Thursday, November 05, 2026

 ‘Power of the Purse’: Schumer Indicates Democrats Will Defund Trump’s Illegal Iran War



“We are going to end the war.”



Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) speaks during a press conference with the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee on November 3, 2026 in Washington, DC.
(Photo by Tom Brenner/Getty Images)

Brad Reed
Nov 04, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

Democratic Senate Leader Chuck Schumer on Wednesday indicated that his party will defund President Donald Trump’s illegal war with Iran when it takes over as the majority next year.

While speaking with reporters, Schumer (D-NY) was asked how Democrats planned to end the war, which Trump launched without congressional authorization in February.

“We are going to end the war,” said Schumer. “We already have some Republicans who have joined us in ending the war. And the Founding Fathers had the power of the purse as one of the ways of deterring a president who does war without the consent of the American people.”

Democrats on Tuesday secured majorities in the US House of Representatives and the Senate, and Democrats will have at least 54 members in the congressional upper chamber.

Earlier this year, four Republicans in the Senate—Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Bill Cassidy (R-La.), and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)—voted with the vast majority of Democrats to pass a war powers resolution aimed at compelling Trump to end the Iran War.


Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) was the lone Democrat to oppose the measure.

While Cassidy and Collins will leave office at the end of this year, a full majority in both chambers of Congress will enable Democrats to go beyond passing war powers resolutions and cut off funding for the US Department of Defense until Trump agrees to wind down the conflict.

Schumer’s remarks on defunding the war came shortly after Vice President JD Vance posted a message on social media acknowledging that voter dissatisfaction with the war, and the subsequent rise in energy prices caused by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, were the major reasons for Republicans’ defeat.

“The reason we lost is the war,” Vance wrote. “The president himself said so last night. If you’d like to argue it was worth it, that losing the Senate for the next six years was worth it, then do so. Argue it was a worthwhile cost to pay. Agree or disagree, that’s at least honest. But everyone knows why we lost.”

Vance’s statement also earned the endorsement of Donald Trump Jr., who may or may not have understood that it was an implicit criticism of his father’s decision-making.

“Every word of this,” the president’s eldest son—who, along with Vance, may run for the White House in 2028—wrote in response to the vice president.
The ‘Blue Wave’ Means Nothing if We Don’t Stop the National Defense Authorization Act

As taxpayers, we are funding our own endgame, but we don’t have to.



Anti-War activists gathered outside the Internal Revenue Service offices in Manhattan for a demonstration on the “traditional” deadline date to file taxes to protest federal tax dollars being spent on the Pentagon and all US wars.

(Photo by Erik McGregor/LightRocket via Getty Images)

Melissa Garriga
Nov 05, 2026
Common Dreams


Tuesday night’s election results proved that a majority of people in this country do not want war and genocide. Polling overwhelmingly showed that the war on Iran was one of the biggest motivating factors in voting. So why are we about to give the very people voters rejected an unprecedented $1.5 trillion budget to continue their reign of death and destruction? Why are we going to allow Congress to hand over the largest war budget in human history to weapons manufacturers and AI tech billionaires who work at the behest of known war criminals?

In the next few weeks, Congress is set to pass what should be viewed as the deadliest piece of legislation of our time—the 2027 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)—or the country’s defense budget, as it is more commonly known. Its potential passage is setting US taxpayers up to be the funders of their own demise by giving carte blanche to a department of war criminals and their humanity-destroying techno-fascist friends with an obscene $1.5 trillion treasure chest to control, murder, oppress, and destroy the planet as we know it.

Sounds a bit hyperbolic? Not if you look at their past and what they are openly saying now, as a prologue.

If you were watching a summer blockbuster and the main characters were handing over their hard-earned money and essentially their trust to the person you know is going to assassinate them in the final act, you would be screaming at the screen, “Don’t do it!”

To understand why this war budget is a catastrophic time bomb, you first have to understand what it actually funds. Under the guise of providing national “security” and protecting “democracy,” the annual Pentagon budget does little of both. Instead, the budget, which consistently fails its financial audits, is a mechanism to funnel billions of dollars into the pockets of weapons manufacturers, who make the very weapons that murder men, women, and children and destroy the planet. Well over half of the discretionary budget each year goes directly to private contractors.

Between 2020 and 2024, the Pentagon designated roughly $2.4 trillion out of $4.4 trillion in discretionary spending to private industry. But hey, at least those private companies are providing much-needed jobs for America’s workforce, right? Well, not so fast.

According to the Climate and Community Institute, employment at military contractors has plummeted over the past three decades: from an estimated 3.2 million workers during the Reagan military-spending peak in the mid-1980s to 1.1 million workers in 2020. The drop occurred even as Pentagon budgets rose 22% over the same period. Meanwhile, the industry’s top recipients of military contracts, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, General Dynamics, and Boeing, pay their CEOs a combined salary of almost $100 million a year. They are literally making a killing off the killing of others.

And now, not only are we draining our pocketbooks for weapon company CEOs, but we are also subsidizing tech-overlords whose recent main objective is to move jobs and agency away from the working class to robots, as well as use that very technology to mass surveil those who oppose it. The Pentagon is requesting an unprecedented $58.5 billion this year for an artificial intelligence program. This program is already responsible for the February 28 Minab School massacre that murdered at least 156 schoolchildren and staff.

Even more frightening, the money for that deadly program is set to go to the most insane lineup of anti-worker villains, including Sam “bad things should happen to benefit AI” Altman; Peter “if you’re evil, you’re not bad” Thiel; and Elon “AI will make jobs irrelevant” Musk. They’re openly telling us they don’t need humans anymore. Meanwhile, they are building their bunkers so that when the United States military finally plunders away all the resources around the world, they can survive.

Why are we handing the military $1.5 trillion to do all this? As it stands, US taxpayers are already paying $116.43 million every hour for war and terror. That’s more than $4,000 in weapons and war costs for the average taxpayer last year alone. Both figures will likely double, since the Trump administration’s request tops former President Joe Biden’s already bloated $1 trillion. Meanwhile, nearly 30% of people have to finance groceries, and 45,000 people will likely die because they lack health insurance or access to affordable healthcare.

If you were watching a summer blockbuster and the main characters were handing over their hard-earned money and essentially their trust to the person you know is going to assassinate them in the final act, you would be screaming at the screen, “Don’t do it!”

But that is exactly what is happening right now, and in fact, many are screaming.

Polls consistently show that Americans are moving away from a war-centric approach to foreign affairs. Almost two-thirds of people in the United States disapprove of President Donald Trump’s war on Iran, and 60% disapprove of the US-supported genocide in Gaza. Similarly, 59% of voters believe the proposed $1.5 trillion Department of Defense budget is too high, and 3 in 5 voters (58%) prefer directing government funds toward domestic priorities like healthcare rather than military or war spending.

The voices are there, but most of those with the power to stop it aren’t listening or are too invested in the war-industrial complex to care. Which begs the question: How can we even call ourselves a democracy, much less its defender, when we, the people, seem to have no agency outside of voting and the majority’s demands are ignored?

This administration, as did previous ones, proudly ignores what the majority is begging for: an end to the genocide in Gaza and the occupation of Palestine; an end to the war on Iran that was started for no reason and is currently sustained through the administration’s pompous arrogance; an end to Immigration and Custom Enforcement’s reign of terror across the United States; an end to the AI-data center boom that is chipping away at our humanity and livelihoods; and reinvestment into the things that will actually keep us safe, such as healthcare, housing, and climate justice.

Make no mistake, the $1.5 trillion set to go to Pete Hegseth’s war department is not funding our security; it is funding our endgame and stealing from our lifelines. If passed, it will be nearly impossible to undo the damage that will come. We all must unite around this—healthcare workers, environmentalists, teachers, journalists, students, veterans—and make democracy actually work for the people before it’s too late. We have to let those we elected to work for us know that this is a red line that humanity cannot afford to cross.

History shows that public pressure can influence policies. Our collective voice can change this country’s trajectory—if we mobilize now. We don’t have to fund our endgame; we can say no. Join us in DC November 10-13 as we demand our country stop funding war and start funding life.


Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

Melissa Garriga
Melissa Garriga is the communications and media analysis manager for CODEPINK. She writes about the intersection of militarism and the human cost of war.
Full Bio >
‘Officially a Green Wave Too’: Climate and Eco Champions Triumph in Historic Midterms

“Voters across the country supported candidates who pledged to cut energy costs, end corruption, and take on corporate greed. That’s the exact framework we need to push a bold clean energy and polluter pays agenda,” Jamie Henn of Fossil Free Media said.


Michigan resident Nichole Kewaybiber attends Democratic US House candidate William Lawrence’s election night watch party at “The Venue by Eleven” on November 3, 2026 in Lansing.
(Photo by Bill Pugliano/Getty Images)

Olivia Rosane
Nov 04, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

Tuesday’s historic rebuke of President Donald Trump’s policies and party was also a major victory for the climate and environment, campaigners said, as Democratic control of Congress gives lawmakers a chance to check the president’s pro-pollution and pro-extinction agenda.

Up and down the ballot, voters elected candidates who champion climate action and holding wealthy polluters accountable while rejecting data centers and tech and fossil-fuel spending blitzes.

“Voters just overwhelmingly repudiated the most anti-environmental, pro-fossil fuel administration in US history,” Jamie Henn, the director of Fossil Free Media, told Common Dreams. “This was a historic climate victory in disguise. Voters across the country supported candidates who pledged to cut energy costs, end corruption, and take on corporate greed. That’s the exact framework we need to push a bold clean energy and polluter pays agenda.”

“Climate politics are back on the table, and we plan to fight for them.”

“Last night’s election opens the door for plenty more states to pass climate legislation, like climate superfund bills, and block industry attempts to hold back clean energy or immunize themselves from climate damages,” Henn said.

Affordability and Corruption Are Climate Issues

While climate and the environment took a backseat in election rhetoric and reporting to issues like affordability and corruption, many winning candidates who champion reducing inequality and challenging corporate greed—such as Sen.-elect Abdul El-Sayed (D-Mich.) and Reps.-elect Chris Rabb (D-Pa.), Claire Valdez (D-NY), and Melat Kiros (D-Colo.)—also back policies such as a Green New Deal and holding polluting industries accountable. Also in Michigan, Democratic Rep.-elect Will Lawrence was a co-founder of the climate focused Sunrise Movement.

“Ardent advocates of climate and environmental action and justice who loudly rejected Trump and the Republican attack on both are now heading to and returning back to Congress and to offices across the nation,” environmental investigative journalist Antonia Juhasz wrote on social media. “It’s officially a Green Wave too.”

Kidus Girma, Sunrise Movement’s campaign director, told Common Dreams that on Tuesday, “Young people proved that progressive ideas like the Green New Deal are just as popular in central Michigan as they are in Brooklyn.”

“Working people in America no matter where they live want the same thing—good green jobs, a pause on data centers, and a system that works for people, not billionaires,” Girma said. “Climate politics are back on the table, and we plan to fight for them.”



Climate advocates pointed out that issues such as the high price of gas due to Trump’s illegal war on Iran are intimately connected with the dependence on a fossil fuel industry that is empowered to profit from energy crises.

“Climate change may not have dominated the election, but the consequences of our dependence on fossil fuels certainly did,” said Cassidy DiPaola, the communications director at Fossil Free Media and spokesperson for the Make Polluters Pay campaign, in a statement. “Americans are struggling with high gas prices, rising energy bills, and mounting climate disaster costs while Big Oil rakes in record profits and spends millions buying influence in Washington.”

Further, the backlash against the AI data centers build-out, reflected in massive wins for data centers moratoriums and anti-data center candidates, is also a major climate victory, as the Sierra Club projects that the use of fossil fuels to power new data centers will increase power sector emissions by 42% by 2030 when compared with 2025 levels, undoing 15 years of climate progress in electricity generation.

“Millions of voters cast their ballots in frustration over data centers, corporate greed, and Trump’s egregious giveaways to fossil fuel CEOs and other industry cronies,” Brett Hartl, the national political director at the Center for Biological Diversity Action Fund, said in a statement.

Elizabeth Bast, executive director at Oil Change Action, said in a statement that “voters send a clear message: They’re fed up with Trump’s agenda of fossil fuel giveaways, illegal and immoral wars, and unchecked data center expansion that makes their lives more expensive while lining the pockets of Big Oil and Big Tech,”

Bast continued: “Affordability and accountability were voters’ top concerns this election cycle. Both are inseparable from fossil fuel dependence. Americans have spent an additional $101 billion on gas since the start of Trump’s war on Iran, highlighting the dangers of fossil fuel reliance. Meanwhile, Trump increased his wealth by tens of millions through stock trades made profitable by his war—a blatant example of this administration’s corruption.”

Big Oil Bet and Lost

One major theme of the midterms was the ability of the “many” to beat the “money,” as El-Sayed put it in his victory speech. Big spending by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and Big Tech oligarchs including Elon Musk failed to force their preferred candidates over the finish line.

This was equally true of Big Oil, as Emily Atklin detailed in a race-by-race breakdown for Heated. On the national level, Chevron, Koch, Energy Transfer, and the American Petroleum Institute gave a combined $25 million to keep Republicans in charge of Congress, only to see the Democrats retake both the House and Senate. Chevron also gave $200,000 each to losing GOP candidates Ken Paxton in Texas and Sen. Susan Collins in Maine.

Lawrence, the Sunrise Movement alum, triumphed over the combined forces of Musk and other GOP insiders in what was the nation’s most expensive House race.

“Lawrence mobilized voters and volunteers by his long-standing commitment to putting working-class families over billionaire polluters and data center developers. His campaign estimates it knocked more doors than any other House Democratic race,” Oil Change’s Bast said.

Mya Lega, a Lawrence campaign spokesperson, told Common Dreams: “Michiganders want our land, air, and water protected from AI data centers, polluters, and corporate oligarchs. Will Lawrence built his career on standing up to them. In the House, he’ll be a leading voice against the Trump administration’s rollbacks on environmental protections and handouts to corporations and oligarchs.”

The victory of people over money was true of more local races as well, as in Georgia where voters flipped the Georgia Public Service Commission to Democratic control despite fossil fuel spending on behalf of Republican candidates, while voters in Colorado rejected an industry-backed attempt to enshrine a right to use or sell natural gas in the state constitution.



“Fossil fuel money is one of the most powerful forces in American politics. It is the biggest obstacle we face in preserving a livable climate for everyone on Earth,” Atkin wrote. “But it is not invincible. Not even close.”

Further, the appetite for getting money out of politics was reflected in votes on energy and climate issues. In Michigan, voters approved Proposition 2 to bar publicly regulated utilities from giving funds to state and local candidates. And nationwide, more than 65 congressional candidates who had signed the No Fossil Fuel Money Pledge won their races.

“Big Oil and Big Tech have poured enormous amounts of money into this election to protect their power and profits,” Bast of Oil Change wrote. “Across the country, candidates who refuse fossil fuel money have won elections, proving that Big Oil’s money is no match for the power of organized communities.”

A Win for Wildlife


Beyond climate and energy concerns, Defenders of Wildlife celebrated Tuesday’s results as a check on Trump’s gutting of protections public lands and endangered species.

“For those of us working to protect America’s wildlife and wild places, this is a moment of renewed hope and possibility,” the group’s president and CEO, Andrew Bowman, said in a statement. “Over the past two years, we have faced extraordinary challenges, including relentless efforts to weaken the Endangered Species Act, roll back protections for public lands, and undermine decades of conservation progress.”

Bowman continued: “A new Congress offers opportunities to defend bedrock environmental laws, strengthen congressional oversight, and advance conservation priorities that have faced significant political headwinds. It also creates new possibilities for bipartisan cooperation around something we know transcends political divisions: America’s shared commitment to wildlife and our natural heritage.”


‘Rallying Cry’


Following Tuesday’s win, climate and environmental campaigners urged victorious candidates to consider their election as a mandate to protect public health and the environment and to hold polluters accountable for harm and corruption.

They also urged current members of Congress to reject the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act (BAAJA), a bill that advocates argue would gut current regulations to clear the way for more fossil fuel and data centers projects.

“The midterm results are a rallying cry for Democrats to use their newfound power to rein in Trump. Democrats must not cut deals in the lame duck that bolster Trump and give Republicans wins but instead lay the foundation to end Trump’s corrupt anti-environmental crusade for good,” the Center for Biological Diversity’s Hartl said.

“Voters gave Democrats control of Congress to advance policies that uplift communities, not offer sweetheart giveaways to corporate polluters and data centers, like the Senate permitting reform bill,” Hartl continued. “Trump has done so much damage to our public lands, wildlife habitats, and clean air and water protections in the last two years. Democrats must take ownership of their new mandate right now and start changing the conversation in Congress.”

“For newly elected leaders looking to establish themselves as champions of the working class, taking on Big Oil is an obvious place to start.”

Earthworks policy director Lauren Pagel warned: “In the coming weeks this administration and current Congress will treat the lame-duck session like a fire sale on essential environmental and health protections and the rights of tribal governments. It is critical we stop them before they do even more damage to our air, water, land, sacred places, and the health of our communities.”

She argued that this started with rejecting BAAJA: “This legislation that the Senate will likely consider next week would permanently undercut the ability of communities to say no to dangerous oil, gas, and mining projects in their backyards.”

Bast of Oil Change agreed, saying: “Democrats have a clear mandate to rein in Big Oil and Big Tech. They must seize the opportunity to do so, first by rejecting the currently proposed permitting deal... and then by taxing Big Oil’s windfall profits in the incoming Congress.”

The Environmental Protection Network (EPN), an organization made up of more than 800 former employees of the Environmental Protection Agency, called on the new Congress to hold Trump’s EPA to account for failing in its mission to protect people and the environment from pollution and to restore it to its prior function and scientific rigor.

“Americans understand that when corporations aren’t held accountable for their pollution, ordinary families end up paying the price,” EPN’s senior director of public affairs, Marc Boom, said in a statement. “Our polling shows that 81% of registered voters surveyed believe the costs of pollution are being shifted onto families. The incoming Congress has an opportunity and a responsibility to hold EPA and the rest of the federal government accountable and make sure they’re doing their jobs to protect public health and leave families safer, not sicker.”

Others urged the new Congress to take the opportunity to hold Big Oil accountable as well.


“Americans are struggling with high gas prices, rising energy bills, and mounting climate disaster costs while Big Oil rakes in record profits and spends millions buying influence in Washington,” DiPaola said in a statement. “Voters made clear they’re fed up with corporate greed and politicians who put wealthy donors ahead of working families. Now Democrats have a chance to prove they’re serious about changing that. For newly elected leaders looking to establish themselves as champions of the working class, taking on Big Oil is an obvious place to start.”

She continued: “We want to see oil executives hauled before Congress to answer for their profiteering and political influence. We want a windfall profits tax that puts money back in working people’s pockets, climate superfund laws that make polluters pay for the damage they’ve caused, and an end to Big Oil’s push for special legal immunity. Democrats have won the power to take on one of the wealthiest and most politically connected industries in America, and we expect them to use it.”


Aaron Regunberg, who directs Public Citizen’s Climate Accountability Project, agreed.

“Democrats across the country ran on a pledge to lower the costs of essentials and take on corporate corruption. They just won a massive mandate to do just that. And you can’t achieve those goals without fighting for Big Oil accountability,” he told Common Dreams.

He continued: “Democrats have an opportunity to crack down on fossil fuel profiteering and haul Big Oil CEOs in to investigate their corrupt dealings with Trump. It would be a huge mistake to not seize this huge opportunity.”

The 2026 Election Gives Winners a Mandate to Act Big on Climate

Over the last two years, we’ve witnessed the most corrupt, pro-fossil fuel, anti-environmental administration in US history. Last night, voters overwhelmingly rejected those priorities and demanded a total system reset. It’s time to deliver.



Demonstrators gather outside Trump Tower on 5th Ave to raise awareness about climate change, environmental protection, and sustainability, and call for stronger policy action and accountability during an Earth Day Protest in New York City on Wednesday, April 22, 2026.
(Photo by Selcuk Acar/Anadolu via Getty Images)


Jamie Henn
Nov 05, 2026
Common Dreams


Where does Tuesday night’s historic election leave the climate movement? The answer is on the cusp of a huge opportunity—if we know how to seize it.

Two of the issues that voters cared about most in this election—energy prices and corruption—present climate advocates with the perfect framework within which to push exactly the sort of bold agenda we need for this moment in the climate fight.

Let’s take energy first. Above all else, this was a gas prices election. It’s hard to imagine the sort of Democratic blowout we saw last night if gas and diesel prices weren’t the highest they’ve ever been for any election day in US history. The same is true for electricity bills. While not as mediagenic as the price ticking up on the pump, utility bills were top of mind for voters. No surprise considering the impact that they have on a family’s bottom line: it’s easier to cut back on miles driven than the need to light and heat your home.

From utility reform, to new investments in public transit, to rapidly scaling up renewables, Democrats have a mandate to roll out a historic clean energy package that will cut costs and pollution at the same time.

In response, Democrats up and down the ballot made energy affordability a core campaign issue. On Tuesday, voters rewarded them for it. In election after election, Democrats who spoke clearly and passionately about the need to drive down rates, hold big utilities accountable, and build more clean energy won overwhelmingly. The same was true for energy cost-related ballot initiatives, like in Michigan, where over 80% of voters supported an initiative to ban their utility from making political donations that many rightfully saw as bribes for politicians to keep rates high. Down ballot, Democrats also won important seats on the Georgia Public Service Commission, the Arizona Corporation Commission, and the Texas Railroad Commission, which all have crucial decision-making roles in those states when it comes to prioritizing renewables over fossil fuels.

These wins set up Democrats at all levels to embrace the most ambitious and sweeping clean energy affordability agenda possible. Voters are demanding that politicians drive down rates, and building more clean energy is the fastest and cheapest way to do it. From utility reform, to new investments in public transit, to rapidly scaling up renewables, Democrats have a mandate to roll out a historic clean energy package that will cut costs and pollution at the same time.

But voters want more than just affordability—they want accountability. Corruption emerged as a major issue in this election, from President Donald Trump and his family’s self-dealing, to Big Tech’s backroom deals to push AI data centers, to Big Oil’s profiteering off the War in Iran and invasion of Venezuela. People are rightfully furious at a system that they see enriching a small circle of billionaires (including all those Big Oil CEOs) at the public’s expense.

That anger is the rocket fuel Democrats need to pursue an aggressive agenda that goes after Big Tech, Big Oil, and other corporate polluters. In Congress, that should look like an aggressive oversight agenda to investigate the corrupt dealings between the Trump administration and the fossil fuel industry. From the sale of our public lands, to the attack on our environmental regulations, to the outrageous profits Big Oil and Trump personally has raked in because of the war in Iran, there is plenty for Democratic-led committees to sink their teeth into.

But oversight isn’t enough. Democrats will also have to show that they’re willing to take these corporations head on. That means doing everything they can to stop the massive build-out of AI data centers, which have become the largest new source of greenhouse gas emissions in the country, along with their other harms. It also means taking immediate action to rein in the massive profiteering oil companies are engaged in right now—just days before the election, Exxon, Chevron, Shell, BP, and TotalEnergies announced they’d made a combined $56.2 billion in the last quarter, or $611 million every day. When the new Congress convenes in January, they should pass a permanent Big Oil Windfall Profits Tax that would send the majority of those profits back to the public and ensure prices aren’t allowed to spike like this again.

Voters’ desire for affordability and accountability also provides fertile ground for politicians of all stripes to throw their support behind the growing Make Polluters Pay campaign, which is demanding fossil fuel companies pay their fair share for growing climate damages. As Tuesday’s election was taking place, people across the Southwest were still grappling with the impacts of record-breaking flooding, which has wiped away bridges and homes across the region and made getting out to vote that much harder. The costs of the damage in New Mexico alone could be as high as $300 million. State leaders should fully embrace the push for climate superfund bills, like those passed in Vermont and New York, which would force the oil and gas companies most responsible for the climate crisis to pay into funds to offset the costs of climate disasters and invest in resiliency, as well as squash any attempts by the industry to pass “big oil immunity” bills which would grant them a get-out-of-jail-free card.

Above all else, we need our politicians to act—and act big. Now isn’t the time for small thinking or convoluted triangulation and half measures. Over the last two years, we’ve witnessed the most corrupt, pro-fossil fuel, anti-environmental administration in US history. Last night, voters overwhelmingly rejected those priorities and demanded a total system reset. Our job now is to do everything we can as a climate movement to help deliver on that vision in the most sweeping way possible.

For a new generation of Democrats looking to make a name for themselves as champions of working people, this is an obvious place to start. From making polluters pay to getting every American access to cheap, clean energy, we know what needs to be done in the years ahead—it’s time to go out and fight for it.


Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

Jamie Henn
Jamie Henn is the director of Fossil Free Media and a co-founder of 350.org.
Full Bio >


Democratic Domination of Midterms Sparks Hope for Medicare for All

“Affordability was top of mind for voters last night, and within that, healthcare is an enormous driver.”



A supporter of Randy Villegas, a Democratic congressional candidate in California, holds a “Medicare for All” sign at his election night party on November 3, 2026 in Bakersfield.
(Photo by Mario Tama/Getty Images)

Jessica Corbett
Nov 04, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

“WHO WANTS MEDICARE FOR ALL?”

US Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) asked that question, in all caps, on social media late Tuesday as he won reelection and joined others from his party in trouncing President Donald Trump’s Republicans across the country, securing majorities in both chambers of Congress thanks to voters frustrated by an affordability crisis under a GOP trifecta.

Although some races haven’t yet been called, and key Democrats such as House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, a New Yorker likely to become the next speaker, don’t support shifting the United States to a universal public healthcare system, the Democratic “tsunami” on Tuesday still revived hope that the results could help the fight for Medicare for All.



Democrats reclaimed both the US Senate and House of Representatives after Trump and congressional Republicans last year used their budget package, the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act, to slash Medicaid spending and allow Affordable Care Act subsidies to expire—which has already led to millions of Americans losing health insurance coverage.

The wave of Democratic wins also came nearly five months after a coalition of over 325 organizations argued that “now is the time to organize” for Medicare for All, given that “we may face a once-in-a-generation opportunity to legislate on healthcare in 2029.”

While—as the coalition suggested—passing federal Medicare for All legislation would likely require not only a Democrat-controlled Congress but also replacing Trump with a progressive president in 2028, the midterm results are still being seen by voters and elected officials alike as “a mandate to deliver big change” over the next two years.

“Wins by progressive candidates will jumpstart a national discussion of Medicare for All,” said Larry Levitt, executive vice president for health policy at KFF. “Medicare for All isn’t going to pass in the next two years. But, newly prominent advocates will have a platform to make sure it’s part [of] the discussion, carrying through to the 2028 primaries.”



Even without support from party leaders and the White House, Democrats may still push for congressional hearings or even votes on single-payer policies before the 2028 elections.

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), lead sponsor of the Medicare for All Act in the House, told Punchbowl News this week that she wants to mark up the bill next year and fight for a vote on the floor: “I want to make sure we have the requisite number of co-sponsors, and I’m hoping that our leadership is part of helping to make that happen.”

As Forbes reported:
Several Democrats who won seats in the US Senate and the US House of Representatives made Medicare for All or a public option key parts of their winning campaigns. Such ideas will likely get more airtime now that Democrats control both houses of Congress in a rebuke of Trump administration policies that have slashed healthcare spending.

Exactly what form a “public option” would take [is] unclear, but such a choice being offered to Americans alongside private and existing health insurance coverage would seem more achievable than replacing the existing health insurance system with Medicare for All.

The American Prospect pointed out that Medicare for All supporters who emerged victorious on Tuesday include Rep.-elects Claire Valdez, Brad Lander, and Darializa Avila Chevalier in New York’s 7th, 10th, and 13th districts, along with “Democratic Georgia state Rep. Dr. Jasmine Clark, who won more than 81% of the vote to represent Georgia’s 13th District; Democrat Melat Kiros, who beat nearly 30-year incumbent Republican US Rep. Diana DeGette to represent Colorado’s 1st District; and Democratic socialist Janeese Lewis George, who will be Washington, DC’s first new mayor in more than a decade.”

Among the victors in the US Senate were Democrats Abdul El-Sayed of Michigan and Troy Jackson of Maine, also both vocal backers of Medicare for All. Jayapal highlighted that “Abdul was up against millions of dollars in dark money from Republican donors—and today Michigan voters sent a clear message that their state and their votes are not for sale.”

“Abdul ran a strong campaign on Medicare for All, refused corporate [political action committee] money, and stayed focused on working families from day one to Election Day,” she added. “I am so proud to have stood with him throughout his campaign and I cannot wait to work with him in Washington to deliver for you.”



The leading voice for Medicare for All in the upper chamber, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), worked to elect both El-Sayed and Jackson, as well as several leftist House candidates who won. He wrote on social media Wednesday that “last night saw some of the greatest progressive victories in modern American history. All across the country, in rural and urban areas, Americans said NO to oligarchy, and YES to an agenda that fights for the working class.”

Sanders, who caucuses with Democrats, is expected to chair the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions when the party takes over in January, and Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), another Medicare for All backer, will likely lead the Finance Committee, as STAT Washington correspondent John Wilkerson noted Wednesday—predicting that “the wins that Democrats amassed on Tuesday night could breathe life into efforts to create some type of a single-payer system.”

Yale University researchers estimated in August that Sanders’ related legislative proposal could save over 114,000 lives and $1 trillion annually. In response to those findings, the senator said that “at a time when 15 million Americans are being thrown off the healthcare they have and 20 million Americans have already seen their premiums double, on average, as a result of Trump’s so-called ‘Big Beautiful Bill,’ we need Medicare for All now more than ever.”

A KFF survey released last month found that 66% of Americans—including 84% of Democrats, 72% of independents, and 34% of Republicans—support Medicare for All, the highest level of support since the organization began tracking the proposal.



Sharing KFF data on how the average US family’s health insurance premium has soared over the past quarter-century, The Tennessee Holler declared on social media Wednesday: “Medicare for All. Now. We can’t afford not to do it. It isn’t radical to support it. It’s radical to oppose it.”
Van Hollen Says No Rubber Stamp for Schumer as Majority Leader Without Support for ‘Bold Agenda’

“It’s not a time for incrementalism,” said Sen. Chris Van Hollen. “It’s a time to move forward a very bold kitchen table agenda.”



Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) speaks at a rally on August 8, 2026 in St. Paul, Minnesota.
(Photo by Stephen Maturen/Getty Images)


Jake Johnson
Nov 05, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

A top progressive senator on Wednesday said Democrats should not commit to supporting Sen. Chuck Schumer to lead the caucus after the party’s historic midterm wins without demanding his support for a “bold agenda” that reflects the needs of the American public, which is facing a worsening cost-of-living crisis under President Donald Trump.

“Working people have been screwed for way too long, and we need to unrig an economy that’s been built to serve billionaires and big corporations,” Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), who previously led Senate Democrats’ campaign arm, told Bloomberg in an interview. “It’s not a time for incrementalism. It’s a time to move forward a very bold kitchen table agenda.”

Van Hollen, a vocal critic of US support for Israel’s genocidal assault on Gaza and a supporter of Medicare for All, has indicated that he does not intend to run for Senate majority leader himself. But the senator said Wednesday that “no one should be committing to anybody as the next Democratic leader” without first discussing how the party plans to advance an ambitious policy agenda.

“We need commitments,” Van Hollen told Bloomberg.

The senator’s remarks came as two prominent progressive advocacy groups, Indivisible and Our Revolution, called for the Senate Democratic caucus to move past Schumer.

“Contact your senators and demand they oppose another term for Chuck Schumer as leader—and insist on a public and transparent process for choosing new leadership,” Indivisible wrote in a series of social media posts on Wednesday. “Schumer has a lower approval rating than Trump. After our seismic wins, we need new leadership to define this new era of politics.”



Schumer, who has headed the Senate Democratic caucus for nearly a decade, brushed off potential challenges to his leadership on Wednesday, telling reporters with certainty, “I’ll be reelected as majority leader.”

But several newly elected Democratic senators—including Adam Hamilton of Kansas, Troy Jackson of Maine, Juliana Stratton of Illinois, and Peggy Flanagan of Minnesota—have explicitly said they would not support Schumer for leadership, raising the possibility of a significant revolt following the party’s midterm wipeout of the GOP. Other senators-elect, including James Talarico of Texas and Abdul El-Sayed of Michigan, have declined to endorse Schumer for the leadership post, saying the party should explore other options.

“We are at the point of a new movement in this country,” Flanagan said Wednesday. “Many of us were elected who refused corporate PAC money and are only beholden to the people who elected us—and are ready to fight for bold change.”

“I think it’s time for a new leadership,” she added, “and I’m eager to work in partnership with my new colleagues to get that done.”


‘Thank You Bernie’: Organizers Credit Progressive Leader for ‘Long Game’ That Paid Off

“He cultivated a whole generation of young leaders through the movement he spawned who are now winning seats everywhere.”



US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) speaks at The People v. The Powerful rally at the Detroit Opera House on July 18, 2026 in Detroit, Michigan.
(Photo by Sarah Rice/Getty Images)

Julia Conley
Nov 04, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

The movement that led to at least 18 progressive victories in congressional races and 42 left-wing winners down-ballot “started with a man with 1% vote and three people at his announcement” of his presidential bid in 2015, said one organizer Tuesday night as Democrats won control of the US Senate and House, a majority of governorships, and made major gains in state legislatures.

“Bernie made the path” for progressive politicians to win crucial elections, said a labor organizer based in San Francisco, referring to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). “This wave has been a long time coming.”

She was one of several observers who drew the connection from Sanders’ unsuccessful but mobilizing presidential runs in 2016 and 2020, and his relentless centering of economic justice in his campaigns and legislative work, to the wave of victories Tuesday night by outspoken economic populists including Sens.-elect Abdul El-Sayed (D-Mich.) and Troy Jackson (D-Maine) and Reps.-elect Melat Kiros (D-Colo.), Donavan McKinney (D-Mich.), and Rebecca Cooke (D-Wis.).

“What a night for the movement Bernie has been building for decades,” said Jeremy Slevin, Sanders’ senior adviser and communications director, listing dozens of the candidates who were endorsed by the senator and ran on platforms demanding Medicare for All, housing justice, civil rights, and an end to the influence of powerful corporations on US politics.



RoseAnn DeMoro, a labor organizer and former executive director of National Nurses United and the California Nurses Association, recalled how, as her organization campaigned for Sanders in 2016 and 2020, “we educated, agitated, organized, gained the most principled allies, incredible people, like Abdul El-Sayed.”

“And last night—we won!” said DeMoro.

She added: “Thank you, Bernie Sanders, for working your heart out to change this country. Your ‘long game’ should be very gratifying today.”

A decade after he first ran for president, the proposals Sanders pushed in 2016 have been embraced by large majorities of Democratic voters, and even Americans across the political spectrum. His signature proposal, Medicare for All, dismissed then by former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton as something that would “never, ever come to pass,” is supported by 66% of US adults, according to a KFF poll taken last month, with 52% of respondents still supporting the idea if it would “eliminate private health insurance companies.”

The US House held its first-ever hearings on Medicare for All in 2019, and some of the Democratic Party’s most popular members—Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), elected in 2018, and New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, elected in 2025—are outspoken proponents of the plan.

On Tuesday night, said Josh Orton of Demand Justice, “across the country, in red states and blue, Democratic candidates adopted the fight Bernie led for years: for the people against the powerful. You lead that fight and welcome everyone to join you, you win.”

Even candidates who did not campaign alongside Sanders, such as Democratic Sen.-elect James Talarico and Gov.-elect Gina Hinojosa in Texas, put forward platforms that showed clear signs of Sanders’ influence on US politics. Hinojosa told The New York Times that “the one fight in this country is about economic power” as she explained why she identifies as a “populist” rather than a progressive, and Talarico spoke out against “the billionaires who own the social media platforms, who own the cable news networks, who own the politicians fighting on our screens.”

“The people at the top work so hard to keep us angry and divided because our unity is a threat to their wealth and their power,” Talarico said, suggesting a call for the working-class solidarity Sanders has urged at his Fighting Oligarchy rallies.



Will Steakin of Politico said he was “not sure any Democratic surrogate campaigned as hard as Sanders this cycle,” counting 58 rallies since the Fighting Oligarchy Tour, attended by 340,000 people, and “20 rallies in October alone.”

Posting a montage of the rallies, set to David Bowie’s “Starman,” the senator himself said that Americans “across the country, in rural and urban areas,” had “said NO to oligarchy, and YES to an agenda that fights for the working class.”



“I am so happy that Bernie Sanders is with us today to be able to see the fruits of his labor. He cultivated a whole generation of young leaders through the movement he spawned who are now winning seats everywhere,” historian Asad Dandia said of the 85-year-old senator. “Thank you, Bernie.”
Mamdani Joins Call for Democrats to Deliver for Working Class With Progressive ‘Mandate’

“It is not enough to simply win power. We must use it,” said the mayor. “And the American people will know the difference between hollow words and hard work.”



New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani speaks during a news conference outside City Hall on November 4, 2026 in New York City.
(Photo by Andres Kudacki/Getty Images)

Julia Conley
Nov 05, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani on Wednesday evening joined the call for Democrats in Congress to ensure they deliver on the progressive “mandate” delivered by voters across the US in Tuesday’s midterm elections, declaring that “it is not enough to simply win power.”

“We must use it,” said the mayor. “And the American people will know the difference between hollow words and hard work.”

The democratic socialist, who has a 69% favorability rating among New Yorkers, according to a recent Siena poll, commented on the historic election results in a video posted on social media, saying, “It’s morning again in America.”

Like other progressives on Wednesday, the mayor suggested that with their new majorities in the US House and Senate, Democrats must deliver major legislative action to materially improve Americans’ lives—or risk rapidly losing voters’ confidence and the next elections.

“People are tired of being told there isn’t enough to go around while Elon Musk becomes the world’s first trillionaire,” said the mayor, an advocate for Medicare for All, universal childcare, and raising taxes on the country’s richest people to pay for social services that would benefit all households. “They are tired of being told to ask for little, and expect even less. And last night, the people stood up.”



Mamdani also appeared on NBC News with anchor Kristen Welker, who asserted that “with the exception of Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan, nearly all of the Democrats’ biggest statewide victories were more moderate candidates.”

Welker did not provide examples to back up the claim, and neglected to mention two key statewide races in which progressive leader Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) endorsed and campaigned with successful left-wing candidates: Sens.-elect Peggy Flanagan (D-Minn.) and Troy Jackson (D-Maine).

Beyond that, Mamdani emphasized that regardless of whether Tuesday’s victories were by candidates who identified themselves as progressives or received endorsements from Sanders, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), and other top left-wing leaders who push aggressively for economic justice, they sent a clear message about what voters across the country want from Congress.

“When we’re thinking about James Talarico, we’re talking about someone who campaigned on universal pre-K. When we’re talking about Annie Andrews, we’re talking about somebody who campaigned on an end to endless wars. When we’re talking about Keisha Lance Bottoms, we’re talking about somebody who campaigned on streamlining the construction of affordable housing,” said Mamdani, referring to the Democratic senators-elect in Texas and South Carolina and the governor-elect in Georgia.

“Those are all hallmarks of what progressive governance also looks like in this country, and I think it’s critically important that when we look at these victories, no matter where they are across the United States, that we understand the unity of purpose that comes out of it,” said Mamdani.



Justice Democrats co-founder Saikat Chakrabarti suggested that the corporate media must look past whether candidates called themselves “progressives” or “moderates.”

“It’s about the promises these campaigns made,” said Chakrabarti. “They promised to end endless wars, take on corporate power, make healthcare available to all. They’ll be held accountable to those promises, and if Democrats don’t deliver, we’ll lose.”

In another interview with MeidasTouch, Mamdani added that the election results had provided Democrats with an “opportunity to understand that there is only one majority in this country, and that’s the working class.”

“Whether you’re a working-class American who’s living in California, whether you’re living in Minnesota, whether you’re living in Texas or South Carolina,” said the mayor, “you deserve dignity that you can actually measure and feel in your life.”