest Trump and Musk

    Fired USAid employees and advocates for people with HIV staged a protest in a Capitol office building on Wednesday, warning that Donald Trump’s drive to dismantle the agency tasked with implementing Washington’s foreign aid agenda imperils the fight against the virus.Wearing white T-shirts that read “Aids funding cuts kill” and chanting “Congress has blood on its hands, unfreeze aid now”, around three dozen protesters lay down in the rotunda of the Cannon House office building, home to the offices of representatives from both parties. Capitol police said about 20 arrests were made of demonstrators who defied their orders to disperse.“What we are demanding of Congress is that they stop behaving like doormats in the face of this attack on humanitarian assistance that truly is highly effective and life-saving,” Asia Russell, executive director of Health Gap, a global advocacy group fighting against HIV, said prior to the protest.“It’s very hard to overstate what’s at stake regarding humanitarian assistance.”The protest came as USAid remained frozen by the Trump administration’s rapid moves to close the agency. Over the weekend, the agency announced that it was placing all but a small number of its employees worldwide, as well as nearly 2,000 staffers based in the United States, on paid leave. Those working in Washington DC have been invited to retrieve their belongings from its headquarters, which is set to be turned into office space for US Customs and Border Protection, one of the agencies implementing Trump’s hardline immigration policies.On Tuesday, a federal judge reportedly gave the government a two-day deadline to release billions of dollars in foreign aid funds that had been held back after Trump ordered USAid to stop work. If those funds are not restored, former USAid employees who attended the protest at the Capitol warned, the global fight against HIV will be set back.The United States has been a leader in the campaign against the virus that causes Aids through Pepfar, a program that provides medication to 20 million people worldwide and was established during Republican George W Bush’s presidency. But USAid’s abrupt closure has stopped payments to providers working with the program worldwide.“This is not controversial, and what is happening is not government efficiency, it’s government fraud, waste and abuse when it comes to what Doge is doing,” said the fired USAid contractor Van Credle, referring to Elon Musk’s so-called “department of government efficiency”, which spearheaded the dismantling of her agency as well as other deep cuts to federal services.The Republican majorities elected to both the Senate and House last November have thus far shown little interest in saving USAid and even supported its closure, despite the fact that foreign assistance has in the past enjoyed support on both sides of the aisle. Kelsey Crow, a contractor at the agency’s bureau of global health who lost her job, said the protest was meant to encourage lawmakers who previously supported USAid to step up.“So much of our work at USAid is mandated by Congress, and so for Congress to not be taking action, for Congress to be holding hearings that are pushing out lies and falsehoods about USAid to say that the waivers are back when we know that they’re actually not turned on and the money’s not actually flowing, it’s incredibly disappointing,” Crow said.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionPeter Kerndt, a physician who spent five years with USAid coordinating the fight against tuberculosis in African and Asian countries, said it will be “impossible” to achieve a global goal of eliminating the virus by 2030 if the agency goes away.“For this administration, for Elon Musk to call USAid a criminal organization that should die and to gleefully celebrate that he spent the weekend putting USAid in the wood chipper instead of going to a party is such an insult to all of the workers, both here and in the country,” he said. “But most of all, the people that suffer are the people that we were there to help.”Andrew Roth contributed reporting More

  • in

    White House claims ‘more than 1 million’ federal workers responded to Doge’s ultimatum email – live

    Asked when is the deadline referred to in Elon Musk’s deadline second email to federal workers, Leavitt says agency heads will “determine the best practices for their employees at their specific agencies”.“The secretaries are responsible for their specific workforce, and this is true of the hirings and the firings that have taken place,” she says.She adds that unless their agency has told them not to, workers should reply to the email.She claims more than a million workers have so far responded, including herself.
    It took me about a minute and a half to think of five things I did last week. I do five things in about ten minutes, and all federal workers should be working at the same pace that President Trump is working.
    Edward Wong of the New York Times reports that Trump appointees at USAid have sent recently-fired employees a list of more than 100 weapons they are prohibited from bringing when returning to the office to collect their belongings.Firearms, axes, martial arts weapons, including nunchucks and throwing stars, were in the list, as well as spearguns and dynamite.Staff will collect their personal belongings at the Ronald Reagan Building this Thursday and FridayThere have been no known recent incidents of aid agency employees making weapon-related threats, Wong reports.President Donald Trump signed an executive order Tuesday instructing the commerce secretary Howard Lutnick to launch an investigation into whether foreign copper production and imports threaten US economic and national security.According to White House officials, the investigation could lead to new tariffs on foreign copper, a material essential to manufacturing and construction, as well as critical to the US military and emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence.The administration said it intends to move quickly on the investigation, but no timeline was given.

    ‘More than one million’ federal workers have responded to Elon Musk/Doge’s ultimatum email, the White House has claimed. Trump’s press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, also said agency heads will “determine the best practices” for dealing with the ‘what did you do last week’ email in terms of whether people should respond and who, if anyone, would get fired. NBC News reported that responses to the email will reportedly be fed into an artificial intelligence system to determine whether their jobs are necessary.

    In a significant shift of journalistic power, the White House press team will now decide which journalists and media outlets will make up the White House press pool. Leavitt said legacy outlets will still be allowed to join and participate in the press pool, but the “privilege” will also be extended to “new voices” from “well-deserving outlets”. It builds on the decision to revoke the Associated Press’s full access to presidential events over its continued use of “Gulf of Mexico” as opposed to “Gulf of America”.

    Some 40% of the federal contracts that the Trump administration claims to have canceled as part of its signature cost-cutting program aren’t expected to save the government any money, the administration’s own data shows. Doge last week published an initial list of 1,125 contracts that it terminated in recent weeks across the federal government. Data published on Doge’s “wall of receipts” shows that more than one-third of the contract cancellations, 417 in all, are expected to yield no savings.

    Elon Musk will attend Trump’s first official cabinet meeting on Wednesday, Leavitt confirmed at the White House press briefing.

    Meanwhile, more than 20 civil service employees resigned from Doge, saying they were refusing to use their technical expertise to “dismantle critical public services. “We swore to serve the American people and uphold our oath to the constitution across presidential administrations,” the 21 staffers wrote in a joint resignation letter, a copy of which was obtained by the Associated Press. “However, it has become clear that we can no longer honor those commitments.”

    House speaker Mike Johnson hinted that the planned budget vote might not go ahead this evening. The budget resolution is on thin ice after at least four GOP lawmakers have come out against it, amid internal ideological turmoil in the party over proposed cuts to Medicaid. Given the slim majority in the House, Johnson can’t afford to lose more than one Republican vote, assuming both parties are in full attendance.

    A federal judge in Seattle blocked the Trump administration’s effort to halt the nation’s refugee admissions system. US district judge Jamal Whitehead said in his ruling after the hearing on Tuesday that the president’s actions amounted to an “effective nullification of congressional will” in setting up the nation’s refugee admissions program. “The president has substantial discretion … to suspend refugee admissions,” Whitehead told the parties. “But that authority is not limitless.”

    A US judge extended an order blocking the Trump administration from instituting a sweeping freeze on trillions of dollars in federal funding by pausing grants, loans and other financial support. US district judge Loren AliKhan in Washington wrote that while some funds had become unfrozen since she first temporarily blocked the administration’s spending pause, there remained a risk the administration might again try to shut off funding. The judge said for those reasons she agreed with groups representing nonprofits and small business that a preliminary injunction was necessary blocking a further funding freeze.

    A federal judge in Washington has ordered the Trump administration to pay foreign aid funds to contractors and grant recipients by 11.59pm on Wednesday night, saying there was no sign that it had taken any steps to comply with his earlier order that the funds be unfrozen.

    The Senate confirmed Daniel Driscoll, an Iraq war veteran and adviser to JD Vance, as secretary of the army.
    Donald Trump was scheduled to sign yet another round of executive orders in the Oval Office at 3pm ET today but he’s running behind. We’ll bring you updates as we get it.The White House announcement this morning did not say what topics will be covered or how many will be signed.Since taking office last month Trump has signed 73 executive orders, according to the office of the federal register – that’s more than any president since FDR in 1937.This report is from Reuters.
    A federal judge in Washington has ordered the Trump administration to pay foreign aid funds to contractors and grant recipients by 11.59pm on Wednesday night, saying there was no sign that it had taken any steps to comply with his earlier order that the funds be unfrozen.
    US district judge Amir Ali’s order came in a telephone hearing in a lawsuit brought by organizations that contract with and receive aid from the US Agency for International Development and the State Department. It applies to work done before 13 February, when the judge issued his earlier temporary restraining order.
    It was the third time Ali had ordered the administration officials to release foreign aid funds that were frozen after Donald Trump ordered a 90-day pause on all foreign aid, throwing global humanitarian relief efforts into chaos.
    Plaintiffs in the lawsuit have said they will have to shut down completely if they are not paid soon. They allege that the administration has violated federal law and the US constitution in refusing to pay out the funds and in dismantling USAid.
    The foreign aid agency on Sunday said that all of its staff except certain essential workers would be put on paid administrative leave, and that 1,600 positions in the US would be eliminated.
    You can read more about USAid and what the freeze means for millions of people around the world here:This report is from Reuters.
    A US judge on Tuesday extended an order blocking the Trump administration from instituting a sweeping freeze on trillions of dollars in federal funding by pausing grants, loans and other financial support.
    US district judge Loren AliKhan in Washington wrote that while some funds had become unfrozen since she first temporarily blocked the administration’s spending pause, there remained a risk the administration might again try to shut off funding.
    The judge said for those reasons she agreed with groups representing nonprofits and small business that a preliminary injunction was necessary blocking a further funding freeze.
    “The injunctive relief that defendants fought so hard to deny is the only thing in this case holding potentially catastrophic harm at bay,” she wrote.
    Those groups sued after the White House’s Office of Management and Budget on 27 January issued a memo directing federal agencies to temporarily pause spending on federal financial assistance programs.
    That memo said the freeze was necessary while the administration reviewed grants and loans to ensure they are aligned with Trump’s executive orders, including ones ending diversity, equity and inclusion programs and directing a pause on spending on projects seeking to combat climate change.
    OMB later withdrew that memo after it became the subject of two lawsuits, one before AliKhan and another before a judge in Rhode Island by Democratic state attorneys general. But the plaintiffs argued the memo’s withdrawal did not mean the end of the policy itself.
    They pointed to a social media post on X by White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt shortly after the memo was withdrawn saying: “This is NOT a rescission of the federal funding freeze. It is simply a rescission of the OMB memo.”
    This report is from the Associated Press.
    A federal judge in Seattle has blocked Donald Trump’s effort to halt the nation’s refugee admissions system.The ruling came in a lawsuit brought by major refugee aid groups, who argued that Trump’s executive order suspending the federal refugee resettlement program ran afoul of the system Congress created for moving refugees into the US.Lawyers for the administration argued that Trump’s order was well within his authority to deny entry to foreigners whose admission to the US “would be detrimental to the interests of the United States”.US district judge Jamal Whitehead said in his ruling after the hearing on Tuesday that the president’s actions amounted to an “effective nullification of congressional will” in setting up the nation’s refugee admissions program.“The president has substantial discretion … to suspend refugee admissions,” Whitehead told the parties. “But that authority is not limitless.”Justice Department lawyer August Flentje indicated to the judge that the government would consider whether to file an emergency appeal.The plaintiffs include the International Refugee Assistance Project on behalf of Church World Service, the Jewish refugee resettlement agency HIAS, Lutheran Community Services Northwest, and individual refugees and family members. They said their ability to provide critical services to refugees – including those already in the US – has been severely inhibited by Trump’s order.Some refugees who had been approved to come to the US had their travel canceled on short notice, and families who have waited years to reunite have had to remain apart, the lawsuit said.
    Peter Baker of the New York Times has compared the White House’s decision to take control of the press pool covering the president and its banning the Associated Press from key White House spaces to treatment of the press under the Kremlin. He wrote on X:
    Having served as a Moscow correspondent in the early days of Putin’s reign, this reminds me of how the Kremlin took over its own press pool and made sure that only compliant journalists were given access.
    The message is clear. Given that the White House has already kicked one news organization out of the pool because of coverage it does not like, it is making certain everyone else knows that the rest of us can be barred too if the president does not like our questions or stories.
    Every president of both parties going back generations subscribed to the principle that a president doesn’t pick the press corps that is allowed in the room to ask him questions. Trump has just declared that he will.
    Important to note, though: None of this will stop professional news outlets from covering this president in the same full, fair, tough and unflinching way that we always have. Government efforts to punish disfavored organizations will not stop independent journalism.
    House minority leader Hakeem Jeffries vowed “not one” Democratic vote on the Republican budget proposal that could come to the floor as early as this evening.Jeffries declared from the steps of the US Capitol, surrounded by Democratic lawmakers and advocates:
    Let me be clear, House Democrats will not provide a single vote to this reckless Republican budget. Not one, not one, not one.
    The press conference was intended to be a show of protest against the Republican bill – the legislative vehicle for enacting Trump’s tax cut and immigration agenda. The minority leader is under pressure to stand up to the Republican majority. Activists have keyed in on the possible cuts to Medicaid, the government insurance program for low-income and disabled Americans.Jeffries said:
    The Republican budget represents the largest Medicaid cut in American history.
    Children will be devastated. Families will be devastated. People with disabilities will be devastated. Seniors will be devastated. Hospitals will be devastated, nursing homes will be devastated.
    In an earlier press conference on Tuesday, House Republicans accused Democrats of “defending and even advocating for government waste, fraud and abuse”.At a rally on Capitol Hill, progressives lawmakers and activists railed against Republicans’ plan to enact Donald Trump’s sweeping tax cut and immigration agenda. A vote could take place as early as this evening, according to House Speaker Mike Johnson.Opposition to the House budget resolution has been steadily building over the last few weeks. During last week’s recess, constituent anger over Republicans’ proposed cuts to Medicaid and other social safety net programs as well as Elon Musk’s efforts to dismantle the federal government boiled over at town halls and Congressional offices across the country.At the Capitol Hill protest, called Tax the Greedy Billionaires and headlined by MoveOn and Indivisible, Senator Chris Murphy assailed the Republican budget bill as the “most massive transfer of wealth and resources from poor people and the middle class to the billionaires and corporations in the history of this country”.He continued:
    You’re talking about $880 billion of cuts to Medicaid. And I get it like $880 billion like, what does that mean? Right? That’s a huge number. Nobody understands. Let me tell you what that means. That means that sick kids die in this country. That means that hospitals in depressed communities and rural communities close their doors, right? That means that drug and addiction treatment centers disappear all across this country.
    Congressman Greg Casar, chair of the Progressive Caucus, compared the moment to the early days of Trump’s first term, when Congressional Republicans, newly in the majority, attempted to repeal the Affordable Care Act. The effort prompted a widespread backlash and ultimately failed in the Senate, with a dramatic thumbs-down vote by the Arizona Republican John McCain.“The American people won and those House Republicans lost,” Casar said. “We’re right back in the same situation, because today, something is happening in America. Americans are rising up to say, ‘We want a government by and for the people, not by and for the billionaires.’”More on opposition to the Trump administration here:Asked why Dan Bongino was named deputy director of the FBI rather than a current special agent, as is normal practice, Leavitt claims Bongino got the job because he understands the depth of “past corruption” at the agency.The press briefing is over now. More

  • in

    House Republicans to vote on spending deal that could slash Medicaid funding

    House Republicans are planning to vote on Tuesday on a spending blueprint central to Donald Trump’s agenda, but the package faces potential derailment over nearly $1tn in Medicaid cuts that could fracture their slim majority.The fiscal year 2025 proposal includes approximately $4.5tn in tax cuts alongside increased spending for defense and border security. To offset these costs, the plan tasks congressional committees with finding about $2tn in spending reductions over the next decade.But some lawmakers are warning that the budget could include an estimated $800bn in potential cuts from Medicaid, a federal program providing healthcare coverage to more than 72 million Americans. Though the resolution doesn’t explicitly target Medicaid, skeptical lawmakers warn there are few alternatives to achieve the $880bn in cuts assigned to the energy and commerce committee.If the budget measure doesn’t pass by the 14 March deadline, the government faces a shutdown – and Democrats are committed to not voting it through.“Let me be clear, House Democrats will not provide a single vote to this reckless Republican budget,” said the House minority leader, Hakeem Jeffries, from the steps of the US Capitol on Tuesday surrounded by Democratic lawmakers and advocates protesting the vote. “Not one, not one, not one.”With Democrats united in opposition, House speaker Mike Johnson’s slim Republican majority cannot afford more than one defection. Several moderate Republicans from vulnerable districts have expressed concerns, particularly those with constituents heavily reliant on Medicaid.Eight House Republicans, including the California representative David Valadao and the New York representative Nicole Malliotakis, warned in a letter to Johnson last week that “slashing Medicaid would have serious consequences, particularly in rural and predominantly Hispanic communities”.The Nebraska Republican Don Bacon, representing a district that backed Kamala Harris as the Democratic presidential candidate in November, has demanded leadership to prove the proposal “won’t overly cut Medicaid”.Opposition to the House budget resolution has been steadily building over the last few weeks. During last week’s recess, constituent anger over Republicans’ proposed cuts to Medicaid and other social safety net programs as well as Elon Musk’s efforts to dismantle the federal government boiled over at town halls and congressional offices across the country.At an earlier Capitol Hill rally on Tuesday, Senator Chris Murphy assailed the Republican budget bill as the “most massive transfer of wealth and resources from poor people and the middle class to the billionaires and corporations in the history of this country”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionHe continued: “You’re talking about $880bn of cuts to Medicaid … That means that sick kids die in this country. That means that hospitals in depressed communities and rural communities close their doors, right? That means that drug and addiction treatment centers disappear all across this country.”The vote comes after the Senate passed its own budget bill last week – a less contentious one that Trump does not support as much as the House’s. House leadership must now navigate competing demands within their caucus: some members want deeper tax cuts while others seek steeper spending reductions or protection for social programs.“There may be more than one [defector], but we’ll get there,” Johnson said on Monday. “We’re going to get everybody there. This is a prayer request. Just pray this through for us because it is very high stakes, and everybody knows that.” More

  • in

    Mitch McConnell is retiring from US politics. Good riddance | Moira Donegan

    You would think that this is exactly what Mitch McConnell wanted. McConnell, the 83-year-old Kentucky senator – who announced last week that he will retire in 2026 and not seek an eighth term – is one of the most influential Republicans in the history of the party. But he has in recent weeks expressed dissent and discontent with the direction of the Republican party. He voted against some of Donald Trump’s cabinet appointees, refusing, for example, to cast a vote for the confirmation of the anti-diversity campaigner and alleged rapist and drunk Pete Hegseth.He has also voiced some tepid and belated opposition to Republicans’ extremist agenda, citing his own experience as a survivor of childhood polio as a reason for his opposition to Republican attacks on vaccines. But the Republican party that McConnell is now shaking his head at is the one that he created. He has no one but himself to blame.Over his 40 years in the US Senate, with almost two decades as the Republican leader in the chamber, McConnell has become one of the most influential senators in the nation’s history, radically reshaping Congress, and his party, in the process. Few have done more to erode the conditions of representative democracy in America, and few have done more to enable the rise of oligarchy, autocracy and reactionary, minoritarian governance that is insulated from electoral check. McConnell remade America in his own image. It’s an ugly sight.In the end, McConnell will be remembered for one thing only: his enabling of Trump. In 2021, after Trump refused to respect the results of the 2020 election and sent a violent mob of his supporters to the Capitol to stop the certification of the election results by violent force, McConnell had an opportunity to put a stop to Trump’s authoritarian attacks on the constitutional order.McConnell never liked Trump, and by that point, he didn’t even need him: he had already won what would be his last term. He could have voted to convict Trump at his second impeachment; if he had, it’s likely that other Republican senators would have been willing to do so, too, and that Trump could have been convicted and prevented from returning to power. He didn’t. McConnell voted to acquit, and to allow Trump to rise again. If the next four years of Trump’s restoration are anything like the first 30 days have been, then that will turn out to have been the singularly significant decision of McConnell’s career.But McConnell had been working against American democracy long before Trump sent the mob to ransack the Senate chamber and smear feces on the walls. It was McConnell, after all, who is most responsible for the current campaign finance regime, which has allowed unlimited amounts of dark money spending to infiltrate politics – making elections more influenceable, and politicians’ favor more purchasable, in ways that tilt public policy away from the people’s interests and towards those of the billionaire patron class.Such arrangements of funding and favors are not consistent with democracy; they change politicians’ loyalties, diminish the influence of voters, diminish constituents and their needs to a mere afterthought or communications problem in the minds of elected representatives. This was by design, and it is how McConnell liked it. In Washington, he operated at the center of a vast funding network, moving millions and millions of dollars towards those Republicans who did his bidding, and away from those who bucked his authority.It was partly his control over this spiderlike web of wealthy funders that allowed McConnell to exert such control over his caucus. It is hard to remember these days, when Republicans pick so many fights with each other, that the party was once feared for their discipline. McConnell was able to snuff out any meaningful dissent and policy difference in public among Republican senators with the threat of his deep-pocketed friends, always ready to fund a primary challenger. The lockstep from Republicans allowed McConnell to pursue what he viewed as his twin goals: stopping any Democratic agenda in Congress, and furthering the conservative capture of the federal courts.As Senate Republican leader during the Obama years, McConnell pursued a strategy of maximal procedural obstructionism. His mandate was that no Republican in the Senate would vote for any Obama agenda item – that there would be no compromise, no negotiation, no horse trading, no debate, but only a stonewalled total rejection of all Democratic initiatives. This has become the singular way that Republicans operate in the Senate; it was McConnell who made it that way.The underlying assumption of McConnell’s strategy of total opposition and refusal was that Democrats, even when they win elections, do not have a legitimate right to govern. In practice, the authorities of the presidency or congressional majorities expand and contract based on which party is in power: Republicans can achieve a great deal more in the White House, or with control of Congress, than Democrats can.In part this is because of McConnell’s procedural approach, which posits bending the rules to suit Republican interests when they are in power, and enforcing the rules to the point of functionally arresting legislative business when Democrats take the majority. This, too, is antithetical to democracy: constitutional powers can’t be limited for one party, and expanded for another, so that voters are only fully represented if they vote one way. The strategy of obstructionism functionally ended Congress as a legislative body in all but the most extreme of circumstances. What was most the most representative, electorally responsive, and important branch of the federal government has receded to the status of a bit player, and policymaking power has been abdicated to the executive and the courts. That’s McConnell’s doing, too.Maybe it was part of McConnell’s indifference to the integrity of democracy meant that he refused, during the Obama era, to confirm any of the president’s judicial nominees. Vacancies on the federal courts accumulated, with seats sitting empty and cases piling up for the overworked judges who remained. But McConnell’s seizure of the judicial appointment power from the executive was only in effect when the president was a Democrat; when Republicans were in power, he jammed the courts full of far-right judges.When Antonin Scalia died in 2016, under Obama, McConnell held the US supreme court seat open for almost a year, hoping that Trump would win the 2016 election and get the chance to appoint a right-wing replacement. When Ruth Bader Ginsburg died, just a few weeks before the 2020 election, McConnell jammed through the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett. His tendencies, then, were always authoritarian: power, in his view, did not belong to those the people elected to represent them. It belonged, always, to Republicans – no matter what the voters had to say about it.Mitch McConnell is an old man. In 2026, when he finally leaves office, he will be 84. He will not have to live in the world that he made, the one where what was left of American democracy is finally snatched away. But we will. Whenever you see a horror of anti-democratic rule – whenever cronyism is rewarded over competence, whenever cruelty is inflicted over dignity, whenever the constitution is flouted, mocked, or treated as a mere annoyance to be ignored by men with no respect for the law or for you – remember Mitch McConnell. You have him to thank.

    Moira Donegan is a Guardian US columnist More

  • in

    Republicans put the sick in sycophancy as they compete to fawn over Trump

    If proof were needed that Donald Trump’s cult of personality has never been stronger, it comes in the inventive ways Republican members of Congress have spent his first month in office trying to lionise him. Welcome to the sycophancy stakes.On 23 January the congressman Addison McDowell of North Carolina introduced legislation to rename Washington Dulles international airport as Donald J Trump international airport.“We have entered the golden age of America largely thanks to President Trump’s leadership,” McDowell said. Alluding to Ronald Reagan Washington National airport, he added: “It is only right that the two airports servicing our nation’s capital are duly honored and respected by two of the best presidents to have the honor of serving our great nation.”Not to be outdone, on the same day the Tennessee congressman Andy Ogles proposed a House of Representatives joint resolution to amend the constitution so that a president can serve up to three terms – provided that they did not serve two consecutive terms before running for a third.This would continue to bar Bill Clinton, George W Bush and Barack Obama from running again but enable Trump, elected in 2016 and 2024, to seek a third term in 2028.Ogles explained: “He has proven himself to be the only figure in modern history capable of reversing our nation’s decay and restoring America to greatness, and he must be given the time necessary to accomplish that goal.”On 28 January Anna Paulina Luna, a congresswoman from Florida, put forward legislation to arrange the carving of Trump’s face on the Mount Rushmore national memorial in South Dakota. Such a move would put him alongside the former presidents George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt.Luna said: “President Trump’s bold leadership and steadfast dedication to America’s greatness have cemented his place in history. Mount Rushmore, a timeless symbol of our nation’s freedom and strength, deserves to reflect his towering legacy – a legacy further solidified by the powerful start to his second term.”On 14 February the New York congresswoman Claudia Tenney introduced legislation to officially designate 14 June as a federal holiday to commemorate Trump’s birthday, along with the date in 1777 when the US approved the design for its first national flag. The holiday would be known as “Trump’s Birthday and Flag Day”.Tenney explained: “Just as George Washington’s birthday is codified as a federal holiday, this bill will add Trump’s birthday to this list, recognizing him as the founder of America’s Golden Age. Additionally, as our nation prepares to celebrate its 250th anniversary, we should create a new federal holiday honoring the American flag and all that it represents.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIt is far from certain that any of the bills will pass. During the last Congress, a proposal to rename Dulles, which is currently named after John Foster Dulles, an influential secretary of state during the cold war, was referred to the House committee on transportation and infrastructure but failed to gain traction. Many conservatives would be reluctant to tamper with an American icon such as Mount Rushmore, which took 14 years to carve and was completed in 1941.Ogles’s stunt faces the biggest obstacle of all. A constitutional amendment must receive a two-thirds majority vote in both the House and Senate. If that is achieved, three quarters of the states – 38 – must ratify the amendment for it to become part of the constitution.Still, the unsubtle exercises in ring-kissing and genuflection demonstrate that, buoyed by election success, Trump’s control over the Republican party is now all but absolute. From Elon Musk’s so-called “department of government efficiency” to the upending of US policy on Ukraine, few Republicans are willing to speak out against the president-cum-monarch.“We’ve gone from ‘Make America Great Again’ to make ‘America Great Britain Again’,” said Kurt Bardella, a Democratic strategist and former Republican congressional aide. “You might as well have an image of Donald Trump staring at a portrait of King George and then turning around and putting a crown on his head, a robe around his suit and a sceptre in his hand.” More

  • in

    Trump blindsides Senate Republicans by endorsing rival House budget plan

    Donald Trump has derailed Senate Republicans’ budget strategy by endorsing a competing House option, leaving GOP leaders scrambling to save their agenda just weeks before a potential government shutdown.The president’s surprise intervention came just hours after Senate Republicans moved to advance their own two-track proposal, as he declared instead that he wants “ONE BIG BEAUTIFUL BILL” through the House’s reconciliation process.“Unlike the Lindsey Graham version of the very important Legislation currently being discussed, the House Resolution implements my FULL America First Agenda,” Trump posted on Truth Social.The announcement forces Senate Republicans to reconsider their carefully planned schedule of votes this week on a slimmer package that was meant to cover defense, border security and energy provisions.While the Senate majority leader, John Thune, admitted being blindsided, he told reporters his side was still full steam ahead on a Thursday vote for its version of a bill.“If the House can produce one big, beautiful bill, we’re prepared to work with them to get that across the finish line,” Thune said. “But we believe that the president also likes optionality.”The House proposal Trump is backing would add $4.5tn to the deficit through tax cuts while demanding enormous cuts to federal benefits programs. Under the plan’s strict rules, Republicans must either slash $2tn from mandatory programs (which could include Medicare, Medicaid and food assistance) or scale back their proposed tax breaks by an equal amount.The timing is already tight, as Congress is barreling down a 14 March deadline to pass the bill that would avoid a shutdown forcing hundreds of thousands of federal employees to go without pay. Although Republicans control both chambers, the majorities are so thin they will need Democratic votes to pass any funding measure.In the Senate, where Republicans hold 53 seats, at least 60 votes are needed to overcome a filibuster. The House speaker, Mike Johnson, working with a slim 218-215 majority, faces similar math problems and internal drama.Johnson immediately claimed victory over Trump’s endorsement of the House plan, saying on X that House Republicans are “working to deliver President Trump’s FULL agenda – not just a small part of it”.But his proposal faces resistance from Republicans worried about proposed entitlement cuts – cuts Trump himself rejected on Tuesday on Fox News, saying: “Medicare, Medicaid – none of that stuff is going to be touched.”“If a bill is put in front of me that guts the benefits my neighbors rely on, I will not vote for it,” the freshman Republican congressman Rob Bresnahan said on X.The White House dispatched the vice-president, JD Vance, to meet Senate Republicans on Wednesday afternoon, attempting to smooth tensions as both chambers grapple with how to advance Trump’s agenda. But it’s clear that some senators will be hard to convince.“I’m not sure [the House budget could] pass the House or that it could pass the Senate,” the Wisconsin senator Ron Johnson told reporters.The House remains in recess until next week, leaving Senate Republicans alone on Capitol Hill to plot their next move. More

  • in

    We are on the road for democracy and justice | Bernie Sanders

    I will be doing town meetings in Omaha, Nebraska, this Friday night and Iowa City, Iowa, on Saturday morning. Further, in the coming weeks and months, I and other progressives will be holding grassroots events from coast to coast.Why, at this moment, are we doing town meetings around the country – especially in conservative areas? The answer is obvious.Trumpism will not be defeated by politicians inside the DC beltway. It will only be defeated by millions of Americans, in every state in this country, coming together in a strong, grassroots movement which says no to oligarchy, no to authoritarianism, no to kleptocracy, no to massive cuts in programs that working people desperately need, no to huge tax breaks for the richest people in our country. And that’s what these events are about.Further, there are a number of congressional districts where Republicans won by only a small number of votes. With the Republican party in the House having only a three-vote majority we can defeat draconian, anti-working-class legislation if just two Republican members of Congress vote no. And they will vote no if we rally their constituents to demand that they vote no.Can Trumpism be defeated? Absolutely! But, if we’re going to make that happen, we need to know exactly what we’re up against and how we can best go forward. Here’s just some of what we need to know:Trumpism has an unlimited amount of money to throw into its efforts. Elon Musk, the wealthiest man on earth, put more than $270m into Trump’s campaign, a tiny portion of his fortune. Other multibillionaires will join Musk in spending whatever it takes.Trumpism has significant control over large parts of the media from which millions of Americans get their information. Fox and Musk’s platform X, among others, are not normal media outlets. Their basic function is not to cover the “news” but to spread rightwing extremist ideology.Trumpism is utilizing the concept of the “big lie” in a way that has never, in this country, been seen. Day after day, blatantly dishonest statements and conspiracy theories are propagated – and repeated over and over and over again.Trumpism does not believe in democracy or the rule of law. Trump recently posted: “He who saves his Country does not violate any Law.” In other words, Trump believes that he can do anything he wants for any reason. He can ignore Congress or the courts. He is above the law.But, while Trump consolidates power into his own hands, there is another reality going on.Today, 60% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck; millions are earning starvation wages; 85 million are uninsured or under-insured; young people are unable to afford the cost of college; 25% of seniors live on $15,000 a year or less; we have the highest rate of childhood poverty of almost any major country on earth, and we have a major shortage in low-income and affordable housing.Oh, and by the way, we’re losing the struggle against the climate crisis – an existential threat to the future of the planet.And here’s the kicker. While Trump moves us away from democracy, while the middle class continues to decline, the wealthiest people in the country have never ever had it so good. Today, the three major oligarchs, Musk, Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg, are worth $905bn – that is more wealth than the bottom half of American society – 170 million people. And, incredibly, since Trump’s election their wealth has grown by $217bn.Our struggle, the American people’s struggle, is to protect democracy and the rule of law. Equally important, we must end oligarchy and create an economy that works for all, not just the few. We are the wealthiest country on earth and AI, robotics and other new technologies will only make our country wealthier. It is absurd, unjust and inhumane that virtually all of that new wealth being created goes to the people who need it the least.While Trump now “floods the zone” and occupies most of the political oxygen, it is imperative that we never lose sight of the progressive vision – a nation and world based on human cooperation and compassion, not greed and a “survival of the fittest” mentality. What we are fighting for is not “utopian”, or unachievable. Much of it already exists in other countries, and poll after poll shows that it is exactly what the American people want.In the richest country in the history of the world we must establish that:

    Healthcare is a human right and must be available to all regardless of income.

    Every worker in America is entitled to earn a decent income. We must raise the minimum wage to a living wage and make it easier for workers to join unions.

    We must have the best public educational system in the world, from childcare to vocational training, to graduate school – available to all.

    We must address the housing crisis and build the millions of units of low-income and affordable housing that we desperately need.

    We must create millions of good paying jobs as we lead the world in combating the existential threat of climate change.

    We must abolish all forms of bigotry.
    Not only must we continue to fight for a nation based on the principles of economic, social, racial and environmental justice, we must also lead the effort against Trump‘s reactionary legislative agenda.In the coming weeks the Republicans in Congress will be bringing forward a major piece of legislation, a “reconciliation” bill, that encapsulates the value system of greed and their obedience to oligarchy. It is the economic essence of Trumpism.At a time of unprecedented income and wealth inequality, this legislation will provide trillions of dollars in tax breaks to the richest people in our country. It will make the rich even richer. At a time when the working class of this country is struggling to put food on the table and pay for housing, this legislation will make savage cuts to Medicaid, housing, nutrition, education and other basic needs. It will make the poor even poorer.We cannot allow this to happen. This legislation is enormously unpopular. It is exactly what the American people do not want. It must not be passed by Congress.It must be defeated and we can defeat it.This is a perilous moment in American history. Let us go forward together.

    Bernie Sanders is a US senator, and chair of the health education labor and pensions committee. He represents the state of Vermont and is the longest-serving independent in the history of Congress More

  • in

    ‘The path forward is clear’: how Trump taking office has ‘turbocharged’ climate accountability efforts

    Donald Trump’s re-election has “turbocharged” climate accountability efforts including laws which aim to force greenhouse gas emitters to pay damages for fueling dangerous global warming, say activists.These “make polluters pay” laws, led by blue states’ attorneys general, and climate accountability lawsuits will be a major front for climate litigation in the coming months and years. They are being challenged by red states and the fossil fuel industry, which are also fighting against accountability-focused climate lawsuits waged by governments and youth environmentalists.On day one of his second term, the US president affirmed his loyalty to the oil industry with a spate of executive actions to roll back environmental protections and a pledge to “drill, baby, drill”. The ferocity of his anti-environment agenda has inspired unprecedented interest in climate accountability, said Jamie Henn, director of the anti-oil and gas non-profit Fossil Free Media.“I think Trump’s election has turbocharged the ‘make polluters pay’ movement,” said Henn, who has been a leader in the campaign for a decade.More state lawmakers are writing legislative proposals to force oil companies to pay for climate disasters, while law firms are helping governments sue the industry. And youth activists are working on a new legal challenge to the Trump administration’s pro-fossil fuel policies.Industry interests, however, are also attempting to kill those accountability efforts – and Trump may embolden them.The state of Vermont in May passed a first-of-its-kind law holding fossil fuel firms financially responsible for climate damages and New York passed a similar measure in December.The policies force oil companies to pay for climate impacts to which their emissions have contributed. Known as “climate superfund” bills, they are loosely modeled on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s Superfund program.Similar bills are being considered in Maryland, New Jersey, Massachusetts and now Rhode Island, where a measure was introduced last week. A policy will also soon be introduced in California, where recent deadly wildfires have revived the call for the proposal after one was weighed last year.Minnesota and Oregon lawmakers are also considering introducing climate superfund acts. And since inauguration day, activists and officials in a dozen other states have expressed interest in doing the same, said Henn.“I think people are really latching on to this message and this approach right now,” Henn said. “It finally gives people a way to respond to climate disasters, and it’s something that we can do without the federal government.”View image in fullscreenProgressives introduced a federal climate superfund act last year. But with Republicans in control of the White House and both branches of Congress, it has a “less than zero chance of passing”, said Michael Gerrard, the faculty director of the Sabin center for climate change law at Columbia University.The state laws are already facing pushback in the courts. This month, 22 red states and two oil trade groups sued to block New York’s climate superfund law.“This bill is an attempt by New York to step into the shoes of the federal government to regulate something that they have absolutely no business regulating,” West Virginia’s attorney general, John B McCuskey, who led the suit and whose state is a top coal producer, told Fox News.In late December, trade groups also filed a lawsuit against Vermont’s climate superfund act which, if successful, could potentially topple New York’s law.Fossil fuel interests were expected to challenge the climate superfund laws even if Kamala Harris was elected president and have been boosted by Trump’s win. “I think [they] feel like they have more of a shot with the executive backing them,” said Cassidy DiPaola, spokesperson for the Make Polluters Pay campaign.It “would not be shocking” if Trump’s justice department were to file briefs in support of plaintiffs fighting the laws, said Gerrard, which could tip the scales in their favor.More legal challenges may also be on the way, and if additional states pass similar policies, they are expected to face similar lawsuits. But Henn says he is confident the laws will prevail.“I think Republicans think that they’re going to be able to just scare off local legislators or local attorneys general from pursuing a polluter pays agenda, but I think they’re wrong,” he said. “We have widespread public support for this approach. People don’t like the fossil fuel industry.”Over the last decade, states and municipalities have also brought more than 30 lawsuits against fossil fuel interests, accusing them of intentionally covering up the climate risks of their products while seeking damages for climate impacts.As Trump’s pro-fossil fuel policies move the US in “precisely the wrong direction” on the climate crisis, they will “surely inspire yet more litigation”, said Gerrard. Michigan has announced plans to file a suit in the coming months, and more are likely to be rolled out this year.The cases face a formidable opponent in the fossil fuel industry, which has long attempted to fend off the lawsuits. Since January, courts have dismissed litigation filed by New Jersey, New York and a Maryland city and county, saying the states lacked jurisdiction to hear the cases.Other decisions have been positive for the plaintiffs. In three decisions since spring 2023, the supreme court turned down petitions from the fossil fuel industry to move the venue of the lawsuits from the state courts where they were originally filed, to federal courts which are seen as more friendly to the industry.Last week, a court in Colorado heard arguments over the same issue in a lawsuit filed by the city of Boulder. The outcome will have major implications for the future of the challenge.Trump has pledged to put an end to the wave of lawsuits, which he has called “frivolous”. During his first term, his administration filed influential briefs in the cases supporting the oil companies – something his justice department could do again. “It’s clear where their allegiances are,” said Gerrard. “And if they file briefs that would be good for the defendants.”Alyssa Johl, vice-president and general counsel of the Center for Climate Integrity, which tracks and supports the lawsuits, said: “There is still a long road ahead for these efforts, but the path forward is clear.”“As communities grapple with the increasingly devastating consequences of big oil’s decades-long deception, the need for accountability is greater than ever,” she said.Youth-led litigationAnother climate-focused legal movement that is gaining steam: youth-led challenges against state and federal government agencies, for allegedly violating constitutional rights with pro-fossil fuel policies.Trump’s second term presents an important moment for these lawsuits, said Julia Olson, founder of the law firm Our Children’s Trust, which brought the litigation. While some lawyers will fight each rollback individually, her strategy could “secure systemic change”, she said.View image in fullscreenOn Wednesday, a US judge rejected an Our Children’s Trust suit filed by California youth against the EPA, saying the challengers failed to show that they had been injured by the federal body. Olson said the judge “misapplied the law”.That same day, the most well-known Our Children’s Trust case, Juliana v United States – in which 21 young people sued the federal government – suffered a blow. In December, the plaintiffs filed a petition with the supreme court to send the case back to trial after it was tossed out. The US solicitor general has now filed a brief opposing their petition; Olson said it “mischaracterized” the case.Our Children’s Trust’s lawsuits have in other instances seen major victories. In December, Montana’s supreme court upheld a landmark climate ruling in favor of young plaintiffs, which said the state was violating youths’ constitutional right to a clean environment by permitting fossil fuel projects with no regard for global warming.That victory in a pro-fossil fuel red state, said Olson, inspires hope that children could win a lawsuit against a conservative, oil and gas-friendly federal government.She is working on another lawsuit against the Trump administration, whose “brazen” anti-environment agenda could bolster the challengers’ arguments, she said.“These policies will kill children … and by making his agenda obvious, I think that he helps us make that clear.” More