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.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) speaks during a committee hearing on February 17, 2022 in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)
Sen. Bernie Sanders on Monday criticized President Joe Biden's request for an $813.3 billion military budget in the next fiscal year as excessive, noting that the United States already spends more on national security than "the next 11 countries combined."
"We do not need a massive increase in the defense budget," Sanders (I-Vt.), the chair of the Senate Budget Committee, said in a statement. "Now that the president has done his job, it is up to Congress to review it, pass the proposals that make sense, and improve upon it."
"This shameful spending makes the U.S. less secure."
Part of a sprawling budget blueprint that the White House unveiled on Monday, Biden's military spending request for Fiscal Year 2023 represents a $31 billion increase over the current level of $782 billion, which is already unprecedented.
William Hartung, a senior research fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, noted in a statement that Biden's proposed budget is "substantially more--adjusted for inflation--than spending at the height of the Korean or Vietnam wars, and over $100 billion more than peak spending during the Cold War."
"The Pentagon's FY 2023 budget will be a boon to defense contractors," Hartung continued, "with a proposed $276 billion for weapons procurement and R&D combined, over $30 billion more than the department's FY 2022 proposal."
If approved by Congress, Biden's latest budget would put the U.S. on track to spend more than $8 trillion on its military over the next decade. In addition to providing $773 billion for the Pentagon alone, the White House's new proposal would also provide the Department of Energy with billions in funding to "modernize" the U.S. nuclear arsenal.
By contrast, Biden is asking Congress for just $44.9 billion in total funding to fight the climate emergency in Fiscal Year 2023.
Robert Weissman, president of the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, said in a statement Monday that "spending $813 billion on weaponry and military contractor pay-offs and calling it 'defense spending' is ill-advised and enormously wasteful."
"The greatest threats to Americans in the 21st century are not external adversaries, but rather skyrocketing wealth inequality, impending climate chaos, public health crises, and corporate greed," said Weissman. "The broken Washington consensus that sky-high Pentagon spending will somehow keep Americans safe works to prop up the military-industrial complex while siphoning resources away from real solutions to these problems and true, urgent human needs."
"Congress must resist the growing pressures to increase militarized spending at all costs," he added, "and instead put that funding to work for everyday people."
\u201cThe US is fast racing to a trillion $ Pentagon budget.\n\nThis shameful spending makes the US LESS secure:\n\n- No more able to stop war but more likely to engage in warfare.\n\n- No more able to address pandemics or climate chaos, but with fewer resources for non-military challenges.\u201d— Robert Weissman (@Robert Weissman) 1648481751
In recent years, Sanders and other progressive lawmakers have tried to pass amendments that would enact modest cuts to the Pentagon budget or merely bring it back into line with the president's earlier requests.
But such efforts have failed to gain enough support to pass the House or Senate thanks in part to lawmakers who receive substantial campaign cash from the weapons industry, which benefits from an ever-increasing military budget.
While progressive lawmakers and advocacy groups spoke out against Biden's proposed military budget, they applauded other elements of the White House's request, including its push for restrictions on corporate stock buybacks and its call for a new annual tax targeting the ultra-rich.
\u201cBiden's proposal targets one of the dodgiest of all the dodgy ways CEOs inflate their paychecks: timing the sale of their own stock holdings to capture the gains from a stock spike they artificially create through buybacks. https://t.co/LNCPcTcHuM\u201d— Sarah Anderson (@Sarah Anderson) 1648484336
Morris Pearl, the chair of the Patriotic Millionaires, hailed Biden's decision to include a minimum tax on billionaires in his budget blueprint as "a monumental step towards making the richest people in the United States pay taxes every year just like Americans who work for a living."
"Democrats in Congress should build on the White House's endorsement and go all-in on passing the Billionaires Income Tax this year," Pearl argued. "The American people want to tax the rich, and they'll reward Democrats in November if they can do it."
In his statement on Monday, Sanders added that "at a time when over 700 billionaires in America became nearly $2 trillion richer during the pandemic while tens of millions continue to struggle, we need a budget that demands that the wealthiest Americans pay their fair share of taxes and substantially improves the lives of working families with children, the elderly, the sick, and the poor."
"I will be doing everything I can to pass a strong and robust budget reconciliation bill that works for working families, not the top 1%," said the Vermont senator.
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. |
Sen. Bernie Sanders on Monday criticized President Joe Biden's request for an $813.3 billion military budget in the next fiscal year as excessive, noting that the United States already spends more on national security than "the next 11 countries combined."
"We do not need a massive increase in the defense budget," Sanders (I-Vt.), the chair of the Senate Budget Committee, said in a statement. "Now that the president has done his job, it is up to Congress to review it, pass the proposals that make sense, and improve upon it."
"This shameful spending makes the U.S. less secure."
Part of a sprawling budget blueprint that the White House unveiled on Monday, Biden's military spending request for Fiscal Year 2023 represents a $31 billion increase over the current level of $782 billion, which is already unprecedented.
William Hartung, a senior research fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, noted in a statement that Biden's proposed budget is "substantially more--adjusted for inflation--than spending at the height of the Korean or Vietnam wars, and over $100 billion more than peak spending during the Cold War."
"The Pentagon's FY 2023 budget will be a boon to defense contractors," Hartung continued, "with a proposed $276 billion for weapons procurement and R&D combined, over $30 billion more than the department's FY 2022 proposal."
If approved by Congress, Biden's latest budget would put the U.S. on track to spend more than $8 trillion on its military over the next decade. In addition to providing $773 billion for the Pentagon alone, the White House's new proposal would also provide the Department of Energy with billions in funding to "modernize" the U.S. nuclear arsenal.
By contrast, Biden is asking Congress for just $44.9 billion in total funding to fight the climate emergency in Fiscal Year 2023.
Robert Weissman, president of the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, said in a statement Monday that "spending $813 billion on weaponry and military contractor pay-offs and calling it 'defense spending' is ill-advised and enormously wasteful."
"The greatest threats to Americans in the 21st century are not external adversaries, but rather skyrocketing wealth inequality, impending climate chaos, public health crises, and corporate greed," said Weissman. "The broken Washington consensus that sky-high Pentagon spending will somehow keep Americans safe works to prop up the military-industrial complex while siphoning resources away from real solutions to these problems and true, urgent human needs."
"Congress must resist the growing pressures to increase militarized spending at all costs," he added, "and instead put that funding to work for everyday people."
\u201cThe US is fast racing to a trillion $ Pentagon budget.\n\nThis shameful spending makes the US LESS secure:\n\n- No more able to stop war but more likely to engage in warfare.\n\n- No more able to address pandemics or climate chaos, but with fewer resources for non-military challenges.\u201d— Robert Weissman (@Robert Weissman) 1648481751
In recent years, Sanders and other progressive lawmakers have tried to pass amendments that would enact modest cuts to the Pentagon budget or merely bring it back into line with the president's earlier requests.
But such efforts have failed to gain enough support to pass the House or Senate thanks in part to lawmakers who receive substantial campaign cash from the weapons industry, which benefits from an ever-increasing military budget.
While progressive lawmakers and advocacy groups spoke out against Biden's proposed military budget, they applauded other elements of the White House's request, including its push for restrictions on corporate stock buybacks and its call for a new annual tax targeting the ultra-rich.
\u201cBiden's proposal targets one of the dodgiest of all the dodgy ways CEOs inflate their paychecks: timing the sale of their own stock holdings to capture the gains from a stock spike they artificially create through buybacks. https://t.co/LNCPcTcHuM\u201d— Sarah Anderson (@Sarah Anderson) 1648484336
Morris Pearl, the chair of the Patriotic Millionaires, hailed Biden's decision to include a minimum tax on billionaires in his budget blueprint as "a monumental step towards making the richest people in the United States pay taxes every year just like Americans who work for a living."
"Democrats in Congress should build on the White House's endorsement and go all-in on passing the Billionaires Income Tax this year," Pearl argued. "The American people want to tax the rich, and they'll reward Democrats in November if they can do it."
In his statement on Monday, Sanders added that "at a time when over 700 billionaires in America became nearly $2 trillion richer during the pandemic while tens of millions continue to struggle, we need a budget that demands that the wealthiest Americans pay their fair share of taxes and substantially improves the lives of working families with children, the elderly, the sick, and the poor."
"I will be doing everything I can to pass a strong and robust budget reconciliation bill that works for working families, not the top 1%," said the Vermont senator.
Sen. Bernie Sanders on Monday criticized President Joe Biden's request for an $813.3 billion military budget in the next fiscal year as excessive, noting that the United States already spends more on national security than "the next 11 countries combined."
"We do not need a massive increase in the defense budget," Sanders (I-Vt.), the chair of the Senate Budget Committee, said in a statement. "Now that the president has done his job, it is up to Congress to review it, pass the proposals that make sense, and improve upon it."
"This shameful spending makes the U.S. less secure."
Part of a sprawling budget blueprint that the White House unveiled on Monday, Biden's military spending request for Fiscal Year 2023 represents a $31 billion increase over the current level of $782 billion, which is already unprecedented.
William Hartung, a senior research fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, noted in a statement that Biden's proposed budget is "substantially more--adjusted for inflation--than spending at the height of the Korean or Vietnam wars, and over $100 billion more than peak spending during the Cold War."
"The Pentagon's FY 2023 budget will be a boon to defense contractors," Hartung continued, "with a proposed $276 billion for weapons procurement and R&D combined, over $30 billion more than the department's FY 2022 proposal."
If approved by Congress, Biden's latest budget would put the U.S. on track to spend more than $8 trillion on its military over the next decade. In addition to providing $773 billion for the Pentagon alone, the White House's new proposal would also provide the Department of Energy with billions in funding to "modernize" the U.S. nuclear arsenal.
By contrast, Biden is asking Congress for just $44.9 billion in total funding to fight the climate emergency in Fiscal Year 2023.
Robert Weissman, president of the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, said in a statement Monday that "spending $813 billion on weaponry and military contractor pay-offs and calling it 'defense spending' is ill-advised and enormously wasteful."
"The greatest threats to Americans in the 21st century are not external adversaries, but rather skyrocketing wealth inequality, impending climate chaos, public health crises, and corporate greed," said Weissman. "The broken Washington consensus that sky-high Pentagon spending will somehow keep Americans safe works to prop up the military-industrial complex while siphoning resources away from real solutions to these problems and true, urgent human needs."
"Congress must resist the growing pressures to increase militarized spending at all costs," he added, "and instead put that funding to work for everyday people."
\u201cThe US is fast racing to a trillion $ Pentagon budget.\n\nThis shameful spending makes the US LESS secure:\n\n- No more able to stop war but more likely to engage in warfare.\n\n- No more able to address pandemics or climate chaos, but with fewer resources for non-military challenges.\u201d— Robert Weissman (@Robert Weissman) 1648481751
In recent years, Sanders and other progressive lawmakers have tried to pass amendments that would enact modest cuts to the Pentagon budget or merely bring it back into line with the president's earlier requests.
But such efforts have failed to gain enough support to pass the House or Senate thanks in part to lawmakers who receive substantial campaign cash from the weapons industry, which benefits from an ever-increasing military budget.
While progressive lawmakers and advocacy groups spoke out against Biden's proposed military budget, they applauded other elements of the White House's request, including its push for restrictions on corporate stock buybacks and its call for a new annual tax targeting the ultra-rich.
\u201cBiden's proposal targets one of the dodgiest of all the dodgy ways CEOs inflate their paychecks: timing the sale of their own stock holdings to capture the gains from a stock spike they artificially create through buybacks. https://t.co/LNCPcTcHuM\u201d— Sarah Anderson (@Sarah Anderson) 1648484336
Morris Pearl, the chair of the Patriotic Millionaires, hailed Biden's decision to include a minimum tax on billionaires in his budget blueprint as "a monumental step towards making the richest people in the United States pay taxes every year just like Americans who work for a living."
"Democrats in Congress should build on the White House's endorsement and go all-in on passing the Billionaires Income Tax this year," Pearl argued. "The American people want to tax the rich, and they'll reward Democrats in November if they can do it."
In his statement on Monday, Sanders added that "at a time when over 700 billionaires in America became nearly $2 trillion richer during the pandemic while tens of millions continue to struggle, we need a budget that demands that the wealthiest Americans pay their fair share of taxes and substantially improves the lives of working families with children, the elderly, the sick, and the poor."
"I will be doing everything I can to pass a strong and robust budget reconciliation bill that works for working families, not the top 1%," said the Vermont senator.
"What AOC is doing is leadership—and people see that," said one observer.
A poll released Friday from the progressive think tank Data for Progress has Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez besting Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, also a Democrat, by 19 points in a hypothetical matchup in the 2028 New York primary for a U.S. Senate seat.
According to the poll, which was was first shared exclusively with Politico, 55% of voters said they would cast a ballot for Ocasio-Cortez or leaned toward supporting her, and 36% said they would support Schumer or leaned toward supporting him, with 9% undecided.
The only subgroup that supported Schumer over Ocasio-Cortez were moderates, who favored Schumer 50%-35%, with 15% undecided. Ocasio-Cortez carried all other subgroups with an outright majority, except for voters over the age of 45, 49% of whom said they would support her or leaned toward supporting her.
The poll—while several years out from the actual race—comes in the wake of Schumer's decision to throw his support behind a Republican-backed spending bill in early March, a move that roiled his own party and prompted calls for him to step aside from his leadership position in the Senate.
The episode also sparked murmurs among some Democrats that Ocasio-Cortez should consider a primary bid against Schumer in 2028.
The poll was conducted March 26-31 and surveyed 767 likely Democratic primary voters in New York state. According to Data for Progress, the polling indicated that the hypothetical matchup between Ocasio-Cortez and Schumer is "relatively static" and does not shift when voters are offered more information about the respective candidates.
Ocasio-Cortez recently declined to speak about a potential run for Senate in 2028, according to Politico.
"Replacing Chuck Schumer with AOC would be an incredible upgrade. I guess we'll have to wait four more years…," wrote Bhaskar Sunkara, president of The Nation.
Zephyr Teachout, a professor at the Fordham University School of Law, shared Politico's reporting on the poll and wrote: "Good morning to leadership and fighting oligarchy!"
"What I mean is that what AOC is doing is leadership—and people see that," added Teachout, who also highlighted that the poll found that an overwhelming majority of respondents, 84%, want their leaders to do more to resist the actions of U.S. President Donald Trump.
Another observer, market researcher Adam Carlson, highlighted that despite Schumer's loss in the hypothetical race, most respondent subgroups still view him favorably, according to the poll. Besides "very liberal" voters and those between ages 18-44, Schumer stands at over 50% "favorable" among all other subgroups surveyed.
"People just want a changing of the guard," said Carlson.
"Trade and tariff wars have no winners," said China's foreign ministry. "We urge the U.S. to stop doing the wrong thing."
The Chinese government on Friday responded to U.S. President Donald Trump's sweeping new tariffs with 34% import duties on all American goods beginning next week, intensifying global blowback against the White House and accelerating a worldwide financial market tailspin.
China's tariffs on U.S. imports, which match the tariffs the Trump administration moved this week to impose on Chinese goods, are set to take effect on April 10. Trump's 34% tariffs on Chinese imports come on top of the 20% tariffs the U.S. president imposed earlier this year.
"The U.S. approach does not conform to international trade rules, seriously damages China's legitimate rights and interests, and is a typical unilateral bullying practice," China's Ministry of Finance said in a Friday statement.
Additionally, China's Commerce Ministry announced immediate export restrictions on rare earth materials and "added 16 entities from the U.S., including High Point Aerotechnologies and Universal Logistics Holdings Inc., to its export control list," according to the state-run China Daily.
"Under the new rule," the outlet reported, "Chinese companies are prohibited from exporting dual-use items to these 16 U.S. entities. Any ongoing related export activities should be immediately halted, said the Ministry of Commerce."
Retaliatory tariffs from the world's second-largest economy mark the latest step in a global trade war launched by the Trump White House, which—despite warnings of disastrous impacts for working-class U.S. households and the broader economy—plowed ahead this week with a 10% universal tariff on imports and larger tariffs on a number of trading partners, including China.
Following Trump's official tariff announcement, Beijing condemned the duties as "unacceptable" and vowed to "take measures as necessary to firmly defend [China's] legitimate interests."
"Trade and tariff wars have no winners. Protectionism leads nowhere," said the spokesperson for China's foreign ministry on Thursday. "We urge the U.S. to stop doing the wrong thing, and resolve trade differences with China and other countries through consultation with equality, respect, and mutual benefit."
Other nations hit by Trump's tariffs are expected to respond in the coming days.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen told reporters Thursday that the E.U. was "already finalizing the first package of countermeasures in response to tariffs on steel, and we are now preparing for further countermeasures to protect our interests and our businesses if negotiations fail."
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney vowed that "we are going to fight these tariffs with countermeasures."
"In a crisis, it's important to come together and it's essential to act with purpose and with force," Carney added. "And that's what we will do."
"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 benefiting 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 Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT), 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 JCT 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 JCT'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."
A previous version of this story incorrectly stated the analysis was conducted by the Congressional Budget Office. It was conducted by the Joint Committee on Taxation.