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.
Reproductive rights defenders march during the Rally for Abortion Justice in Washington, D.C. on October 2, 2021. (Photo: Kisha Bari/Women's March/Twitter)
As the future of reproductive rights in the United States is threatened by the U.S. Supreme Court's right-wing supermajority and a wave of anti-choice laws passed by states across the nation, some Democrat-led states are taking proactive steps to safeguard the right to choose in ways that go above and beyond affirmative legislation.
"In my mind, there should be no question where Vermont stands with regard to its core values and fundamental rights... they need to be enshrined in our state constitution."
This month, after upholding a Texas law banning abortions after six weeks of pregnancy--with no exceptions for rape or incest, and empowering vigilantes to enforce the statute--the Supreme Court heard arguments inDobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, a case that the Center for Reproductive Rights said "will decide the fate of abortion rights in the U.S."
With a 6-3 conservative supermajority--thanks largely to the appointment of three anti-choice justices by former President Donald Trump--and with a dozen states having already enacted so-called "trigger laws" that would severely restrict or ban abortions if Roe v. Wade is overturned, reproductive rights advocates fear the worst. But they are also taking action.
"There is a lot of work to be done in order to shore up abortion rights and access," Elizabeth Nash, a state policy analyst with the pro-choice research group Guttmacher Institute, told the Associated Press.
In California, Gov. Gavin Newsom, state lawmakers, reproductive healthcare providers, advocacy groups, and others have joined forces in a bid to make the Golden State an abortion refuge in the event of a Roe overturn.
Predicting a wave of hundreds of thousands of people seeking the medical procedure if it is banned elsewhere, Newsom, a Democrat, said earlier this month that "we'll be a sanctuary."
"We are looking at ways to support that inevitability and looking at ways to expand our protections," he added. That means possibly funding travel, lodging, healthcare, and other expenses for people who choose to undergo abortions, according to a recent report from the California Future of Abortion Council, a group launched by the governor.
Vermont, which along with Oregon is the only state to pass laws affirming reproductive rights throughout pregnancy, is aiming to go even further. A proposed amendment to the state constitution--Proposal 5, or the Reproductive Liberty Amendment--easily passed both houses of the Democrat-dominated state Legislature in 2019.
Under Vermont law, lawmakers must approve a constitutional amendment during two successive legislative sessions with an election in between. The state House--which passed the bill by a vote of 106-38 in May 2019--is expected to vote on the measure next month.
\u201cIf the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, over a dozen states will immediately restrict or outright ban all abortions \u2013 with more to follow.\n\nWe\u2019ve got a big fight ahead of us, and we\u2019re not backing down. We need to protect our right to an abortion.\nhttps://t.co/rAcEqaHSmm\u201d— Women's March (@Women's March) 1640732727
Proposal 5 affirms that "the right to reproductive liberty is central to the exercise of personal autonomy and involves decisions people should be able to make free from compulsion of the state," and that "enshrining this right in the constitution is critical to ensuring equal protection and treatment under the law and upholding the right of all people to health, dignity, independence, and freedom."
"In my mind, there should be no question where Vermont stands with regard to its core values and fundamental rights," state Rep. Ann Pugh (D-59) told the Associated Press. "And for those rights and responsibilities and values to be protected more definitively, they need to be enshrined in our state constitution."
"I think there's been a sense of complacency. I think this is a wake-up call. This is a clarion call to all of us."
Lucy Leriche, Planned Parenthood Vermont Action Fund's vice president of public affairs, toldVT Digger earlier this month that three years ago, many Vermonters questioned the need for a constitutional amendment to protect reproductive rights in one of the nation's most progressive states. And in 2019, Vermont voters approved Act 47, a law which "recognizes an individual's fundamental right to reproductive choice."
However, Leriche noted that laws can be overturned, and with Roe imperiled, she said "the stars are aligned" for action.
"I think there's been a sense of complacency," she said. "I think this is a wake-up call. This is a clarion call to all of us. And I think people are activated and waking up and realizing that this is not something we can take for granted."
"I kind of can't believe that we're here after nearly a half a century of this," Leriche added, "this right being established and reaffirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court, that we're actually in a moment where our constitution has been politicized to the point where we are looking at taking away a fundamental right that people have had for nearly a half a century."
Related Content
While Democrat-led states are taking action to affirm and expand abortion rights, advocates are also pressuring the U.S. Senate to codify Roe at the federal level by passing the House-approved Women's Health Protection Act--even if it requires reforming or abolishing the filibuster.
Trump and Musk are on an unconstitutional rampage, aiming for virtually every corner of the federal government. These two right-wing billionaires are targeting nurses, scientists, teachers, daycare providers, judges, veterans, air traffic controllers, and nuclear safety inspectors. No one is safe. The food stamps program, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are next. It’s an unprecedented disaster and a five-alarm fire, but there will be a reckoning. The people did not vote for this. The American people do not want this dystopian hellscape that hides behind claims of “efficiency.” Still, in reality, it is all a giveaway to corporate interests and the libertarian dreams of far-right oligarchs like Musk. Common Dreams is playing a vital role by reporting day and night on this orgy of corruption and greed, as well as what everyday people can do to organize and fight back. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover issues the corporate media never will, but we can only continue with our readers’ support. |
As the future of reproductive rights in the United States is threatened by the U.S. Supreme Court's right-wing supermajority and a wave of anti-choice laws passed by states across the nation, some Democrat-led states are taking proactive steps to safeguard the right to choose in ways that go above and beyond affirmative legislation.
"In my mind, there should be no question where Vermont stands with regard to its core values and fundamental rights... they need to be enshrined in our state constitution."
This month, after upholding a Texas law banning abortions after six weeks of pregnancy--with no exceptions for rape or incest, and empowering vigilantes to enforce the statute--the Supreme Court heard arguments inDobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, a case that the Center for Reproductive Rights said "will decide the fate of abortion rights in the U.S."
With a 6-3 conservative supermajority--thanks largely to the appointment of three anti-choice justices by former President Donald Trump--and with a dozen states having already enacted so-called "trigger laws" that would severely restrict or ban abortions if Roe v. Wade is overturned, reproductive rights advocates fear the worst. But they are also taking action.
"There is a lot of work to be done in order to shore up abortion rights and access," Elizabeth Nash, a state policy analyst with the pro-choice research group Guttmacher Institute, told the Associated Press.
In California, Gov. Gavin Newsom, state lawmakers, reproductive healthcare providers, advocacy groups, and others have joined forces in a bid to make the Golden State an abortion refuge in the event of a Roe overturn.
Predicting a wave of hundreds of thousands of people seeking the medical procedure if it is banned elsewhere, Newsom, a Democrat, said earlier this month that "we'll be a sanctuary."
"We are looking at ways to support that inevitability and looking at ways to expand our protections," he added. That means possibly funding travel, lodging, healthcare, and other expenses for people who choose to undergo abortions, according to a recent report from the California Future of Abortion Council, a group launched by the governor.
Vermont, which along with Oregon is the only state to pass laws affirming reproductive rights throughout pregnancy, is aiming to go even further. A proposed amendment to the state constitution--Proposal 5, or the Reproductive Liberty Amendment--easily passed both houses of the Democrat-dominated state Legislature in 2019.
Under Vermont law, lawmakers must approve a constitutional amendment during two successive legislative sessions with an election in between. The state House--which passed the bill by a vote of 106-38 in May 2019--is expected to vote on the measure next month.
\u201cIf the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, over a dozen states will immediately restrict or outright ban all abortions \u2013 with more to follow.\n\nWe\u2019ve got a big fight ahead of us, and we\u2019re not backing down. We need to protect our right to an abortion.\nhttps://t.co/rAcEqaHSmm\u201d— Women's March (@Women's March) 1640732727
Proposal 5 affirms that "the right to reproductive liberty is central to the exercise of personal autonomy and involves decisions people should be able to make free from compulsion of the state," and that "enshrining this right in the constitution is critical to ensuring equal protection and treatment under the law and upholding the right of all people to health, dignity, independence, and freedom."
"In my mind, there should be no question where Vermont stands with regard to its core values and fundamental rights," state Rep. Ann Pugh (D-59) told the Associated Press. "And for those rights and responsibilities and values to be protected more definitively, they need to be enshrined in our state constitution."
"I think there's been a sense of complacency. I think this is a wake-up call. This is a clarion call to all of us."
Lucy Leriche, Planned Parenthood Vermont Action Fund's vice president of public affairs, toldVT Digger earlier this month that three years ago, many Vermonters questioned the need for a constitutional amendment to protect reproductive rights in one of the nation's most progressive states. And in 2019, Vermont voters approved Act 47, a law which "recognizes an individual's fundamental right to reproductive choice."
However, Leriche noted that laws can be overturned, and with Roe imperiled, she said "the stars are aligned" for action.
"I think there's been a sense of complacency," she said. "I think this is a wake-up call. This is a clarion call to all of us. And I think people are activated and waking up and realizing that this is not something we can take for granted."
"I kind of can't believe that we're here after nearly a half a century of this," Leriche added, "this right being established and reaffirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court, that we're actually in a moment where our constitution has been politicized to the point where we are looking at taking away a fundamental right that people have had for nearly a half a century."
Related Content
While Democrat-led states are taking action to affirm and expand abortion rights, advocates are also pressuring the U.S. Senate to codify Roe at the federal level by passing the House-approved Women's Health Protection Act--even if it requires reforming or abolishing the filibuster.
As the future of reproductive rights in the United States is threatened by the U.S. Supreme Court's right-wing supermajority and a wave of anti-choice laws passed by states across the nation, some Democrat-led states are taking proactive steps to safeguard the right to choose in ways that go above and beyond affirmative legislation.
"In my mind, there should be no question where Vermont stands with regard to its core values and fundamental rights... they need to be enshrined in our state constitution."
This month, after upholding a Texas law banning abortions after six weeks of pregnancy--with no exceptions for rape or incest, and empowering vigilantes to enforce the statute--the Supreme Court heard arguments inDobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, a case that the Center for Reproductive Rights said "will decide the fate of abortion rights in the U.S."
With a 6-3 conservative supermajority--thanks largely to the appointment of three anti-choice justices by former President Donald Trump--and with a dozen states having already enacted so-called "trigger laws" that would severely restrict or ban abortions if Roe v. Wade is overturned, reproductive rights advocates fear the worst. But they are also taking action.
"There is a lot of work to be done in order to shore up abortion rights and access," Elizabeth Nash, a state policy analyst with the pro-choice research group Guttmacher Institute, told the Associated Press.
In California, Gov. Gavin Newsom, state lawmakers, reproductive healthcare providers, advocacy groups, and others have joined forces in a bid to make the Golden State an abortion refuge in the event of a Roe overturn.
Predicting a wave of hundreds of thousands of people seeking the medical procedure if it is banned elsewhere, Newsom, a Democrat, said earlier this month that "we'll be a sanctuary."
"We are looking at ways to support that inevitability and looking at ways to expand our protections," he added. That means possibly funding travel, lodging, healthcare, and other expenses for people who choose to undergo abortions, according to a recent report from the California Future of Abortion Council, a group launched by the governor.
Vermont, which along with Oregon is the only state to pass laws affirming reproductive rights throughout pregnancy, is aiming to go even further. A proposed amendment to the state constitution--Proposal 5, or the Reproductive Liberty Amendment--easily passed both houses of the Democrat-dominated state Legislature in 2019.
Under Vermont law, lawmakers must approve a constitutional amendment during two successive legislative sessions with an election in between. The state House--which passed the bill by a vote of 106-38 in May 2019--is expected to vote on the measure next month.
\u201cIf the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, over a dozen states will immediately restrict or outright ban all abortions \u2013 with more to follow.\n\nWe\u2019ve got a big fight ahead of us, and we\u2019re not backing down. We need to protect our right to an abortion.\nhttps://t.co/rAcEqaHSmm\u201d— Women's March (@Women's March) 1640732727
Proposal 5 affirms that "the right to reproductive liberty is central to the exercise of personal autonomy and involves decisions people should be able to make free from compulsion of the state," and that "enshrining this right in the constitution is critical to ensuring equal protection and treatment under the law and upholding the right of all people to health, dignity, independence, and freedom."
"In my mind, there should be no question where Vermont stands with regard to its core values and fundamental rights," state Rep. Ann Pugh (D-59) told the Associated Press. "And for those rights and responsibilities and values to be protected more definitively, they need to be enshrined in our state constitution."
"I think there's been a sense of complacency. I think this is a wake-up call. This is a clarion call to all of us."
Lucy Leriche, Planned Parenthood Vermont Action Fund's vice president of public affairs, toldVT Digger earlier this month that three years ago, many Vermonters questioned the need for a constitutional amendment to protect reproductive rights in one of the nation's most progressive states. And in 2019, Vermont voters approved Act 47, a law which "recognizes an individual's fundamental right to reproductive choice."
However, Leriche noted that laws can be overturned, and with Roe imperiled, she said "the stars are aligned" for action.
"I think there's been a sense of complacency," she said. "I think this is a wake-up call. This is a clarion call to all of us. And I think people are activated and waking up and realizing that this is not something we can take for granted."
"I kind of can't believe that we're here after nearly a half a century of this," Leriche added, "this right being established and reaffirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court, that we're actually in a moment where our constitution has been politicized to the point where we are looking at taking away a fundamental right that people have had for nearly a half a century."
Related Content
While Democrat-led states are taking action to affirm and expand abortion rights, advocates are also pressuring the U.S. Senate to codify Roe at the federal level by passing the House-approved Women's Health Protection Act--even if it requires reforming or abolishing the filibuster.
"What Republicans are trying to jam through Congress right now is a level of economic recklessness we’ve never seen before," said a group of Democratic lawmakers.
A new analysis indicates Republicans' plan to extend soon-to-expire provisions of their party's 2017 tax law, as well as their push to tack on additional tax breaks largely benefitting the rich and big corporations, would cost $7 trillion over the next decade, a figure that a group of congressional Democrats called "staggering."
The analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), published on Thursday, updates previous estimates that suggested the GOP effort to extend expiring provisions of the 2017 law would cost $4.6 trillion over a 10-year period. The new assessment shows that extending the law's temporary provisions—which disproportionately favored the wealthy—would cost $5.5 trillion over the next decade.
The projected cost of the GOP agenda balloons to $7 trillion after adding Senate Republicans' call for $1.5 trillion in additional tax cuts in the budget resolution they advanced in a party-line vote on Thursday. The GOP has come under fire for using an accounting trick to claim their proposed tax cuts would have no budgetary impact.
"The Republican handouts to billionaires and corporations will come at a staggering cost, and it's unconscionable that their plan to pay for those handouts includes kicking millions of Americans off their health insurance, hiking the cost of living with tariffs, and driving up child hunger," Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.), and Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.) said in a joint statement issued in response to the CBO figures.
"Even after making painful cuts that will inflict hardship on typical American families, Republicans will still risk sending us into a catastrophic debt spiral that does permanent harm to our economy," the Democrats added. "What Republicans are trying to jam through Congress right now is a level of economic recklessness we've never seen before."
The CBO's updated cost analysis came as President Donald Trump plowed ahead with what's been characterized as the biggest tax hike in U.S. history, one that will hit working-class Americans in the form of price increases on household staples and other goods.
Trump administration officials, not known for providing reliable numbers, have claimed the president's sweeping new tariffs could produce roughly $6 trillion in federal revenue over the next decade. The Trump tariffs have sent financial markets into a tailspin, heightened recession fears, and prompted swift retaliation from targeted nations, including China.
In an appearance on MSNBC on Thursday, Boyle—the top Democrat on the House Budget Committee—said Trump's tariffs represent "the single largest tax increase in American history."
"It's a tax that everyone will pay in this country, based on the goods that they buy," said Boyle. "However, it's also a tax that is highly regressive—the poorest amongst us will end up paying a higher percentage of their income."
The new Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services administrator joins "a team of snake oil salesmen and anti-science flunkies that have already shown disdain for the American people and their health," said one critic.
Echoing a party-line vote by the U.S. Senate Finance Committee last week, the chamber's Republicans on Thursday confirmed President Donald Trump's nominee to head the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, former televison host Dr. Mehmet Oz.
Since Trump nominated Oz—who previously ran as a Republican for a U.S. Senate seat in Pennsylvania—a wide range of critics have argued that the celebrity cardiothoracic surgeon "is profoundly unqualified to lead any part of our healthcare system, let alone an agency as important as CMS," in the words of Robert Weissman, co-president of the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen.
After Thursday's 53-45 vote to confirm Oz, Weissman declared that "Republicans in the Senate continued to just be a rubber stamp for a dangerous agenda that threatens to turn back the clock on healthcare in America."
Weissman warned that "in addition to having significant conflicts of interest, Oz is now poised to help enact the Trump administration's dangerous agenda, which seeks to strip crucial healthcare services through Medicare, Medicaid, and the Affordable Care Act from hundreds of millions of Americans and to use that money to give tax breaks to billionaires."
"As he showed in his confirmation hearing, Oz will also seek to further privatize Medicare, increasing the risk that seniors will receive inferior care and further threatening the long-term health of the Medicare program. We already know that privatized Medicare costs taxpayers nearly $100 billion annually in excess costs," he continued, referring to Medicare Advantage plans.
CMS is part of the Department of Health and Human Services, now led by Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.—who, like Oz, came under fire for his record of dubious claims during the confirmation process. Weissman said that "Dr. Oz is joining a team of snake oil salesmen and anti-science flunkies that have already shown disdain for the American people and their health. This is yet another dark day for healthcare in America under Trump."
In the middle of Trump's tariff disaster, the Senate is voting to confirm quack grifter Dr. Oz to lead the Centers for Medicaid & Medicare Services.
[image or embed]
— Jen Bendery (@jbendery.bsky.social) April 3, 2025 at 12:29 PM
Oz's confirmation came a day after Trump announced globally disruptive tariffs and Senate Republicans unveiled a budget plan that would give the wealthy trillions of dollars in tax cuts at the expense of federal food assistance and healthcare programs.
"While Dr. Oz would rather play coy, this is no hypothetical. Harmful cuts to Medicaid or Medicare are unavoidable in the Trump-Republican budget plan that prioritizes another giant tax break for the president's billionaire and corporate donors," Tony Carrk, executive director of the watchdog group Accountable.US, said ahead of the vote.
"None of Dr. Oz's 'miracle' cures that he's peddled over the years will help seniors when their fundamental health security is ripped away to make the rich richer," Carrk continued. "And while privatizing Medicare may enrich Dr. Oz's family and big insurance friends, it will cost taxpayers far more and leave millions of patients vulnerable to denials of care and higher out-of-pocket costs."
Lee Saunders, president of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), was similarly critical, saying after the vote that "at a time when our population is growing older and the need for access to home care, nursing homes, affordable prescription drugs, and quality medical care has never been greater, Americans deserve better than a snake oil salesman leading the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services."
"Dr. Mehmet Oz has been shilling pseudoscience to line his own pockets. He can't be trusted to defend Medicare and Medicaid from billionaires who want to dismantle and privatize the foundation of affordable healthcare in this country," the union leader added. "AFSCME members—including nurses, home care and childcare providers, social workers and more—will be watching and fighting back against any effort to weaken Medicare and Medicaid. The 147 million seniors, children, Americans with disabilities, and low-income workers who rely on these programs for affordable access to healthcare deserve nothing less."
"While your kids are getting ready for school, kids in Gaza were once against just massacred in one," said one observer.
Israeli airstrikes targeted at least three more school shelters in the Gaza Strip on Thursday, killing dozens of Palestinians and wounding scores of others on a day when local officials said that more than 100 people were slain by occupation forces.
Gaza's Government Media Office said that at least 29 people—including 14 children and five women—were killed and over 100 others were wounded when at least four missiles struck the Dar al-Arqam school complex in the Tuffah neighborhood of eastern Gaza City, where hundreds of Palestinians were sheltering after being forcibly displaced from other parts of the embattled coastal enclave by Israel's 535-day assault.
Al Jazeera reported that "when terrified men, women, and children fled from one school building to another, the bombs followed them," and "when bystanders rushed to help, they too became victims."
A first responder from the Palestine Red Crescent Society—which is reeling from this week's discovery of a mass grave containing the bodies of eight of its members, some of whom had allegedly been bound and executed by Israel Defense Forces (IDF) troops—told Al Jazeera that "we were absolutely shocked by the scale of this massacre," whose victims were "mostly women and children."
Warning: Video contains graphic images of death.
Horrifying scenes following the Dar Al-Arqam School Massacre!#Gaza pic.twitter.com/xOvuq3Zztx
— Dr. Zain Al-Abbadi (@ZainAbbadi11) April 3, 2025
An official from Gaza's Civil Defense, five of whose members were also found in the mass grave on Sunday, said: "What's going on here is a wake-up call to the entire world. This war and these massacres against women and children must stop immediately. The children are being killed in cold blood here in Gaza. Our teams cannot perform their duties properly.
Gaza Health Ministry spokesperson Zaher al-Wahidi said that the death toll was likely to rise, as some survivors were critically injured.
Dozens of victims were reportedly trapped beneath rubble of Thursday's airstrikes, but they could not be rescued due to a lack of equipment.
The IDF claimed that "key Hamas terrorists" were targeted in a strike on what it called a "command center." Israeli officials routinely claim—often with little or no evidence—that Palestinian civilians it kills are members of Hamas or other militant resistance groups.
Israel also bombed the nearby al-Sabah school, killing four people, as well as the Fahd School in Gaza City, with three reported fatalities.
Some of the deadliest bombings in the war have been carried out against refugees sheltering in schools, many of them run by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA)—at least 280 of whose staff members have been killed by Israeli forces during the war.
The United Nations Children's Fund has called Gaza "the world's most dangerous place to be a child." Last year, U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres for the first time added Israel to his so-called "List of Shame" of countries that kill and injure children during wars and other armed conflicts. More than 17,500 Palestinian children have been killed in Gaza since October 2023, according to the Gaza Health Ministry.
Thursday's school bombings sparked worldwide outrage and calls to hold Israel accountable.
"While your kids are getting ready for school, kids in Gaza were once against just massacred in one," Australian journalist, activist, and progressive politician Sophie McNeill wrote on social media. "We must sanction Israel now!"
There were other IDF massacres on Thursday, with local officials reporting that more than 100 people were killed in Israeli attacks since dawn. Al-Wahidi said more than 30 people were killed in strikes on homes in Gaza City's Shejaya neighborhood, citing records at al-Ahli Arab Baptist Hospital in Gaza.
Al Jazeera reported that al-Ahli's emergency room "is overwhelmed with casualties and, as is so often the case over the past 18 months, the victims are Gaza's youngest."
Thursday's intensified airstrikes came as Israeli forces pushed into the ruins of the southern city of Rafah. Local and international media reported that hundreds of thousands of Palestinian families fled from the area, which Israel said it will seize as part of a new "security zone."
Human rights defenders around the world condemned U.S.-backed killing and mass displacement, with U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)—whose bid to block some sAmerican arms sales to Israel was rejected by the Senate on Thursday—saying: "There is a name and a term for forcibly expelling people from where they live. It is called ethnic cleansing. It is illegal. It is a war crime."
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant, his former defense minister, are fugitives from the International Criminal Court, which last year issued arrest warrants for the pair over alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity. Israel is also facing a genocide case at the International Court of Justice.
According to Gaza officials, Israeli forces have killed or wounded at least 175,000 Palestinians in Gaza, including upward of 14,000 people who are missing and presumed dead and buried beneath rubble. Almost everyone in Gaza has been forcibly displaced at least once, and the "complete siege" imposed by Israel has fueled widespread and sometimes deadly starvation and disease.