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
ron wyden
Senators Want to Know Why RFK Jr. Dined With Pharma Execs at Trump's Private Club
"You owe the American public an explanation for why you took part in PhRMA's influence-peddling events with President Trump," wrote Sens. Elizabeth Warren, Ron Wyden, and Bernie Sanders.
Mar 11, 2025
A group of progressive U.S. senators on Monday pushed Robert F. Kennedy Jr., secretary of the Health and Human Services Department, to disclose what he and President Donald Trump discussed with pharmaceutical executives at recent private dinners as the industry pressures the new administration to end Medicare drug price negotiations.
In a letter to Kennedy, Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) pointed to Wall Street Journalreporting from last month on the millions of dollars that healthcare industry executives spent to dine with Trump at his Mar-a-Lago club in Florida ahead of his inauguration.
Kennedy, according to the Journal, "attended several of the dinners, but largely stayed quiet as Trump and others talked."
Warren, Wyden, and Sanders wrote to Kennedy that "the dinners may have served as an opportunity for Big Pharma to gain insider access to both you and President Trump" and asked the HHS chief to reveal information about the meetings with industry executives, including how many there have been since the November election and whether Medicare drug price negotiations or other critical matters were discussed.
"Big Pharma stands to profit immensely from a second Trump administration, especially if they can convince you and President Trump to abandon policies like Medicare drug price negotiations and patent reform that would save Americans hundreds of billions of dollars on lifesaving drugs," the senators wrote. "Indeed, the executives that attended these dinners have called on him to 'pause drug negotiations'—negotiations that are expected to save taxpayers $100 billion by 2032."
"You owe the American public an explanation for why you took part in PhRMA's influence-peddling events with President Trump, what happened at these meetings, and whether they will affect your commitment to ensuring that Americans receive the relief they deserve from high drug prices," the senators added.
RFK Jr. said he'd "clean up corruption" as HHS Secretary. So why'd he have dinner with Big Pharma executives at Mar-a-Lago with Trump? The American people deserve to know what kind of deals might have been made at those "million-dollar" dinners.
[image or embed]
— Elizabeth Warren (@warren.senate.gov) March 10, 2025 at 7:29 PM
The Journal reported that the CEO of Pfizer, which pumped $1 million into Trump's inaugural committee, was among the executives who attended the private Mar-a-Lago dinners. Eli Lilly's chief executive also joined at least one of the dinners.
Though Kennedy, an anti-vaccine conspiracy theorist, has vocally criticized Big Pharma and its political influence, the industry did not lobby against his nomination to lead HHS, which oversees the Medicare drug price negotiations that began during the Biden administration.
Last month, the head of the pharmaceutical industry's biggest lobbying group and several pharma CEOs met with Trump as part of a campaign to weaken the price negotiations, which threaten drugmakers' ability to jack up prices at will.
The negotiations have yielded significant results, but Trump's Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services—an agency within HHS—has signaled it is open to altering the program.
"The Trump administration's statement is far from an embrace of drug price negotiation," Wyden and other senators warned earlier this year, "and appears to be opening the door to changes that could undermine Medicare's ability to get the best price possible on drugs."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Bloodbath': Social Security Administration Begins Mass Firings
What is being described as a "total annihilation" of SSA, say critics, proves that Trump's promises to protect Social Security "are a sham."
Feb 28, 2025
The Social Security Administration, now under the control of an official installed by U.S. President Donald Trump, began the process of gutting whole segments of the agency and firing a huge portion of its already diminished workforce, sparking alarm among advocates who say the move will almost certainly result in benefit delays and disruptions.
The American Prospect, which first reported earlier this week that Acting SSA Commissioner Leland Dudek was weighing staff cuts of up to 50%, obtained an email sent late Thursday indicating that the department has launched an "agency-wide organizational restructuring that will include significant workforce reductions."
"The email gives employees until March 14 to decide among a number of options," the Prospect reported. "They can seek voluntary reassignments, or 'separate from federal service through retirement or resignation.' All employees at least 50 years of age with at least 20 years of service are being offered an 'early out' voluntary early retirement; that's lower than the typical benchmarks for federal employees. Early retirees are typically eligible for an annuity."
"In addition, between now and March 14 employees can take voluntary separation incentive payments of up to $25,000, depending on job classification. Employees are also encouraged in the email to resign and take the payout of their annual leave," the outlet added.
Trump has pledged that Social Security "will not be touched," but the progressive advocacy group Social Security Works argued that the assault on SSA "has only one goal: The total annihilation of Social Security by firing half of the workforce and closing the field offices."
"Wall Street billionaires want to destroy Social Security so they can give themselves trillions in tax handouts," the group wrote on social media.
The ongoing bloodbath at the Social Security Administration has only one goal: The total annihilation of Social Security by firing half of the work force and closing the field offices. Wall Street billionaires want to destroy Social Security so they can give themselves trillions in tax handouts.
[image or embed]
— Social Security Works (@socialsecurityworks.org) February 27, 2025 at 8:28 PM
The Prospect reported that while the email sent to SSA staff on Thursday "does state that some employees may be reassigned from so-called 'non-mission critical' positions to direct service positions at field offices and processing centers, it would be difficult to achieve large-scale reductions in force without impacting staff at the more than 1,200 field offices across the country."
"Already, one large hearing office in White Plains, New York has been shuttered, and there are unclear plans for other lease terminations on the Department of Government Efficiency( DOGE) website," the Prospect observed.
SSA, which is highly efficient despite being chronically understaffed, is one of a number of federal departments that Elon Musk's lieutenants have infiltrated in recent weeks as part of a lawless onslaught against government workers and operations.
"The goal of this effort is to hollow out an agency that currently delivers retirement benefits with a 99.7% accuracy rate, and hand over the keys to private equity and grifters who want to pillage Social Security for all it's worth."
ProPublicareported over the weekend that DOGE staffers' "first wave of actions" at SSA, including the elimination of dozens of jobs and shuttering of local offices, "was largely lost in the rush of headlines."
"Those first steps might seem restrained compared with the mass firings that DOGE has pursued at other federal agencies," the investigative outlet noted. "But Social Security recipients rely on in-person service in all 50 states, and the shuttering of offices, reported on DOGE's website to include locations everywhere from rural West Virginia to Las Vegas, could be hugely consequential. The closures potentially reduce access to Social Security for some of the most vulnerable people in this country—including not just retirees but also individuals with severe physical and intellectual disabilities, as well as children whose parents have died and who've been left in poverty."
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, said Thursday that "firing half of all Social Security workers will guarantee that seniors will stop seeing their earned benefits arrive on time and in full."
"Trump's promises to protect Social Security are a sham, just like the rest of his actions since taking office," Wyden added. "A plan like this will result in field office closures that will hit seniors in rural communities the hardest. The goal of this effort is to hollow out an agency that currently delivers retirement benefits with a 99.7% accuracy rate, and hand over the keys to private equity and grifters who want to pillage Social Security for all it's worth."
Keep ReadingShow Less
How Can Congressional Dems Fight Back Against Trump and Musk? Oversight
There are far too many tools at congressional Democrats’ disposal for them to throw up their hands and act as though nothing can be done.
Feb 28, 2025
Earlier this month, as Elon Musk and his DOGE agents were initiating their chaotic takeover of the federal government, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jefferies (D-N.Y.) was asked what Democrats could do to slow Musk down or win concession in budget negotiations. In response, Jeffries literally threw up his hands and posed his own now-infamous question: “What leverage do we have?”
It was a wildly out-of-touch answer.
For one thing, the self-pitying tone is out of step with public opinion—Democratic voters and activists have been demanding more fight from their representatives. They want fewer (in fact, zero) Democratic Senators voting to confirm Trump nominees, and more spine in budget negotiation to get the simple concession of “no more unconstitutional impoundment of the funds we appropriate.” Fewer instances of Democratic representatives folding under the corrupting influence of crypto campaign cash to support industry-backed bills. More visiting and amplifying the voices of the people most harmed by DOGE’s cuts and firings.
As the minority party, Democrats certainly have less power, but they are far from powerless.
Further, Jeffries’ question suggests a concerning lack of familiarity with the modest—but substantial, and potentially impactful—array of tools at his and his colleagues’ disposal. In fact, as I lay out below, there are many things congressional Democrats can do, including requesting investigations from accountability offices; utilizing formal and informal hearings; writing letters to agency heads; and being opportunistic about accountability maneuvers at their disposal, even those unlikely to succeed in an immediate sense.
Congressional Oversight As The Minority Party
Democrats need to be winning the messaging battle, constantly telling the American people how Trump and DOGE are facilitating material harms. In that fight, Democrats have a key, but largely neglected, point of leverage: congressional oversight.
Prior to last year’s election, I wrote in Common Dreams that Democrats needed to better utilize their congressional oversight powers. But that was when Democrats had a Senate majority, and therefore the power to conduct official hearings, investigations, and issue subpoenas.
So, what can they do now?
Request Investigations from Accountability Offices
As the minority party, Democrats certainly have less power, but they are far from powerless. For starters, they can outsource investigations and research to nonpartisan offices like the Congressional Research Service, Inspectors General, or the Government Accountability Office (GAO). Each office has their usefulness, but given that President Donald Trump fired 17 Inspector General in a corrupt move that is currently being litigated, Democrats should focus on utilizing the GAO.
The GAO is an independent agency that acts as a watchdog at the request of Congress, conducting investigations to examine how federal dollars are spent and offering nonpartisan solutions on how to improve federal programs. (Essentially, GAO is what DOGE claims to be, minus the neo-nazi tendencies, complete lack of expertise, and rampant corruption.) Any member of Congress can request the GAO look into a given topic or program, though the office can take anywhere from a few months to over a year before finalizing reports.
For every instance of DOGE wreaking havoc, Democrats need to request a corresponding investigation, even if the GAO doesn’t have capacity to undertake each one or release the reports on an expedited timeline.
The long-term nature of the process can be leveraged strategically, though, with just a little bit of media savvy. In January of 2024, Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) successfully requested a GAO report on the Community Health Center Fund and former President Joe Biden’s Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) program. He and his Republican colleagues then utilized the investigation to hold press conferences and release statements attacking the Biden administration for “prevent[ing] students and families from accessing crucial financial aid.” They got the spotlight they were looking for on their issue of choice, even though the GAO report wasn’t issued until two months prior to the election. (Of course, Republicans have done nothing to help implement the recommendations GAO made, now that the report is out.)
Regardless of whether Republican concern was genuine, the utility is clear. Democrats can make headlines today simply by requesting and securing investigations they are entitled, by virtue of being members of Congress, to ask for. In fact, Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) recently did just that, successfully asking the GAO to investigate Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent giving DOGE access to payment systems. Perhaps more importantly, however, Democrats can use the GAO report that will eventually result to remind the American people of Bessent’s lawlessness long after it was buried in the public’s mind under a deluge of other scandals.
This tactic needs to be used for every agency and program under attack from DOGE. Request the GAO to investigate how spending freezes at the USDA and USAID will affect farmers. Request a report on staffing cuts at the FAA and the effect on air safety and travel times. Spend tax season demanding a review of how decimating the IRS will increase tax avoidance by the wealthy and increase wait times. For every instance of DOGE wreaking havoc, Democrats need to request a corresponding investigation, even if the GAO doesn’t have capacity to undertake each one or release the reports on an expedited timeline. (If Democrats ever give votes to an appropriations process that once again governs federal spending, they should request the GAO expand its staffing. Sadly, there are many talented recent civil servants on the job market.)
Utilize Hearings, Both Formal and Informal
Without control in either chamber, Democrats have little say over official Congressional hearings. But they still have two important roles they can harness: calling witnesses and asking questions. Democrats cannot subpoena witnesses, but they can still choose a witness to voluntarily appear at hearings. This often results in experts that can calmly explain the intricacies of an issue and recommend how to improve the situation. This isn’t bad on its face, but in the era of DOGE decimation, Democrats should be discerning in their witness choices.
Each DOGE attack means someone lost their job and someone is a victim of the funding cuts. Leverage this harm! Bring in people who have been fired at a given agency to explain exactly who they used to help or protect. Bring in the victims to explain how their lives will now be worse because of Trump and Musk. Democrats can force Congressional Republicans to face the people affected by their failure to constrain Trump. As recent vitriolic town halls exemplify, there’s ample appetite to make Republicans answer publicly for their cowardice.
In the same vein, Democrats need to be combative in every hearing. We rolled out a series of suggested questions for Trump nominees in their confirmation hearings, including new questions that Secretary of Education nominee Linda McMahon needs to answer before her confirmation vote. Unfortunately, Democrats were woefully unprepared, even praising some nominees and failing to use their fully allotted questioning time. This needs to change. Every hearing is an opportunity to produce a viral clip that can break through to people otherwise not paying attention.
Additionally, as my colleague Emma Marsano explained in this newsletter last week, Democrats can also hold informal hearings that amplify the voices of people most impacted by executive overreach. There are, unfortunately, countless examples they could be elevating through hearings, social media, press hits, and coordination with influencers. Democrats could also creatively use their franking privileges—sending mail to their constitutions using their signature as postage rather than a stamp—to inform constituents on “matters of public concern” or issue “questionnaires seeking public opinion” to get an idea of how DOGE actions are affecting people locally.
Flood the Zone with Letters
Members of Congress regularly send letters to heads of executive departments demanding answers and information regarding happenings under their purview. To their credit, Democrats have made good use of letters: to OMB Director Russell Vought demanding he reverse attacks on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau; to the SEC and other agencies demanding an investigation into Trump’s meme coin; to HUD Secretary Scott Turner highlighting the effect that proposed staffing cuts will have on seniors, veterans, and people with disabilities, among many others.
While this method of oversight is virtually all bark, it’s a useful tool in garnering headlines to amplify your message. Democratic members on each congressional committee should closely monitor DOGE and other executive branch attacks on government functions, then produce as many letters as possible with the goal of getting coverage in the media. Not every letter will be picked up, but every headline that tells the public “Democrats are Fighting Republican Attacks on [Fill in the Blank]” is useful. These letters can also be referred back to as launching points for formal investigations or hearings should Democrats regain either chamber in the midterms.
Take Longshots, Even if They Miss
Democrats can try to utilize subpoena and impeachment powers, even if they are longshots. My colleague Kenny Stancil explained yesterday in The American Prospect that Democrats can (and should) move to impeach Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent for his capitulation to, and lying about, DOGE’s attempts to access payment systems. While unlikely to result in a successful impeachment vote, it raises the issue’s salience and forces congressional Republicans to own it.
Similarly, earlier this month Democrats in the Oversight Committee tried to rush through a vote to subpoena Musk while Republicans were out of the room. It was a long shot that fell short, but it’s worth trying such tactics at every opportunity, on the off chance it works one time.
To be clear, none of these tactics alone will save us. Trump’s administration will continue to terrorize the civil service, and congressional Republicans will continue to stand by. But with many months between now and the midterms, Democrats need to use—no, leverage—every form of oversight at their disposal to slow down the onslaught, inform the American public, and ensure Republicans pay a hefty price.
There are far too many tools at congressional Democrats’ disposal for them to throw up their hands and act as though nothing can be done—people elected them to do something, and they need to act like it, especially with so much at stake.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular