The Race To Replace California's Worst Democrat In Congress

California is a blue state but the Republican wing of the Democratic Party is very strong in the state. There are 46 California Democrats serving in the House. Believe me, they're not all like Barbara Lee, Ted Lieu, Ro Khanna or Judy Chu. according to ProgressivePunch, 15 have voting records that score "A." Three more than that-- 18-- have voting records that score "F." The worst belongs to Blue Dog Jim Costa, who doesn't even have the excuse of being in a red or even a swing district. CA-17, his central Valley district has a PVI of D+9. Not even the DCCC at its most incompetent could lose a district that blue. In fact, although Democrats routinely get elected in red districts-- including strong red districts-- there is only one blue district in the entire country held by a Republican at this point-- NY-24 (D+3).





There is no conceivable reason why Democrats in Fresno, Merced, Madera, Chowchilla and Los Banos should have to put up with someone as conservative and someone as opposed to core Democratic Party values as Costa. Replacing him should be a priority for California progressives. Another conservative candidate from the party machine-- Esmeralda Soria, a long-time Costa supporter-- jumped into the race, a purely careerist move that may have inspired some anti-Costa activists because she surely wasn't going to be as bad as he is, even just because she's a woman and younger than him. But not even remotely a progressive. But then we met former Obama administration diplomat Kimberly Williams and quickly figured out that we do have a real progressive in the race-- under-financed to be sure, but someone with the values we need in Congress. Blue America endorsed her. So did the local chapter of Our Revolution. Then PDA came on board.

One trusted progressive group didn't though-- Courage Campaign. They endorsed Soria. I contacted them and told them they had made a grievous error. They told me they hadn't made an error at all. Yesterday, I introduced them to Kim Williams and sent them-- with her permission-- this letter she had sent me, a letter that was a continuation of a week's worth of correspondence. She also said it would be OK for me to share it here at DWT. Please read it and consider contributing to her campaign by clicking on the 2020 Blue America Primary A Blue Dog thermometer on the right. his isn't about personalities or just getting rid of the odious Jim Costa. It is also about Medicare-for-All, the Green New Deal, affordable housing, debt-free college, criminal justice reform and whether California is going to send another conservative Democrat to Congress like Ami Bera, Pete Aguilar, Julia Brownley, Lou Correa and Scott Peters or someone who is going to stand up with Barbara Lee, Ro Khanna and Ted Lieu. Esmeralda Soria is a Dianne Feinstein Democrat. Is that good enough? Or do you want another member of Congress who has endorsed Bernie and is running on much of his platform?



Kim Williams' Letter:

I know several other people have reached out besides Kevin [Hall] to folks with the Courage Campaign. [Soria] has a terrible track record with environmentalists and homeless advocates, and she is not known as a progressive here by any actual progressives.

Those who are progressive know that Soria came up the ranks under well known conservatives in the Valley, and from the very beginning of this race, she has identified as a centrist. In fact, at our first meeting, she told me directly that I was further left than her and she thought we could help each other. Since that time last summer, we've done several candidate forums together and I've never heard her articulate a single word of progressive policy on anything from labor to healthcare. She frequently misstates basic facts and runs from hard questions around policies considered too far left by right-leaning Democrats. If she would have come out as a progressive, I would have dropped out of the race and supported her a long time ago. She never did.

My friends and I have knocked on nearly 6,000 doors and every time we passed out literature for my campaign, we shared Bernie's literature because our platforms have aligned from the start. I also endorsed him after he was hospitalized and pundits tried to say he was done.  We've backed progressive policies when it was unheard of in the Valley and even risky to do so. And we've paid for it in several ways. I've walked out of fundraising events without one dollar because I supported Bernie for president and a Green New Deal. We've been completely ignored by the local media which won't cover 500 people at an impeachment rally but will print astonishingly sexists op-eds because they want to reflect all view points. We have gone up against an ocean of structural bias and every manner of low-grade corruption in this race, but we never wavered in our support for progressive policies.

There's a reason PDA national, you, Our Revolution's local chapter, and DSA (who is expected to announce this weekend) have all backed this policy-driven campaign. We are showing up in all the forgotten places no other candidate has visited, and we are boldly backing a progressive policy platform that she quite publicly runs from. It’s why we have the progressive volunteer base that shows up every weekend. They understand, and frequently state,that if Soria doesn’t have the backbone to support Medicare for All and a Green New Deal at a debate, then she won’t fight for it when the Washington lobbyists come calling.

What has happened is unfortunate, and I get why someone outside the district might come to the conclusion that she’s progressive, especially when she calls herself one in front of progressive groups. But if you step outside the small circle of Fresno’s political class of older Democrats who speak Republican and insiders who embrace transactional politics, you will find hundreds of thousands of people living in poverty who are in desperate need of change.

This is why I entered this race, and this is why I stayed. We knew from the beginning this would be a David and Goliath battle but I wanted to shine a light on the horrific poverty that plagues this district and demand a progressive economic solution. Party insiders, of which Soria is very much a part, may shape the public narrative which has no doubt influenced the referenced poll I've never seen, but they do not speak for the masses. They are part of the political neglect that has denied the experiences of so many struggling families and are surprised by the fact that Bernie and his “far left” policies are resonating so loudly with a base of voters that needs housing, healthcare, and jobs. Soria is not backing Bernie now because she is brave, she’s doing it because he’s rising in the polls.

I wish the Courage Campaign could have connected with Emily Brandt, who wrote three in-depth pieces on each Democratic candidate in the race. She spent hours going over policy with Soria, and she would not commit to Medicare for All. They could have also checked with James Williams and Bill Hess with PDA's local club who know her long history of rising up through the ranks under conservatives and could speak to Soria’s public remarks on healthcare. And I wished someone could have connected with the young Democrats at UCMerced when she told them Medicare for All was impossible to achieve.

From my view, and I know I speak as a competitor, the Courage Campaign did not endorse a woman of courage who will defend progressive policies. They endorsed a woman who whispers support for Medicare for All in closed rooms and then reverts to conservative talking points when she's in front of establishment Democrats. She doesn't even support it on her website. I'd also add that whatever success she's found so far has been achieved through personal connections and by catering to the establishment. If someone is hoping that she'll cross the finish line by embracing progressive polices now that the progressives have done the hard work of proving there's a appetite for such a thing, can they really be sure she'll deliver in Washington?

Regardless of how this email is taken, I care about nothing more than lifting our families out of poverty. From the day I arrived, I knew I could leave. But I stayed because I knew there were thousands of families here that could not escape countless neighborhoods that literally resembled third world counties. I didn't care one bit about who moved the policies forward, I just wanted change no one else was calling for. Soria is part of the insider club that has helped maintain the status quo and I have no faith that she will deliver on any promise she might make now. 

Please feel free to pass my number along if anyone would like to discuss this race further.

All my best,

Kim

Three-Way Democratic Race In California's Central Valley-- The Choice Is Clear

It's crucially important to get to know who a candidate is in order to be able to predict what kind of a member of Congress they are likely to be-- not just how they will vote-- but also how they will lead, how competent and effective they will be, etc. Recently, we asked incisive author, labor activist, author and former congressional candidate Jonathan Tasini to spend some time with Central Valley progressive Kim Williams. The resulting interview on the Working Life Podcast (above) offers one of the best opportunities to get to know Williams. I urge you to listen to the 23 minute discussion. If you like what you hear, you can contribute to Kim's grassroots campaign by clicking on the Congress Needs More Progressive Women thermometer below.

Recently, Fresno Free Press reporter Emily Brandt dug into the crucial election in CA-16, a blue district that takes in parts of Fresno, Merced and Madera counties. It's a D+9 district where Obama won both times he ran and even Hillary beat Trump (58.0% to 36.4%). Brandt began by looking at the very conservative Blue Dog incumbent, Jim Costa, by asking if he deserves another term.

In his 14 years in Congress, Costa has only written five bills, one of which was the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act of 1995. This pivotal legislation prevents local municipalities from enacting rent control on any properties. It was largely supported by Republicans, but some Democrats voted for it because of a clause that states “if serious health, safety, fire, or building code violations were discovered and not corrected for six months” rents cannot be raised. Attempts to reverse and/or repeal this act are ongoing, the last of which failed in 2018 over the fears that rent control lowers the production of low-income housing.

Money in political campaigns: Representative Costa’s congressional career began before public interest and scrutiny into money and campaigns had grown to the current high level. That focus is the direct product of Bernie Sanders 2016 campaign and his insistence on remaining distant from for-profit Political Action Committees, large influential donors such as Wall Street investment firms and banks, large pharmaceutical companies, the fossil fuel industry, private health care companies, and other interest groups that have a comfortable history of controlling the policy of Democratic candidates as much as Republican candidates running for office.

Costa’s record belies his stated commitments to climate change, improving air and water quality while taking large sums from Chevron and others who are even now polluting Kern County, the City of Richmond, and other areas of California. He appears not to be bothered by the frequent benefits to the privileged few resulting from his votes with Republicans rather than Democrats and his embrace of powerful interest groups. This is no great surprise to anyone since it has been the pattern of hundreds of members of Congress for decades.

  Costa’s family owned a large corporate dairy farm called Costa Brothers Dairy and real estate interests worth several million dollars, which in no way reflects the experience of farmworkers. His family’s farming interests have turned to almonds rather than dairy over the years.

His stories of driving tractors on the farm ring hollow next to the accounts of those who have been paid below minimum wage for decades, suffering health problems from repetitive work injuries and pesticide exposure, at the least, whose stories of farm labor fail to be romanticized as do Costa’s. That isn’t to ignore the fact that Costa’s ancestors had a hard row to hoe as they accumulated sufficient wealth to establish a dairy of their own.

Costa’s family finances have made money matters easy–on paper–with $1 million in the bank from the corporate farm and $1 million from his family’s real estate business. Another view of Costa’s campaign donations can be found here. The differences between his finances and Williams are, not surprisingly, very large; Soria has pledged not to take any for-profit donations during the Primary, so for the moment, there’s not much there.

In the past, Soria’s Councilmember runs reveal big donations from developers and other interests. What her finances will look like should she win the Primary will be interesting to watch. Senator Elizabeth Warren has made the same pledge in her run for president. The amount of influence purchased can only reveal itself over some terms in office, as they have with Costa.

Environment Commitments: Costa’s bill-sponsorship record is pretty small given his eight terms in office. With his record of sponsoring a meager five bills in nearly 16 years, Costa could not be described as an active legislator. To vote 43% of the time with Republicans is very high, especially in a district with a high number of Democratic voters, most of whom represent a high rate of poverty, low educational levels and who suffer from high rates of serious disease due to environmental pollution.

The League of Conservation Voters gives him a 69% rating–though to be fair–Costa did miss a number of key votes due to a medical procedure. In May of 2019, he did vote in favor of the U.S. staying in the Paris Climate Agreement.

Reversing Pres. Obama’s Offshore Moratorium Act; Bill H.1231; vote number 11-HV320 on May 12, 2011, Costa voted YES on Opening the Continental Shelf to Oil Drilling in 2012 at increasing levels through 2027. This bill reverses new efforts after the BP oil platform disaster at implementing stronger safety regulations to prevent spills. It also gives access to Exxon-Mobil and Shell Oil Company profits at the expense of the environment. Costa’s reliance on very large donations from Chevron among others, explains his willingness to vote against bills that restrict the access of Big Oil to new oil fields.

In the same year, Costa voted for the Energy Tax Prevention Act; Bill H.910; vote number 11-HV249 which would have prevented the EPA from regulating  Greenhouse Gas Emissions. This is an especially damaging vote since his district, Congressional District 16 has the worst air quality in the State of California. Yet, he was re-elected following a whole series of votes that put his district’s residents at greater risk. Democrats have stood by him for decades and are only now beginning to show signs of rejecting this record of failing to serve their best interest.

Clearly, protecting farmworkers and others was not an issue on Costa’s mind when he voted for the ACRE Bill, Agricultural Certainty for Reporting Emissions, eliminating  vital provisions in the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) which protects the public through the clean up of industrial toxic waste dumps, oil spills, and chemical tank explosions and enforcement of environmental regulations on farmland.

Anything that would reduce or lessen these types of public health protection is a very bad idea and the City of Fresno and surrounding county is replete with such former Superfund sites. The Bill even makes it easier for farmers to dump pesticides into waterways regulated by the Clean Water Act.

Costa’s vote to fund the Keystone Pipeline is in direct contradiction to any commitments he has made to mitigate the impact of climate change. He was one of 28 Democrats in the House of Representatives who voted to build the pipeline. Overall, Costa’s votes on energy were rated at 33% by the Campaign for America’s Future...

Medicare For All/Single Payer/Medical Debt Forgiveness: When it comes to the Affordable Care Act, Costa only voted in favor of the legislation in March 2010, long after other Democrats had committed themselves. His vote was only secured after the Democratic Party promised to give Costa and Dennis Cardoza funding for a medical school in the Central Valley. Costa would only commit to healthcare reform as far as Soria has. Both believe that the ACA needs a few minor unspecified tweaks.

Clearly, Soria has every reason from her parent’s experience to support Medicare for All. Costa, however, does not seem to have any personal incentives to do so. Williams is committed to Medicare for All and to all of Bernie Sanders platforms as she demonstrated on her website kimwilliamsforcongress.com and further sealed in her open endorsement of Bernie Sanders.

...Free Public University Tuition/Student Debt Forgiveness: College debt forgiveness does not seem to be a concern to Rep. Costa. He has devoted several pages of his website to the subject of financial aid, to help students navigate the process in high school and maintain solvency in college though there are no promises of amending the current plan in any way. The pages make access to existing loan information available to students in a step-by-step process. 

On Friday, Brandt asked another question for Fresno readers to ponder: Kim Williams: Can A Policy Wonk Change The Central Valley For The Good? She began by asking Williams what motivated her to run for Congress. Williams told her to is poverty and wrote that she went on to reflect: "My day-to-day encounters and then researching the numbers and just seeing how many homeless families [there are in Congressional District 16] was so appalling to me and so unacceptable that I couldn’t understand why more federal resources weren’t being put into place and the more I saw that, the more I see that there was just a ton of political neglect here."

One particular area of interest to Williams has long been American History which she taught for seven years as a tenured faculty member at Hillsborough Community College in Tampa, Florida. She studied the slave trade and traveled the slave route ultimately leading her to a U.S. State Department assignment in the African nation of Ghana. One persistent thread through her life seems to be to seek out geographical places and cultures that are unlike any she’s previously known.

This seems to be what led her to and has anchored her in the Central Valley of California working for Mariposa County as the Director of Human Resources where she is currently. This type of work follows naturally upon her work in Management and Communications in the U.S. State Department where Williams spent her last years before moving to California.

As a U.S. historian, she looks for the roots, the causes as the key to finding solutions; as a diplomat who served in Africa and Siberia, she also tends to look at everything on a large scale. As she emphasizes, this kind of poverty isn’t happening in other parts of North America and there is a reason for that. Her efforts to reach public officials to get answers here have been unsuccessful.

She has learned, as many of us have, that the powers that be make a concerted effort to avoid taking our calls and engaging with community members. The reasons, she concluded, must be linked to the fact that they don’t want to answer for their conservative voting patterns and inability to take on this district’s tougher challenges.

Williams begins talking about her experience as a single mother. She describes the many moments of “low-grade terror of ‘I know she’s not well, I have a meeting at work and I feel forced to choose between caring for my child and for my job that supports my child.’ I don’t ever want another parent to feel that way and I know millions do.” That’s why she was attracted to Elizabeth Warren’s Universal Pre-K Plan. Now, she’s recognized that Bernie Sanders offers exactly such a plan and offers much more along the lines that Williams enthusiastically supports which have won her the important endorsement of Our Revolution, Sanders’ non-profit PAC and Justice Democrats.

Money In Political Campaigns: Williams has never run for public office before, so there is no record to compare her current practice of refusing corporately funded PAC money. Williams devotes a section of her VISION statements to the subject. She explores the damage it is doing to the whole exercise of government as the primary protector of the people from the exploitation of largely unregulated big money and corporate interests that pay few if any, taxes. A comparison of the three Congressional District 16 candidates Federal Election Commission filings is here.

At the Fresno County Latina Democrats Debate Forum, Williams addressed the persistent problems of billions of dollars being spent to influence Washington to make decisions that favor corporate interests and hurt the public in very direct ways. This is why she proposes solutions such as creating publicly funded elections and eliminating corporately-funded Political Action Committees such as those created by oil companies, pharmaceutical companies and the health insurance industry to name a few. They are ultimately creating, controlling and approving the litigation almost without the middle “people” sitting in chairs in Congress. Williams does not accept Democratic National Committee funds.

Environmental Commitments: Williams states very directly that “everything is intersectional” or interdependent, and Climate Change is really at the center of this. She embraces the Green New Deal completely and is committed to the ways in which each part of the process from transitioning off of fossil fuels to renewable energy affects every area from producing electricity to manufacturing cars that are fossil fuel independent, food production, food waste management, toxic waste management to rethinking geopolitics on a global scale. Williams turns to history to draw parallels and make distinctions between the original New Deal and the Green New Deal.

Like the New Deal of the 1930s, she says the Green New Deal can establish “fixed-term project and programs” and those types of investments, particularly to rural communities, was just life-altering for generations to come to bring in experts . . . who can solve the water and air problems and get us to where we have clean air and not the least-breathable air in America. Unlike the New Deal which excluded women, people of color for some time and would not work with unions, the Green New Deal would be worker protected and eliminate all the flaws of the original New Deal.

“The Green New Deal does two things: it fixes the immediate crisis of environmental concerns, but then it’s building that class of engineers, healthcare workers, scientists who can support a middle class for generations to come and attract jobs to the area because you have this great base of workers,” she explains,” this forms the new middle class, as sustainable and growing new businesses, attracting new businesses to the area who will depend on the now skilled workforce while also providing a need for the service sector once again. This then leads us into the future of the “next new bold ideas.”

This is how Williams sees the impact of the Green New Deal as it focuses the economy not on maintaining the status quo with industries as they currently are polluting air and water, but in industries that will clean up and solve the problems those industries have brought with them. She goes on to contrast that picture of the future with what we currently have: Amazon-like businesses which do not choose to base their headquarters for management in Fresno, but chose instead to build a fulfillment center that didn’t require an educated or skilled workforce.

These centers will fade into obsolescence in five years perhaps as they are replaced by robots and which once again, leaves Fresno with a large group of unemployed workers who have gained no skills and/or education to lead to better jobs and a better quality of life. Even the trucking industry is working very hard to develop systems of self-driving trucks to replace drivers.

The added cost to the community in forfeiting the Amazon, Ulta and other corporate taxes, that could have funded a myriad of improvements to the poor community, is what lured them to this poorest of areas in the first place. It is rank human and environmental exploitation which Soria defends because it brought “jobs.”

Medicare For All/Single Payer/Medical Debt Forgiveness:  “Healthcare is a human right.” Aside from the fact that all European countries have some variation of universal healthcare which covers all medical, dental, optical and mental healthcare, Williams envisions a system that will absorb all the current healthcare workers who are now part of the private industry.

These tasks will largely still need to be performed for processing payments, prescriptions, procedures, therapies, hospitalizations, etc. Redundancies will be eliminated and the bloated executive class who are grossly overpaid will no longer exist. There will also be no corporations, no advertising for healthcare companies or big pharma and no stockholders. These are some of the major generators of high cost.

In many ways, it will be a return to pre-Nixon healthcare when it was illegal to make a profit from healthcare-related industries. “Nixon signed into law, the Health Maintenance Organization Act of 1973, in which medical insurance agencies, hospitals, clinics and even doctors, could begin functioning as for-profit business entities instead of the service organizations they were intended to be.”

The current system has only been in place some 46 years and it shouldn’t be viewed as such an irrational move. As Williams states on her website, “California’s family coverage premiums have increased by 248.8%. This high cost has not improved the quality of our healthcare or increased access. In our district, 62,000 individuals have no coverage at all.”

...Free Public University Tuition/Student Debt Forgiveness: Working her way through college was difficult but not an impossibility at the time that Williams attended in the 1990s. It was vastly different from Soria’s younger brother’s experience. The first increase in the price of a public college education came after Baby Boomers had attended for nearly free.

Costs rose steadily through the 1980s, 1990s and the first decade of the 2000s, but the recent jump in cost didn’t begin until about five years ago, during the Great Recession. Working your way through college used to mean you could pay for your living expenses and use financial aid for your tuition. That no longer works after the massive cuts to financial aid, in addition to incredibly high tuitions, and the steep rise in interest rates on student loans.

Given Williams’ awareness of this history and her time spent overseas where higher education is often free or nearly free, it doesn’t seem like a pipe-dream or unrealistic plan to her. Forty years ago, California had such a system for public universities. Living expenses weren’t free; students either lived with their parents or they worked their way through college, but tuition itself was free.

People actually left their Canadian homes to take advantage of the free public university tuition after establishing residence in California to get eligibility. Williams calls her vision for this “Debt-Free College.” On her website, she states: “Education is key to breaking generational poverty. Higher education leads to greater social mobility and economic opportunity, and when we prioritize education in all communities, the middle class will grow.” 

Williams plan...

I support student debt cancellation of up to $50,000 and public service loan forgiveness programs that connect graduates with high need communities like those in California’s 16th congressional district. I also support tuition-free community colleges and technical schools as well as tuition-free education at public four-year schools for financially-challenged families” (https://kimwilliamsforcongress.com/wpcampaign/debt-free-college/ is very similar to that of Bernie Sanders.

Soria has no college debt plan nor any plan for funding colleges in a way that makes them affordable for all students. Costa’s website, like Soria, does not provide any policy positions or platforms beyond a list of his accomplishments.

Will the Central Valley recognize the rare opportunity to be represented by someone who has valuable State Department experience in the foreign service which means being sent to new areas of the world to assess and embrace the cultures, problems and solutions quickly and deeply. The Central Valley is another area-- a deeply troubled area that legislators and local politicians have left behind to be ruled by real estate developers and Big Agriculture for decades. Will Central Valley voters yet again be blindly loyal to the lure of unsatisfactory leaders simply because they are local?

The third candidate in the race, Esmeralda Soria, is a member of the Fresno City Council who, at least ideologically, is more like Costa than like anyone resembling a progressive. "Her record," wrote Brandt, "is mixed on redevelopment policy in Fresno, environmental restrictions on industrial and agricultural pollution, and policies that will end the gross under-employment suffered by tens of thousands of city residents. In her campaign letter, Soria mentions her commitment to clean water and air and says she is a leader who 'will stand up to corporate special interests and the powerful to do what is right for the Valley–no matter what the political consequences.' Does her voting record bear out this commitment?

Although she was absent for the Fresno city council vote to give Amazon tax benefits and locate a fulfillment center in South Central Fresno, one of the most polluted and poorest areas of Fresno, she has since spoken favorably about the Center. Prior to that, Soria and Baines voted against The Gap’s warehouse because of environmental and health concerns.

Then Soria reversed course on Amazon saying in our interview that “we need the jobs.” She forfeited the tax monies that the community could have benefited from and sank the residents into increased trucking and diesel pollution that brings in tons of toxic air. An example of the pollution damage can be found [in the video below] from the failed Caglia Project in South Central Fresno.





During this interview, she said that she would stand up to corporate interests, but she has not shown this willingness to stand up, whatever the cost, in her actions so far as some of her policies fail to pass as progressive. Nor do they reflect the environmental values she professes regarding protections against water and air pollution by vigorous enforcement of restrictions with legal consequences. As with most issues, Soria often knows what she should be against, but she lacks the expertise or will to read and research the subjects to gain the expertise to be able to write legislation and make informed policy decisions.

Money In Political Campaigns: In the past, Soria has not been above taking money from real estate developers and other big donors. One look at opensecrets.org reveals a history that is not aligned with the current practices of progressives. In her political novitiate years, she worked for two masters of acquiring corporate funds, former public officials, Henry T. Perea and Michael Rubio. Both men took large donations from corporate interests and then retired from politics early to work full-time as lobbyists for them.

She has committed herself to not accept any “corporate PAC funds,” though she is still accepting direct donations from developers and other powerful corporate interests. This will make it very difficult for Soria to do as she states in her campaign letter “I did so [declared my candidacy] knowing I would be going against incredible odds and entrenched corporate interests.” A comparison of all three candidates’ financial records can be found here.

There is a vast difference between the three Democratic campaigns for Congressional District 16 and their willingness to accept money from corporations. Rep. Jim Costa accepts money from all corporate interests including corporate PAC funds. Soria said in our interview that she is accepting “small donations,” however, her FEC filings reveal money in all forms except corporate PAC funds. To be clear, this means she has accepted money from individuals who are powerful developers giving the maximum amount allowed and which could make Soria beholden to their interests.

Kim Williams accepts money only from individual small-amount donations and from non-profit PACs; she accepts no for-profit corporate PAC funds. The fact of the matter is that even if Soria were currently scrupulously avoiding such big donations by individuals who represent a corporate interest, she still has a record of doing so which continues to provide ties to these interests. Williams has no such history as she has never run for public office before.

Environmental Commitments: The term, “Green New Deal” during this interview, elicited no response from Soria. At the recent Fresno County Latina Democrats District 22 Debate Forum, which featured only Williams and Soria, the latter candidate showed a clear lack of mastery of the subject matter. As a city councilmember, Soria doesn’t seem to have considered it a subject that demanded much research and concern. This, clearly, is not the case since Fresno development is fraught by what to do with land that has been restricted in use by land covenants due to complex toxic land-use histories.

These matters do not seem to have surfaced as areas of focus for Soria. They were not explored deeply in this interview either. During the Fresno County Latina Democrats Forum, Soria gave no hint of having dived into a study of the Green New Deal. She didn’t mention it or any part of the subject of green jobs, ending the reliance on fossil fuels or Climate Change as it will affect the Central Valley.

Climate Change wasn’t a term Soria used or appeared to consider in any way. As mentioned above, she failed to protect South Central and Southwest Fresno from the devastating pollution of the Amazon warehouse, Ulta Beauty distribution center, and other truck distribution headquarters in South Fresno that contribute to life expectancies that are 20-25 years shorter than in North Fresno.

Medicare For All/Single Payer/Medical Debt Forgiveness: [A compelling personal story] didn’t drive her to take a second look at Medicare for All or immerse herself deeply in studying healthcare policy. At a recent UC Merced debate forum, a student asked Soria about Medicare for All. Soria responded that Medicare for all is a “dream.” She likewise said in our interview that it couldn’t become a reality.

...Free Public University Tuition/Student Debt Forgiveness: “I can tell you that I have personally experienced what it is to have college debt,” Soria says, but she fails to go further to solve the problem of what to do to prevent future generations from accruing such college debt and of how to resolve the problem for those who have five and six-figure college debt which is impeding their quality of life right now. They don’t have access to buying houses, in many cases, to having a family and many other things that their parents were able to afford. She spoke of no plan for debt forgiveness, or any other method of solving the problem of college debt.

Likewise, Soria did not talk about how to reduce the cost of college education, but she did devote considerable time to telling the story of her brother who went to the University of Southern California as an undergraduate and then completed a Master’s in Education. He taught for over a year only to leave the profession because he wasn’t earning enough money to support his family.

She mentioned that it makes her mad that he had to make this hard choice as he is now a truck driver and no longer contributing to student lives through teaching, which he clearly loved. Still, Soria provides no broader statistics of information on how these problems can be resolved. What is her plan to fix the problem or will she rely on others to formulate plans and she will just vote for or against them? And will that be enough for residents of Congressional District 16 to vote for her?

Last weekend at the party convention, the California Democratic Party denied Jim Costa its endorsement, making him the only 2020 congressional incumbent without the party's support. Blue America has endorsed Kim Williams, who we feel strongly will give CA-16 the kind of smart, committed advocacy the district badly needs. Williams is one of the best of the 2020 challengers so far this year anywhere and we ask you to consider supporting her campaign by chipping in what you can here or here or here... or here. 

  

Blue Dog Jim Costa Gets A Strong Progressive Opponent-- Meet Kim Williams

Whenever there's any kind of legislation put forward to help working families, you can always count on two things-- Republicans will vote NO and a certain number of reactionaries from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party will join them. In the forefront of that group of reactionaries is always Central Valley Blue Dog Jim Costa. Despite representing a strong blue district, Costa always acts out of fear-- fear of Republicans. 2020 is giving him a reason to start fearing Democrats instead. The only close calls he ever has are not because of a strong Republican but because he has been unable to motivate Democrats to turn out. CA-16 has one of the lowest voter turn-out rates in America. (Obama won both times there and Hillary beat Trump 58.0$ to 36.4%.)

ProgressivePunch grades Costa a very low "F." His lifetime crucial vote score is an excruciatingly low 43.57%. Only 3 non-freshmen have lower scores. Blue America has had him on our radar for a very long time, waiting for a strong progressive challenger to come along. And now one has!

Kim Williams grew up in a working class family in rural Georgia where she attended community college and then earned her BA while working three jobs. She went on to become a tenured history professor and U.S. diplomat. She’s a single mother who understands the difficult challenges working families face and is committed to bold solutions that dismantle income inequality, combat poverty, and hand political power back to the American voter.

Kim is running an unapologetically progressive campaign that’s resonating with Valley voters. She is dispelling the myth that this solidly blue district needs to lean conservative to win elections. She is walking neighborhoods that other campaigns have neglected and connecting with voters of all stripes on the need for a Green New Deal, universal Pre-K, and Medicare-for-All. I asked her to introduce herself with the guest post below. If you like what she has to say and would like to help her replace the worst Democrat from the entire West Coast, please consider contributing what you can by clicking on the 2020 Blue America congressional primary thermometer on the right.





Can a Progressive Win in the Central Valley?
by Kim Williams, Congressional Candidate, CA-16

When I look around my district, I see poverty. We are situated in the middle of California, the world's fifth largest economy, and yet one in four adults lives below the poverty line, and two in three children are on some form of federal assistance. We are one of the poorest congressional districts in the U.S. with some of the highest high school dropout rates and some of the worst pollution.

But in spite of this, many people question whether there’s an appetite for change. I’ve encountered several folks who skeptically ask me, “Can a progressive really win in this district?”

It is generally assumed that area is ultra-conservative and that voters only care about policies that preserve our AG economy. The assumption is that good schools, a fair justice system, a clean, healthy environment, and economic opportunity are secondary to ensuring that resources and policies are in place to bolster and protect right-leaning farmers.

But the fact is this district leans blue. The Cook Partisan Voter Index placed CA-16 as D+9 in 2018, which means that our district is nine points more Democratic than the national average. It’s even higher on presidential election years.

It’s time to question our assumptions, and it’s time to recognize that our district could benefit from progressive policies.

A Progressive Vision for the Valley

With unemployment high above the national average, we need to rethink how we invest in the Valley’s human capital. Just as FDR’s New Deal delivered a “direct and vigorous” response to the crisis of the day, a Green New Deal could be a double win for CA-16. Programs and projects that clean up the environment and stave off climate change can also bring better-paying alternatives to retail jobs and other low paying positions that lack worker protections.  An expanded national service program could put our young people to work modernizing schools while boosting employment prospects of individuals without a high school degree (currently ⅓ of our workforce) by 50%. With increased wages, our community could support more small businesses and improve the overall economy.

Progressive policies could further help working families in need by subsidizing jobs. Recently enacted in 39 states and Washington D.C., these programs benefit workers and business by injecting money into hard-hit economies like ours.  It also protects families on the brink of homelessness from teetering over the edge.

A progressive representative could enact legislation that would expanded income tax credits that are paid to more people on a monthly basis instead of yearly. This would ensure that those in need can rely on an advance on their taxes instead of sinking into an inescapable cycle of debt waiting for spring. They could reduce debt burdens and medical bankruptcies by finally removing the profit motive from healthcare and passing Medicare for All.

Progressive policies can also place the next generation on a solid path towards the American dream. Universal Pre-K, paid for through taxes on the ultra-wealthy, would relieve parents of the high cost of childcare, create better paying, federally-funded jobs in the middle of a childcare desert, while ensuring our youngest residents get the care and attention they need to succeed. Even better, we can guarantee funding for higher education, incentivising more people to grow their careers, achieve financial independence, and support a thriving economy right here in the Central Valley.

This vision for the Valley can all be achieved by enacting a fair tax plan and protected by ensuring publicly funded elections. So that never again will we have to settle for representatives who take campaign contributions from the very companies that move middle class jobs overseas, attack worker protections, and pollute our air and water.

The Writing is on the Wall

In short, it’s not risky to run as a progressive. Progressive policies offer the surest path to prosperity and consider the needs of the many over the desires of the few. It is our best shot at bringing economic justice and security to the district.

Valley voters are ready for change, and the incumbent knows this. He would not suddenly be seeking progressive endorsements otherwise. But these endorsements aren’t likely to save him now. Costa seems to see the “hundred year wave” coming in 2020 and recognizes that voter turnout could be the highest in a century. But he might be missing the point that high turnouts rarely occur during times of prosperity. This “wave” will be driven by the large numbers of voters who feel they’ve been left behind. Disquieting news, no doubt, from “forgotten” California.

Costa has not stayed in office all these years because he has addressed the needs of his constituents. He has stayed in office because our voters have had to choose between the party of Trump and a man who spent last Congress voting with Trump 47% of the time. This March, however, voters will finally have a choice, and this Valley will finally have a chance. A progressive agenda can lift our families out of poverty and grow our middle class, but only when we elect change candidates who commit to change policies.


 

It Would Be Great To See Blue Dog Jim Costa Replaced In Congress-- But Not With Another Blue Dog

Sometimes people ask me who the single worst Democrat in Congress is. Until very recently, I had never even thought it was Pelosi. Last session it was unquestionably Kyrsten Sinema, the genuinely mentally unbalanced Blue Dog from Arizona, who is currently the single worst Democrat in the Senate. This cycle it has been Josh Gottheimer, Blue Dog, grotesquely corrupt Wall Street whore, New Dem, tool of the murderous Saudi regime and chair of the Problem Solvers Caucus. So far this session, Gottheimer's 26.32 ProgressivePunch crucial vote score can be compared to Justin Amash, a Republican until 2 weeks ago when he became an independent and whose score is 60.53.

But looking beyond just raw scores there are always 3 or 4 Blue Dogs on the band side of everything important, Trump enablers and enemies of working families and progressive values, Thank God just one is here in California, sex predator and Blue Dog Jim Costa, who represents the 16th district in the Central Valley. The district has a sweet D+9 PVI and Trump only managed 36.4% there. One of the poorest districts in the country (the 412th poorest out of 435), it is a Latino majority district (59.2%) and only 23.5% white.

Costa, like Devin Nunes, is the grandchild of Portuguese immigrants who went into dairy farming. He was elected to the state Assembly in 1978, where he was widely considered the worst and most right-wing Democrat in the legislature. When he was finally term-limited out in 2002 he became a corporate lobbyist. But then his local New Dem congressman, Cal Dooley, retired 2 years later to become a K Street lobbyist himself. Costa-- despite an arrest for hiring teenage hookers-- one of whom was an undercover cop-- and despite drug paraphernalia found in his home, won the primary.

Costa's congressional district, CA-16, includes most of the city of Fresno, all of Merced County and a piece of Madera County. Aside from Fresno, the population centers are Merced, Madera, Chowchilla and Los Banos. Costa, who engenders zero enthusiasm among Democratic base voters, has been on shaky ground recently. In 2010, Republican Andy Vidak's challenge was so strong that, despite Costa outspending him $2,076,986 to $891,826, it took 3 weeks of recounts before Costa was declared the winner by 3,050 votes. 2014 was even worse for Costa. With no help from the GOP whatsoever, dairyman Johnny Tacherra-- outspent by Costa $1,116,677 to $342,204-- was declared the winner on election night. A shady recount in Fresno handed the final tally to Costa 46,277 (50.7%) to 44,943 (49.3%). Costa's foolish and dysfunctional response to these close calls has been to tack further and further right.

His Trump affinity score is 34.4%, second worst of any Democrats', having voted, for example, to support ICE, to roll back Dodd Frank protections, to allow guns in schools, to allow for racial profiling by auto finance companies, against opening impeachment hearings (twice), reauthorizing warrantless wiretapping of American citizens under FISA, for attempts to repeal Obamacare, removing antitrust exemption for insurance companies, for Trump's scheme to hobble regulatory agencies, for repealing a rule requiring energy companies to reduce waste and emissions, and against Climate Change efforts involving ozone standards... Whenever there are Democrats crossing the aisle to support the GOP, you can always expect Costa to be among them. After he voted for the TPP (which included $700 million in cuts to Medicare), Blue America sent our lovely accountability truck (below) to drive around Modesto, Merced, Atwater, Livingston and Fresno, you know,  to spend a couple of weeks reminding voters in the district what Congressman Costa is all about. We sent the truck out again when he was one of the only Democrats in Congress to continue funding the genocide in Yemen.

So... you'd think it would be a dream come true to see Costa with a primary challenge. And, in a way it is. First I heard Kim Williams, a college professor and former foreign service diplomat was taking him on and more recently Fresno City Council member Esmeralda Soria declared that she's running. (The Republicans have a real estate agent, Kevin Cookingham, in the jungle primary.) I've tried getting in touch with both Williams and Soria but neither has responded. As far as I can tell, Williams is a bit to the left of Costa and Soria is pretty much exactly the same, politically, as he is.





Late last week, the Fresno Bee took a look at Soria's announcement of her campaign. "Fresno City Councilmember Esmeralda Soria," reported Brianna Calix, "announced on Thursday she is running to represent California’s 16th Congressional District. Soria, a Democrat born to Mexican immigrant farm laborers in the Tulare County town of Lindsay, is in her second and final term on the city council. Soria’s political strength in Fresno could make her the most formidable challenge of Costa’s career."

After Soria’s announcement, Costa said he was disappointed in her decision and pointed to her past endorsements. He said in the last eight months they’ve met for lunch, coffee and social events and she never shared any major criticisms or disagreements with him.

Costa said his record will help him win again as it has in prior elections.

“I always work very hard every day to help people in our Valley,” he said in a telephone interview with The Bee. “…I always put my trust and faith in the voters of the Valley. This is my home and this is what my passion is.”

Costa’s victories over the years have come from his strong voter base in Fresno, while he lost ground in Republican-dominated rural areas like Merced County’s west side. Much of Soria’s council district in south-central Fresno falls within the 16th Congressional District, and she’s made allies with the other Democrat council members representing the southern parts of the city.

Soria also enters the race at a time when people of color are gaining traction in Fresno and challenging the political establishment in ways similar to what Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez accomplished in New York through grassroots organizing and community activism.

In an interview with The Bee, Soria never uttered Costa’s name, saying her congressional bid isn’t about her opponent or partisan politics. “I’m focused on who I represent,” she said. “People want a fair shot. They don’t want a handout.”

Costa, a 67-year-old Blue Dog Democrat, has faced one Democratic challenger since his first bid for Congress in the 2004 primary, Steve Hazei n 2010.


...Whether Soria can beat the veteran politician could depend largely on early fundraising. She said she won’t take any corporate money for her campaign.

Meanwhile, Costa in his last election accepted money from PACs and corporations such as Chevron, Google, Comcast, McDonald’s and Wal-Mart, plus various agriculture or labor-related groups. Costa also is likely to receive fundraising support from other longtime and high-profile California Democrats.

Costa touted his long list of endorsements from the state’s top leaders, including Gov. Gavin Newsom, Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Kamala Harris and Attorney General Xavier Becerra, as well as members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. Many have committed to coming to the Valley to help him campaign, he said.

Soria may not be well-known outside of Fresno and her hometown in Tulare County, but the 37-year-old millennial said her background as the daughter of immigrants from a rural community will help her connect with voters in Merced and Madera.


Soria said she was inspired to run by her family’s personal stories and the ones she’s heard from city constituents, former interns and students she’s taught as an adjunct faculty member at Fresno City College.

“My family and the thousands of families here in the Valley that continue to struggle, they’ve worked hard, they’ve played by the rules and they give back. Yet, to this date, they’re barely making ends meet,” she said. “Things haven’t changed. The economy has gotten better. Our unemployment rate has decreased, but not enough. There’s still too many families that are struggling to make ends meet.”

On the issue of health care, Soria wants more affordable options, saying everyone should be able to have similar health care plans as representatives in Congress.

Immigration is a top issue for Soria, who once planned to be an immigration attorney. She called the immigration system broken and said she supports a path to citizenship for Dreamers, a guest worker program for seasonal workers, and condemned the current border crisis, saying “we can’t continue to allow these kids to be in cages.”

Affordable college and student loan debt is another top issue for Soria, who said she’s personally saddled with $150,000 debt from law school.

While Soria avoided directly criticizing Costa in her interview with The Bee, she added: “I wouldn’t be running if those issues were fixed.”


Costa pointed to his voting record to support water needs, transportation infrastructure, reducing prescription drug prices and working with state assemblymembers to bring a medical school to the Valley.

She touted her record at City Hall, helping spur job growth and fix neighborhood problems such as paving roads, building parks, advocating for affordable housing and holding more than 40 community meetings.

Soria’s council colleague Garry Bredefeld recently criticized her for a trip to Washington, D.C., where she met with Ocasio-Cortez. “AOC,” as she’s known online, has been described as a Democratic Socialist and also challenged a longtime Democratic incumbent in her district, where she represents Queens and the Bronx in New York.

While Soria vocally supports some progressive issues such as immigration reform and race-related issues, she’s also supported law enforcement and has been recognized for being “business friendly” while on the Fresno City Council.

The idea of Soria painting herself as a progressive is patently absurd. One actual progressive politician in Fresno told me she is basically Costa with a skirt and "every bit another Blue Dog-in-the-making."

American Weapons Transfers Blowback-- Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Iran, al Qaeda, Trump, UAE...

Right now, Blue America has a mobile billboard riding up and down the highways of two adjacent California congressional districts, CA-22 and CA-16, both centered in the Fresno area. Those are Devin Nunes' and Jim Costa's districts, the first a corrupt reactionary Republican and the second a corrupt reactionary Blue Dog Democrat. Both have backed continued U.S. arms sales and logistic support for the Saudi/Emerati genocide in Yemen-- the reason for the mobile billboard:

When Ted Lieu (D-CA) first began working to end the U.S. participation in the civil war in Yemen, it wasn't a popular decision. Most Republicans like wars in general and Democrats only oppose wars when Republicans are leading them. When the U.S. first got involved in Yemen, Obama was president but in 2015 Lieu was already calling attention to the beginnings of what has turned out to be a 21st Century genocide. Long before Trump was elected he had already introduced the first resolution (H.J. RES 90) to provide limitations on the transfer of air-to-ground munitions from the United States to Saudi Arabia and stating flatly that "The United States needs to send a clear message to Saudi Arabia: the continued civilian casualties in Yemen are completely unacceptable. The Saudis need to do everything in their power to eliminate the risk to innocent civilians in this conflict and until they do the U.S. should not be supporting their military actions there." It was a beginning. By 2017 he had introduced legislation to place conditions on all air-to-ground munitions sales to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The three conditions relate to avoiding civilian casualties, facilitating humanitarian aid, and targeting U.S.-designated terrorist organizations such as AQAP and ISIS. The 2018 National Defense Authorization Act signed by Trump includes two of Lieu's provisions on Yemen, one to bring congressional oversight to the conflict there, requiring the Departments of Defense and State to report to Congress on whether the Saudis and Emiratis are abiding by their commitments in Yemen and another one requiring Trump to submit a detailed report that contains a military and diplomatic strategy for Yemen. Last month he followed up with a bill to prohibit the U.S. from conducting aerial refueling of Saudi-coalition jets in support of the Yemen conflict. On top of that, his 2018 bill to give Congress more oversight of arms sales was just reintroduced by Lieu and Jim McGovern as H.R. 332. This morning he told me that "The fact that US weapons have been found in the hands of al-Qaeda terrorists and Iranian-backed rebels should infuriate every American. This is exactly why the US should not be engaged in the Yemeni civil war-- certainly not without congressional authorization. I fail to see how U.S. personnel supporting possible Saudi war crimes in Yemen is in our national interest. Over the past 50 years Congress has slowly and consistently ceded its  war-making power to the Executive Branch. It is long past time we took some of it back."

CNN reported yesterday that the U.S. is, far and away, the top supplier of weapons systems to both countries and without U.S. support, the war against Yemen, now the site of the world's worst humanitarian crisis, would end rapidly. CNN's team reported that "US lawmakers are trying to pass a resolution ending the Trump administration’s support for the coalition. But there is scant evidence that the White House wants to listen, despite evidence that the actions of a key US ally may be making Americans less safe. In the wake of the murder of Jamal Khashoggi murder last year, Trump said it would be foolish for the US to cancel multi-billion dollar arms deals with the Saudis. 'I don't want to lose all of that investment being made into our country,. he said."

The point of the blockbuster CNN report, Sold To An Ally, Lost To An Enemy, addresses an urgent American national security threat that has come to light in regard to these weapons transfers-- the Saudis and Emeratis have been giving U.S. weapons to al Qaeda in violation of their agreements with the United States.

The weapons have also made their way into the hands of Iranian-backed rebels battling the coalition for control of the country, exposing some of America's sensitive military technology to Tehran and potentially endangering the lives of US troops in other conflict zones.

Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, its main partner in the war, have used the US-manufactured weapons as a form of currency to buy the loyalties of militias or tribes, bolster chosen armed actors, and influence the complex political landscape, according to local commanders on the ground and analysts who spoke to CNN.

By handing off this military equipment to third parties, the Saudi-led coalition is breaking the terms of its arms sales with the US, according to the Department of Defense. After CNN presented its findings, a US defense official confirmed there was an ongoing investigation into the issue.

The revelations raise fresh questions about whether the US has lost control over a key ally presiding over one of the most horrific wars of the past decade, and whether Saudi Arabia is responsible enough to be allowed to continue buying the sophisticated arms and fighting hardware.  Previous CNN investigations established that US-made weapons were used in a series of deadly Saudi coalition attacks that killed dozens of civilians, many of them children.

...[S]ome of America's "beautiful military equipment," as U.S. President Donald Trump once called it, has been passed on, sold, stolen or abandoned in Yemen's state of chaos, where murky alliances and fractured politics mean little hope for any system of accountability or tracking.

Some terror groups have gained from the influx of US arms, with the barrier of entry to advanced weaponry now lowered by the laws of supply and demand. Militia leaders have had ample opportunity to obtain military hardware in exchange for the manpower to fight the Houthi militias. Arms dealers have flourished, with traders offering to buy or sell anything, from a US-manufactured rifle to a tank, to the highest bidder.

And Iran's proxies have captured American weapons they can exploit for vulnerabilities or reverse-engineer for native production.

...Amid the chaos of the broader war, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) made its way to the frontlines in Taiz in 2015, forging advantageous alliances with the pro-Saudi militias they fought alongside.

One of those militias linked to AQAP, the Abu Abbas brigade, now possesses US-made Oshkosh armored vehicles, paraded in a 2015 show of force through the city.

Abu Abbas, the founder, was declared a terrorist by the US in 2017, but the group still enjoys support from the Saudi coalition and was absorbed into the coalition-supported 35th Brigade of the Yemeni army.

“Oshkosh Defense strictly follows all US laws and regulations relating to export control," the firm told CNN.

And there are deadlier forms of weaponry that have made their way into the city. In October 2015, military forces loyal to the government boasted on Saudi- and UAE-backed media that the Saudis had airdropped American-made TOW anti-tank missiles on the same frontline where AQAP had been known to operate at the time.

Local officials confirmed that the airdrop happened, but CNN's attempts to conduct further interviews were blocked and the team was intimidated by the local government. A local activist joked that the weapons had probably been sold on.

..."The United States has not authorized the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia or the United Arab Emirates to re-transfer any equipment to parties inside Yemen," Pentagon spokesman Johnny Michael told CNN. "The US government cannot comment on any pending investigations of claims of end-use violations of defense articles and services transferred to our allies and partners."

Last October, Ro Khanna and Elizabeth Warren penned a joint OpEd about the Trump Regime's complicity in the unfolding catastrophe in Yemen. They wrote that "in August, the world watched in horror as a Saudi-led coalition airstrike in Yemen claimed the lives of 40 innocent children. The boys, many under the age of 10, were killed when their school bus was bombed during a class trip. The weapon used in that deadly bombing was made in America."

It was not the first time. In June, airstrikes hit a cholera treatment center run by Doctors Without Borders, even though it was clearly identified as a medical facility.

In April, 20 civilians, many from a single family, were killed while celebrating a wedding in a village in northwest Yemen.

As a result of this conflict, at least 10,000 Yemenis have died, 2 million more are displaced, and 22 million are in need of humanitarian assistance. To make matters worse, a man-made famine has brought nearly 8 million people in Yemen to the brink of starvation.

This humanitarian catastrophe didn't happen overnight. For more than three years, a military coalition led by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates has been bombing Yemen as part of a proxy war to counter the Iran-supported Houthi militias.

During this period, the United States has been quietly providing intelligence and military advice to the Saudi-led coalition. Our government refuels Saudi coalition warplanes in midair. Our government provides advice and assistance. Our government authorizes the sale of US-made bombs and missiles the coalition uses to conduct this war.

There is no doubt that Iran's actions in Yemen are destabilizing. Iran's government supports militias that attack Saudi territory and undermine the internationally recognized central government of Yemen. But we can no longer turn a blind eye to the actions of the Saudi coalition-- or our own role in the suffering of the Yemeni people.

There is a growing push in Washington to seek an end to this civil war. In this year's defense authorization bill, Congress threatened to cut off US support for the Saudi-led coalition's operations in Yemen until the Trump administration certified the coalition was making "an urgent and good faith effort" to reduce civilian casualties, alleviate the humanitarian crisis, and negotiate an end to the civil war.

But rather than using this opportunity as leverage to hold our partners accountable, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo rubber-stamped the Saudi-led coalition's actions. Secretary of Defense James Mattis asserted that the coalition was making "every effort" to prevent civilian casualties-- even as the United Nations reported that the coalition was responsible for the majority of the children killed in Yemen last year.

The administration's decision to double down on US support for the bombing campaign makes a mockery of congressional oversight authority. Overlooking the Saudi-led coalition's apparent disregard for international norms and laws of armed conflict does nothing to improve US standing in the world. And continuing to support an ill-conceived proxy war in Yemen does not make America safer.

The framers of our Constitution believed that the decision to involve ourselves in a conflict like the one in Yemen requires the consent of the people, expressed through their elected representatives. But Congress has never authorized our involvement in this conflict. That's why we have supported bicameral, bipartisan efforts to end the US involvement in Yemen's civil war unless Congress specifically authorizes it.

While counterterrorism operations against al Qaeda and its affiliates would continue, support for the Saudi coalition's military operations against the Houthis would stop.

The crisis in Yemen is worsening, and the United States can do something about it. We can hold the Saudi coalition accountable. We can demand that all parties cease the violence. We can support UN Special Envoy Martin Griffiths' peace negotiations.

The Yemeni people are suffering. Instead of supporting more bombing, the United States can help bring peace to the region. Congress has an urgent responsibility to act.

Time Magazine's report about Trump's lack of interest in and ability to comprehend U.S. intelligence reports-- coupled with his kleptocratic self-interest in the name of U.S. foreign policy-- makes these weapons transfers even more dangerous to American national security. John Walcott reported that intelligence officials, citing multiple in-person episodes, say "Trump displays what one called 'willful ignorance' when presented with analyses generated by America’s $81 billion-a-year intelligence services. The officials, who include analysts who prepare Trump’s briefs and the briefers themselves, describe futile attempts to keep his attention by using visual aids, confining some briefing points to two or three sentences, and repeating his name and title as frequently as possible. What is most troubling, say these officials and others in government and on Capitol Hill who have been briefed on the episodes, are Trump’s angry reactions when he is given information that contradicts positions he has taken or beliefs he holds. Two intelligence officers even reported that they have been warned to avoid giving the President intelligence assessments that contradict stances he has taken in public."

Ro Khanna has taken the lead on Yemen de-escalation in the House. When I spoke with him yesterday morning about the the revelations of what the Saudis have been doing with American weapons, he seemed quietly angry and eager to prevent more of that from happening. He jotted me a note a could share here:

One of my first major op-eds as a congressman was with Senator Rand Paul. In our broader case for restraint, we cautioned about the the Saudi-led war in Yemen. In addition to highlighting the awful humanitarian catastrophe the war created, we made the case this war was making the US less safe. We wrote, "What makes matters worse is that the Saudis have formed a temporary alliance of convenience with Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, also known as AQAP, to fight the Houthi rebels. AQAP is our enemy. The group claimed credit for the attack on the USS Cole in 2000, the "underwear bomber" in 2009 and the intercepted plot to send bombs to Jewish organizations in Chicago in 2010."

Today, we learned that not only are the Saudis allied with AQAP, but they are actively giving our weapons to them. This is unconscionable and confirms our original reservations that the Saudis are not to be trusted. They showed their blatant disregard for the truth and human rights when they murdered Khaghoggi and lied to us about what happened. This is just more proof of why we cannot trust them.

I think this news and realization will give our war powers resolutions great momentum and show why we need to end all US involvement with the Saudis in this war. This will be the first time in our nation's history that Congress will take back its war-making powers and pass a war powers resolution through both chambers.