We’ve been told all our lives that America is a land of equal opportunity. We’ve been told that everyone has an equal chance of getting ahead—of landing a good job, making decent money, having a place to call their own.

This ideal has long been called the American Dream. It’s a pleasing phrase, but it runs head-on into an un-pleasing fact. The late comedian George Carlin said it all with a memorable wake-up call: “The reason they call it the American Dream is because you have to be asleep to believe it.”

Politicians have been proving Carlin right for decades, Republicans consistently and Democrats all too often. The GOP and the second Trump administration seem bent on doing what they’ve always done, sometimes even turning the American Dream into the American Nightmare.

Less revenue from the top means either higher taxes for those down below, making it harder for them to get along; or it means fewer dollars period, threatening the safety net programs that so many Americans depend on.

Taxes are a major contributor, especially the billions upon billions that the rich and corporations don’t pay. Trump and his fellow Republicans are committed to keeping it that way—and, if their slim congressional majorities can stick together, to do even more for those who need it the least. As one small example, the overall corporate tax rate could drop to 20%; domestic manufacturers could do even better, ending up with an effective corporate rate of 15%.

The federal tax code is famous (and infamous) for its huge handouts to those with the highest incomes, the most egregious being the cap on Social Security taxes.

Most workers pay the 6.2% Social Security tax on every dollar they make. Big earners, though, avoid that tax by the billions. There’s a dollar cap on earnings subject to the tax, and it rises yearly at the same rate as average wages. Last year’s cap was $168,600, for 2025 it’s $176,100.

For those in the earnings stratosphere, the cap means that Social Security taxes can literally begin and end on January 1. In 2024 Elon Musk hit the earnings cap at 12:04 am on New Year’s Day; for Tim Cook of Apple, it took all of two hours.

Lower taxes on income from wealth than income from work amount to another giant giveaway to the rich. Taxes on long-term capital gains top out at 20%; the corresponding rate on income from work is nearly twice as high at 37%.

The tax code is also chockful of loopholes, many of them so complex that ordinary Americans can’t even begin to understand them. The wealthy don’t understand them either, but they don’t have to. They’re able to pay small fortunes to have their tax accountants and lawyers handle it: “You have an army of well-trained, brilliant people who sit there all day long, charging $1,000 an hour, thinking up ways to beat” this tax, that tax, any tax.

One way or the other—whether it’s lawyers working loopholes, whether it’s the tax laws themselves—the rich somehow avoid paying tens of billions in taxes. All those lost billions lead inevitably to one result or the other, both of which gnaw away at The Dream. Less revenue from the top means either higher taxes for those down below, making it harder for them to get along; or it means fewer dollars period, threatening the safety net programs that so many Americans depend on.

Medicare is one of these programs, and its trust fund is set to run dry sometime in the 2030s. Wouldn’t you know it, part of the blame lies with some of the richest men in America. While paying Medicare taxes is routine for workers, a gilded few have been paying not a penny. ProPublica laid it all out in a piece published just last month, “How a Decades-Old Loophole Lets Billionaires Avoid Medicare Taxes.”

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) acts as the nation’s steward for tax collection and enforcement. It’s long been GOP gospel to do whatever it can to lower collections and lessen enforcement.

Despite the fact that cutting IRS funding “doesn’t save money, it costs money,” Republicans have repeatedly slashed away. Between 2010 and 2021 alone, the GOP managed to reduce the IRS enforcement budget by nearly a quarter. The cutting is endless and relentless—and it’s not likely to change under Billy Long, Trump’s choice as an early replacement for the reformer Danny Werfel as IRS commissioner.

Summing up, you have to be in slumberland (or not paying attention) to believe in the American Dream. Taxes are a major downer, lopsidedly favoring those at the top. Those with the power to act need to finally wake up, to insist that corporations and the wealthy pay their fair share.

Fat chance, obscenely fat. With the GOP in control, America’s taxes will just keep on mocking the American Dream.

This piece was originally published by the New York Daily News on Wednesday, January 8, 2025.

President Joe Biden, flanked by his Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Vice President Kamala Harris, announced the cease-fire in Gaza earlier this week with an air of accomplishment, framing it as a crowning achievement of his administration’s diplomatic efforts. However, this assertion is profoundly misleading. While the cease-fire was presented as a diplomatic victory, the truth reveals a far darker reality. For many, the Biden administration will not be remembered for brokering peace but for enabling and facilitating policies that allowed Israel’s genocide to continue unabated.

Far from a legacy of peace, the Biden administration, through its supply of the tool of genocide and to shield Israeli war crimes from international accountability, bears direct responsibility in the Israeli carnage. In announcing the cease-fire deal, President Biden claimed it was the result of eight months of diligent diplomatic efforts by his administration. In fact, it was eighth months of normalizing Israeli war crimes as self-defense. Under the leadership of America’s most Israel-first Secretary of State, the cease-fire is a symbolic gesture that conceals the deeper moral and political failings of an administration that has proven servile to Israel.

This failure is also an emblematic of a broader issue within U.S. foreign policy: prioritizing parochial or political expediency over moral and ethical imperatives. By allowing Benjamin Netanyahu to act with impunity, President Biden not only compromised America’s standing in the world but also perpetuated, unchecked, Israeli genocide in Gaza. In doing so, the administration became a complicit partner in war crimes, further undermining the United States supposed standing as a defender of human rights and international law.

Far from a legacy of peace, the Biden administration, through its supply of the tool of genocide and to shield Israeli war crimes from international accountability, bears direct responsibility in the Israeli carnage.

Biden and Blinken's legacy will be marked not by a cease-fire but by their role in providing and enabling Israel to drop 85,000 tons of bombs on Gaza—an amount that surpasses the combined bombings of Dresden, Hamburg, and London during World War II. Their tenure will be remembered for presiding over murdering or injuring 10% of Gaza’s population and the destruction of 86% of all building structures.

When students in Gaza eventually return to school after 15 months of devastation, they will face the grim effect of what the American-made bombs have wrought: 123 universities and schools reduced to rubble, murdering 750 academics, and the loss of 130 scholars and university professors who once inspired hope and knowledge.

As aid trucks will be allowed to slowly roll into Gaza, the people will not forget the 300 humanitarian workers deliberately killed by Israel, nor the 160 journalists and media workers who risked—and lost—their lives attempting to broadcast the cries of a besieged population, only to have their voices fall on deaf ears and a world of dead conscious.

Amid the ruins of over 654 healthcare facilities, the memory of 1,000 selfless healthcare workers and some of Palestine’s finest medical doctors who perished in their efforts to save lives will remain seared into the collective consciousness. For the people of Gaza, this is not just a story of destruction but a testament to the world’s indifference and complicity in the face of a humanitarian catastrophe of unimaginable scale.

The current cease-fire agreement could have been secured months earlier. In May, President Biden proposed a similar framework that the Palestinians accepted. However, Netanyahu rejected it as a “nonstarter,” prioritizing his political survival over ending genocide. Instead of holding Israel accountable or insisting on compliance with international humanitarian law, the Biden administration—led by the genocide facilitator, Secretary of State Blinken—chose to appease and embolden Netanyahu in his crimes.

Meanwhile, and not to be buoyed by false optimism, it’s not far-fetched to suspect that a future collapse or backtracking of the cease-fire deal could be part of a typical Netanyahu strategy. A last-minute attempt to exert pressure, either to undermine the agreement or 'wordsmith' language to change terms, such as the names of prisoners to be released, or to resume the war once he gets what he wants from the exchange. This would not be unprecedented for Netanyahu, as he counts on the docile support from Washington’s genocide enablers.

This was made all the more apparent when, on the same day Netanyahu agreed to the terms of the cease-fire, his army escalated air raids, murdering 81 civilians in eight separate massacres, capping its crimes under Biden’s granted “self-defense” genocide license

Nonetheless, ending Israel’s war of genocide offers a fleeting sense of relief after 15 months of suffering. This, however, is less of a triumph to American diplomacy and more an indictment of systemic failures in the Biden’s foreign policy. Nor should it be seen as the success Donald Trump wants to project, but a reality more rooted in the abject weakness and failure of Biden, the self-proclaimed Zionist.

In this context, Trump’s allies have opportunistically seized the moment to frame the cease-fire as a vindication of his so-called strength in foreign affairs. However, such a claim could not be farther from the truth. The cease-fire was not the result of decisive U.S. intervention or diplomatic maneuvers but rather an Israeli failure to subdue the steadfast resistance of the Palestinian people, despite giving Netanyahu a carte blanche for over 15 months to achieve his elusive "victory."

To this end, the ceasefire is a stark acknowledgment of Israel’s inability to impose its will, even with the unlimited U.S. military aid and diplomatic cover. Instead of securing the domination, the resistance from Gaza underscored the resilience and determination of the Palestinian people in the face of overwhelming odds. This outcome serves as a reminder that no amount of force or repression can extinguish the fight for justice and self-determination.

By Ralph Nader January 17, 2025 The rise of Donald Trump from a widely publicized, if failed, business boss to a two-term President has taught us a great deal about our society. He will teach us even more as his dictatorial regime, starting January 20th, 2025, further unravels what is left of the civilized norms,…

            One of my editorial cartoonist colleagues got arrested for child pornography (or CSAM, for “child sexual abuse material” as it is also called) this week. As I write this, he is in jail, apparently unable to make bail, awaiting arraignment.

            I won’t get into the details of his case, or at least the details we have so far, here. It is, as these things go, a novel set of allegations. I may write about those aspects of the situation in the future.

            He has had an exceptionally rewarding life and career. First Black cartoonist to win the Pulitzer in cartooning. Creator of a widely-syndicated and highly-respected comic strip. Author of a bestselling graphic novel. Husband and father of four.

            All of that is starting to fall apart. His employers have issued statements distancing themselves from him even as they note that, legally at least, Americans are presumed innocent until proven guilty. It isn’t difficult to predict what will happen next. His life as he knew it before the police arrived at his home bearing a search warrant has come to an end. It is highly unlikely that he will ever be paid to draw cartoons again or, for that matter, to do anything at all. At this point, his best-case scenario is that he doesn’t lose his family, makes bail so he can fight his case and is found not guilty or manages to negotiate a shorter-than-usual prison sentence.

            Because you might wonder: we were not friends. Either of us could have called the other with reasonable certainty that the call would be returned. And we did. We talked about business stuff once or twice. We talked at a recent cartooning convention after he delivered a talk about his work.

            He has not been charged with physically harming any children. In our culture, however, there is no worse offense to be accused of than anything that relates to pedophilia or child pornography. In prison, those convicted of “child molestation” are targeted for violence by inmates who have committed what they deem to be less serious offenses, like murder. He is in the worst kind of trouble.

            It is completely understandable that we have contempt for those who violate and rape children, the most vulnerable members of society. Kids should be protected and cared for, not victimized. Survivors of childhood sexual (and other) trauma carry their wounds around with them the rest of their lives.

            Reflecting our desire to protect children, lawmakers have instituted harsh penalties for those who are found guilty of crimes like those of which my colleague stands accused. For first offenders found guilty of CSAM possession, 99% go to prison; the average sentence is eight years. The House of Representatives is about to consider legislation, reportedly supported by President-Elect Donald Trump, that would impose either the death penalty or a mandatory life sentence.

            By all accounts, however, harsh sentencing is not having the desired deterrent effect. “Last year, tech companies reported over 45 million online photos and videos of children being sexually abused—more than double what they found the previous year,” The New York Times reported in 2019. “Twenty years ago, the online images were a problem; 10 years ago, an epidemic. Now, the crisis is at a breaking point… Pictures of child sexual abuse have long been produced and shared to satisfy twisted adult obsessions. But it has never been like this: Technology companies reported a record 45 million online photos and videos of the abuse last year.” CSAM had become even more widespread by 2023. AI “deep fake” CSAM, at least some of which is “trained” by scraping the real thing, has exploded all over the Internet.

            Perhaps it’s time to start thinking of men (who account for over 99% of those charged with possessing CSAM) who seek out this material not as monsters, but as people desperately in need of help. As Dr. Fred Berlin, director of the Johns Hopkins Sex and Gender Clinic, told the Times: “People don’t choose what arouses them—they discover it. No one grows up wanting to be a pedophile.”

We used to think that victims of what we used to call child molestation tended to become molesters themselves. It happens, but not as much as experts formerly believed. Now the growing scientific consensus is that pedophiles are born that way. “The biological clues attached to pedophilia demonstrate that its roots are prenatal,” James Cantor, director of the Toronto Sexuality Center, said. “These are not genetic; they can be traced to specific periods of development in the womb.” It’s hard-wiring. Unlike other people, many pedophiles’ sexual attraction to young people remains frozen in time from when they too are young, rather than aging along with them.

None of this is to imply that people who consume CSAM are not a threat to flesh-and-blood children. They are. Roughly half of prisoners convicted of CSAM eventually admit that they assaulted at least one kid. And the recidivism rate for sexual offenders is high.

Though it is tempting to say that dangerous people should be locked up or even killed, where is our compassion for the fact that they are themselves victims, of a psychological disorder? That they’re trying to fight off strong sexual urges that they never chose? That it’s almost impossible for them to get the help they need? State of mind of the accused is, or should be, front and center when evaluating whether someone has a criminal mindset and deserves imprisonment or suffers from a disorder that causes urges that could be effectively treated by psychotherapy and/or psychotropic and other drugs.

If you can’t summon sympathy, try focusing on the fact that our current approach is failing miserably.

One reason we’re losing the fight is that the problem is so vast. One out of six men told a 2023 Australian study that they were sexually attracted to children under age 18. Aside from CSAM, “mainstream” media including advertising and social media increasingly sexualizes children at ever-younger ages. For every guy like my colleague, whose life we destroy and toss into prison at taxpayer expense, there are countless more to replace him and countless more disgusting images online and countless more young victims being exploited to provide them.

(Ted Rall (Twitter: @tedrall), the political cartoonist, columnist and graphic novelist, co-hosts the left-vs-right DMZ America podcast with fellow cartoonist Scott Stantis and The TMI Show with political analyst Manila Chan. His latest book is the graphic novel 2024: Revisited.)

The post Sympathy for Our Devils first appeared on Ted Rall's Rallblog.

The post Sympathy for Our Devils appeared first on Ted Rall's Rallblog.

Editorial cartoonists Ted Rall (on the Left) and Scott Stantis (on the Right) react to the arrest of Pulitzer Prize-winning editorial cartoonist and comic-strip artist Darrin Bell for possessing and distributing child pornography.

The post DMZ America Podcast Ep 189: Darrin Bell Arrested for Child Porn first appeared on Ted Rall's Rallblog.

The post DMZ America Podcast Ep 189: Darrin Bell Arrested for Child Porn appeared first on Ted Rall's Rallblog.

The Israeli government is slated to meet today to ratify the recently-announced cease-fire deal with Hamas, despite mixed messages from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on implementation and resistance from some of his most extreme ministers. For its part, Hamas remains committed to the cease-fire agreement, and has reportedly urged president-elect Donald Trump to pressure Israel to honor its initial commitment. Pressure is what had been missing from Joe Biden’s approach.

The framework of the deal is nearly identical to the cease-fire agreement Biden presented from May. At the time, Biden stated that Israel had initiated the proposal, but Netanyahu dismissed it as a “nonstarter” the next day. Netanyahu then derailed negotiations by introducing new demands, such as the permanent occupation of Gaza’s border with Egypt, which appeared to be aimed solely at undermining the deal. Negotiations over a cease-fire and hostage release stalled thereafter. The fact that the agreement announced Wednesday is nearly identical to the one proposed in May suggests that Israel has since abandoned some of the key demands that previously sabotaged the deal.

What changed? As far as U.S. actions are concerned, Biden and Trump both credited themselves for the diplomatic breakthrough, and are now jockeying for the greater share of it. “I laid out the precise contours of this plan on May 31, 2024,” Biden declared in a statement. “My diplomacy never ceased… to get this done.” That’s true, but Netanyahu publicly rebuffed the plan, embarrassing the administration. Yet, when presented with a nearly identical proposal seven months later by Trump’s envoy, Steve Witkoff, Netanyahu agreed to it.

Achieving the current breakthrough did not require Trump’s election but rather a change in course from the policy Biden enacted and Vice President Kamala Harris endorsed on the campaign trail.

The difference was Trump’s willingness to pressure Netanyahu—pressure Netayahu knows he is better off not to resist. Arab officials reportedly told The Times of Israel that Trump’s envoy “swayed Netanyahu more in one meeting than Biden did all year.” While Netanyahu brushed off Biden, Trump “bulldozed” him into accepting the deal, according to Haaretz. A diplomat familiar with the negotiations told The Washington Post that Trump’s intervention was “the first time there has been real pressure on the Israeli side to accept a deal.” Former Democratic Congressman Tom Malinowski acknowledged this dynamic, writing, “This was Biden’s deal… but he couldn’t have done it without Trump.” Malinowski credited the breakthrough to Trump’s blunt warning that the war must end by January 20, contrasting this with Biden’s reluctance to exercise similar leverage.

The Biden administration pretended it was powerless to shape Israel’s behavior over the last year. For instance, in February, State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller claimed, “There is a mistaken belief that the United States is able to dictate other countries’ sovereign decisions.” Meanwhile, the administration was sending Israel new weapons shipments every 36 hours, on average. These shipments empowered Netanyahu’s government to reject cease-fire agreements and pursue its preferred course of action instead, namely, continuing its genocide of Palestinians in Gaza.

Without the unprecedented levels of military aid approved by Biden, Israel’s war machine would have ground to a halt. Retired Israeli General Yitzhak Brik underscored this, stating, “All of our missiles, the ammunition, the precision-guided bombs, all the airplanes and bombs—it’s all from the U.S. The minute they turn off the tap, you can’t keep fighting. Everyone understands that we can’t fight this war without the United States. Period.” Instead of forcing Israel to accept a cease-fire, the Biden administration spent tens of billions in U.S. taxpayer dollars incentivizing Netanyahu not to. Achieving the current breakthrough did not require Trump’s election but rather a change in course from the policy Biden enacted and Vice President Kamala Harris endorsed on the campaign trail.

The path forward is clear: Trump must sustain pressure on Israel. Without it, the massacres that have continued even after the cease-fire announcement are likely to persist. If Trump’s administration fails to maintain this pressure, Netanyahu’s statement from last month may become a grim reality: “If there is a deal—and I hope there will be—Israel will return to fighting afterward. There is no point in pretending otherwise because returning to fighting is needed to complete the goals of the war.”

Fortunately, the United States holds immense leverage over Israel. It is crucial to question whether the Trump administration will use it effectively to ensure the cease-fire progresses past its initial stages and leads to a lasting cease-fire, one that involves the unconditional release of hostages and political prisoners, a total Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, and implementation of security and reconstruction efforts needed to allow Gazans to return home.

This piece was co-published with the International Policy Journal.

Today, the Supreme Court upheld Congress’s wrongheaded decision to ban TikTok in a unanimous decision. The ban on TikTok is set to take effect on Sunday January 19, 2025.

Ahead of this misguided ruling, 15 racial justice nonprofits submitted an emergency filing to the Supreme Court, explaining how the TikTok ban violates the rights of 170 million U.S. users and echoes a disgraceful history of anti-Asian racism.

It is no secret that our government wrongfully uses “national security” as a weapon against Asian American and Pacific Islander communities. Stop AAPI Hate’s research highlights how the government routinely scapegoats our communities for economic downturns, public health crises, and national security threats—often without any evidence.

When our government engages in anti-Asian racial profiling and biased enforcement, it encourages everyday people to do the same.

In the case of TikTok, the government claims that a ban is necessary to protect U.S. national security against China. However, the government also filed an affidavit in open court, signed by a senior U.S. national security official, stating there is “no information” that China had ever tried to use TikTok for nefarious purposes in the United States.

In other words, what Congress is telling the world is that being a person or company that simply has origins in Asia is enough to be labeled a national security threat—no evidence required.

That is racial profiling, plain and simple. And it is an affront to the Constitution.

It is disappointing, though unsurprising, that our government is targeting Asian American communities solely because of our race and national origins. Since our nation’s founding, our government has repeatedly trampled on the rights of Asians, Asian Americans, and other minority groups by relying on so-called “national security” concerns as a basis for outright racial discrimination.

Take, for example, the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, Japanese American incarceration during World War II, and government-sanctioned racial profiling and surveillance of innocent Muslim communities following the 9/11 attacks. More recently, we saw the China Initiative, a Department of Justice operation from 2018 to 2022 that unjustly targeted Chinese and Chinese American academics, ruined careers and livelihoods, and chilled scientific research.

Every time the government insisted that such laws or programs targeting Asian Americans were necessary, it reinforced the pernicious “perpetual foreigner” stereotype or the idea that all Asian people in America are inherently suspicious and disloyal to the United States based on our ancestry, skin color, or religious faith.

Those laws and programs were based on fearmongering and scapegoating. All three branches of government—the president, Congress, and the Supreme Court—eventually admitted that Japanese American incarceration violated the Constitution. Both the House and the Senate officially apologized for the Chinese Exclusion Act and other discriminatory laws. And the DOJ eventually shut down the China Initiative, acknowledging it perpetuated a discriminatory double standard against people with any ties to China, though President-elect Donald Trump wants to revive it.

Our government never seems to learn and instead continues to pass laws motivated by anti-Asian prejudice, like this TikTok ban.

The TikTok ban has real human costs. The ban will silence 170 million U.S. users, including communities like ours that rely on TikTok to build solidarity, share valuable information, practice their faith, and engage in free expression.

But what worries us even more is how the TikTok ban fuels hateful rhetoric and actions against Asian Americans. It is clear that Congress targeted TikTok because the company is Chinese. Other social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube collect vast amounts of user data and have had major privacy and security issues—yet the government is not applying the same level of scrutiny on those companies.

When our government engages in anti-Asian racial profiling and biased enforcement, it encourages everyday people to do the same. We saw this exact ripple effect of hate during the Covid-19 pandemic.

At the start of the pandemic, then-President Trump spewed racist, anti-Asian rhetoric blaming Chinese people for the virus, fueling a torrent of hate against AAPI communities. In fact, from 2020 to 2022, Stop AAPI Hate received over 2,000 reports of hate acts in which offenders mimicked Trump’s language. His rhetoric emboldened people to spit racist vitriol at our community members as we shopped for groceries, dropped our kids off at school, and took the bus to work. They shouted that we were diseased and told us to go back to our country. Since our founding in March 2020, we have received over 12,000 reports of anti-AAPI hate acts from across the country—and we know racism and discrimination increase when politicians target our communities.

That’s why AAPI communities must tell our leaders that we disagree with the TikTok ban. This decision is not only an affront to our civil liberties and free speech, it is also an affront to our safety. We need leaders who will defend our rights and safety—not strip it away.

Live at 10 am Eastern time today and streaming 24-7 thereafter:

Calin Georgescu, a right-wing politician from the right-wing Alliance for the Union of Romanians (AUR) Party, won the first round of Romania’s presidential election on November 24. Shocked by the results, pro-NATO and pro-EU officials in Romania claimed that Georgescu had been boosted by TikTok and Russia, both of whom denied interfering.

Romania’s highest court annulled the results and ordered the government to rerun the election in its entirety. Georgescu denounced the vote cancellation as a “formalized coup d’etat.” The first round of the replacement election is now scheduled for May 4.

Dr. George Szamuely, senior research fellow at the Global Policy Institute, joins “The TMI Show”’s Ted Rall and Manila Chan to analyze this strange geopolitical turn in the heart of Europe.

The post TMI Show Ep 59: “The Very Strange Romanian Election That Wasn’t” first appeared on Ted Rall's Rallblog.

The post TMI Show Ep 59: “The Very Strange Romanian Election That Wasn’t” appeared first on Ted Rall's Rallblog.

It’s the beginning of the end for corporate control of health care. The tsunami of outrage against the health insurance industry in the wake of the shooting of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson, can propel an urgent, unyielding demand for the removal of profit from healthcare and the enactment of a universal, national single payer system. That is, if the single payer, Medicare for All, national health service movement can summon the vision and audacity to rise to the occasion.

The myth, promoted by health care think tanks and policy experts, that people in the United States are satisfied with their health insurance was exploded in the social media rage unleashed in the aftermath of the killing of the United Healthcare CEO.

Fifteen years after the passage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), our failing health care system is exposed with all its cruel denials, debt, disease, despair and death at the hands of the investor-owned companies for whom patients are merely pawns for the extraction of profit.

Health care in the United States comes in dead last when rated against comparable countries. The U. S. is at the bottom in overall performance, health outcomes, equity, access to care, and efficiency. As the Commonwealth Fund states: “In fulfilling this fundamental obligation [the ability to keep people healthy], the U. S. continues to fail.”

Health care in the United States comes in dead last when rated against comparable countries.

People in the United States aren’t living to their full potential. Already, the U.S. is 55th in life expectancy, behind Panama, Albania, and Czechia, and will fall in its global rankings by 2050 if the country continues the same trajectory. Years of life are lost to a health care system that serves profit over the value of life.

Our maternal mortality rate would be the shame of many of the poorest nations. In 2020, U.S. maternal mortality rate was higher than in Gaza. In 2022, there were 22 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births in the U.S. This is easily double, and often triple, the mortality rate in peer nations, which can be as low as 5 per 100,000 live births. Black mortality rate is criminally worse: 49.5 per 100,000 live births.

Over one million in the U.S. died in the pandemic, a rate much higher than other nations. Over 330,000 of the pandemic deaths in the U.S. were avoidable. Those lives could have been saved had we had a healthcare system that left no one with inadequate coverage.

Cancer patients must not only fight for their lives but also for the economic survival of their families. The newest treatments with so much hope are beyond the means of those who have insurance policies but no great wealth. About 30% of cancer survivors report lasting financial hardship.

Cancer patients are nearly 5 times more likely to experience bankruptcy, and the medical burden forces many to forego care.

Those who have employer-based insurance were assumed to have the gold standard in health care. Now even the highest paid workers are subjected to premiums, deductibles, and co-pays that impede their care despite the family plans that average $32,000 per year. More have insurance that covers less than a hospital gown. Gold has turned to scrap metal.

As people struggle to pay for the premiums, deductibles, and co-pays, revenues of the seven largest health insurance companies in 2022 reached $1.25 trillion and profits soared to $69.3 billion. That’s a 287% increase in profits in just one decade, when profits were $24 billion.

The toxicity of the health care profit makers that spread unnecessary suffering and death generates the hatred that is poisoning the land.

Medicare, our best health care program, publicly funded and open to all, is now strangled in the grip of the privatized Medicare Advantage plans and the Accountable Care Organizations facilitated by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI). Medicare Advantage now controls a majority of recipients, not because it is better, but because the law that established it and the regulators that control it have allowed it to charge less in monthly premiums—plans that are also allowed to delay and deny care yet are overpaid by billions every year. CMMI issues waivers to the private plans exempting them from fraud and abuse laws and allowing kickbacks, self-referral, and illegal benefit inducement.

Millions on fixed incomes cannot afford the alternative of traditional Medicare plus a prescription drug plan and a supplementary Medigap plan. Those who have managed to escape the clutches of Medicare Advantage can still find themselves assigned, without their knowledge, to “value-based” payment schemes such as ACO REACH and other Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) which privatize traditional Medicare. “Value-based” payment models are touted, without evidence, as reducing costs for Medicare, yet encompass a multitude of for-profit entities and subject patients to physicians incentivized to deny care. There is ample evidence that “value-based” payment schemes do not lower costs for Medicare. Nevertheless, the privatization of Medicare, through Medicare Advantage or ACOs, is now official policy.

The hoax of “value-based” payments, promoted by CMMI, is exposed by the fact that, despite all the assertions of promoting equity, the inequities of health care are expanding.

Medicaid, the program for children and adults with low income, is almost completely privatized, subjecting the recipients to delays, denials and restrictions imposed by the private managed care organizations that control it.

The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) is hurtling down the wrong track. They invite venture capital and health care investors into the Health Care Payment Learning and Action Network (LAN) that they created. CMS holds conferences, seeking advice and collaboration from the very profiteers that are the cause of high cost, low-quality care. The “value-based” payment scheme promoted by CMS has advanced the power of the profit makers, raising costs, cutting care, and pretending to promote equity for minorities and low-income patients.

It’s time to end the chaos. No more foxes in the hen house, no more poison in the system, no more profit in health care.

The toxicity of the health care profit makers that spread unnecessary suffering and death generates the hatred that is poisoning the land.

It’s time to end the chaos. No more foxes in the hen house, no more poison in the system, no more profit in health care. The nation has rejected the insurance company health care model that delays and denies care, demands skin in the game, asserts that there is massive unnecessary care, throws up barriers against care, and walks away with billions. A system that collects money from patients and employers then profits by withholding the promised care is not a business but a fraudulent, diabolical scam.

This system built on profit cannot be tweaked or regulated into better performance. Runaway trains are not deterred by guardrails.

There is one way to heal the nation. Put single payer on the nation’s table and focus the steaming rage to move the engine of change. Raise the demand for removal of profit and enactment of an Improved Medicare for All free from profit to a level commensurate with the damage that our current failing system is causing the patients’ and the country’s goodwill.

Some look at the current Congress, make the assessment that it’s not possible to pass single payer, then change their demand to a lesser proposal. But incremental changes are at the root of the privatization and profit schemes we are locked into now. Fifteen years after the ACA we have a failing health care system. We have witnessed that more incrementalism does more harm than good. Power concedes nothing without a demand, and the demand must be equal to the solution needed.

There is one way to heal the nation. Put single payer on the nation’s table and focus the steaming rage to move the engine of change.

As Marcia Angell, former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, taught us, in our current private profit-based system, proposals that lower costs also decrease care, and proposals that increase care, raise costs. To improve care and control costs, we must turn to national single payer, free from profit or a national health service.

The status quo is deadly, and people are demanding a stronger more effective fight. We must organize and educate, locally and nationally with a new determination. In every town hall, classroom, union, organization, and neighborhood, people must hear the message and join the fight. Redirect the rage into a positive force for change.

The new anger in the nation makes possible what we could not do before. Many are now discussing the possibility of setting a National Day of Action in 2025 to demand freeing health care from corporate profit and covering everyone under a national single payer plan. That’s a great idea. Actions across the country lifting up that demand could inspire the movement we need.

National Single Payer—an Improved Medicare for All free from profit with everybody in and nobody out. Nothing less can heal the nation.

There is little doubt that President-elect Donald Trump’s posture vis-a-vis Israel is a key reason why a cease-fire in Gaza has finally been achieved. According to a diplomat briefed on the matter, this was “the first time there has been real pressure on the Israeli side to accept a deal.”

This means that for 15 months, Israel has dropped American bombs on children in tents, on refugees sheltering in schools, and on patients seeking help in hospitals without President Joe Biden exerting any “real pressure” on Israel to stop.

And once the mere posture of pressure was exerted on Israel by an envoy representing a man who isn’t even president yet, lo and behold, a cease-fire was secured.

By willingly making America complicit, Biden’s decisions will have profound and long-lasting strategic repercussions for the American people on par with the damage George W. Bush’s illegal invasion of Iraq inflicted on America’s standing, credibility, and security, as well as on the region’s stability.

All these senseless deaths, all the American credibility lost, all the Biden voters who stayed home in protest on November 5 could have been avoided.

The truth of the matter is that every day for the past year, Biden could have secured a cease-fire by using America’s vast leverage.

And every day for the past year, from all the evidence we have today, Biden chose not to.

That is the crux of the matter. It is precisely the fact that Biden chose this path that will damage America for years to come. It wasn’t that he lacked the ability or strength to stop the carnage. It’s not that he really wanted to stop it but sadly couldn’t. It wasn’t that his hands were tied. It wasn’t that Congress forced him. Or that polls showed that he or Kamala Harris would lose the elections if they pressed Israel. It wasn’t any of that.

Biden was simply in on it. He was on board with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s war plans. He even attended the war cabinet where the plans were adopted.

In an exit interview with The Times of Israel, Biden’s outgoing ambassador to Israel even bragged about the Biden administration never exerting pressure on Netanyahu to halt the killing. “Nothing that we ever said was, Just stop the war,” Ambassador Jack Lew proudly declared.

By willingly making America complicit, Biden’s decisions will have profound and long-lasting strategic repercussions for the American people on par with the damage George W. Bush’s illegal invasion of Iraq inflicted on America’s standing, credibility, and security, as well as on the region’s stability.

Biden’s own acting Director of the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), Brett Holmgren, told CBS that "anti-American sentiment fueled by the war in Gaza is at a level not seen since the Iraq war." Terrorist groups such as al Qaeda and ISIS are recruiting on these sentiments and issuing the most specific calls for America in years, according to Holmgren.

So every bomb Biden provided Israel to drop on children in Gaza was not only morally monstrous; it also made Americans less safe.

It will take years for America to recuperate from the damage Biden has inflicted on our standing, our moral compass, our credibility, and on our security. America is still recovering from the sins of the Iraq invasion.

But there will be no healing at all, no bouncing back, unless we admit the errors, hold those responsible accountable, and learn to do better. Just as Bush’s Iraq invasion and Global War on Terror gave birth to the strongest anti-war sentiments among Americans seen in decades, made war-mongering bad politics, and the epithet “neocon” an insult, Biden’s bearhug strategy on and blind deference to Israel must forever be remembered as the original sin that led America down the path of complicity in what most likely amounts to genocide.

Welcome to the age of Oil-Garchy, where the concentrated wealth and power of the fossil fuel industry dominates our political system. After donating heavily to Trump’s campaign, the industry has already begun to reap return on their investments.

Trump has nominated some of the most vociferous climate deniers and advocates for the oil, gas, and coal industries for key positions overseeing the environment, energy, and public lands. Former Congressman Lee Zeldin has been nominated to run the Environmental Protection Agency and Chris Wright, CEO of fracking company Liberty Energy, is poised to oversee the Energy Department.

In addition to putting drillers in charge of the watershed, the financial returns are beginning to flow in likely anticipation of pro-oil and gas policies. The top 15 fossil fuel industry billionaires have already seen their personal combined wealth rise from $267.6 billion to $307.9 billion, a gain of over $40 billion, or 15.2 percent since April 2024.

The Climate Accountability Research Project (CARP) released its first monthly tracking report, Pipeline to Power: Trump and the “Oil-garch” Wealth Surge, that will monitor wealth gains and losses by top billionaires in the sector over the coming year. According to the report, the first wave of big wealth gainers include:

• Richard Kinder, Chairman and CEO of Kinder Morgan who saw his wealth increase from $8.1 billion to $11 billion, a gain of 35 percent. Pipeline magnate Kinder may be realizing speculative gains in anticipation of new liquified natural gas (LNG) infrastructure and export capacity.
  
• Lyndal Stephens Greth, chair of Endeavor Energy Resources, saw her wealth increase from $24.3 billion to $29.9 billion, a gain of 23 percent. Greth family wealth is probably surging in anticipation of the resumption of “drill baby drill” policies under the Trump administration. Endeavor Energy Resources, one of the largest private oil producers in the U.S. and owner of more than 500,000 acres of Texas oil country, was sold to Diamondback Energy in September for $26 million in stock and cash.
  
• Koch Industries billionaires, Julia Flesher-Koch (wife of the late David Koch) and Charles Koch, saw their wealth increase from $58.5 billion and $64.3 billion, respectively, to $67.5 and $74.2 billion.

Return on Investment

On April 11, 2024, the CEOs and leaders of the oil and gas industries gathered at Mar-A-Lago for a meeting with candidate Trump about energy policy. Trump used the occasion, according to witnesses present, to make a brazen transactional pitch: raise $1 billion for his campaign and he would do their bidding. Trump told the assembled that the amount of money they would save in taxes and legal expenses after he repealed regulations would more than cover their billion-dollar contribution. Trump implied that if elected, he would expand offshore drilling, weaken environmental rules, and scrap electric vehicle and wind policies and other regulations opposed by the industry groups. Trump vowed to reverse President Biden’s pause on new LNG exports.

Present at the Mar-a-Lago Club on that April day were industry leaders such as Harold Hamm, the wildcat fracker and chairman of Continental Resources, who played an influential role in Trump’s first administration, pushing for Scott Pruitt to serve as Trump’s head of the Environmental Protection Agency. Also present was Doug Burgum, governor of North Dakota and Trump’s nominee to Interior Secretary, a position overseeing gas leases on public lands. Other attendees included leaders from the American Petroleum Institute and executives from Chevron, ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, along with fracking producers Cheniere Energy and EQT.

Harold Hamm and Vicki Hollub, CEO of Occidental Petroleum, organized donors within the fossil fuel sector to support Trump and funnel money to his campaign. They didn’t raise a billion dollars, but they helped move hundreds of millions to PACs supporting Trump and directly to the candidate.

According to Climate Connections at Yale University, the fossil fuel industry spent $219 million to influence the new U.S. government. This included $26 million in direct oil and gas industry contributions to the campaigns of policymakers taking office in 2025, with 88 percent going to Republican lawmakers. The analysis found an additional $151 million in outside spending, including donations to political action committees (PACs), and $67 million to PACs supporting candidates. Nearly $23 million in oil and gas industry funds went directly to candidate Trump and his PACs.

Trump’s mega-donors included banking and oil scion Timothy Mellon and Timothy Dunn, CEO billionaire of CrownQuest, a major oil and fracking company based in Texas. George Bishop, the CEO of oil and gas company GeoSouthern Energy, donated $1 million to Trump’s campaign, with his wife forking over an additional $500,000. Fossil fuel billionaires Kelcy Warren and Harold Hamm donated $5 million and $1 million respectively to Trump's 2024 presidential campaign.

This is what “Oil-garchy” looks like. See the whole report, Pipeline to Power: Trump and the “Oil-garch” Wealth Surge, at www.climatecriminals.org.

You’re reading the words of a formerly undocumented immigrant.

When I fled El Salvador four decades ago, I was 12 years old and alone. I wanted to escape the country’s civil war, where U.S.-backed death squads had made murders and rape our daily reality.

I reunited with my sisters, my only surviving family, in Wichita, Kansas. Once there, I helped open churches, started businesses, and raised three daughters. There were times I wasn’t sure we’d make it to the end of the month, but I was grateful for the sense of peace and security we were able to create here.

We all have a stake in stopping private prison corporations from becoming more powerful, regardless of our language, race, gender, or community.

That’s why I’m so alarmed that the new Republican-led Congress has chosen to open with a bill, H.R. 29, that strikes fear in the hearts of immigrant families all across the country. This bill would strip judges of discretion and require immigrants to be detained and subject to deportation if they’re accused—not even convicted—of even minor offenses like shoplifting.

This major assault on due process won’t keep anyone safer. It would terrorize all immigrants in this country, who studies show are much less likely to commit crimes of any kind than native-born Americans.

So who benefits from H.R. 29? Private prison corporations like CoreCivic and GEO Group, who made a fortune during the last Trump administration by running private prisons for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

CoreCivic and GEO kept immigrants and asylum seekers in inhumane and toxic conditions with poor hygiene and exposed women and children to sexual predators. Under this new law, cynical executives will siphon off more public dollars, and wealthy investors will reap more rewards, from abusing and demonizing people seeking refuge from violence or poverty.

When President-elect Donald Trump won, private prison stocks soared. Why? Because investors anticipated making a fortune detaining immigrants. More than 90% of migrants detained by ICE end up in for-profit facilities.

GEO Group, which maxed out its campaign contributions to Trump, told its investors they could make almost $400 million per year supporting “future needs for ICE and the federal government” in a second Trump term. Their stock price nearly doubled in November.

Whether those detained are guilty or not, CoreCivic and GEO get paid. That’s what H.R. 29 is for: advancing corporate greed, not protecting Americans.

We all have a stake in stopping private prison corporations from becoming more powerful, regardless of our language, race, gender, or community. In addition to jailing immigrants, for-profit prison companies also look for ways to put citizens in prison more often—and for longer—so they can make more money.

Whenever we allow fundamental rights to be taken away, we erode our shared humanity and diminish all of our rights and freedoms.

The people behind H.R. 29 want us to be afraid of each other so we won’t stand together. They want to be able to barge into our homes, schools, and churches to take our neighbors and loved ones away. They want workers to be too scared to stand up to their bosses’ abuse. All so their donors in the private prison industry can make more money.

Democrats will need to find their way in this new Congress. Falling in line behind nativist fear-mongers who take millions in campaign contributions from the private-prison industry is not the right way to do it.

Americans demand better. We want true leadership with an affirmative vision for the future of this country and dignity for all people, including immigrants.

H.R. 29 targets whole communities because of the language we speak and the color of our skin. Instead, our elected leaders, regardless of party, must work to address people’s needs through building an economy that works for all of us, not just the wealthy few.

In her Tuesday confirmation hearing, President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for Attorney General, Pamela Bondi, had a contentious exchange with Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) about 2020 election denialism and the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of birthright citizenship. Bondi was evasive and tried to waste time through rambling answers instead of directly answering Padilla’s questions. However, it was her non-answer to the question about the 14th Amendment that spoke loudest.

Padilla asked the following question, “Now when we met yesterday, you did not seem to be familiar with the citizenship clause [of] the 14th Amendment of the United States of America, which was deeply disappointing. And I’m hoping you are more familiar with it today after I gave an opportunity to study it overnight. So can you tell me at this committee what the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment says?”

This is an extremely straightforward question. Although I wouldn’t expect anyone to be able to recite all of the text of all of the Amendments of the Constitution verbatim from memory, Bondi gave a stonewalling non-answer that was very telling. “Senator, I’m here to answer your questions. I’m not here to do your homework and study for you. If I’m confirmed as Attorney General,” at which point the senator repeated his question and tried to press her for an answer. The only answer that she ended up giving on this topic was a pathetic, “Senator, the 14th Amendment we all know addresses birthright citizenship…. I didn’t take your homework assignment: I’m sorry I was preparing for today.”

Although Bondi’s answer made her sound like a student who is giving a book report on a book they didn’t read, I am certain that she knows exactly what the 14th Amendment says. Padilla, to his credit, did not fall for Bondi’s attempted dodge. He asked point blank, “So now on the 14th Amendment, you’ve testified repeatedly to this committee that you will uphold the laws of this country and defend the Constitution of the United States. Do you believe birthright citizenship is the law of the land and will you defend it regardless of a…child born in the United States, regardless of their parents’ immigration status?”

Again, Bondi’s lack of a direct response tells you everything you need to know. “Senator, I will study birthright citizenship. I would love to meet with you regarding birthright citizenship.” Bondi does not have the courage to own up to the fact that she and the administration that she is applying to work for will put into practice an illegal set of policies designed to contravene the 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause and deny U.S. citizenship to children born in the U.S. to undocumented parents. She does not want to say the text of the 14th Amendment out loud because it’s really quite unambiguous.

For reference, the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment says, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.” Children who are born in the U.S. to undocumented parents are subject to the jurisdiction of U.S. laws. Therefore, they are citizens. It couldn’t be any more straightforward. As I wrote about previously, the conservative legal “theory” that these children are not subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. and are therefore not citizens is completely ludicrous and incoherent. I also recently wrote about the dystopian nightmare that would be created if Donald Trump is allowed to bring this incoherent theory into practice. With Trump’s inauguration looming next week, it is important that we understand what Bondi’s role would be in the push to end birthright citizenship in the U.S.

As Attorney General, Bondi would be a key player in Trump’s Push to end birthright citizenship and shred the 14th Amendment

There are three key roles Bondi would play as Attorney General in Donald Trump’s plan to destroy the 14th Amendment. First, the Attorney General is the head of the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel. The OLC is a critical part of any administration that many Americans may not be aware of. As the OLC’s website says, “The Office drafts legal opinions of the Attorney General and provides its own written opinions and other advice in response to requests from the Counsel to the President, the various agencies of the Executive Branch, and other components of the Department of Justice…. All executive orders and substantive proclamations proposed to be issued by the President are reviewed by the Office of Legal Counsel for form and legality, as are various other matters that require the President’s formal approval.” (emphasis added).

As Attorney General, Bondi will be responsible for issuing OLC legal memos and reviewing the legality (or illegality) of Trump’s executive orders. Although OLC legal memos are only advisory in nature, they can have powerful effects. We are still living under the shadow of the 1973 OLC memo that concludes that a sitting President is immune from criminal prosecution. OLC memos create legal cover and justification for agencies to take action. Further, Bondi would be theoretically responsible for signing off on the constitutionality of any Trump executive orders that contravene the 14th Amendment. Her statement that she has to “study” the 14th Amendment is hard to believe because I would not be surprised to find out that they have a legal memo and executive orders already drafted and ready to go that will start the attack on birthright citizenship as soon as Trump takes office. We can assume that behind closed doors, she has already signed off on Trump’s illegal plan to deny citizenship to children of undocumented parents.

Second, the Attorney General sits at the top of the Executive Office for Immigration Review, which is commonly referred to as “Immigration Court.” The EOIR is the arm of the government that carries out removal proceedings, i.e., deportation proceedings. In a previous piece for Common Dreams, I wrote about a nightmare scenario where the federal government would begin to detain and deport people born in the U.S. with undocumented parents. As Attorney General, Bondi would be instrumental in this as her office would be carrying out these proceedings under the flagrantly incorrect notion that these people born in the U.S. are not citizens.

Third, the AG controls the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG). The OSG is the arm of the Executive Branch that will defend Trump’s policies in court against the inevitable legal challenges that they will draw. Of course, as I previously wrote, these policies are intentionally designed to draw legal challenges and make their way to the corrupt U.S. Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court overturns birthright citizenship despite the incredibly clear language of the 14th Amendment, it will be because of the arguments put forward by Bondi’s attorneys who are part of the Office of the Solicitor General and the Department of Justice. If birthright citizenship in the U.S. is erased, it will be because of Pam Bondi.

Bondi’s response that she would have to “study” the 14th Amendment is a lie. She is lying to cover up the fact that she will be a key player in Trump’s plans to shred the 14th Amendment and abrogate his oath of office. Just let that sink in. She is lying at her confirmation hearing because she knows that she will be a major part of the incoming administration’s effort to break the law by ignoring the plain text of the U.S. Constitution. Her nomination should be opposed unanimously, but of course, we cannot count on any Republicans in the Senate to do the right thing, ever. We need to keep a clear moral perspective and never let them forget what they have done if they are successful in confirming Bondi and destroying the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of birthright citizenship in the U.S.

“Democratic laws and institutions can only function effectively when they are based on a culture of democracy.” —Thorbjørn Jagland, Secretary General of the Council of Europe (2018)

If political rage propels authoritarianism, what supports democratic governance? If a culture of democracy is required, is it attainable? Or has the slide into authoritarian rule crossed the point of no return? The time of cultural reckoning has arrived.

U.S. democracy, historically thin, is susceptible to demagoguery and oligarchy. As political philosopher Benjamin Barber observed decades ago, “the survival of democracy remains an open question.” It will endure “only as strong democracy,” secured by a competent, responsible, politically engaged, and well-informed citizenry; a lasting commitment to self-governance requires a civically educated public.

Strong democracy presupposes a culture of democracy.

What is a culture of democracy?

This question is so important that in 2018 the Council of Europe—an intergovernmental human rights organization representing 46 European member states—published a three-volume report dedicated to answering it. According to the report, a civic culture strong enough to sustain democratic institutions, laws, and practices consists of a full set of values, attitudes, and knowledge acted upon by the citizenry in public spaces. This is a high standard, especially for a markedly diverse country of over 300 million. It presumes adherence to key values, command of relevant knowledge, and proficiency in corresponding competencies.

Democratic values include a commitment to human dignity and rights, cultural diversity, equality, fairness, justice, the rule of law, and democratic procedures. Human rights apply universally, are safeguarded without distinction, and are exercised short of violating the rights of others. Respect for cultural diversity enables the contribution of diverse perspectives to public deliberation and decision-making. Decisions by majority or plurality vote are made without resort to coercion and with continuing respect for civil liberties.

Among democratic attitudes, openness to cultural diversity entails a suspension of prejudice and a willingness to cooperate with citizens of different cultural identities in a relationship of equality. An attitude of tolerance and respect presumes the intrinsic dignity and equality of others regardless of their differences. An attitude of civic mindedness and self-sufficiency involves a sense of interconnectedness among citizens, a concern for one another’s welfare, a willingness to serve the common good, an expectation of personal accountability, and a belief that one’s contribution can make a positive difference. Civic mindedness extends to dealing creatively and constructively with complexities, ambiguities, and uncertainties.

A functioning democracy requires a substantial investment in cultural knowledge, not just technical competency.

Implementing these values and attitudes requires various democratic competencies. Analytical thinking consists of logical and systematic analysis of issues and arguments together with critical thinking to make evaluative judgments about options and to sort out political propaganda, while recognizing that one’s own judgments are contingent on a working perspective. Active listening and close observation are required to appreciate subtleties, identify inconsistencies and omissions, and understand cultural differences. Empathy is requisite to apprehending the cognitive and affective orientation of people with dissimilar cultural backgrounds. Flexibility and adaptation to changing circumstances and experiences are necessary to reconsider fixed habits of thought. Competency in communication is needed to express opinions, ideas, and wants, to request and provide clarifications, to persuade and negotiate constructively, to compromise, cooperate, manage conflict, and build consensus.

The democratic knowledge expected of citizens is familiarity with the complexities of the larger world. It encompasses an understanding of political and legal concepts such as rights, equality, and justice as well as an awareness of how democratic institutions operate; knowledge of current affairs and the political views of others; knowledge of the history, texts, doctrines, practices, and diversity of religious traditions; understanding how history is constructed and shapes contemporary perceptions; knowing how media select, interpret, and edit information for various purposes, and their impact on the public’s judgment and behavior; understanding economic processes, their consequences for profit and employment, and their intersection with social, political, and environmental issues.

Is a culture of democracy attainable?

Even more than the above synopsis, the full text of democratic values, attitudes, knowledge, and competencies conveys an expectation that is well above the present capacity of publics in the U.S., Europe, and elsewhere. This disjunction between aspiration and reality raises a question of feasibility. Can the public’s competencies be raised to a closer approximation of the ideal, to a level close enough for civic culture to support democratic politics?

The decline of liberal arts and civic education is indicative of the difficulty of answering the feasibility question affirmatively. Democratic culture is undermined rather than advanced by a commitment to technical and applied training at the expense of teaching the humanities, arts, and social sciences. A functioning democracy requires a substantial investment in cultural knowledge, not just technical competency. Nor can a balanced education be restricted to elites if the aim is to develop an able, well-informed public.

Beyond the deficit in formal education, lifelong civic learning is hampered by economic struggle, health crises, life’s everyday demands, violence riddled entertainment, sensationalized news media, and polarized politics. The country is caught in a downward political spiral exacerbated by its diminishing influence in the world, the economic disruption of globalization, inequity of wealth distribution, ongoing demographic shifts and migration, and imminent climate change, culminating in the election of a rightwing authoritarian regime. Under these circumstances, it is difficult to foresee a rise of civic culture above even the minimum needed to sustain thin democracy.

The value of an aspirational model as a gauge of the democratic deficit is that it can provide a goal and sense of direction for rectifying present deficiencies. The problem with an aspirational model is that the ideal can be too far removed from exigent circumstances, frustrated expectations, and fragmented politics to inspire commitment to a democratic future. It takes strong faith to bridge the gap and to move forward in an imperfect world.

Has faith in the democratic ideal expired?

Perhaps the spirit of democracy is most immediately in need of revival, if that is possible. An analytical ideal of democratic culture is abstract, literal, even antiseptic, and thus stripped of narrative texture and figurative transcendence. Absent a binding mythos, a people’s shared sentiment fades, and collective faith in democracy diminishes. The people are deprived of a political north star.

Just as Trumpism mobilizes the country’s dark impulses, historian Jon Meacham argues, the people must call upon their better angels and reach within the nation’s soul for a noble guiding vision. That “ancient and perennial” soul is an “immanent collection of convictions, dispositions, and sensitivities that shape character and inform conduct.” It is “the vital center, the core, the heart, the essence of life.”

Historian Heather Cox Richardson documents how the country’s antidemocratic leaders have rewritten the nation’s story to abandon the principle of equality. She also observes that Americans have managed, despite several close calls, to hold on to democratic principles for over three centuries, “however imperfectly they lived them.” In her view, “the true nature of American democracy … is, and has always been, a work in progress.” The task at hand in this “time of testing,” she writes, is one of “keeping the dream of equality alive.”

By these accounts, reawakening the spirit of democracy is a plausible undertaking. An imperfect citizenry might draw sustenance from its centuries-long, checkered quest for liberty and equality, and it might reasonably hope to muddle through dark times.

When robust democratic deliberation is rendered inherently destabilizing, the modes of responsible and active citizenship by a competent public are diminished.

That said, rhetorical scholar Jennifer Mercieca observes that the capacity of the citizenry to act democratically is “ambiguous.” American citizenship, depending on “whoever ‘the people’ are thought to be,” is a “conflicted, paradoxical, and complex” phenomenon that does not ensure the kind of national stability the Constitution was designed to protect. By representing active citizenship as a danger to stability, the country’s Constitutional founders strayed from the revolutionary conception of citizens actively watching and critiquing government, resisting corruption and oppression, and working for the common good. Over the course of time, a pseudo-democratic conception of citizenship, informed by an infantilizing discourse of a distempered public, a public that must be contained and constrained by political parties, has demoted citizens from decisionmakers to bystanders and relegated them to consumer status. When robust democratic deliberation is rendered inherently destabilizing, the modes of responsible and active citizenship by a competent public are diminished.

While the slide into authoritarianism has perhaps reached the point of no return, which we cannot know for certain, now might instead be regarded as an exigent moment for revitalizing the spirit of democracy. Reconstituting civic will would take a fugitive act in the Jeffersonian sense of instigating a little rebellion now and again—a rebellious interval of deliberative dissent with sufficient intensity and duration to jump start the democratic dream. There can be no guarantee, only a conviction that an effort to prevent the demise of democracy might succeed.

Never have Americans been more surveyed or tracked, a situation highlighted by airport security. We present IDs, allow our retinas to be scanned and submit to X-rays. Meanwhile, random migrants are falling out of airplane wheel wells and scrambling across our international borders. To be free, you need to be outside the system.

The post Documented vs. Free Range first appeared on Ted Rall's Rallblog.

The post Documented vs. Free Range appeared first on Ted Rall's Rallblog.

Echoing President Dwight Eisenhower’s warning of a “military industrial complex” in his 1961 farewell address, President Joe Biden brought his decades-long career in politics to an end by warning of “an oligarchy [that] is taking shape in America of extreme wealth, power and influence that really threatens our entire democracy, our basic rights and freedom.”

Indeed, income and wealth inequality have exploded to levels similar to those that preceded the 1789 French Revolution. “The TMI Show”’s Ted Rall and Manila Chan ask: what can or should be done to make American society and economics more equal?

Meanwhile, Israel and Hamas agreed to a ceasefire deal in the Gaza War that could send three dozen Israeli hostages home and give starving and homeless Palestinians a reprieve from more than a year of genocidal violence and wind down a 15-month war that helped destroy Biden’s presidency.

Streams live Monday-Friday 10 am Eastern time. You can watch anytime thereafter.

The post TMI Show Ep 58: “Biden’s Farewell + Gaza Ceasefire” first appeared on Ted Rall's Rallblog.

The post TMI Show Ep 58: “Biden’s Farewell + Gaza Ceasefire” appeared first on Ted Rall's Rallblog.

Donald Trump is about to return to the White House, but it's clear who's really running the show: Elon Musk, the wealthiest man in the world and the chair of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE.

Musk will do anything to avoid paying his fair share of taxes. That's why he wants to use DOGE to cut $2 trillion in government spending—which is mathematically impossible without slashing Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Last month, Musk amplified a thread from Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) that used zombie lies about Social Security to call for cutting and privatizing it.

Nobody voted to cut Social Security, Medicare, or Medicaid. Despite his past history of supporting cuts to these programs, Trump blanketed millions of households in swing states with flyers promising to protect them.

Our job is to remind voters of that promise, and demand that Republicans keep it. Trump won't be on the ballot again, but every member of the House of Representatives (and one-third of the U.S. Senate) is up for reelection in less than two years. That's why they want to slash our benefits behind closed doors.

I went to the first meeting of the DOGE Caucus, and stood outside those closed doors to confront members as they entered and exited the room. I handed them copies of Trump's campaign flyers promising to protect Social Security and Medicare, and asked if DOGE intended to keep that promise.

One Republican told me that "there will be some cuts" to Social Security and Medicare. Another said that "everything is on the table." Most of the rest refused to answer—except for DOGE Caucus co-chair Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.). When I handed her Trump's flyers, she said, "We don't care" and tossed them to the ground.

That's what Marjorie Taylor Greene thinks of Trump's campaign promise to protect earned benefits—and we're going to make sure her constituents know it. My organization, Social Security Works, just sent a billboard truck to drive to every large senior center in her district, reading "Marjorie Taylor Greene is helping the richest man in the world cut YOUR Social Security" and urging voters to call her office.

We are also planning to send a billboard truck to the district of Rep. Derrick Van Orden (R-Wis.). Van Orden is a member of the DOGE Caucus and refused to pledge to protect Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. He is one of the most vulnerable Republican incumbents, winning his most recent race by fewer than 11,256 votes.

These two billboard trucks are just the beginning. We are demanding that every member of Congress, starting with the members of the DOGE Caucus, pledge to protect Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. If they refuse, our trucks will be driving through their districts in the very near future.

Join our campaign to protect Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid at https://socialsecurityworks.org/pledge.

In late November, President-elect Donald Trump announced Pam Bondi—former Florida attorney general, current partner at Ballard Partners, and long-time Trump-world regular—as his nominee for attorney general. Bondi perfectly exemplifies Trump’s approach to staffing the executive branch: prioritizing loyalists with a history of defending him personally and actively creating opportunities for revolver-induced corruption.

Going into the second Trump administration, the Department of Justice (DOJ) faces a broad array of issues, from counter-intelligence to civil rights enforcement. But in many respects the Justice Department is most central and critical as the enforcer of laws that limit corporate misbehavior. From monopolistic collusion and tax evasion to wage theft and polluting the air, the DOJ is constantly deciding whether to pursue potential civil and criminal actions against a wide array of corporations.

Is someone whose (virtual) rolodex is full of contacts at large tech companies likely to be enthusiastic about supporting antitrust enforcement against the very tech executives she has a warm working relationship with?

If confirmed, Bondi will be a classic corporate revolver. While at Ballard, she’s worked with a slate of corporate clients, prominently including Amazon, which has pending cases before the DOJ and Federal Trade Commission. As attorney general, Bondi would stand to oversee cases against a number of her former clients and their ilk, creating at the very least the appearance of a conflict of interest.

Bondi would also have the power to influence resource allocation decisions, determining how much effort the federal government puts toward enforcing the law against corporate actors and individuals alike. With many of Bondi and her Ballard peers’ clients and former clients number among those who stand to face federal enforcement, there are clear reasons to worry she might de-emphasize corporate misconduct and prioritize Trump’s political enemies.

Is someone whose (virtual) rolodex is full of contacts at large tech companies likely to be enthusiastic about supporting antitrust enforcement against the very tech executives she has a warm working relationship with? Questions like this seem to answer themselves, and the outlook isn’t good for those of us who see the role of government as protecting most of us from the greed and abuses of wealthy and powerful corporations and executives.

Beyond concerns about corporate revolver dynamics that could undercut DOJ’s efficacy in cracking down on corporate wrongdoing, Bondi herself has a worrying history of receiving support from corporate actors before seemingly using her power to shield them from legal action.

In 2011, newly inaugurated Florida Attorney General Bondi led the charge to fire two attorneys who had been investigating Lender Processing Services (LPS)—a mortgage services company that later pled guilty to having forged documents to illegally repossess borrowers’ homes—after Bondi received substantial campaign contributions from LPS. In 2013, Bondi directly solicited a reelection campaign donation from the Donald J. Trump Foundation. Shortly after Bondi received the $25,000 donation, her office declined to continue investigating complaints against Trump University. Also during Bondi’s first term as Florida attorney general, she had an extended relationship with lawyers from firm Dickstein Shapiro who met with Bondi to represent an array of corporate clients. In several documented cases, Bondi declined to use her AG powers to pursue action against these companies, as The New York Times reported in a Pulitzer-winning 2014 series. (As the Miami Herald reports, a brochure from the firm even boasts that “we persuaded AGs not to sue Accretive Health.”)

These corruption concerns don’t even scratch the surface of Bondi’s broad network of financial and personal relationships with conservative interest groups and influential corporate actors, not to mention her lobbying work for the nation of Qatar. As such, Bondi's confirmation would likely become quite difficult, as every issue from how to deal with Foreign Agents Registration Act enforcement to antitrust policy is implicated by her time at Ballard.

These blatant concerns with Bondi’s fitness for the role were drawn out to some extent in her first confirmation hearing on Wednesday. Bondi repeatedly took a combative tone in response to questions. She dodged or evaded numerous questions about how her loyalty to Trump might influence her decision-making as attorney general, even making the blanket statement, “I’ll never speak on a hypothetical, especially one saying that the president would do something illegal”—a concerning hard line for her to take, given Trump's multiple, non-hypothetical, criminal convictions.

Bondi’s second hearing, scheduled for on Thursday, promises to produce more eventful and contentious testimony, as hearings for Trump nominees continue this week.

After years of advocacy from the disabled community, the Department of Labor is proposing a rule that would end the issuance of 14(c) certificates, which enable businesses to pay subminimum wages to disabled workers.

If you’re unfamiliar with Section 14(c) of the 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act, you might be shocked to learn that it is, in fact, legal to pay disabled workers below the minimum wage. Companies across the country can request 14(c) certificates that give them license to pay disabled workers far below poverty wages. It’s a practice that has been present for decades, but there is once again movement toward making 14(c) a thing of the past.

Ending this practice is long overdue, and is desperately needed to keep disabled people out of poverty. In the South, where my organization New Disabled South works, poverty is higher than anywhere else in the country. And there are more 14(c) certificates in the South than any other region in the nation. We know that disabled people live in poverty at twice the rate of nondisabled people—which means that there is simply no reason to keep disabled people in poverty by paying them poverty wages. It is unconscionable.

Calling this a “special” wage is an insult to the disability community, which deserves to thrive and live with dignity.

Proponents of 14(c) certificates have emphasized the supposed merits of these certificates, saying that they provide people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) the opportunities to work that they otherwise wouldn’t have. One argument that gets perpetuated often is that it’s better to pay folks with IDD something rather than nothing at all. This is perhaps the most disturbing justification imaginable—implying that sheltered workshops are sufficient options for people who “wouldn’t otherwise be employable.” In truth, segregated, subminimum wage jobs deprive disabled people of the chance to know what we’re capable of when our needs are valued and met. We rise to the occasion when employers, family advocates, caregivers, regulatory agencies, and legislators meet their responsibilities to us. Many more disabled people would be capable of competitive integrated employment—and more generally, would be better able to reach our highest potential—if we are first provided with fair wages, in addition to wrap-around support that allows us to improve our skills and do our jobs in an accessible environment.

Decades of research demonstrate that segregated, subminimum wage jobs generate higher costs for employers and worse outcomes for disabled people. Plus, employment rates for disabled people improve in states that end 14(c). What is truly needed is Competitive Integrated Employment (CIE), which ensures that disabled people get paid fairly and have opportunities for employment in their community, as opposed to being segregated from it. Many more of us would be capable of CIE if we were provided with the integrated opportunities afforded under Olmstead and the reasonable accommodations protected under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), including those that teach and allow us to communicate via augmentative and alternative communication (AAC).

Arguments favoring the continued use of 14(c) certificates are primarily based on fear or misunderstanding of the current policy and programmatic landscape. The biggest misconception is that payments above subminimum wage will disqualify disabled employees from receiving the public benefits they require. However, two existing options for mitigating that possibility are ABLE Accounts and Medicaid “buy-in” programs.

ABLE accounts are savings accounts that allow disabled people to save money without it counting toward the asset limits associated with eligibility for SSI, Medicaid, SNAP, and other government assistance programs. Medicaid “buy-in” programs allow disabled workers to access, sometimes in exchange for a premium, the home- and community-based services that are not provided under employer-sponsored or other private health insurance plans. Forty-seven states and D.C. have Medicaid “buy-in” programs. No one should have to choose between keeping a job and keeping their healthcare, and this program makes it possible for disabled people to have both.

ABLE accounts and Medicaid “buy-in” programs must be expanded to eliminate disincentives to work. Income and asset limits associated with eligibility for government assistance programs must also be raised to align with the rising cost of living across the country, particularly for disabled people. But even in the absence of those policy changes, the finalization of DOL’s proposed 14(c) rule will still be beneficial.

This is what equity and inclusion looks like, not continuing the standard set by Section 14(c) for low quality of life, inequality, and economic suffering. Proponents of the 14(c) program refer to subminimum wages as the “Special Minimum Wage,” a stunningly offensive term aimed at diminishing the harm that paying these wages does to disabled workers. As of 2019, the majority of 14(c) employees were earning less than $3.40 an hour, or $213.76 per month, while—as I highlighted two years ago—the executive directors of many of these workplaces made five- and six-figure salaries. Calling this a “special” wage is an insult to the disability community, which deserves to thrive and live with dignity.

The Department of Labor is accepting public comment through January 17, meaning there is still time to encourage them to finalize the proposed rule and finally end the 14(c) program once and for all. To learn more about DOL’s proposed rule and how to submit comments by January 17, check out this Plain Language explainer and action alert from the Autistic Self Advocacy Network.

Until recently, the American-funded Israeli genocide of Palestinians unsurprisingly continued without a stop in sight. On January 13, 2025, Israeli attacks assassinated at least 45 Gazans. Shortly after these attacks, however, a cease-fire and hostage deal (reportedly split into three phases) was confirmed on January 15, 2025. Importantly, Steven Witkoff, selected by U.S. President-elect Donald Trump to be his special envoy in the Middle East, has forced Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to accept a cease-fire and hostage plan in two months, existing in stark contrast with the Biden administration’s incompetent (and frankly cruel) inability to pressure Netanyahu into accepting a plan over the past year.

Nevertheless, even though the incoming Trump administration secured a cease-fire and hostage deal, it’s impossible to truly know what will come next. Trump is notoriously unpredictable. According to recent estimates from Gaza’s Health Ministry, at least 45,000 Palestinians have been slaughtered since October 7, 2023. In the days leading up to his presidential inauguration, many around the United States and the world at large are uncertain about how Trump will treat Israel’s ongoing genocide and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a whole. To help answer these questions, I interviewed a variety of scholars.

First, it’s important to assess Trump’s impact on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict during his first term. On the one hand, Trump perpetually enabled Israeli expansionism. “Trump recognized Israel’s illegal annexation of Jerusalem, [and] he recognized Israel’s illegal annexation of the Golan Heights,” political scientist Norman Finkelstein told me. Further, the two-state proposal that Trump disclosed in 2020 radically reversed the policy of his predecessors by allowing Israel to annex the Jordan Valley and the vast majority of illegal settlements in the West Bank, while merely allotting 15% of historic Palestine toward a Palestinian state. Trump’s first administration simply didn’t value Palestinian sovereignty, a sentiment shared by the Biden administration. “Biden could have reversed [Trump’s] decisions, but elected not to,” Finkelstein further explained to me. The Biden administration’s encouragement of Israel’s genocide are simply an outgrowth of Trump’s previous policies, which approved of Israeli expansionism.

Although criticizing Liz Cheney and other members of Washington’s war machine, Trump remains perpetually ignorant of his own hawkish behavior.

On the other hand, Trump partly abandoned the Palestinian issue during his first term. “Trump (or more precisely, Kushner and others) tried to sideline the Palestinian issue completely and to focus on promoting normalization between Israel, the Gulf States, and Saudi Arabia instead,” international relations scholar Stephen Walt told me. After feeling deserted by the Trump administration, many Palestinians, according to Walt, came to believe that they “had no options other than violence.” Since the Biden administration continued Trump’s policies of abandonment, “October 7 was the result.”

While Finkelstein and Walt highlight the negative consequences of Trump’s policies toward Israel, famed Israeli revisionist historian Benny Morris views Trump’s previous actions differently. “[Trump] recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, which previous U.S. presidents should have done, but apart from giving Israelis a good feeling, it had no impact on the conflict,” Morris told me. Nevertheless, by arguing that Trump was right to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and that previous American presidents “should have,” Morris explicitly acknowledges and approves of the Israeli expansionism that Trump fomented, undermining Morris’ credibility to speak on behalf of whether or not the Palestinians perceived Trump’s actions to be escalatory.

Early signs already indicate that the second Trump administration will, at the very least, further enable illegal Israeli expansion, especially upon the occupied West Bank. Two of Trump’s key appointees, Pete Hegseth (Defense Department) and Mike Huckabee (ambassador to Israel), dismiss a two-state solution. Further, Huckabee habitually denies Palestinian existence itself, identifies the West Bank as “Judea and Samaria,” and believes that the entirety of the West Bank belongs to Israel. David Friedman, who remains a close associate with Trump and was U.S. ambassador to Israel under his first administration, recently wrote a book arguing for a single Jewish state, which would include the West Bank and likely Gaza. Understanding that a second Trump presidency enables further Israeli expansionism, Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich stated that “now is the time” to seek sovereignty over the settlements in the West Bank.

It’s entirely likely that the second Trump administration will encourage Israeli expansion over the West Bank to a degree that would guarantee the prevention of an independent Palestinian state from emerging. Former Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) representative Sari Nusseibeh, previously one of the most visible Palestinian peace activists advocating for a two-state solution, maintains, “Under Trump, Israel’s policy will be the geographic and political dismemberment of the embryonic Palestinian state, bringing all this under a hegemonic Israeli authority, with total disregard to international opinion.”

Although a cease-fire and hostage deal has been achieved, Trump promised Netanyahu that his administration would maintain support for Israel even if it violated the agreement, according to a recent report. While a cease-fire was previously reached between Israel and Lebanon, Israel has continued air striking southern and eastern Lebanon. Neither the Trump nor Biden administration has punished Israel, and it’s unlikely that they will. Recently, Hegseth expressed his support for Israel to kill “every last member of Hamas.” In practicality, this entails that high-ranking members of the Trump administration approve of Israel intensifying its indiscriminate assault on Gaza. In addition to the possibility of “the elimination of Gaza as a Palestinian entity and the continuing [encroachment] on the West Bank and its absorption into the state of Israel,” it’s very likely that there will be “more killing and ethnic cleansing” under the second Trump administration, cultural studies scholar Iain Chambers told me. Such wariness regarding the possible perpetuation of genocide and Israeli expansionism under a second Trump administration is also shared by Walt: “The genocide/ethnic cleansing will continue, and I think it is likely that Israel will annex the West Bank (and perhaps portions of Syria and Lebanon).”

Although the future is never entirely given, it’s possible to gauge how the second Trump administration will treat Israel. Based on Trump’s disastrous actions toward Palestinians (during his first term and now), it’s plausible to assume that the second Trump administration will sharply enable Israeli expansionism at the very least, although the simultaneous escalation of Israel’s genocide is also a likely option. Although criticizing Liz Cheney and other members of Washington’s war machine, Trump remains perpetually ignorant of his own hawkish behavior. While hopelessness may ensue upon the realization that the second Trump administration will have disastrous consequences for Palestinian livelihood, one must resist feeling discouraged. Perpetual, collective political action still remains the only viable form of resistance to Washington’s endless support of oppression.