Right before Russia invaded Ukraine, crude oil was trading for $99 a barrel, and American motorists were paying $3.61 at the pump. Crude then quickly jumped to $130 and gas prices soared to $4.30. Crude tumbled back down to $98 (3/16), but we’re still paying the same $4.30 for gas, according to AAA.
Erice Boehlert noted at PressRun.Media (3/21), “For a press that obsessed over gas prices as they climbed, while platforming Republican claims that President Joe Biden was to blame for the energy inflation (another White House ‘crisis’), the media have now lost interest in the gas station saga. It’s another case of putting extra energy into chasing Bad News for Biden stories. And news outlets have shown no interest in putting Big Oil under a microscope to highlight what role they play in today’s stubbornly high gas prices.”
Is price gouging a factor today? Democrats think so. “As American families work to make ends meet, Congress must take action to investigate reports of illegal profiteering, anticompetitive business practices, and price gouging within the oil and gas industry and hold public hearings, as appropriate,” wrote 32 members of Congress who signed a letter to US House and Senate leaders urging “immediate investigations.”
The press couldn’t care less. During the week of March 6-12, when they were in a frantic mode, often reporting live from outlier gas stations that were pushing astronomical prices, “gas” was mentioned 1,450 times on CNN, CNBC, Fox News, and MSNBC, according to TVeyes. By contrast “price gouging” that week was referenced just 45 times. There hasn’t been an ounce of media skepticism in play for this story.
POLL SHOWS 80% OF US VOTERS SUPPORT WINDFALL PROFITS TAX ON BIG OIL. US voters—regardless of party affiliation—overwhelmingly support a windfall profits tax on US oil corporations that are using Russia’s war on Ukraine to hike prices at the pump, Jake Johnson reported at CommonDreams (3/18).
According to polling results released by the League of Conservation Voters, 80% of US voters—including 73% of Republicans—support “placing a windfall profits tax on the extra profits oil companies are making from the higher gasoline prices they are charging because of the Russia-Ukraine situation.”
More broadly, 87% of US voters want Congress and President Joe Biden to “crack down on price gouging and excessive price increases by oil companies that result in higher gas prices at the pump.”
Jamie Henn, director of Fossil Free Media, said in a statement that the survey data shows voters “know who is to blame for high gas prices: Big Oil.”
“For politicians on both sides of the aisle, this polling is proof that their constituents overwhelmingly support the idea of a windfall profits tax that would stop Big Oil profiteering and send relief directly to consumers,” Henn added. “If members of Congress refuse to act, it’ll be concrete evidence that they’re in the pockets of the industry.”
The fresh polling came days after a group of House and Senate Democrats unveiled legislation that would hit large, highly profitable oil companies with “a per-barrel tax equal to 50% of the difference between the current price of a barrel of oil and the pre-pandemic average price per barrel between 2015 and 2019.”
“Revenue raised from the windfall profits of big oil companies will be returned to consumers in the form of a quarterly rebate, which would phase out for single filers who earn more than $75,000 in annual income and joint filers who earn more than $150,000,” according to a summary released by the office of Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), the bill’s lead sponsor in the House.
After an initial surge following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, oil prices have fallen in recent days—but gas prices in the US have remained elevated, bolstering the narrative that corporate profiteering is driving up costs at the pump.
“Oil prices are decreasing, gas prices should too,” President Joe Biden wrote in a Twitter post (3/16). “Last time oil was $96 a barrel, gas was $3.62 a gallon. Now it’s $4.31. Oil and gas companies shouldn’t pad their profits at the expense of hardworking Americans.”
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), the chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, echoed the president’s message.
“Once more for the people in the back: rising oil prices are being caused by corporate greed,” Jayapal wrote.
CFPB GETS BILLIONS IN MEDICAL DEBT WIPED FROM CREDIT REPORTS. Since early 2011, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has demonstrated what good government is all about. Well, mostly—there was a real hiatus for it during 2017-20—years in which every form of sabotage possible was thrown at it by Republicans. Nevertheless, the CFPB persisted and has come roaring back in defense of the American consumer, Joan McCarter noted at DailyKos (3/18). Their latest win is a big one.
The three big credit reporting firms—Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion—have agreed to strip tens of billions of dollars of many types of medical debt from credit reports. It doesn’t erase the actual debt, but it will mean that millions of people won’t have their credit trashed by having that debt. Starting in July, the companies will erase the history of medical debt that had been sent to collections and paid off. Those debts could stay on a credit report for as long as seven years, even after having been paid. The companies also announced that they won’t add new, unpaid medical debt to credit reports for the first full year after it has been sent to collections. Additionally, beginning next year, they’ll remove any debts of less than $500 from reports.
“This is an important step to support consumers in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic,” the companies said in a joint statement. “These changes reflect our ongoing commitment to helping facilitate access to fair and affordable credit for all consumers.”
More like, it reflects the pressure that the CFPB’s director Rohit Chopra has been putting on the companies for the past year. “As the CFPB is our primary regulator, we have continual engagement with them on a variety of issues,” a Trans-Union spokesman said..
In early March, the agency released a report on medical debt burden, identifying it as “the most common collection tradeline reported on consumer credit records.” As of June 2021, their research found, there was an astounding $88 billion in medical debt on consumer credit records. That’s just the medical debt in collections that’s furnished to the credit reporting companies.
“America’s credit reporting oligopoly has little incentive to treat consumers fairly when their credit reports have errors,” CFPB Director Chopra said in unveiling the report. “Today’s report is further evidence of the serious harms stemming from their faulty financial surveillance business model.”
In 2021, they found, “58% of all third-party debt collection tradelines were for medical debt, making medical debt the most common debt collection tradeline on credit records.” In particular, they found, “young adults, people with low incomes, and Black and Hispanic people are disproportionately likely to have medical debt. Veterans and older adults are also significantly impacted by medical debt.”
Kaiser Family Foundation has also been researching the issue, releasing their own report in March. They find that “23 million people (nearly 1 in 10 adults) owe significant medical debt. The [Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP)] suggests people in the United States owe at least $195 billion in medical debt.” Their findings suggest that about “16 million people (6% of adults) in the US owe over $1,000 in medical debt and 3 million people (1% of adults) owe medical debt of more than $10,000.” Their findings mirror the CFPB research, in finding that Black and Hispanic population, low-income people, and the uninsured carry the highest burden of debt.
The CFPB, even through the years of the previous administration, has been showing that government can effectively fight for everyday Americans. Even counting those years, by the end of 2020, the CFPB had secured $12.9 billion in consumer relief in refunds, principal reductions, canceled debts, and other consumer relief for 175 million people.
TRUMP AIDE REPORTEDLY AUTHORED REPORT THAT ANCHORED TRUMP ELECTION FRAUD LIES. A former White House aide, Joanna Miller, is reportedly responsible for authoring a report that served as the basis for ex-President Donald Trump’s sweeping attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 election.
The Guardian first reported the alleged connection (3/17), citing anonymous sources who have reviewed the original materials. The document at issue was entitled “Overview 12/2/20 — History, Executives, Vote Manipulation Ability and Design, Foreign Ties” and it proposed that President Joe Biden’s win was only the result of corrupt Dominion Voting Systems voting machines, Brandi Buchman noted at DailyKos (3/18).
A public version of this report has been circulating since 2020 and, according to The Guardian, Miller was listed on the document’s pages and metadata as its original author before her name was curiously scrubbed and replaced with lawyer and lobbyist Katherine Friess.
Investigators on the Jan. 6 committee subpoenaed Friess on March 2, noting her reported involvement in drafting an executive order that directed the seizure of voting machines. Other committee targets like Bernie Kerik, the former New York Police Commissioner who regularly met with Trump’s attorney Rudy Giuliani before Jan. 6 at Trump’s “war room” at the Willard, told the panel Friess was instrumental in preparing legal documents for the reelection campaign.
The decision to replace Friess with Miller was reportedly rather abrupt. Historically, Friess has told the press that she has no idea how the name change happened.
From this week’s reporting:
“It was not clear why Miller’s name was removed from the report, which was sent to Trump’s former attorney Rudy Giuliani on 29 November 2020, or why the White House aide’s involvement was obfuscated in the final 2 December version.”
The Dominion report was rife with conspiracies, often drawn on by many of Trump’s most ardent promoters of his lies about the outcome of the 2020 election, like Rudy Giuliani and ex-trade adviser Peter Navarro. The report featured debunked claims that Dominion utilized purposefully glitchy Smartmatic software to run its machines, and also quoted anonymous Venezuelan officials who alleged Smartmatic had ties to state-run Venezuelan businesses.
The claims about Smartmatic ultimately prompted the company to sue “news” companies, like One America News—a pro-Trump propaganda channel—and the right-leaning Newsmax, for defamation.
An unnamed source told The Guardian that the Dominion report also incorporated into much of what was produced about so-called election fraud reports written by officials like Peter Navarro.
SOLDIERS DEPLOYED FOR ABBOTT’S BORDER STUNT WERE SENT TO RANCHES OWNED BY RICH TEXANS. National Guard soldiers who’ve been forced to participate in Greg Abbott’s anti-immigrant stunt on the Rio Grande have made no secret of their discontent with Operation Lone Star. “Chronic underpayment issues,” “lack of proper equipment and sleeping facilities,” and, well, a lot of standing around have been just some of the problems surrounding the Operation Lone Star campaign stunt, Gabe Ortiz noted at DailyKos (3/17).
Just where has some of that standing around taken place? Gov. Abbott would just love for all of us to believe his soldiers are standing guard over some alleged “invasion”—his racist wording, not mine—when in reality he’s stationed them outside vast ranches belonging to “wealthy or politically connected owners,” including some properties that already have private security, the Texas Tribune reports.
Texas Tribune reported that nearly three dozen soldiers were earlier this year stationed outside properties belonging to wealthy Texans, including the Armstrong Ranch, “the property of a longtime Republican family that has hosted GOP leaders like Karl Rove, former Gov. Rick Perry, and former Vice President Dick Cheney.”
This is where Cheney infamously shot a lawyer in the face while hunting—and got the to apologize to him. Another ranch that got taxpayer-funded security belongs to Kenedy County Judge Charles Burns, a Democrat whose support for Operation Lone Star was touted in a press release from Abbott’s office. “I think their presence has been very beneficial to the county,” Burns said. More like, very beneficial to your ranch.
Anyway, Abbott and the scheme’s defenders might claim that these placements were strategic. “But service members with firsthand knowledge of the mission told the Texas Tribune that troops rarely saw migrants from their posts nearly 80 miles away from the border,” the report said.
While soldiers said they wouldn’t be able to go through the private property even if they did spot someone, officers reportedly have forced migrants onto private property in order to arrest them as part of the Operation Lone Star scheme. “Texas prosecutor drops charges after migrants claim they were marched to private property, then arrested for trespassing,” the Texas Tribune reported last October.
Soldiers, who asked to be kept anonymous for fear of retaliation, said they were sent to these properties even though some already had private security. “We really don’t understand why we are there,” one soldier said in the report. “We’re essentially mall security for ranches that already have paid security details to protect them.” The placements occurred in early January but are no longer happening, after the news outlet began to press officials for information. Funny how that always happens.
There’s no question that Operation Lone Star has been a disaster, for both vulnerable asylum-seekers and soldiers deployed to the scheme. But Abbott has tried to scapegoat others for his actions, recently replacing the chief executive officer of the Texas Military Department. But remember, this is his scheme. “You can switch Generals, but we all know where the buck stops,” Democratic challenger Beto O’Rourke recently told Army Times and the Texas Tribune, adding that Abbott took thousands of guard members “from their families, jobs, and communities.”
GOP ATTACKS TRANSGENDER YOUTH FROM EVERY POSSIBLE ANGLE. Republican lawmakers have targeted transgender children and their parents for restrictive legislative and possible prosecution.
USA Today reported (1/20) approximately 280 bills eroding transgender rights are projected for this year, up from 147 in 2021, according to the Human Rights Campaign. Over 125 anti-trans bills have been recently active across dozens of state legislatures, according to the ACLU. States with active anti-trans legislation include Arizona, Arkansas, Iowa, Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Missouri, New Jersey, Ohio, and Hawaii, among others. Many of these states are Republican-dominated, but not all.
Last year, bills prohibiting health care for trans youth were introduced in more than 20 states, with two states — Arkansas and Tennessee — signing them into law, according to a tally from the American Civil Liberties Union. And out of the more than 30 states to introduce restrictions on trans athletes last year, nine states enacted the legislation into law, according to advocacy group the Human Rights Campaign.
Supporters of the bills have largely argued that they want to prevent young people from making medical decisions they might later regret and to protect the rights of cisgender girls and women in school sports.
In Texas, Gov. Greg Abbott in February, using a nonbinding legal opinion by Attorney General Ken Paxton, ordered state child welfare officials to launch child abuse investigations into reports of transgender kids receiving gender-affirming care, including reversible puberty blockers. Parents who support trans children could be investigated and lose custody of the child, even if parents were following medical advice.
In Idaho, a bill that would ban gender-affirming care for youth and would have made it a felony to help a child access gender-affirming care outside the state passed the Republican-led House, but Idaho Senate leaders said they will not be taking up the bill, at least for now.
An Alabama anti-trans effort hits as many points as conservatives can—making gender-affirming care for minors a felony, requiring teachers to “out” trans youth, and perhaps even barring trans youth from getting their driver’s license, Marissa Higgins noted at DailyKos (3/15).
The Alabama Vulnerable Child Compassion and Protection Act (V-CAP) has passed the Alabama Senate and heads to the House next, and Republican Gov. Kay Ivey has already suggested she will sign it into law. The legislation would mandate that both public and private school staff (like teachers, coaches, etc.) would have to “out” youth to their parents if they’re transgender. They would also be barred from encouraging or “coercing” minors from withholding such an identity from their parents or guardians.
The bill would also make it a crime for physicians to provide gender-affirming care to trans youth, like puberty blockers and hormonal therapies. That crime would come with a penalty of up to 10 years in prison and a fine of $15,000. This legislation defines minors as people under 19, not 18.
In Florida, Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a bill into law that would allow parents to sue teachers who acknowledge the existence of LGBTQ people, even in small ways such as allowing kids of same-sex parents to talk about their families during “show and tell.”
Georgia state senators filed SB 613, which mimics the discriminatory Florida “Don’t Say Gay” bill, but instead targets K-8 private school students who don’t have the same protections as public school students.
Florida Sen. Rick Scott also released an 11-point GOP plan for America that states heterosexual marriage is “God’s design for humanity,” which isn’t just an insult to LGBTQ Americans but the nearly 50% of all adults who aren’t married. And the Republican attack on choice doesn’t stop with prohibiting abortions. Florida Republicans also invited legislative testimony from an anti-choice activist who argued against legal birth control, claiming, “The contraceptive mentality is what fuels the bloodthirsty abortion industry.”
But Amanda Marcotte noted at Salon.com (3/2): “Republicans have a good reason to believe those moderate and swing voters they need to win will never find out about their extreme statements and actions. As political scientists Yanna Krupnikov and John Barry Ryan argued in the New York Times in 2020, ‘most Americans — upward of 80% to 85% — follow politics casually or not at all.’ They will never hear about Republicans pushing to allow birth control to be criminalized, or Republican candidates calling rape-caused pregnancy a gift. So conservatives can happily play up far right bona fides to their rabid base, content in the belief that the majority of voters will never know how terrible they are.”
SENATORIAL SPEECHES AT BEGINNING OF SUPREME COURT NOMINATION HEARINGS SHOULD BE CANNED. “If I were king of the forest,” Charles P. Pierce wrote at Esquire.com (3/21), “I would pass a rule for the Senate by which every opening statement by any senator in a confirmation hearing would be sent in writing to the committee chairman and entered into the record as written. That way, the first day of the hearings would consist of the nominee’s opening statement and then everybody could go home for the day. I came to this conclusion while watching the beginning session of the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing into the nomination of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court. Herewith, my evaluation of the pros and cons of such a change.”
Downside:
1. No chance of hearing Senator Sheldon Whitehouse explain to his Republican colleagues that, if they want to bring some bullshit about “outside groups” and “dark money” supporting the nominee, he has several barges worth of receipts concerning the Federalist Society and its wingnut front groups conveniently moored along the Potomac.
2. No chance to hear Senator Amy Klobuchar diss the Hapsburgs and silos, the latter a risky choice for a senator from Minnesota.
3. No chance to hear Chuck Grassley wrestle with some absurd metaphor about elephants in mouseholes.
4. No chance to see the nominee look at Tailgunner Ted Cruz in such a way as to become the living embodiment of the phrase, “Oh, please.”
Upside:
1. Not having to listen to endless whinging about what happened to poor Brett Kavanaugh, and poor Robert Bork, and poor Janice Rogers Brown.
2. Not having to listen to Young Ben Sasse give us a demonstration of When Middle School Civics Goes Horribly Wrong while throwing an elbow into the doctrine of unenumerated powers along the way.
3. Not having to listen to Huckleberry Graham’s patented syrupy passive-aggression. I swear you could grease up an 18-wheeler with a paragraph of his rhetoric.
4. Not having to listen to konztitooshunal skolar Mike Lee explain that, “The Constitution, written by wise men over 200 years ago. Wise men who I believe were raised up by almighty God for that very purpose.” And, in the Beyond, James Madison comes to the sad realization that his life’s work had no purpose.
5. Not having to watch Tailgunner Ted Cruz mistake a Senate hearing room for an afternoon session at CPAC, thereby prompting the aforementioned look from the nominee.
6. Not having to watch as the Reconstruction Amendments are simply read out of American constitutional history—“Cancelled,” if you will—in favor of a conservative concept of retroactive clairvoyance about what a bunch of 18th-century lawyers and slavers, and both, were thinking.
I’ll take the swap, actually. More to follow, I’m sure.
From The Progressive Populist, April 15, 2022
Blog | Current Issue | Back Issues | Essays | Links
About the Progressive Populist | How to Subscribe | How to Contact Us