SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
congressional progressive caucus
Progressives Organize 'Shutdown Showdown' to Defend Healthcare From Trump and GOP
"Republicans could end this Trump Shutdown today by passing a deal that averts the massive spike in healthcare costs," said a co-director of Indivisible. "They need to feel heat from their constituents."
Oct 02, 2025
Progressive activist groups and legislators have launched a new effort to pressure Congress to reach a deal to end the government shutdown that protects healthcare programs from brutal budget cuts.
The government officially shut down on Wednesday after Republicans refused Democrats' demands to reverse cuts to Medicaid and Affordable Care Act (ACA) spending from July's GOP megabill that, if allowed to go into effect, are expected to result in around 15 million Americans losing their health insurance coverage over the next decade.
On the first evening of the shutdown, over 18,000 people joined a conference call organized by a coalition of advocacy groups, including Public Citizen, MoveOn, Working Families Power, and Indivisible. Also in attendance were Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas), the chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, and vice chair Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-Fla.).
"We know that we are already in a broken healthcare system in this nation," Frost told the thousands of attendees. "Not only do they not want to do anything to fix the problems we have, they are making it worse."
Video: MoveOn
"We want to reopen this shutdown government and restore healthcare back to the American people," Casar said. "But House Republicans are nowhere to be found. I'm here in Washington, DC, and those House Republicans fled on vacation."
The hosts urged attendees to call their Republican senators and make them aware of their responsibility for the shutdown and the loss of healthcare that millions of their constituents may soon face.
They also singled out certain Senate Democrats, such as Sen. John Fetterman (Pa.) and Catherine Cortez-Masto (Nev.), who voted to advance the GOP's continuing resolution despite the lack of benefits on healthcare, for "siding with [President] Donald Trump."
"We can do this," said movement organizer Ash-Lee Woodard Henderson. "We can put the pressure on that forces the Democratic Party to have a backbone and the Republicans to prioritize people over profit."
The groups have dozens of events planned over the coming days as part of what they have called the "Shutdown Showdown" campaign, including rallies and demonstrations outside the offices of Republican lawmakers.
“Trump and congressional Republicans control a federal government trifecta; they are responsible for ending the shutdown," said Ezra Levin, co-executive director of Indivisible. "We don’t know how long this shutdown is going to last."
He said Republicans "need to feel heat from their constituents to actually sit down and negotiate with the Democrats. That’s where we come in.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Largest Caucus in House Endorses Bill to Block US Bombs to Israel
"The United States cannot continue to send bombs we know will be used to commit terrible atrocities in Gaza."
Sep 21, 2025
The Congressional Progressive Caucus over the weekend officially endorsed a bill that would block the sale of many offensive US weapons to Israel. This move coincides with growing outrage from US voters from across the political spectrum who say they have seen enough of American complicity with the genocidal humanitarian blockade and bombardment of the Gaza Strip.
"The United States cannot continue to send bombs we know will be used to commit terrible atrocities in Gaza,” said Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas), chair of the CPC, the largest single caucus in Congress, with nearly one hundred members.
The Block the Bombs Act, first introduced in May by Rep. Delia C. Ramirez (D-Ill.) and now backed by 49 co-sponsors, calls for a prohibition on the sale of a variety of US weapons and a limitation on military services to the Israeli government, accused of committing a genocide in Gaza.
The vote by the caucus, which took place Saturday and was first reported by Zeteo, marks a historic shift—even for the most progressive group of lawmakers on Capitol Hill—that provides "a significant boost to efforts to hold Israel accountable for its genocidal war in Gaza."
While the CPC acknowledged that the legislation, H.R. 3565, "targets the most destructive and indiscriminate weapons systems, such as BLU-109 bunker buster bombs, 2,000-pound bombs, Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAMs), 120mm tank rounds, and 155mm artillery shells," it does not put restrictions on what it terms "defensive systems," such the Iron Dome missile shield.
"Netanyahu and Trump are a lethal, unaccountable, extremist duo," said Ramirez in a statement on Sunday. “The Block the Bombs bill is the first step toward oversight and accountability for the murder of children with U.S.-made, taxpayer-funded weapons. In the face of authoritarian leaders perpetrating a genocidal campaign, Block the Bombs is the minimum action Congress must take. I am proud to be part of a caucus of progressive leaders who are challenging policies that destroy life, rob our children of futures, or dehumanize our neighbors."
Last week, despite a finding just earlier by the UN Commission of Inquiry that Israel is, in fact, perpetrating genocide in Gaza, the US vetoed a United Nations Security Council resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire between Israel and Hamas and the resumption of humanitarian aid to Gaza, now undergoing a famine in which hundreds of people—young people and old—have died of starvation and otherwise preventable disease.
In a Saturday op-ed on Common Dreams, Peace Action president Kevin Martin said it's way beyond time for the US to end its arming of Israel, and he heralded Ramirez's bill, though not perfect, as the best vehicle in the moment for doing that.
"The bill is as close as we have to a de facto arms embargo on Israel," argued Martin, "as it would ban transfers of seven specific offensive weapons systems, from bunker-busting bombs to tank ammunition to white phosphorus artillery munitions.
"The Biden Administration’s support for Israel was bad, but predictably, Trump has been worse, accelerating transfers of bombs and guns with monolithic Republican," argued Martin, "and far too much Democratic, support, in spite of Israel’s clear violations of U.S. and international law in its mass killing of civilians and denial of life-saving humanitarian aid to Gaza."
DropSite News co-founder Ryan Grim emphasized the historic nature of the vote in a social media post following Saturday's news.
“Historically, the CPC had resisted weighing in at all on Israel because so many of its members were ‘progressive except for Palestine,'" said Grim.
"That era is fading," he added, "this endorsement is a major signal."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Omar Brings War Powers Resolution After Trump Bombed Boat in Caribbean With 'No Legal Justification'
"It was not self-defense or authorized by Congress," the Minnesota congresswoman said of Trump's strike on a boat bound from Venezuela, which killed 11 people last week.
Sep 12, 2025
US Rep. Ilhan Omar introduced a war powers resolution in the US House of Representatives on Thursday, seeking to restrain President Donald Trump from conducting attacks in the Caribbean after he ordered a drone strike on a ship from Venezuela last week, killing 11 people.
The Trump administration has claimed, with little evidence, that the boat was a drug trafficking vessel that posed an imminent threat to the United States. But that narrative has come increasingly into doubt in recent days.
In a statement on the resolution provided to The Intercept, Omar (D-Minn.) said:
There was no legal justification for the Trump administration’s military escalation in the Caribbean... It was not self-defense or authorized by Congress. That is why I am introducing a resolution to terminate hostilities against Venezuela, and against the transnational criminal organizations that the administration has designated as terrorists this year. All of us should agree that the separation of powers is crucial to our democracy, and that only Congress has the power to declare war.
Article I, Section 8 of the US Constitution gives Congress the "sole authority to declare war," but presidents have often carried out military actions without congressional approval, citing their role as commander-in-chief of the armed forces, particularly since the passage of the Authorization for Use of Military Force in 2001.
The War Powers Act of 1973 allows Congress to check the president's war-making authority, requiring the president to report military actions to Congress within 48 hours and requiring Congress to authorize the deployment of troops after 60 days.
Omar unveiled the resolution alongside several of her fellow members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, including Chair Greg Casar (D-Texas) and caucus whip Rep. Jesús “Chuy” García (D-Ill.).
" Donald Trump cannot be allowed to drag the United States into another endless war with his reckless actions," Casar said. "It is illegal for the president to take the country to war without consulting the people's representatives, and Congress must vote now to stop Trump from putting us at further risk."
In the days following Trump's strike on the ship, the administration's narrative that it contained members of Venezuela's Tren de Aragua gang bound for the United States has been called into question by news reports and by those briefed by the Department of Defense, which the Trump administration recently rebranded as the "Department of War."
After his staff was briefed on Tuesday, Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, told CNN that the Pentagon has "offered no positive identification that the boat was Venezuelan, nor that its crew were members of Tren de Aragua or any other cartel."
While Trump has stated that the boat was en route to the US, the briefers themselves acknowledged that they could not determine its destination. Secretary of State Marco Rubio contradicted the president, saying "these particular drugs were probably headed to Trinidad or some other country in the Caribbean, at which point they just contribute to the instability these countries are facing."
The New York Times, meanwhile, reported Wednesday that the boat "had altered its course and appeared to have turned around before the attack started," which further contradicts the claim of imminent harm to the US.
“There is no evidence—none—that this strike was conducted in self-defense," Reed said. "That matters, because under both domestic and international law, the US military simply does not have the authority to use lethal force against a civilian vessel unless acting in self-defense.”
Even if the people aboard the boat were carrying drugs, as the administration claims, there is no legal precedent for the crime of drug trafficking justifying such an extraordinary use of military retaliation.
The White House has attempted to argue that the president has the legal authority to summarily kill suspected drug smugglers using an unprecedented legal rationale, which labels cartel members as tantamount to enemy combatants, who are allowed to be killed in war, because the product they carry causes thousands of deaths per year in the US. Legal analysts have described this as a flimsy pretext for extrajudicial murder.
Scott R. Anderson, a senior fellow in the National Security Law Program at Columbia Law School and a former legal adviser at the US State Department, wrote for the Lawfare blog:
There is no colorable statutory authority for military action against Tren de Aragua and other similarly situated groups. Occasional suggestions in the press that the Trump administration’s description of Tren de Aragua as a terrorist organization is meant to invoke the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) are almost certainly mistaken: That authorization extends only to the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks and select associates, and no one—not even in the Trump administration—has accused Tren de Aragua of being that.
Marty Lederman, who served as deputy assistant attorney general in the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel from 2009 to 2010, wrote for Just Security:
Regardless of which laws might have been broken, what’s more alarming, and of greater long-term concern, is that U.S. military personnel crossed a fundamental line the Department of Defense has been resolutely committed to upholding for many decades—namely, that (except in rare and extreme circumstances not present here) the military must not use lethal force against civilians, even if they are alleged, or even known, to be violating the law."
The resolution introduced by Omar is the first seeking to restrain Trump's ability to launch military strikes against Venezuela. But it's not the first seeking to rein in his wide-ranging use of unilateral warmaking authority.
In June, following his launch of airstrikes against Iran, war powers resolutions introduced in the House and Senate to limit Trump's actions in the Middle East narrowly failed despite receiving some Republican support.
Though specific attempts to rein in Trump's power have failed, the House did pass a bipartisan resolution earlier this week to repeal the AUMFs issued by Congress in the lead-up to the Iraq War, and which presidents have used for over two decades to justify a wide range of military actions across the Middle East without congressional oversight.
If passed, Omar's measure would require Trump to obtain congressional approval before using military force against Venezuela or launching more strikes on transnational criminal organizations that he has designated as terrorist groups since February, including Tren de Aragua.
García, the Progressive Caucus whip, said the resolution was an effort to begin restoring Congress' authority to check a president operating with impunity.
"The extrajudicial strike against a vessel in the Caribbean Sea is only the most recent of Trump’s reckless, deadly, and illegal military actions. Now, he’s lawlessly threatening a region already profoundly impacted by the destabilization of U.S. actions,” said García. "With this War Powers Resolution, we emphasize the total illegality of his action, and— consistent with overwhelming public opposition to forever war—reclaim Congress' sole power to authorize military action.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular