

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Kevin Kamps, Beyond Nuclear, 240.462.3216 /
Debbie Grinnell, C-10, 978.465.6646
A
coalition of dozens of national and grassroots environmental and safe
energy organizations has filed an official petition for rulemaking with
the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) urging safety and security
upgrades on high-level radioactive waste containers. The petitioners
include national groups Alliance for Nuclear Accountability, Beyond
Nuclear, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, Nuclear Age Peace
Foundation, Nuclear Information and Resource Service, Physicians for
Social Responsibility, Public Citizen, and SUN DAY Campaign, as well as
numerous grassroots groups across the country.
The
groups call upon NRC to strengthen quality assurance rules on the
design and manufacture of dry storage casks. These outdoor concrete and
steel silos are used at most atomic reactors across the country to
store irradiated nuclear fuel. The groups cite the risks of disastrous
releases of radioactivity into the air, soil, and water due to
accidents, attacks, or eventual leakage, and demand that safeguards be
strengthened. The petition is posted on the Beyond Nuclear home page, www.beyondnuclear.org.
The
petition for rulemaking was initiated by the C-10 Foundation, a
watchdog group based in Massachusetts within ten miles of New
Hampshire's Seabrook nuclear power station. NRC recently approved
Seabrook owner Florida Power and Light's request to install dry cask
storage. But C-10's research indicated that the NRC regulations for the
design, construction, and certification of dry storage casks are
woefully inadequate
"NRC
continues to certify casks based on technical design criteria for a
twenty-year deployment, when in fact they will actually store
high-level radioactive waste on-site at reactors indefinitely, many
decades into the future," said Debbie Grinnell, C-10 Foundation
Research Assistant and author of the petition for rulemaking.
"As
the federal government fails to protect the public against the risks
associated with high-level radioactive wastes, states will inevitably inherit
the problem," Grinnell added. "These risks will continue on long after
the reactors are shut down and decommissioned. Funding will be needed
for generations to come to manage these forever deadly radioactive
wastes," Grinnell concluded.
The 104
operating atomic reactors across the U.S. each generate 20 to 30 tons
of irradiated nuclear fuel each year. At least 60,000 tons have
accumulated to date in the U.S. Since the indoor waste storage pools at
almost 80 of the 104 reactors are already filled to capacity, nuclear
utilities have turned to outdoor dry cask storage. More than two dozen
permanently shut down reactors, and even several completely dismantled
nuclear power plants, still store the high-level radioactive wastes
they generated on site in dry casks, since the U.S. lacks a national repository.
As of
three years ago, the most recent data readily available to the public,
nearly 800 dry casks had already been loaded at 36 nuclear power plant
sites. An additional 13 nuclear plants were poised to begin installing
dry casks. NRC estimates that by 2015, almost all operating reactors
will have established dry cask storage. Each dry cask contains over 200
times the long-lasting radioactivity released by the Hiroshima atomic
bomb.
"Industry
and even NRC inspectors themselves have blown the whistle on widespread
safety problems with radioactive waste storage casks around the
country," said Kevin Kamps at Beyond Nuclear in Takoma Park, Maryland.
"Yet, even despite their own safety staff warning the casks violate
codes and regulations, the NRC continues to rubberstamp approval for
their extended use. If and when these casks fail, the result could be
disastrous in terms of harm to human health and environmental
contamination."
"This court has effectively told every aspiring monopolist that our current justice system is on their side."
Anti-monopoly advocates are warning that a federal judge's ruling in favor of Facebook parent company Meta in a major antitrust case will have negative repercussions for US consumers by allowing Facebook to continue wielding monopoly power in the social media marketplace.
Judge James Boasberg in the District Court for the District of Columbia ruled Tuesday that the company’s acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp did not violate US antitrust policy.
Boasberg found that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) had not proven Meta holds monopoly power in the personal social networking market, "largely because he folded TikTok and YouTube into the same market and concluded that their popularity reduces Meta’s share below illegal levels," said the American Economic Liberties Project (ALEP).
John Bergmayer, legal director at Public Knowledge, argued that Boasberg's ruling demonstrates a basic misunderstanding about the economics of the social media market.
"The court's opinion reflects a view of the market that is at odds with how digital-platform power operates today," he said. "Meta systematically acquired emerging competitors precisely because direct, head-to-head competition threatened its dominance. Meta’s consolidation strategy deprived consumers of innovative services and prevented the development of a truly competitive social-networking ecosystem."
Nidhi Hegde, executive director of ALEP, described the ruling as a "colossally wrong decision" that "turns a willful blind eye to Meta’s enormous power over social media and the harms that flow from it."
"These deals let Meta fuse Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp into one machine that poisons our children and discourse, bullies publishers and advertisers, and destroys the possibility of healthy online connections with friends and family," she said. "By pretending that TikTok’s rise wipes away over a decade of illegal conduct, this court has effectively told every aspiring monopolist that our current justice system is on their side."
Hegde added that it should now fall upon US Congress to "step in and break up Big Tech, prohibit addictive surveillance algorithms, and create the conditions for building a better future."
Open Markets Institute policy counsel Tara Pincock said Boasberg's ruling was "profoundly misguided," and accused the judge of blocking the FTC from reversing a mistake it made last decade when it signed off on Meta's purchases of Instagram and WhatsApp.
"Judge Boasberg erred in concluding that Facebook competes with TikTok and YouTube," said Pincock, a former state assistant attorney general in Utah. "I was part of the bipartisan coalition of states that brought this case alongside the FTC in December 2020, and the court’s framing misrepresents what is at stake. This case has never been about generic 'time and attention.' It is about how people connect, communicate, and build communities—and about how a powerful company abused its dominance to protect itself from competition."
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said no government rescue of artificial intelligence firms "as healthcare is being denied to everyday Americans."
US Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said Tuesday that the federal government should not consider a taxpayer bailout of the artificial intelligence industry as fears grow that the rapidly expanding sector poses systemic risks to the global economy.
"Should this bubble pop, we should not be entertaining a bailout," Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) said during a House subcommittee hearing. "We should not entertain a bailout of these corporations as healthcare is being denied to everyday Americans, as SNAP and food assistance is being denied to everyday Americans, precipitating some of the very mental crises that people are turning to AI chat bots to try to resolve."
Ocasio-Cortez echoed the concerns of industry insiders and analysts who have warned in recent weeks that the AI investment boom created a bubble whose rupture would cause far-reaching economic carnage.
"We're talking about a massive economic bubble," the New York Democrat said Tuesday. "Depending on the exposure of that bubble, we could see 2008-style threats to economic stability."
Ocasio-Cortez's remarks came on the same day that Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) sounded the alarm about potential Trump administration plans to "use taxpayer dollars to prop up OpenAI and other AI companies at the expense of working class Americans."
"The Trump administration’s close ties with AI executives and donors—including millions of dollars of contributions to President Trump’s new ballroom project—raise concerns that the administration will bail out AI executives and shareholders while leaving taxpayers to foot the bill," Warren wrote in a letter to the White House's AI czar, David Sacks.
OpenAI, a firm at the center of the nascent industry, has reportedly been in discussion with the Trump administration about the possibility of receiving federal loan guarantees for the construction of chip factories in the United States. Robert Weissman, co-president of the watchdog group Public Citizen, warned earlier this month that "it is entirely possible that OpenAI and the White House are concocting a scheme to siphon taxpayer money into OpenAI’s coffers, perhaps with some tribute paid to Trump and his family."
"Perhaps not so coincidentally, OpenAI president Greg Brockman was among the attendees at a dinner for donors to Trump’s White House ballroom, though neither he nor OpenAI have been reported to be actual donors," Weissman added.
Writing for the Wall Street Journal last week, Sarah Myers West and Amba Kak of the AI Now Institute observed that "the federal government is already bailing out the AI industry with regulatory changes and public funds that will protect companies in the event of a private sector pullback."
"The Trump administration is rolling out the red carpet for these firms," they wrote. "The administration’s AI Action Plan aims to accelerate AI adoption within the government and military by pushing changes to regulatory and procurement processes. Government contracting offers stable, often lucrative long-term contracts—exactly what these firms will need if the private market for AI dips."
"Federal policy has jumped the gun: We don’t yet know if AI will transform the economy or even be profitable," West and Kak added. "Yet Washington is insulating the industry from all sorts of risk. If a bubble does pop, we’ll all be left holding the bag."
"If we had Medicare for All everyone would have healthcare with no premiums, deductibles or co-payments and we’d save $650 billion and 68,000 lives a year."
President Donald Trump on Tuesday proclaimed he would not sign any fix to the nation's healthcare crisis that would send money to what he termed, in all capital letters, as the "BIG, FAT, RICH INSURANCE COMPANIES, WHO HAVE MADE $TRILLIONS, AND RIPPED OFF AMERICA LONG ENOUGH"—and progressives did not hesitate to point out that by taking for-profit, private insurers out of the healthcare equation, one would quickly—if they cared about covering more people with less money—be left with something more akin to the kind of universal, publicly-supported healthcare systems that most nations in the developed world already enjoy.
"Just wait until we tell you about Medicare for All," said Dr. Abdul El-Sayed, a Democrat running for the US Senate in Michigan, in response to Trump's Truth Social post.
The president has been openly railing against the insurance companies that benefit from federal subsidies that are central to the healthcare plans made available on exchanges created by the Affordable Care Act (ACA), but his solution—a nebulous call for direct payments to individuals who could then somehow purchase "THEIR OWN, MUCH BETTER INSURANCE" with those same federal dollars.
With significant cuts to Medicaid—the largest in the program's history—and an end to ACA subsidies that could see premiums double or more for over 20 million people in the coming year, Democrats are warning of a healthcare crisis in 2026 like nothing the nation has ever seen.
But the solution being offered by Trump and his GOP allies in Congress, according to progressive critics, would only further entrench the crisis.
"Trump’s 'healthcare' plan will bankrupt and kill millions of Americans," warned Melanie D'Arrigo, executive director of the Campaign for New York Health, a single-payer advocacy group. "We can eliminate the private insurance industry, and save $650 billion per year with Medicare for All—which would cover everyone, save families money, and include dental, vision, prescriptions, and long-term care."
"We can eliminate the private insurance industry, and save $650 billion per year with Medicare for All."
On Sunday, Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), went on "Face the Nation" in order to put some "meat on the bone" regarding direct payments and said his office was working closely with Trump's White House on the proposal.
WATCH: @SenBillCassidy tells @margbrennan about his health care proposal, saying he wants to "...take the $26 billion that would be going to insurance companies" if the enhanced subsidies under the Affordable Care Act are extended, and instead "give it directly to the American… pic.twitter.com/xPLScs7YU8
— Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) November 14, 2025
Essentially, what the Cassidy-Trump plan would do is replace federal subsidies for inadequate health plans with high deductibles from private insurance giants with federal cash payments that people could only use to purchase—wait for it—inadequate health plans with high deductibles from private insurance giants.
After Administrator for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Dr. Mehmet Oz, also on Sunday, played a similar card on behalf of the Trump administration by saying, "If you had a check in the mail, you could buy the insurance you thought was best for you," immediate pushback followed.
Warren Gunnels, a longtime policy advisor to Sanders in the Senate, was among those who slammed Oz's efforts to deceive the American people by pushing the Trump administration's direct payments.
"If we had Medicare for All, everyone would have healthcare with no premiums, deductibles, or co-payments, and we’d save $650 billion and 68,000 lives a year," said Gunnels in response to Oz's remarks. "If we gave cancer patients, at most, a check for $6,500 for a $150,000 treatment, they’d go bankrupt and die an early death."