Trump's cuts to this agency will cost families $500 a year: report
U.S. President Donald Trump reacts as he attends the premiere of the documentary film Melania at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. (REUTERS)
June 03, 2026
ALTERNET
President Donald Trump’s changes to the Social Security program, implemented under the guidance of X CEO Elon Musk, will cost many families $500 a year.
The new analysis by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) projects that benefit checks will be cut by $500 a month on average if the program is allowed to hit its “go-broke” date by late 2013. If these cuts were not imposed, the CRFB found, the absence of the 24 percent benefit cut in the Social Security Administration’s payments will cause the fund to be entirely exhausted.
“Applying this projected reduction to current state-level data, we estimate an across-the-board monthly cut would range from $459 to $556 across the 50 states and the District of Columbia,” the report explained. It identified the 10 states that will have the highest average cuts as Connecticut ($556), New Jersey ($554), New Hampshire ($553), Delaware ($549), Maryland ($541), Washington ($531), Minnesota ($530), Massachusetts ($527), Michigan ($523) and Utah ($523).
“The Senior Citizens League (TSCL) believes any discussion of Social Security solvency must be grounded in the reality that millions of older Americans depend on these earned benefits to pay for housing, food, healthcare, and other essential expenses,” Senior Citizens League spokesperson Shannon Benton told Nexstar. “Acting sooner rather than later can help restore the program’s long-term solvency while minimizing the impact on beneficiaries and avoiding sudden benefit reductions that millions of Americans can simply cannot afford.”
The CRFB added, “No state would be spared from the potentially devastating effects of insolvency.”
According to a recent report by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Trump has weakened the Social Security program by gutting its staff.
“In just 15 months, the Trump Administration has pushed out more than 8,000 Social Security Administration (SSA) workers — causing SSA’s largest one-year staffing reduction on record,” the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. “This 14 percent cut has compromised SSA’s ability to reliably serve seniors, bereaved families, and people with disabilities. By January 2026, SSA had fewer employees than at any time since 1967, when the agency was not yet responsible for administering Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and served 52 million fewer beneficiaries.”
Speaking with AlterNet last month, former Social Security Commissioner Martin O’Malley disputed the widespread argument made by fiscal conservatives that the program faces the threat of insolvency.
“This isn’t true — but it is often repeated,” O’Malley told AlterNet at the time. “Social Security is a pay as you go program. It is not funded by deficit spending. It is more akin to an insurance company. People premiums and benefits are paid out from those premiums. Even the surplus — which because of income inequality is being depleted sooner (2032) than thought in 1983, even that was built up by payroll tax, not borrowed money. “
O’Malley added, “An utter devaluation of the dollar — which Trump is causing and risking in so many reckless and self/serving ways (bitcoin), would be really bad for everything in US including Soc Sec, it is not true that Social Security depends on deficit spending for its support or benefits. (Except a small portion of admin expenses).”
'Unwell': Trump's surprising sizing chart draws immediate mockeryCOMMON DREAMS
0
U.S. President Donald Trump holds a placard comparing the reflecting to skyscrapers at the Oval Office of the White House, in Washington, D.C., June 3, 2026. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque
President Donald Trump showed off a surprising size chart during a press gaggle in the Oval Office on Wednesday, leaving onlookers stunned.
Trump held up a chart comparing the size of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool renovation project underway to famous skyscrapers such as the Willis Tower in Chicago, the Empire State Building, and One World Trade Center in New York. The chart was titled, "Our Pool is Bigger than Skyscrapers."
"So, if you lay it on its side, it would take two or three of them to fill it in," Trump told reporters as he held the sign. "The width is almost 200 feet wide."
Political analysts and observers were stunned by the moment and shared their reactions on social media.
"I don’t know who needs to hear this, but skyscrapers are vertical, and pools are flat," journalist Aaron Rupar posted on X.
"He keeps showing off this same chart. Unwell," the MeidasTouch Network posted on X.
"To be fair, the way things are going in his presidency, it's only a matter of time until those skyscrapers are lying on their side," the political advocacy group Majority Democrats posted on X.
"The way in which men like Trump will so predictably hold a public show-and-tell to compare the size of phallic objects…" Michelle Kinney, a Democratic strategist, posted on X.
‘The Country Is Not Trump’s to Liquidate’: New Report Details Depths of Presidential Corruption and Grift
“Americans know they’re being ripped off and are demanding accountability.”
Brad Reed
Jun 03, 2026
COMMON DREAMS
The American Economic Liberties Project and Groundwork Collaborative on Wednesday released a joint report detailing how President Donald Trump’s unprecedented corruption is padding his own pockets at the expense of US taxpayers.
The report—titled “The Price of Corruption: How Trump’s Pay-to-Play Administration is Driving Up Costs for Working Families”—explains how Trump isn’t just using the presidency to enrich himself, but leaving ordinary Americans to foot the bill for his corrupt dealings
The report notes that the TrumpRx website, which purports to offer Americans deep discounts on drugs, is actually a scheme for funneling even more money to large pharmaceutical companies.
“When Trump rolled out TrumpRX earlier this year, the administration claimed it was a way for Americans to access more affordable prescription drugs,” the report states. “Instead, the platform fails to disclose information about less expensive generic alternatives and, in some instances, charges consumers more for products that are available for less elsewhere.”
Rather than providing real relief, the report charges, TrumpRx “serves as free advertisement for Big Pharma and may be lining the pockets of the president’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., who is on the board of prescription drug platform BlinkRX, which stands to benefit from the administration’s promotion of direct-to-patient medicine sales.”
The report also highlights the way that Trump has used his tariffs, which raise the cost of imported goods for US consumers, as a personal self-enrichment tool, such as when he slashed tariffs on Switzerland “just a few days after Swiss business leaders presented him with a personalized gold bar worth more than $130,000 and a Rolex desk clock.”
Trump levied tariffs against Brazil last year in retaliation for that country convicting a political ally, former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, of plotting a coup to illegally stay in power after he lost an election to current President Luiz Inácio Lula Da Silva.
“Americans paid the price for Trump’s international allies breaking the law,” states the report, “as coffee imported from Brazil surged to a 40% increase in price.”
One particularly egregious instance of Trump’s corruption, the report explains, comes from the president’s unprecedented number of pardons of political allies, including hundreds of rioters who violently stormed the US Capitol on his behalf on January 6, 2021.
Beyond the high-profile rioter cases, the report shines a spotlight on a number of white-collar criminals who have received presidential clemency, including Paul Walczak, “a nursing home executive convicted of tax evasion” who was pardoned “three weeks after his mother donated $1 million to Trump at a Mar-a-Lago fundraiser,” and cryptocurrency mogul Changpeng Zhao, who received a pardon months after helping boost the Trump family’s crypto venture.
The report notes that the Trump administration has also stacked regulatory agencies in ways that directly benefit the business interests of the president’s family members, most prominently in the realm of online prediction markets tied to Donald Trump Jr.
“Over the past year, Donald Trump Jr. has served as a strategic advisor to Kalshi and a large investor in Polymarket, while the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC)—the agency overseeing these firms—has acted as their ally, rather than their watchdog,” the report says. “Both firms had actively lobbied Trump’s CFTC to block states from regulating prediction markets in the same way they regulate gambling companies.”
Morgan Harper, director of policy and advocacy at the American Economic Liberties Project, called the report on Trump’s corruption “a reminder that we cannot afford to look away or pretend that any of this is normal.”
“The country,” Harper added, “is not Trump’s to liquidate.”
Molly Claflin, senior fellow at Groundwork Collaborative, made the case that Trump’s corruption and the economic pain being felt by Americans are inseparable.
“As working families buckle under the weight of Trump’s high prices, the president is further driving up costs by abusing his position to direct taxpayer-funded kickbacks to his family and political allies,” said Claflin. “His erratic policymaking is making daily life more expensive. Americans know they’re being ripped off and are demanding accountability.”
MAGA lawmaker calls for progressive American Hasan Piker to be banned from his own countryRAW STORY
FILE PHOTO: Randy Fine, Republican nominee for 2025 Florida's 6th congressional district special election, speaks at a watch party, as Florida holds a special election for a U.S. House of Representatives seat vacated by National Security Adviser Michael Waltz, in Ormond Beach, Florida, U.S. April 1, 2025. REUTERS/Octavio Jones/File Photo
Rep. Randy Fine (R-FL) said he thinks progressive influencer Hasan Piker should be banned from the United States after the United Kingdom blocked his visit with fellow commentator and his uncle, Cenk Uygur, TMZ reported on Wednesday.
The MAGA lawmaker was walking on Capitol Hill when a TMZ reporter asked Fine to comment on Piker's entry to the country being revoked over the weekend. The two were scheduled to speak at the SXSW London Festival but were turned away "because of their criticism of Israel," The BBC reported.
"Well I don't think he should be allowed into America, so I think that's a good start," Fine said.
The TMZ reporter responded and asked Fine, "What about freedom of speech?"
"People have freedom of speech but I think when you're a terrorist you should be held responsible for that," Fine said. "And I think he's clearly a supporter of terror. He's a walking billboard for the problem of birth tourism. He was brought here by his Turkish family, they had him, then they took him home, made him hate America, then sent him in to torment us. The guy's a horrible human being and I wouldn't let him into my country if it was up to me, so I don't blame them."
Piker, who is an American citizen, has condemned Islamophobia and been an outspoken critic of MAGA and the Trump administration. He has a large social media following, primarily through streaming on Twitch and weighing in on political topics. He frequently discusses social issues and engages in debates with commentators across the political spectrum.
The reporter pushed back again and suggested that "banning him from a country is [a] pretty crazy step for someone who is expressing his opinion."
"And by the way, they're allowed to do that," Fine said.
When the reporter pressed the Republican again on freedom of speech, he repeated his talking point.
"He promotes Muslim terror, so I think they're making the right decision," said Fine, making the unsubstantiated claim. "I'm surprised they did it but I think they did the right thing."
‘Absurd and Cowardly’: Labour Government Slammed for Barring Hasan Piker, Cenk Uygur From UK
“An Israeli politician who oversaw genocide? Here’s a red carpet!” one critic said in response to the ban.
Influencer Hasan Piker speaks at Web Summit Vancouver 2026 at Vancouver Convention Centre in Vancouver, Canada on May 13, 2026.
(Photo By Florencia Tan Jun/Web Summit via Sportsfile via Getty Images)
Brad Reed
Jun 01, 2026
COMMON DREAMS
The UK government is drawing heavy criticism for barring Cenk Uygur and Hasan Piker, two prominent critics of Israel, from entering the country.
According to a Monday report from The Guardian, the UK’s Home Office cancelled electronic travel authorizations (ETA) for both Uygur and Piker on grounds that their presence in the country “may not be conducive to the public good.”
Uygur took to social media shortly afterward and said the UK banned him due to his criticisms of Israeli influence over US policy.
“I didn’t get banned for criticizing the UK, but for criticizing Israel,” Uygur wrote. “They broke the irony record by saying it was because I said Israel might control other governments.”
“Think about it,” Uygur added, “if I had said that the Israeli government controls the British government so thoroughly that they’ll ban someone from coming to the UK just for criticizing Israel, they would have said that was an antisemitic statement. This is absolutely Kafkaesque.”
Shortly after Uygur’s post, Piker, who is Uygur’s nephew, accused the UK government of barring him for similar reasons.
“The UK has revoked my visa as well,” Piker wrote. “All at the behest of Israel. The west is betraying ‘liberal values’ for a genocidal fascist foreign government.”
UK commentator Owen Jones noted the “double standard” in the UK’s decision to bar Israel critics such as Uygur and Piker, but not applying the same restrictions to Israeli politicians who have engaged in genocidal rhetoric against Palestinians.
“An Israeli politician who oversaw genocide? Here’s a red carpet!” wrote Jones. “And you can say anything, however murderous, about Palestinians and freely enter. If you say: ‘I’m glad Israel wiped Gaza from the face of the earth,’ in you come!”
Jeremy Corbyn, former leader of the UK Labour Party, the current ruling party whose government decided to bar the two Israel critics, described the move as “an absurd and cowardly decision from an increasingly authoritarian government.”
“Let us call this what it is,” Corbyn added, “an attack on the freedom to criticize Israel, as well as the UK government’s own complicity in genocide.”
Jemimah Steinfeld, chief executive of the Index on Censorship, told The Guardian that the ban is “paternalistic” on the government’s part because it “assumes we are just passive consumers of views rather than people who can think, judge, and challenge.”
Steinfeld also predicted that the ban would ultimately be ineffective.
“It confers an underdog status to the people not allowed to enter, it could embolden other countries to follow suit, and it feels fairly meaningless in the internet age where people can simply go online to hear what they have to say,” she said. “Free speech is tested by hard cases and, in this instance, the UK is failing.”
‘Profits Over Safety’: Chemical Disasters Under Trump Pile Up as More Safety Cuts Loom
“Instead of protecting workers and families from death, injury, and illness, Trump’s EPA is putting communities at greater risk of harm,” said the Coalition to Prevent Chemical Disasters.
An aerial view of water being sprayed onto an overheated 34,000-gallon tank at GKN Aerospace on May 23, 2026 in Garden Grove, California.
(Photo by Apu Gomes/Getty Images)
Brad Reed
Jun 01, 2026
COMMON DREAMS
Two recent high-profile chemical plant disasters are putting a spotlight on the Trump administration’s aggressive deregulation of the industry, with even more cuts to chemical safety regulations expected in the coming months.
The disasters—one at a paper mill in Washington state that killed 11 people and the other in an aerospace plastics facility in California that forced tens of thousands of people to evacuate their homes—came after months of warnings from experts and labor unions about the impact of the administration’s deregulatory agenda.
In late March, for instance, members of United Steelworkers (USW) rallied in Washington, DC to protest against a US Environmental Protection Agency plan to scrap regulations enacted under former President Joe Biden, which included “new safeguards such as identifying safer technologies and chemical alternatives, requiring implementation of safeguard measures in certain cases, more thorough incident investigations, and third-party auditing.”
USW Local 13-228 process safety specialist Phil Stagg at the time warned that scrapping the rule would put “profits over safety” by prioritizing cost cutting over worker safety.
Following last week’s twin disasters, the Coalition to Prevent Chemical Disasters also pointed to plans to weaken Biden-era safety regulations as a grave mistake that will put American workers at greater risk.
“The fatal and shocking incidents communities have faced in recent days demonstrate the urgent need to implement and build on existing regulatory safeguards so communities near chemical facilities are protected from chemical disasters,” the group said. “But, instead of protecting workers and families from death, injury, and illness, Trump’s EPA is putting communities at greater risk of harm by weakening the nation’s primary defense against chemical facility incidents.”
The administration has also been targeting the Chemical Safety Board (CSB), an independent federal watchdog charged with investigating the root causes of industrial chemical accidents.
As The New York Times reported last month, Trump’s proposed budget all but eliminates the CSB by cutting its funding down to $0 while arguing that the watchdog merely duplicates work already done by the EPA.
Rep. Marie Glusenkamp Perez (D-Wash.) said in a Sunday social media post that the CSB did essential work in preventing future accidents, and she vowed to fight the administration’s plans to zero out its budget.
“I’ll be making it my priority ensuring [CSB] has the resources they need for a through, unbiased investigation,” Perez said. “They also have three vacancies currently on that board of directors, and my hope is that we’re able to work with the administration to ensure that people with real trades experience are appointed to that board.”
Jordan Barab, a former deputy assistant secretary at the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), explained in an interview published by Mountain State Spotlight last week that CSB produces invaluable work about chemical disasters’ root causes, whereas the EPA’s work focuses on whether disasters were caused by violating federal regulations.
In particular, Barab noted that CSB can “look at other problems, other causes that aren’t necessarily covered by regulations or standards,” and added that “a lot of the ways the industry has modernized to improve safety are based on recommendations that came out of the CSB.”
Schumer Among Top Dems Who Marched at NYC Israel Parade With Accused ‘War Criminal’ Smotrich
Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich has called for the “annihilation” of Gaza and has led forced displacement efforts in the West Bank.
US Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) is seen at the 2026 Israel Day Parade on May 31, 2026 in New York City.
(Photo by BG048/Bauer-Griffin/GC Images)
Julia Conley
Jun 01, 2026
Numerous headlines over the weekend focused on New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s decision not to attend the city’s Israel Day Parade on Sunday, with Israeli officials condemning his absence and outlets emphasizing that he was breaking “with a decades-long political custom because of his support of Palestinian rights.”
But with the Israeli government’s approval rating plummeting among the US public, including Jewish Americans, since Israel began its US-backed assault on Gaza more than two-and-a-half years ago, progressives were asking not why Mamdani skipped the parade—but why top Democratic officials such as Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (NY) chose to take part in it, especially considering the involvement of Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich.
The International Criminal Court requested a warrant for Smotrich’s arrest last month over his efforts to forcibly expel thousands of Palestinians from their homes in the West Bank, a violation of international law. He has played a key role in efforts to expand Israeli settlements in the West Bank, which have ramped up since October 2023, when Israel began attacking Gaza’s entire population of over 2 million Palestinians in retaliation for a Hamas-led attack. He also publicly called for the “annihilation” of Gaza in 2024.
The New York Times reported that Smotrich was not part of Israel’s official delegation that was sent to take part in the annual parade, whose theme this year was “Proud Americans, Proud Zionists,” but he marched nonetheless.
The Israeli government sent about 10 members of the Israeli Knesset to take part in the event, including two members of National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir’s ultranationalist Otzma Yehudit Party. Heritage Minister Amichai Eliyahu, who said last year that Israel was “rushing toward Gaza being wiped out,” was also part of the delegation.
As Smotrich was joining establishment Democratic figures from New York state in the parade—including New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, US Rep. Dan Goldman, Attorney General Letitia James, and New York City Council Speaker Julie Menin—Ben-Gvir on Sunday was publicly calling for the Israel Defense Forces to “flatten” Beirut’s suburbs in the IDF’s incursion into Lebanon—“a direct incitement to mass civilian destruction,” according to Middle East Eye.
“Why is it controversial for Zohran to skip a parade because of his principles but not for Democratic politicians to march with a fascist bigot like Smotrich?” asked Ben Rhodes, a former national security official under the Obama administration.
At the parade, Schumer spoke about his view that Jewish Americans’ “security and our safety is never safe as long as we lack a place of refuge, a homeland,” but Ali Abunimah, director of Electronic Intifada, wondered how the Senate leader’s involvement in a parade with officials who have openly called for ethnic cleansing would make hundreds of thousands of Muslim New Yorkers, including thousands of Palestinian Americans, feel about their own safety.
“How can all New Yorkers feel safe, especially Muslims and Palestinians, when the New York City police commissioner marches with genocidal criminals like Smotrich for the same supremacist cause?” said Abunimah, suggesting Commissioner Jessica Tisch should be removed for her involvement in the parade. “Would Mayor Zohran Mamdani keep a police chief who marched with [the Ku Klux Klan]?”
The city’s Democratic Socialists of America chapter called for Smotrich to “be arrested to face justice for his horrific crimes against Palestinians and humanity,” and said that “every politician who marched with him aligned themselves with Israel’s crimes.”
Along with the participation of Smotrich and Eliyahu, Palestinian journalist Abubaker Abed noted that at the parade, the flag of the IDF’s Golani Battalion, which was behind the killing of 15 Palestinian paramedics in Rafah last year, was displayed at the event.
Beth Miller, the political director for Jewish Voice for Peace, took issue with a statement by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) that condemned Mamdani for not taking part in the parade, calling it “the city’s largest and most visible Jewish celebration.”
“It’s antisemitic to conflate Jews and Israel. Which is exactly what the ADL is doing by calling the ‘Israel Day Parade’ a ‘Jewish celebration,’” said Miller. “As a Jewish person who lives here, I’m pretty fucking glad we finally have a mayor who isn’t at a parade celebrating atrocity crimes.”
Ryan Grim of Drop Site News pointed out that while New York City was welcoming the Israeli delegation, including officials from the country’s extreme right, commentators Hasan Piker and Cenk Uygur were barred from entering the United Kingdom. Both have vehemently criticized Israel and were flagged as potentially not being “conducive to the public good.”
Journalist Krystal Ball of the online show “Breaking Points” said sardonically that the two concurrent events displayed “Western values.”
Khanna Vows Amendment to Kill ‘Insidious’ Effort to Deepen Military Ties Between US, Israel
One analyst noted that Section 224 of the National Defense Authorization Act would “provide a higher level of military-industrial integration than the US has with any other country in the world.”
Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) conduct a news conference on February 9, 2026 in Washington, DC.
(Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
Jake Johnson
Jun 01, 2026
COMMON DREAMS
US Rep. Ro Khanna on Sunday said he will introduce an amendment to kill a provision tucked inside the sprawling 2027 National Defense Authorization Act that would deepen ties between the American and Israeli militaries.
Khanna (D-Calif.) wrote on social media that he would work to ensure the provision, Section 224 of the NDAA, is removed from the bill in the House Armed Services Committee, which is set to mark up the $1.15 trillion legislation on Thursday. The provision, according to legislative text unveiled last week, would “require the secretary of defense to designate an executive agent responsible for synchronizing cooperative efforts between the United States and Israel, including bilateral defense technology research, development, testing, evaluation, integration, and industrial cooperation.”
Khanna’s pledge to spearhead committee efforts to remove the provision came after Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.)—who has partnered with the California Democrat in pushing for the full release of the Epstein files—condemned Section 224 on social media and vowed to “offer an amendment to strip it from the bill on the floor” if it survives the House Armed Services Committee.
“We are a sovereign country,” Massie wrote.
Ben Freeman, director of the Democratizing Foreign Policy program at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, noted last week that while the US and Israel “already work together heavily on missile defense,” Section 224 “would greatly expand coordination to seemingly every area of defense tech, including AI, quantum, autonomous systems, directed energy, cyber, biotech, and many more.”
“It also proposes ‘network integration’ and ‘data fusion.’ In other words, the US military’s data could soon be the Israeli military’s data. If fully enacted, this proposal would provide a higher level of military-industrial integration than the US has with any other country in the world,” Freeman wrote. “The result could well be a US political system even more susceptible to the whims of an Israeli government that seemingly has no qualms about drawing the US into military conflicts in the Middle East.”
The NDAA provision has drawn outrage from anti-war groups that are pushing American lawmakers to cut off military assistance to Israel over its genocidal assault on Gaza, which has been carried out with the help of US weaponry. Last month, the Trump administration fast-tracked the approval of a transfer of American rockets to the Israeli military, which receives around $4 billion per year in aid from the US.
“While Americans oppose more military aid to Israel, Congress is inserting something even deeper and more insidious into the US military budget (NDAA): US integration with the Israeli military!” Medea Benjamin, co-founder of the peace group CodePink, said last week. “Tell Congress: Reject Section 224 of the NDAA. No military integration. No weapons and AI partnerships.”
Section 224 is crammed into legislation that, if passed, would authorize more than $1 trillion in military spending for the coming fiscal year—part of President Donald Trump’s push for an unprecedented $1.5 trillion military budget for 2027.
Experts at the Center for American Progress (CAP) noted in a Monday analysis that “while the recently released chairman’s mark of the NDAA does moderate some aspects of the budget—such as introducing guardrails on the ‘Trump-class’ battleship program—it does not go nearly far enough.”
“Congress should refuse to authorize the president’s unjustifiable increase request,” CAP argued. “Instead, lawmakers should insist on a disciplined defense budget that makes sense, ensuring that funds are spent on programs critical for the well-being of American servicemembers and modern defense needs—not vanity projects with limited military utility.”
‘This Must Stop’: Call Grows for US Lawmakers to Pass Lebanon War Powers Resolution
A coalition of anti-war groups said Rep. Rashida Tlaib’s resolution “is the only legislative tool that can force a vote and thus every member of Congress to take a position about this war on the record.”
US Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) speaks during a press conference outside the US Capitol building on September 16, 2025, in Washington, DC.
(Photo by Celal Gunes/Anadolu via Getty Images)
As Israel’s deepening invasion of Lebanon threatens to derail peace talks between the US and Iran, American lawmakers are facing pressure to pass a war powers resolution to limit US involvement this week.
In recent days, despite a ceasefire agreement in April, Israel has ordered the forced evacuation of hundreds of thousands more Lebanese civilians from their homes in the country’s south, and declared all areas south of the Zahrani River a combat zone.
In what Defense Minister Israel Katz has described as a continuation of its “Gaza model,” the Israel Defense Forces have systematically razed dozens of villages across southern Lebanon.
US Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), who introduced the war powers resolution in April, said, “This must stop.”
“Our country should not be assisting or supporting indiscriminate bombings and forced displacement anywhere, including Lebanon,” Tlaib said on social media Monday, responding to a report that the death toll had climbed above 3,400 since Israel launched its assault on Lebanon in March. “We must pass the Lebanon war powers resolution this week.”
The brief resolution would require the US to end unauthorized military cooperation with Israel within seven days of being passed, which proponents said may also limit the ability of the US military to share intelligence and coordinate targets with Israel.
Tlaib and other progressives like Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) initially pushed for the resolution to be brought to a House vote during the week of May 18, but it was kicked until after lawmakers returned from recess.
In the meantime, several cosponsors have signed onto the resolution, bringing the total up to 17. They include Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar (D-Texas) and Rep. André Carson (D-Ind.), who serves on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
War powers votes can be introduced by any member of Congress and do not need the support of the Republican Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson (La.).
A coalition of anti-war groups led by Just Foreign Policy organized a letter-writing campaign to tell members of Congress to support the resolution. The groups say supporters have sent nearly 24,000 letters to Congress so far.
“Israel’s invasion of Lebanon has killed more than 3,000 people since March 2nd, displaced over 1.2 million—a fifth of the country’s entire population—and caused over $14 billion in destruction. Hospitals bombed. Entire villages erased,” they said. “Rashida Tlaib’s resolution... is the only legislative tool that can force a vote and thus every member of Congress to take a position about this war on the record.”
Spokespeople for the Democrats on the House Foreign Relations Committee did not respond when asked by Common Dreams whether members planned on supporting Tlaib’s resolution.
Israel has been accused of ramping up its attacks on Lebanon as a means of sabotaging peace talks between the US and Iran. Abbas Araghchi, Iran’s foreign minister, wrote on social media Monday that “the ceasefire between Iran and the US is unequivocally a ceasefire on all fronts, including in Lebanon.”
It was reported by Iran’s Tasnim News Agency on Monday that Tehran was backing away from talks with President Donald Trump in response to Israel’s escalation in Lebanon. The country’s foreign ministry said the US “bears direct responsibility both for the violations of the ceasefire against Iran and for the violations committed by the Zionist regime against Lebanon.”
However, after phone calls with a Hezbollah intermediary and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Trump said on Truth Social that “talks were continuing at a rapid pace,” and “there will be no Troops going to Beirut, and any Troops that are on their way have already been turned back.”
Netanyahu responded to the reports by saying that he planned to launch more attacks against Lebanon’s densely populated capital if Hezbollah did not stop attacking Israel, and that Israel would “continue operating in southern Lebanon as planned.”
Democrats Opposed to Tlaib’s Resolution to Stop U.S. Joining War on Lebanon
Israel’s war on Lebanon is “quickly turning southern Lebanon into the ‘next Gaza,’” according to advocacy groups.PublishedJune 3, 2026
U.S. Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) speaks during a news conference on congressional oversight of the homeland security in front of the U.S. Capitol on April 8, 2025 in Washington, DC.Alex Wong / Getty Images
Democrats are reportedly “not happy” that Michigan Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D) is pushing for a vote on a war powers resolution to limit U.S. support for Israel’s war on Lebanon, according to an Axios report on Wednesday.
The resolution, which is likely to face a vote on Thursday in the House, calls for President Donald Trump to end all U.S. participation in Israeli military operations in Lebanon, including removing U.S. forces and ending any intelligence sharing with Israel in Lebanon.
But according to lawmakers and aides, this resolution has engendered more opposition within the Democratic Party than Iran war powers resolutions.
“The United States is assisting this destruction [in Lebanon] through the weapons, intelligence, logistics, and diplomatic cover it provides the Israeli government,” Tlaib’s office explained in a press release.
Tlaib wrote on X on Monday that, “Our country should not be assisting or supporting indiscriminate bombings and forced displacement anywhere, including Lebanon.”
According to the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), Israel’s war on Lebanon is “quickly turning southern Lebanon into the ‘next Gaza.’” Israel has killed over 3,400 people and displaced over 1.2 million in Lebanon since its latest war on the country began in March. But Israel has been engaged in a lower-scale but longer-term war on the south of the country since 2024.
On Monday, Iranian state media announced that Iran would be ceasing negotiations with the U.S. due to Israel’s expanded war on Lebanon. Earlier that day, Israel had threatened to bomb the Lebanese capital, Beirut, while expanding its occupation of the south of the country.
Although Trump said later on Monday that he had spoken to both Hezbollah and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and that Beirut would not face strikes, Netanyahu said that Israeli forces “will continue to operate as planned in southern Lebanon.”
The U.S. government, meanwhile, has been working to pressure the Lebanese government to disarm Hezbollah, pushing for the demilitarization of the one group that has the ability to defend the south from Israel’s incursions. In February, the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Middle East held a hearing entirely focused on dismantling Hezbollah, with Democrats like Brad Sherman saying there is a “historic opportunity” to disarm Hezbollah in the wake of the genocide in Gaza. But this ignores realities in Lebanon. Beyond the fact that Hezbollah is the sole group with the capability of defending the south from Israel’s occupation, disarming Hezbollah would likely lead to civil war in the country.
Still, Democrats’ widespread agreement with disarming Hezbollah might be a factor in their seeming opposition to Tlaib’s resolution.
In a statement to Axios, Tlaib said: “Poll after poll shows that the American people do not support our government sending a blank check and unlimited military assistance to the Israeli government as it massacres thousands of innocent civilians and demolishes entire cities and communities.”
“Members of Congress should listen to them,” particularly as Israel’s campaign in Lebanon “threatens to prolong the disastrous war with Iran,” she said.
But top Democrats in the House Foreign Affairs, Armed Services and Intelligence Committees are likely to vote no, which will likely sway other Democrats to vote no.
‘Huge Win for the Constitution’ as House Finally Passes Iran War Powers Resolution
“Now it’s time for the Senate to act,” said CodePink’s Medea Benjamin. “Let’s keep the pressure on and send this resolution to Trump’s desk. No more illegal wars. No more blank checks for militarism.”
A group of National Guardsmen walk past a Win Without War billboard truck displaying the message “No War With Iran” in front of the US Capitol in Washington, DC on February 24, 2026.
(Photo by Jemal Countess/Getty Images for Win Without War)
Brett Wilkins
Jun 03, 2026
COMMON DREAMS
Raucous applause erupted in the House of Representatives on Wednesday after US lawmakers passed a war powers resolution aimed at ending Donald Trump’s illegal war of choice against Iran—although skeptics cautioned that the measure will likely have little impact on the actions of a president who has habitually shown utter contempt for the rule of law.
House lawmakers voted 215-208, with 7 legislators not voting, in favor of H.Con.Res.86, introduced in April by Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY) and cosponsored by Reps. James Himes (D-Conn.), Adam Smith (D-Wash.), Gabe Amo (D-RI), Maggie Goodlander (D-NH), and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.).
Every Democrat present voted for the resolution, while three Republicans—Reps. Tom Barrett (Mich.), Warren Davidson (Ohio), and Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.)—broke ranks with their GOP colleagues and joined Massie in voting to approve the measure, which directs Trump to “remove United States armed forces from hostilities with Iran.”
“We are trapped in a war that won’t end because an incompetent president launched it thinking of only his own ego while failing to prepare for the consequences,” Meeks, the ranking member on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said during floor debate ahead of Wednesday’s vote. “Diplomacy is the only exit from this, not more bombing, not more bluster.”
The War Powers Resolution of 1973—also known as the War Powers Act—requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing troops to military action and limiting such action to 60 days, with a 30-day withdrawal period, unless lawmakers declare war or issue an authorization for the use of military force.
It’s been 95 days since the US and Israel launched their war on Iran, which followed last summer’s separate bombing campaigns by both allies. Since then, more than 3,400 Iranians—many of them civilians—have been killed and over 26,000 others wounded by airstrikes, while Iranian counterattacks have killed 13 US troops, 26 Israelis, and over 20 people in Gulf Arab states aligned with the US.
House lawmakers had tried and failed to pass Iran war powers resolutions on three previous occasions. Last month, after four US Senate Republicans helped Democrats advance one of the resolutions, GOP leadership in the House canceled two subsequent votes on the measure.
“Since President Trump’s illegal war of choice on Iran began, I have been extremely clear over and over again that Congress alone has the power to declare war,” Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.)—who did not vote Wednesday because she was in India due to a family health emergency—said in a statement. “This war has had disastrous effects for the American people and for the world in the nearly 100 days since Trump began it without congressional approval.”
Jayapal continued:
“Waged with absolutely no imminent threat and no endgame, this war has already killed 13 US service members and injured many more; killed thousands of civilians in Iran and Lebanon, and displaced millions more; wasted billions in US taxpayer dollars that should have been spent on lowering healthcare and housing costs for Americans; and all while causing gas prices and grocery costs to skyrocket.
“The simple truth is that the American people are paying the price for Trump’s lawlessness,” Jayapal added. “Every day that this war continues is a violation of our Constitution.”
Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-NY) asserted that “our victory—while monumental—does not change the truth that this war never should have began, and never would have began, had the president not disgraced America and our laws to ensure that it did.”
Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) said on social media: “The American people are tired of presidents abusing their power by spending billions of our taxpayer dollars on unnecessary wars. I urge the Senate to quickly pass this bill to end Trump’s illegal war in Iran.”
Civil society groups opposed to the war applauded Wednesday’s vote, which Medea Benjamin, co-founder of the peace group CodePink, called a “total rebuke of Trump.”
“After 95 days of illegal war, Congress is finally enacting the will of the people, who overwhelmingly oppose President Trump’s disastrous war on Iran,” Eric Eikenberry, government relations director at Win Without War, said in a statement.
“While congressional action is welcome, it is woefully late. Congress should not have taken over three months to pass a resolution that would force Trump to end this war,” he continued. “Their delay has left millions of people struggling amidst unnecessary, unacceptable human and economic consequences.”
“Lawmakers who’ve placed their loyalty to Trump over acting to determine when and whether the United States goes to war have failed both their constituents and their constitutional duty,” Eikenberry added.
Naveed Shah, political director of the veterans’ group Common Defense, said following the vote, “Veterans understand the costs of war better than most Americans, which is why we commend the Republicans who joined Democrats on this vote and showed the kind of courage and independence this moment demands.”
“This was an important step toward ending a dangerous war and ensuring that the American people have a voice through their elected representatives,” Shah added. “It is long past time to put guardrails on this brazen president, who launched us into an illegal war with Iran.”
Alix Fraser, vice president of advocacy at Issue One, a group dedicated to reducing the role of money in politics, said in a statement that “today’s vote is a huge win for the Constitution and for the American people.”
“The House finally had the political willpower to stand up to the president’s unconstitutional war,” Fraser added. “Americans should celebrate this massive victory, but have every right to feel frustrated that it took this long for Congress to work on behalf of the people. That must change. Our democracy will not survive if Congress fails to uphold its responsibility to check executive power at this critical juncture.”
“Every day that this war continues is a violation of our Constitution.”
Some observers noted that Wednesday’s vote is likely to be largely symbolic, pointing to Trump’s veto—and the Senate’s failure to overturn it—of a 2019 bipartisan war powers resolution directing him to end US military support for the Saudi-led war in Yemen.
Still, lawmakers and advocates urged the Senate to pass the Iran resolution to uphold the rule of law and force Trump’s hand.
“Ending this war is a moral imperative,” said Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.).
Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) implored upper chamber lawmakers to “immediately follow suit and act to end this war.”
Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-NM) posted on Bluesky: “Now it’s time to pass the Senate. The power to declare war has been with Congress. Now let’s get it done and end this war!”
Benjamin said: “Now it’s time for the Senate to act. Let’s keep the pressure on and send this resolution to Trump’s desk. No more illegal wars. No more blank checks for militarism.”
In ‘Troubling Escalation’ Against Free Press, Pentagon Bans Reporters From Public Affairs Office
“Banning journalists from the press office in the Pentagon, where they worked professionally in previous administrations, is simply a sign that current DOD leadership fears accountability,” said one reporter.
US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth speaks during the 23rd IISS Shangri-La Dialogue at the Shangri-La Hotel on May 30, 2026 in Singapore.
(Photo by Ezra Acayan/Getty Images)
Julia Conley
Jun 02, 2026
COMMON DREAMS
The Trump administration’s “asinine attempts to silence objective journalism just hit a new low,” said one press freedom advocate late Monday after the Pentagon announced that the US Department of Defense would mark its press office as a classified area, banning journalists from the space where they’ve previously talked openly with DOD officials.
Reporters on the military are currently largely banned from the building altogether as litigation is ongoing over the administration’s requirement that journalists have an escort to move about the Pentagon, but the new policy means that should they be able to return, they would be even more limited in their access to public affairs officers whose job it is to keep the press and public informed.
“For multiple administrations, Pentagon reporters have used the press office to meet with public affairs officers and have open conversations about what America’s armed services are doing in order to keep the public informed,” said Ben Grazda, an advocacy manager for Reporters Without Borders North America.
Calling Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth “petulant” and pointing to his unsuccessful demand that journalists sign “loyalty pledges,” Grazda added that “journalists will continue their tenacious reporting and hold the Pentagon accountable for the money, operations, and lives they impact every day.”
The Washington Post reported that Pentagon speechwriters will be moved into the public affairs office, which will be equipped with the Secret Internet Protocol Router Network, or SIPRNet, which is used to transmit classified information.
“This is the most transparent war department in history. No amount of spin from the Fake News media will change that. The Pentagon Press Office has been redesignated as a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility due to speechwriters from the Office of the Secretary of War sharing the facility,” said Jose Valdez, the acting Defense Department press secretary, on social media on Monday, referring to Hegseth by the title he prefers.
Despite Valdez’s claims, journalists referred to the decision as “Orwellian” and noted that Hegseth is further curtailing press access to the Pentagon as the US is mediating talks to end the war the US and Israel started against Iran in February.
The policy was also announced as The New York Times reported that Hegseth had blocked the promotions of nine Navy officers who had been selected by senior Navy admirals, appearing to “violate the rules governing a promotion system that is supposed to be apolitical and merit-based.”
“Banning journalists from the press office in the Pentagon, where they worked professionally in previous administrations, is simply a sign that current DOD leadership fears accountability,” said Times reporter Trip Gabriel.
The decision to close the press office to members of the press comes eight months after hundreds of journalists walked out of the Pentagon in protest of a new policy barring them from seeking information that the Trump administration had not authorized for release.
That policy was struck down by a federal court earlier this year, but the government has appealed the ruling.
The National Press Club called the Pentagon’s newest policy “a remarkable and troubling escalation in the Defense Department’s ongoing effort to restrict independent reporting.”
“This move does not occur in isolation,” said Mark Schoeff Jr., a reporter at CQ Roll Call and president of the organization. “It follows a troubling pattern of escalating restrictions on Pentagon coverage, including efforts to limit journalists to pre-approved information, revoke credentials for routine reporting practices, and physically remove reporters from long-standing workspaces and access without an escort.”
“Calling a press workspace ‘classified’ does not make the government more transparent,” said Schoeff. “It creates yet another obstacle between journalists and the information Americans have a right to know, especially at a moment when the public needs clear, unfiltered information about the US military.”
“Independent reporting on the US military is not optional,” he added. “When journalists are pushed farther from the institutions they cover, the American people are left with less information, less transparency, and less oversight. Any effort to restrict that access should alarm everyone who values a free and informed society.”
.jpg)