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.
Taylor McKinnon, Center for Biological Diversity, (928) 310-6713
Roger Clark, Grand Canyon Trust, (928) 774-7488
Sandy Bahr, Sierra Club Grand Canyon Chapter, (602) 253-8633
The Center for Biological Diversity, Grand Canyon Trust and Sierra
Club Grand Canyon Chapter have reached a settlement agreement with the
United States Forest Service and VANE Minerals, a British mining firm,
over a legal challenge to uranium exploration approved last December
for national forest land immediately south - some within three miles -
of Grand Canyon National Park.
The suit held that
the Kaibab National Forest violated the National Environmental Policy
Act and Appeals Reform Act when it approved 39 exploratory drilling
holes using a "categorical exclusion" from detailed public and
environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act. The
settlement follows an April preliminary injunction and requires the
Forest Service and VANE Minerals to withdraw the drilling approval and
to undertake a full Environmental Impact Statement process prior to any
renewed effort to drill at the sites.
"Public lands
abutting Grand Canyon deserve better than the uranium industry's vision
of a radioactive industrial zone," said Taylor McKinnon, public lands
director for the Center for Biological Diversity. "This settlement
repeals an illegal exploration project and requires a full
environmental and public review of any new drilling proposed for those
sites. It's a clear victory for the Grand Canyon."
The 39 drilling sites' approval was the first of five similar uranium
exploration projects slated for national forest land immediately south
of Grand Canyon National Park. Recent spikes in the price of uranium
have caused mining companies to file thousands of new uranium claims,
conduct dozens of exploratory drilling projects, and move to open
several uranium mines on public lands both north and south of the Park.
Concerns about uranium development causing
surface- and ground-water contamination of Grand Canyon National Park
and the Colorado River have been expressed by Arizona Gov. Janet
Napolitano; the Los Angeles Water District; the Southern Nevada Water
Authority; the Arizona Game and Fish Department; the Navajo, Hopi,
Havasupai, Hualapai and Kaibab Paiute nations; and Coconino County.
"Uranium development poses a real and immediate threat to Grand Canyon
and the Colorado River," said Sandy Bahr of the Sierra Club's Grand
Canyon Chapter. "At stake is the drinking water for tens of millions of
Americans and the crown jewel of our national park system."
Heeding these concerns, Congressman Raul Grijalva in March introduced the Grand Canyon Watersheds Protection Act,
legislation that would prohibit new uranium exploration across 1
million acres of federal public lands in watersheds surrounding Grand
Canyon. In June, the U.S. House of Representatives' Committee on
Natural Resources passed an emergency resolution requiring the
Secretary of Interior to establish the same protections for three years
across the same 1 million acres - which includes national forest lands
south of Grand Canyon slated for new exploration.
"This settlement is a significant step toward protecting Grand Canyon
and the Colorado River," said Roger Clark of the Grand Canyon Trust.
"Congress should follow the lead provided by Representative Nick Rahall
and Representative Raul Grijalva and pass the Grand Canyon Watersheds
Protection Act of 2008 and reform the 1872 mining law. Both are
critical to securing Grand Canyon's future."
The
1872 law established mining as the highest priority use of federal
public lands by allowing mining companies, including foreign firms such
as VANE Minerals, to mine federal lands without paying royalties, with
minimal environmental safeguards and at the expense of other land uses.
Attempts to reform the antiquated legislation so far have failed.
Attorneys Marc Fink of the Center for Biological Diversity, Neil Levine
of Grand Canyon Trust and Roger Flynn of the Western Mining Action
Project argued the Grand Canyon uranium exploration suit and negotiated
the settlement agreement.
To view a copy of today's settlement agreement, click here.
At the Center for Biological Diversity, we believe that the welfare of human beings is deeply linked to nature — to the existence in our world of a vast diversity of wild animals and plants. Because diversity has intrinsic value, and because its loss impoverishes society, we work to secure a future for all species, great and small, hovering on the brink of extinction. We do so through science, law and creative media, with a focus on protecting the lands, waters and climate that species need to survive.
(520) 623-5252“If Speaker Johnson drives House Republicans down this highly partisan path," said Democratic leaders, "the odds of a shutdown go way up."
Leading U.S. Senate Democrats on Friday accused House Republicans of "wasting precious time catering to the hard MAGA right" as House Speaker Mike Johnson unveiled a stopgap funding bill tied to a proposal that would require proof of citizenship in order to vote in federal elections.
The proposal—the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act—has been pushed by Republican presidential nominee and former President Donald Trump and was passed by the House in July, with five Democrats joining the GOP in supporting the bill.
Non-citizens are already barred from voting in federal elections. With about 21.3 million eligible voters reporting in a recent survey that they would not be able to quickly access their birth certificate, passport, naturalization certificate, or certificate of citizenship in order to prove their status, critics say the proposal is a clear attempt to stop people of color and young Americans from taking part in elections.
Johnson proposed including the legislation in a stopgap bill, or a continuing resolution, that would keep the government running roughly at current spending levels through March 28—a move that would postpone major spending negotiations until after the next president takes office.
U.S. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Patty Murray (D-Wash.) said that "avoiding a government shutdown requires bipartisanship, not a bill drawn up by one party," and alluded to former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy's (R-Calif.) attempt last September to ram a spending bill through with immigration and border policy changes in order to avert a government shutdown.
"Speaker Johnson is making the same mistake as former Speaker McCarthy did a year ago," said Schumer and Murray in a statement. "The House Republican funding proposal is an ominous case of déjà vu."
“If Speaker Johnson drives House Republicans down this highly partisan path," they added, "the odds of a shutdown go way up, and Americans will know that the responsibility of a shutdown will be on the House Republicans' hands."
Johnson is expected to bring the bill to the House floor on Wednesday after lawmakers return from summer recess. Congress has a September 30 deadline to make changes to the spending bill in order to avoid a partial government shutdown on October 1.
The House speaker called the proposal "a critically important step" toward funding the government and ensuring "that only American citizens can decide American elections"—prompting one critic to accuse Johnson of pushing a "manufactured" issue.
"Anyone who reads the SAVE Act understands it is a bad bill," said attorney Heath Hixson, "a poorly worded unfunded mandate that'll lead to voter suppression and racist outcomes."
Floridians and reproductive rights advocates responded with alarm on Friday to Tampa Bay Timesreporting that Florida law enforcement officers have been sent to the homes of multiple voters who signed a petition to get an abortion rights measure on the November ballot.
While Isaac Menasche told the newspaper that he isn't sure which agency the plainclothes officer who came to his home is with, fellow Lee County resident Becky Castellanos said Florida Department of Law Enforcement Officer Gary Negrinelli showed his badge and gave his card.
Both visits were about potential fraud related to the petition for Amendment 4, which would outlaw pre-viability abortion bans in Florida. Menasche was asked if he signed the petition, which he had. Negrinelli inquired about Castellanos' relative, who also signed the petition.
"This is pure voter intimidation, just like with the 'election police' in 2022. It's Gestapo tactics."
The officer inquiries appear "to be part of a broad—and unusual—effort by Gov. Ron DeSantis' administration to inspect thousands of already verified and validated petitions for Amendment 4 in the final two months before Election Day," the Times reported.
The Republican governor signed the state's six-week ban that would end if the ballot measure passes. He has also faced criticism for creating an Office of Election Crimes and Security, whose work has led to the arrest of Floridians who believed they were legally allowed to vote following the passage of a referendum that restored voting rights to many people with past felony convictions.
As the Times detailed Friday:
Since last week, DeSantis' secretary of state has ordered elections supervisors in at leastfour counties to send to Tallahassee at least 36,000 petition forms already deemed to have been signed by real people. Since the Timesfirst reported on this effort, Alachua and Broward counties have confirmed they also received requests from the state.
One 16-year supervisor said the request was unprecedented. The state did not ask for rejected petitions, which have been the basis for past fraud cases.
While Department of State spokesperson Ryan Ash said the agency has "uncovered evidence of illegal conduct with fraudulent petitions" and "we have a duty to seek justice for Florida citizens who were victimized," a representative for the coalition behind Amendment 4 criticized the state effort.
"This is very clearly a fishing expedition," ACLU of Florida spokesperson Keisha Mulfort, whose group is part of Floridians Protecting Freedom, told the Times. "It is more important than ever for Floridians to reject these authoritarian tactics and vote yes on Amendment 4 in November."
Promoting the report on social media, the ACLU of Florida added, "This is what state-authorized election interference looks like."
Democrats in the state were similarly critical. Florida state Rep. Anna V. Eskamani (D-42) shared a social media post in which Menasche described feeling "shaken" and "troubled" by the encounter with the officer.
"This is unhinged and undemocratic behavior being pushed by DeSantis and his cronies in an effort to continue our state's near total abortion ban," said Eskamani. "It's clear voter intimidation and plain corruption—continue to call it out and fight back. Vote @yes4florida and spread the word."
Responding to Eskamani, Pamela Castellana, chair of the Brevard Democratic Executive Committee, said: "This literally took my breath away. This is pure voter intimidation, just like with the 'election police' in 2022. It's Gestapo tactics. If you live in Florida you know. If you don't—please help me get the word out. Stop authoritarianism."
Journalist Jessica Valenti argued Friday that Republicans "don't care that voters want abortion rights restored—and if they need to dismantle democracy to keep it banned, so be it."
"We've seen lots of Republican attacks on pro-choice ballot measures—but what makes this one especially insidious is that it's trying to gaslight Americans into thinking that voters don't really want abortion rights restored, but that the overwhelming support is fabricated," she added.
In addition to raising concerns about the fraud allegations, Amendment 4 supporters are outraged over the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration on Thursday launching a webpage claiming that the ballot measure "threatens women's safety."
Florida Senate Minority Leader Lauren Book (D-35) pledged that she is looking into "appropriate legal action," while Bacardi Jackson, executive director of the ACLU of Florida, said in a statement that "this kind of propaganda issued by the state, using taxpayer money and operating outside of the political process, sets a dangerous precedent."
"This is what we would expect to see from an authoritarian regime," added Jackson, "not in the so-called 'Free State of Florida.'"
"Dr. de la Torre will be held accountable for his greed and the damage he has caused the American people and our nation's healthcare system."
Taking aim at Steward Health Care CEO Dr. Ralph de la Torre's refusal to comply with a Senate subpoena, U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders on Friday said the committee he chairs will still hold a hearing next week on the company's bankruptcy and healthcare industry greed.
"Working with private equity vultures, Steward Health Care CEO Dr. Ralph de la Torre has made hundreds of millions of dollars ripping off patients and healthcare providers across the country," said Sanders, who heads the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP).
"This outrageous display of corporate greed has resulted in more than 30 Steward hospitals in eight states being forced to declare bankruptcy, putting patients and communities at risk," added the senator, who said the hearing is set to take place next Thursday at 10:00 am Eastern time.
"Ralph de la Torre has made hundreds of millions of dollars ripping off patients and health care providers across the country."
Steward is trying to auction off all 31 of its hospitals in order to pay down its debt. As Common Dreamsreported, the HELP committee—which includes 10 Republicans—voted 20-1 in July to investigate Steward Health Care's bankruptcy, and 16-4 to subpoena de la Torre.
"Dr. de la Torre will be held accountable for his greed and the damage he has caused the American people and our nation's healthcare system," Sanders said Friday. "Is it my hope that Dr. de la Torre will do the right thing, change his mind, and join our hearing to provide testimony? Yes. But let me be clear: With or without him, this hearing is going forward."
"We will expose his fraud, and put his greed on display," the senator added. "I look forward to hearing from patients, medical professionals, and community members whose lives have been upended by Dr. de la Torre and his private equity cronies."
Another HELP committee member, Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who is a bankruptcy law expert, on Wednesday accused de la Torre of using Steward-owned hospitals "as his personal piggy bank."
De la Torre—who according to Steward's bankruptcy filing received more than $4 million in compensation between May 2023 and April 2024—has also come under fire for his 2021 purchase of a 190-foot megayacht believed to be worth around $40 million. That year, Steward's owners paid themselves millions of dollars in dividends.
On Thursday, CBS Newsreported that in 2017 Steward executives including de la Torre illegally conspired with Maltese officials in order to secure a hospital contract, according to a whistleblower.
While a spokesperson for the executive denied any wrongdoing, whistleblower Ram Tumuluri alleged in a complaint to the U.S. Congress that "in touting Steward's supposed competitive advantage in Malta... de la Torre boasted that he could issue 'brown bags' to government officials if necessary to close transactions."