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
us congress
Planned Parenthood Can Access Medicaid Funds Again as Congress Lets Ban Expire
Reproductive healthcare advocates vowed to keep up the fight as conservative activists pressure Congress to make the funding ban permanent.
Jul 05, 2026
Planned Parenthood and other reproductive health clinics regained access to Medicaid funding on Saturday after a provision in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act defunding the organizations expired.
The provision depriving Planned Parenthood was touted as a major victory for the anti-abortion movement when the bill was signed on July 4, 2025, but, due to Senate rules, the defunding only lasted for one year, and Congress failed to renew it before their summer recess.
While this means that Planned Parenthood, Health Imperatives in Massachusetts, and Maine Family Planning can once again bill Medicaid for non-abortion related healthcare, it doesn't reverse the damage caused by a year-long lack of access to funds totaling more than $800 million per year for Planned Parenthood alone.
“Tens of thousands of patients have been denied access to services like cancer screenings and birth control and STI testing and treatment. These are things that just can’t be undone,” Nora Walsh-DeVries, vice president of political and legislative affairs at Planned Parenthood Action Fund, told The Hill.
"Patients have totally borne the cost of this politically motivated attack on care."
In a report published July 1, Planned Parenthood and Planned Parenthood Action Fund said that the defunding had led to the closure of almost 30 health centers, two-thirds of which were in rural areas, or locations that had a shortage of medical services or healthcare professionals. In addition, all of the closed centers were in "contraceptive deserts." Overall, the number of Medicaid visits to the organization decreased by 25% compared with the year before.
“By deliberately targeting Planned Parenthood, President [Donald] Trump and his allies in Congress worsened a public health crisis, making it harder for people to get the essential and lifesaving care they needed at their trusted provider," Alexis McGill Johnson, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Federation of America and Planned Parenthood Action Fund, said in a statement.
Olivia Pennington, a spokesperson for Maine Family Planning, told NPR, "It's been devastating to see this defund and to see the impacts that it's had across the nation."
As Walsh-DeVries further told The Hill, “I think it’s just really clear that patients have totally borne the cost of this politically motivated attack on care."
Despite the restoration of funding, uncertainty lingers. Walsh-DeVries said that it wasn't clear how clinics could obtain the restored funds, and states can now block Medicaid funds to Planned Parenthood on their own, thanks to a Supreme Court ruling last year. To date, 13 states have blocked or tried to block funds.
What's more, conservative and anti-abortion advocates have expressed outrage at Congress' failure to extend the funding ban, and are determined to pressure it do so via a reconciliation bill.
"This failure must be corrected immediately. President Trump and Congress must act as fast as possible to restore and extend the defunding of Planned Parenthood and every organization that commits abortion," Lila Rose, founder and president of anti-abortion group Live Action, said in a statement.
However, 65% of Americans oppose congressional efforts to defund Planned Parenthood, according to polling by the organization, and it is unclear if Republicans as a whole have the political will to renew the ban ahead of the midterm elections. Planned Parenthood Action Fund is currently mobilizing to unseat House republicans who voted for the ban last year.
“We have to really continue to do the work that we’re doing to make this as politically toxic as possible,” Walsh-DeVries told Politico.
McGill Johnson affirmed: "Anti-abortion lawmakers are trying to make ‘defund’ permanent because Planned Parenthood health centers provide abortion care where it’s legal. They are willing to sacrifice the lives and health of people across the country if it gets them closer to their goal of banning abortion everywhere and shutting down Planned Parenthood."
She continued: "We’re in a fight for survival—not just for Planned Parenthood health centers, but for everyone to get high-quality, affordable healthcare from their trusted provider. And know this: Planned Parenthood will never stop fighting to ensure everyone can get the care they need.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Microplastics Have No Place in Baby Food
Current scientific evidence on microplastics and plastic chemicals justifies global and national precautionary action to drastically reduce and ultimately eliminate babies’ exposure to plastics-related contaminants.
Jul 01, 2026
As new parents, we cherish the fleeting firsts: the first laugh, the first unsteady steps, and the first foods at family dinners. We research, we plan, and we try to give our babies the healthiest start possible. And in the swirl of advice from every direction, we often lean on what feels familiar and trusted.
For generations, store-bought baby food provided some of the earliest meals for babies across the country. The distinctive, petite glass jars have long symbolized the kind of wholesome, uncomplicated nourishment many parents reach for when they want something healthy and reliable.
Over time, many of these glass jars were replaced with plastic pouches—but plastic food containers have given us something new to consider.
Many of us think of plastic as a simple, single material. It is not. It is made from more than 16,000 chemicals, including 4,200 known to harm human health. And plastic doesn’t truly break down; it breaks into microplastics—tiny plastic particles less than 5 millimeters in size—that can leach into packaged food, inadvertently adding a large number of health concerns.
Parents should not have to be scientists to feed their children safely.
None of that belongs anywhere near a baby's meal.
Babies are uniquely vulnerable: Their organs and nervous systems are developing rapidly, and even small exposures to certain chemicals—such as the hormone-disrupting chemicals found in plastics—during these formative months can have lifelong effects on growth, metabolism, and reproductive systems.
Previous research found significant microplastic contamination of baby formula from many different brands. And now, a recent report produced by our colleagues highlights lab testing that found microplastics in the pouches of two of the world’s leading baby food companies: Gerber and Happy Baby Organics. A single pouch of Gerber baby food contains an estimated 5,000 microplastic particles, with the plastic lining likely the source. One gram from the Happy Baby Organics pouch (the weight of a small raisin) contained up to 99 microplastic particles, on average—the equivalent of up to 495 microplastics per teaspoon.
And it’s not just these two food products. Much of today’s baby food aisle is wrapped in plastic—from the now-ubiquitous squeezable pouches to purées in plastic tubs and packaged snacks. Single-use squeezable plastic pouches exceed all other forms of baby food packaging, with production growing year on year by over 8%. Millions of single-use baby food pouches are used daily, meaning that every day, millions of babies may be ingesting invisible contaminants along with their plastic-packaged food.
In addition, it’s forecast that the market for all types of multilayered flexible plastic packaging—the most notoriously problematic and polluting form of plastic packaging—will grow by 5.3% year-on-year through 2035.
No parent should have to confront the risks of all that microplastic and chemical exposure. Amid navigating near-constant decisions about our babies’ health, parents should not have to be scientists to feed their children safely.
The current US administration campaigned on protecting Americans’ health, especially children's, under its Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) agenda. It even declared a war on microplastics. Yet parents across the political spectrum are still waiting, with many in the MAHA base voicing frustration about the slow pace of change on chemicals and plastics.
Instead of meaningful protection, we’ve seen failed promises, gutted agencies, and announcements about more research at a time when many families are calling for concrete action. Our babies don’t have time for more research. More importantly, they should not be subjects in a science experiment to which they did not consent.
Current scientific evidence on microplastics and plastic chemicals justifies global and national precautionary action to drastically reduce and ultimately eliminate babies’ exposure to plastics-related contaminants. Research on microplastics is still emerging, but decision-makers have enough information to act. Yet, regulation has not kept pace, and does not protect people’s health from microplastics and hazardous chemicals in food packaging, failing to account for the unique vulnerability of babies in particular.
We have a real opportunity right now: Congress can close a decades-old loophole in our food safety system. Under current rules, plastic producers and food companies determine for themselves whether the chemicals in packaging are “safe.” Congress could finally close that gap and help prevent exposure to microplastics, particularly for children—but the real question is whether they will honor their promises to protect the most vulnerable among us.
We’ve risen to moments like this before—pushing to eliminate lead from toys and teething products, demanding safer cribs and bedding materials, and adopting modern car safety standards that have saved countless children’s lives. This crisis calls for the same resolve. Ours should be the last generation of babies forced to grow up in a food system that puts plastic and profits over their long-term health.
Keep ReadingShow Less
22 Democrats Join GOP to Block Lebanon War Powers Resolution, Enabling Netanyahu's Sabotage of US-Iran Ceasefire
"The United States is not a bystander to these war crimes. It's an active participant," said the resolutions sponsor Rep. Rashida Tlaib.
Jun 30, 2026
Nearly two dozen Democrats joined almost every Republican on Tuesday to vote down a war powers resolution that would have halted US military participation in Israel's assault on Lebanon, which is threatening to derail President Donald Trump's peace negotiations with Iran.
"More than 1.3 million people have already been forced to leave their homes or be killed, with the Israeli military telling them they will not be allowed to return," said the resolution's sponsor, Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), on the House floor Tuesday. "Eighty-one Lebanese neighborhoods have been violently depopulated and demolished—erased from the map entirely."
Along with Republican Reps. Thomas Massie (Ky.) and Lauren Boebert (Colo.), the resolution received support from 187 Democrats on Tuesday, more than double the number who supported a similar resolution introduced by Tlaib earlier this month.
Despite top House Democrats, including Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (NY) and Foreign Affairs Committee Ranking Member Gregory Meeks (NY), giving rhetorical backing to the resolution this time around, The Intercept reported that they did not formally whip the vote.
Twenty-two Democratic hawks joined the GOP to vote against ending cooperation with Israel's war, which has killed more than 4,000 people since March.
Among them were a clique of Democrats who have signed on to the centrist "Promise to America" aimed at countering the momentum of progressive and democratic socialist candidates within the party—including Reps. Donald Davis (NC), Laura Gillen (NY), Vicente Gonzalez (Texas), Josh Gottheimer (NJ), Adam Gray (Calif.), Susie Lee (Nev.), and Tom Suozzi (NY).
Others include favorites of the America Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), including Reps. George Latimer (NY), Henry Cuellar (Texas), Jared Golden (Maine), and Brad Schneider (Ill.), who have each received over a million dollars from it and other pro-Israel lobbying groups over their careers, according to FEC reports reviewed by Track AIPAC.
Other Democratic opponents include Reps. Steny Hoyer (Md.), Greg Landsman (Ohio), Jared Moskowitz (Fla.), Donald Norcross (NJ), Jimmy Panetta (Calif.), Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (Wash.), Brad Sherman (Calif.), Darren Soto (Fla.), Norma Torres (Calif.), Juan Vargas (Calif.), and Marc Veasey (Texas), many of whom have also received extensive support from the lobby.
As voting began on Tuesday afternoon, Lebanese-American journalist Rania Khalek said that "how people vote on this is a big indicator of who is bought and paid for by the war machine and Israel lobby."
In a comment to Axios, the staunch pro-Israel centrist Golden justified his vote against the measure by claiming that "to the best of my knowledge, we're not engaged in a conflict with Lebanon."
Latimer made a similar statement on social media, claiming that the resolution was only good for "messaging" since the US did not have any active troops in Lebanon.
But Tlaib argued on the House floor that "the United States is not a bystander to these war crimes. It's an active participant."
"The United States is currently engaged in illegal and unauthorized hostilities supporting the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in violation of the War Powers Act," she said. "The Trump administration is providing intelligence, coordinating strikes, demonstrating overt command over the Israeli military decisions, including greenlighting specific Israeli attacks and operations."
Other supporters of the resolution emphasized that ending Israel's occupation of Lebanon is a precondition for ending Trump's war with Iran.
"Ending Israeli military action in Lebanon is a key part of ensuring that the negotiation process with Iran continues and peace prevails in the Middle East," said Rep. Betty McCullom (D-Minn.).
The memorandum of understanding signed by the US and Iran earlier this month states that, for peace to be achieved, it must be implemented on "all fronts," including in Lebanon.
Iranian negotiators have repeatedly emphasized that they will not allow Trump to pull back from the war he's desperate to end unless Israel fully withdraws troops from Lebanon, which Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has emphatically refused to do.
Janet Abou-Elias, a researcher at the Democratizing Foreign Policy Project at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, told Common Dreams earlier this month that without US military participation, Israel could likely continue its occupation “only for a limited period of time."
Just Foreign Policy, an anti-war group that has agitated for the passage of Tlaib's war powers resolution, lambasted the 22 Democrats who voted against it.
"These 22 fringe House Democratic hawks revealed today that they don't actually want the Iran War to end," the group wrote in a post to social media. "By failing to end US participation in the Israeli war in Lebanon, they are undermining a peace deal."
Noting that the closure of the Strait of Hormuz has caused oil prices to spike and inflation to ripple across the economy, the group said these Democrats were "keeping prices high for Americans."
Just Foreign Policy's executive director Erik Sperling told The Intercept that although the resolution did not pass, the vote signaled that things were moving in the right direction.
“Democrats have been pretty unified about speaking out against the killing of innocents and all of the harm by the Iran War, but there has been less vocal outrage about the mass killing and occupation in Lebanon,” Sperling said. “This is just an important signal that Democrats are aware of the way the Lebanon war is a humanitarian crisis and is the key roadblock to ending this war and delivering the peace that Americans are demanding.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular