

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.

During remarks on the floor of the U.S. Senate, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) Tuesday called for President Joe Biden to fulfill his campaign promise to prevent companies that are engaged in illegal anti-union activities, like Amazon, from receiving lucrative contracts from the federal government on the taxpayers dime. Sanders urged President Biden to sign an Executive Order to implement this plan.
Sanders' remarks, as prepared for delivery, are below.
During remarks on the floor of the U.S. Senate, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) Tuesday called for President Joe Biden to fulfill his campaign promise to prevent companies that are engaged in illegal anti-union activities, like Amazon, from receiving lucrative contracts from the federal government on the taxpayers dime. Sanders urged President Biden to sign an Executive Order to implement this plan.
Sanders' remarks, as prepared for delivery, are below.
M. President, the American people are increasingly disgusted with the level of corporate greed that we are seeing in this country.
As you know, while prices are rapidly increasing corporate profits are soaring - in the oil industry, in the food industry, in housing, and many other areas. Meanwhile, while the very rich get richer because of inflation many workers are seeing a decline in their real wages.
During this pandemic, unbelievably, while workers struggle, the billionaire class has seen a $2 trillion increase in their wealth - and the level of income and wealth inequality today is the highest it's been in over 100 years. Two people, Mr. Musk and Mr. Bezos, now own more wealth than the bottom 42 percent - over 130 million Americans.
In the midst of all of this, working people have declared loudly and clearly that enough is enough. We must end this corporate greed.
Workers are now fighting back to improve their standard of living, to get the wages and benefits they need, and to get a seat at the negotiating table in a way that we have not seen in many years. They are organizing unions at a grassroots level and they are prepared to go out on strike when the greed of large corporations prevents them from receiving decent wages and decent benefits.
During the last couple of years I have personally been involved in a number of union organizing campaigns and strikes throughout the country - from the John Deere, Nabisco and Kellogg's strikes in the Midwest, to the Warrior Met strike in Alabama, to the Kroger's grocery store strike in Colorado. I have been enormously impressed by the courage and tenacity of these workers who are demanding nothing less than economic justice.
M. President, as you may know, an historic union victory was achieved nearly one month ago by Amazon workers in Staten Island.
Amazon, as you know, is one of the most profitable and one of the most powerful corporations in America. It is also one of the largest employers in America with close to a million employees.
We're talking about a company that made a record-breaking $36 billion profit last year - a 453% increase from where it was before the pandemic. In other words, Amazon is doing better today than it has ever done.
We're talking about a company that is owned by Jeff Bezos, the second wealthiest person in America worth $170 billion.
Interestingly, given our regressive and unfair tax system, we're talking about a company that paid nothing in federal income taxes in 2017 and 2018 and paid a lower tax rate than a nurse or a firefighter last year after making billions in profits.
We're also talking about Mr. Bezos, who, in a given year, despite his extraordinary wealth, also pays nothing in federal income taxes. That's what you can do when you make campaign contributions and have an army of accountants and lawyers working for you.
M. President, during the pandemic, Mr. Bezos, like other billionaires, became much richer. In fact, since March of 2020 Mr. Bezos became $65 billion richer. M. President, do you know why people in this country are angry? During the pandemic, tens of thousands of essential workers had no choice but to go to work. And they died. That's what happens when you live paycheck to paycheck. And during that same period, Mr. Bezos became $65 billion richer.
Mr. Bezos has enough money to own a $500 million, 417-foot mega-yacht.
He has enough money to afford a $175 million estate in Beverly Hills that includes a 13,600 square-foot mansion.
He has enough money to afford a $78 million, 14-acre estate in Maui.
He has enough money to own a $23 million mansion in Washington, DC with 25 bathrooms.
He has enough money to buy a rocket ship to blast William Shatner to the edge of outer space.
And yet, even though Mr. Bezos can afford all of those mansions and all of those yachts and all of those rocket ships, Mr. Bezos refuses to pay his workers decent wages, decent benefits or provide decent working conditions. This is what excessive greed is all about. And the American people want action.
From the very beginning of the union organizing effort until today, Mr. Bezos and Amazon have done everything possible, legal and illegal, to defeat the union.
In fact, Amazon cannot even come to grips with the reality that the workers in Staten Island won their union election fair and square. In order to stall the process out, their lawyers have appealed that election result to the NLRB. Their strategy is obviously to use their incredible wealth to stall, stall and stall.
In every way possible, they are refusing to negotiate a fair first contract with the Amazon Labor Union.
In fact, Amazon has been engaged in a massive attempt to undermine the union organizing drive - in direct violation of labor laws and regulations.
Let's be clear: Amazon has already been penalized more than $75 million for breaking federal discrimination and labor laws.
Amazon is currently being sued by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to reinstate a worker who was illegally fired for organizing a union.
To date, there are currently 59 unfair labor cases against Amazon pending at the NLRB.
Several current and former employees have alleged that Amazon has engaged in illegal harassment and discrimination based on race, gender, and sexual orientation.
Amazon misclassifies delivery drivers as independent contractors rather than employees to evade tax, wage, and benefit responsibilities.
Amazon's inadequate workplace safety policies also pose grave risks to workers. If you can believe it, according to a New York Times investigation, Amazon has a 150% percent turnover rate. Workers come into the warehouses, they are worked as hard as humanly possible, and they leave. And a whole set of new workers come in to replace them.
Further, in some locations, their workplace injury rates are more than 2.5 times the industry average.
Last December, six Amazon workers died after they were required to continue working during unsafe weather conditions in a warehouse that did not have appropriate safety facilities or policies.
It is abundantly clear that time and time again Amazon has engaged in illegal anti-union activity.
Amazon may be a large and profitable corporation, it may be owned by one of the wealthiest people in America, but it cannot be allowed to continue to violate the law and the rights of its employees. If working people are asked to obey the law they do it or they are punished by the law. That same principle must be upheld for a large and powerful corporation like Amazon.
And that is why, this morning, I sent a letter to President Biden urging him to sign an executive order to prohibit companies like Amazon that have violated labor laws from receiving federal contracts paid for by the taxpayers of America.
Let me quote from this letter:
"Dear President Biden:
Last September, I was delighted to hear you state that you 'intend to be the most pro-union President leading the most pro-union administration in American history.'
At a time of massive income and wealth inequality, where too many workers are falling behind, your sentiment is exactly right. We need to build the trade union movement in America and allow more workers to engage in collective bargaining.
One of the most effective ways for you [President Biden] to begin accomplishing this important goal would be to ensure that no corporation that is engaged in illegal anti-union activities receives a contract paid for by the taxpayers of the United States.
As you will recall, during the presidential campaign you [President Biden] promised to 'institute a multi-year federal debarment for all employers who illegally oppose unions' and to 'ensure federal contracts only go to employers who sign neutrality agreements committing not to run anti-union campaigns.'
That campaign promise was exactly right. Today, I am asking you [President Biden] to fulfill that promise ... As you may know, Amazon, one of the largest and most profitable corporations in America, is the poster child as to why this anti-union busting Executive Order is needed now more than ever."
M. President: I ask unanimous consent to include the full text of my letter into the record.
President Biden, more than any other president in modern American history, has talked over and over again about being pro-union - and I appreciate the President's rhetoric and know him to be sincere on this issue.
Just this afternoon, in an article in Politico, in response to my letter, "A White House official said that the president 'has stated consistently and firmly that every worker in every state must have a free and fair choice to join a union and the right to bargain collectively with their employer.' The official, who declined to be named, added that Biden believes 'there should be no intimidation, no coercion, no threats, and no anti-union propaganda from employers while workers are making that vitally important choice about a union.'"
But that is exactly what is happening at Amazon. There is intimidation. There is coercion. There are threats and anti-union propaganda. In fact, all of that is precisely what Amazon is doing.
In my view, the time for talk is over. The time for action is now.
Taxpayer dollars should not go to companies like Amazon and multi-billionaires like Jeff Bezos who repeatedly break the law.
No government - not the federal government, not the state government and not the city government - should be handing out corporate welfare to union busters and labor law violators.
So today I say to President Biden: You promised to prevent union busters like Amazon from receiving lucrative contracts from the federal government. Please keep that promise.
“If my 5% wealth tax on billionaires was enacted, you’d owe $135 million more in taxes, and a family of four making $150,000 or less would receive a $12,000 payment. Oh, and you’d still be worth more than $2.5 billion."
As billionaires nationwide rally to stop tax increases on the wealthy, US Sen. Bernie Sanders stepped in to "clear things up" for one of Wall Street's top power brokers after he railed against the proposal.
Following in the footsteps of California, where a popular ballot initiative to impose a one-time 5% tax on the state's 200 billionaires has gained steam, Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) introduced their own federal proposal earlier this month to tax those with net worths of more than $1 billion 5% of their annual household wealth.
The proposal is projected to raise $4.4 trillion over the next decade to provide direct payments to lower-income Americans, reverse Republicans' cuts to Medicaid and Affordable Care Act spending, expand Medicare, and build millions of affordable housing units, among many other expenditures.
Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JPMorgan Chase, who is worth about $2.8 billion according to Forbes, appeared on Fox News on Tuesday and was asked by anchor Brian Kilmeade about Sanders' frequent accusations that billionaires "don't pay their fair share" in taxes.
"I don't know what he means by fair share," Dimon said. "I've listened to that my whole life, and I don't know what he means."
The two did not address the facts that may have led Sanders to draw such a conclusion. For instance, the senator often notes that fewer than 1,000 billionaires own more wealth than the bottom half of the US, around 175 million people.
Those billionaires also manage to pay a lower effective tax rate than the average American by wielding loopholes that allow them to exempt large chunks of their fortunes.
Sanders took to social media to respond to Dimon's incredulity about his idea of "fairness."
"Ok, Jamie: Let me clear things up for you," the senator wrote. "If my 5% wealth tax on billionaires was enacted, you’d owe $135 million more in taxes, and a family of four making $150,000 or less would receive a $12,000 payment."
"Oh, and you’d still be worth more than $2.5 billion," Sanders added. "Seems pretty fair to me."
Dimon's remarks came as billionaires are in a full-blown panic over the proposal for a one-time 5% tax in California, which is projected to raise about $100 billion, mostly to cover the Medicaid funding shortfall caused by the massive cuts in last year's GOP budget law.
A poll earlier this month showed that the measure, which will be put to voters in November, has about 2-1 approval, despite a more than $80 million effort by the state's elite—most notably Google co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page—to stop it in its tracks.
Dimon himself is not known to have contributed to the effort. But during his Tuesday appearance on Fox, he echoed one of the movement's oft-used talking points: that raising taxes on the rich leads to an "exodus" of wealth from financial hubs like New York and California.
As Forbes senior contributor Teresa Ghilarducci explained late last year, "Decades of economic research show that billionaire 'flight' is rare, exaggerated, and often confused with tax avoidance through accounting maneuvers rather than physical relocation."
Christopher Marquis and Nick Romeo similarly said last month in a piece for TIME that “despite multiple debunkings, the ‘millionaire exodus’ panic remains a popular narrative,” even though it is “frequently based on biased or sloppy arguments where anecdote replaces systematic evidence, correlation poses as causation, and every modest redistributive proposal is framed as an existential threat to prosperity.”
"Unless and until Congress blesses this project through statutory authorization, construction has to stop!" wrote US District Judge Richard Leon.
President Donald Trump was left fuming after a federal judge blocked construction of his planned White House ballroom.
In a ruling delivered Tuesday, US District Judge Richard Leon granted a preliminary injunction requested by the National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United States, which had sued to stop the ballroom from being built.
While handing down the injunction, Leon reminded Trump that "the president of the United States is the steward of the White House for future generations," then emphasized "he is not, however, the owner" of the building.
The judge—appointed by former President George W. Bush—found that Trump's ballroom was the first time that a proposed major addition to the White House went forward without any kind of congressional approval, and he recommended that the president seek input from the legislative branch before moving forward with the project.
"Unless and until Congress blesses this project through statutory authorization, construction has to stop!" Leon wrote in his conclusion. "But here is the good news. It is not too late for Congress to authorize the continued construction of the ballroom project."
The judge granted a two-week delay for his order to go into effect, but he warned any above-ground construction of the ballroom done in that time will be "at risk of being taken down depending on the outcome of this case."
In a Truth Social post delivered after the ruling, the president angrily lashed out at National Trust for Historic Preservation, which he described as "a Radical Left Group of Lunatics."
The president also claimed that his ballroom and the renovated John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts—which Trump shut down less than two months after illegally slapping his own name on the side of the building—"will be among the most magnificent Buildings of their kind anywhere in the World."
Trump last year tore down the entire East Wing of the White House in preparation for the ballroom's construction, which was set to begin this week.
The cost of the ballroom is estimated at $400 million, and Trump is financing it by soliciting donations from some of America’s wealthiest corporations—including several with government contracts and interests in deregulation—such as Apple, Lockheed Martin, Microsoft, Meta, Google, Amazon, and Palantir.
The president held an exclusive White House dinner for some of the largest donors to the ballroom in October, in a move that many critics decried as a “cash-for-access” event.
“This is not just a policy shift—it’s a wholesale abandonment of government commitments to the American public," said one advocate.
The so-called "Make America Healthy Again" movement encapsulated a key campaign promise ahead of President Donald Trump's second term in office, with Trump telling one Pennsylvania crowd in 2024, "We’re going to get toxic chemicals out of our environment, and we’re going to get them out of our food supply."
But the Trump administration has gradually announced a slew of public health-related policies and proposals since the president took office—pushing to loosen emissions rules for the cancer-causing gas ethylene oxide; suggesting the polio vaccine should be optional; and mandating the production of carcinogenic glyphosate—and a peer-reviewed study has now cataloged the "grave threat to America's health" that Trump's policies present.
"During the first administration of President Donald Trump, nearly 100 environmental and occupational protections, including air-quality safeguards, were rescinded," reads the study, published in The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) on March 25. "Although many of those rescissions were delayed by litigation or reversed by President Joe Biden, they inflicted considerable harm on Americans’ health. The second Trump administration’s actions have been even more aggressive, portending greater harm."
Weeks after the US Senate confirmed Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy in February 2025—a confirmation that he secured after making the baseless claim that Americans would prefer the for-profit insurance system over universal healthcare and refusing to reject debunked claims about vaccines—the administration appeared to make clear its true views on public health when it announced 31 climate regulation rollbacks.
"Those initiatives and other administration actions are set to reverse progress on pollution, make workplaces more dangerous, and (in Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin’s words) drive 'a dagger straight into the heart of the climate change religion,'" reads the study.
The proposals swiftly introduced by the administration included:
Ken Cook, co-founder of the Environmental Working Group (EWG), said the study described "a deliberate dismantling of safeguards that protect the air, water, and health of nearly every person in this country—all in the service of polluters."
“This is not just a policy shift—it’s a wholesale abandonment of government commitments to the American public and the MAHA movement that helped propel Trump into office,” said Cook, who did not contribute to the study.
Philip Landrigan, a pediatrician and public health physician who directs the Global Observatory on Planetary Health at Boston College and is the lead author of the paper, told EWG that the “impacts of these rollbacks will fall most heavily on the most vulnerable among us—including infants—resulting in brain injury, neurodevelopmental disorders, increased preterm births, and elevated lifelong risk of chronic disease.”
Children and other vulnerable populations, including those in low-income communities situated close to petrochemical industrial areas, are likely to have increased mercury, benzene, and arsenic exposures—raising their risk of developing cancers and other diseases—due to the Trump administration's rollbacks, according to the study.
"Several proposed policies would weaken water-quality standards, reducing drinking-water safety for millions of people," reads the paper. "For example, the EPA seeks to weaken regulations governing effluent discharges from coal-fired power plants. The resulting increase in waterborne lead, mercury, and arsenic will increase the incidence of bladder cancers and adversely affect children’s cognitive function."
The study's authors emphasized that "statistics and documentation are not enough" to protect the public from the White House's harmfiul policies.
"Unless health professionals speak up, and unless we put a human face on the tragic consequences of these environmental rollbacks, the connection between these seemingly abstract policy changes and the real health harms they cause may remain invisible," reads the study. "We health professionals must call urgent attention to this silent but deadly assault on Americans’ health, work with broad coalitions to halt it, and ultimately rebuild the agencies, protections, and shared sense of trust and responsibility that have given us clean air and water and enabled us and our children to live longer, healthier lives."
Cook noted that the NEJM itself has been a target of the administration, with Kennedy calling highly respected, science-based journals "corrupt" and the Department of Justice questioning the publication's editorial integrity.
“No amount of political pressure or intimidation should silence independent science or the experts working to protect public health,” Cook said. “The NEJM and the study’s authors rightly ignore those threats and lay bare the real-world consequences of the Trump administration’s actions—and the American people deserve to hear it.”