

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.

Joshua Osborne-Klein, Earthjustice, (206) 343-7340 ext. 28
Glen Spain, PCFFA (541) 689-2000
Aimee Code, NW Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides, 541-344-5044, ext 27
Today, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) released a biological opinion
that sets forth a plan for protecting Pacific salmon and steelhead from
three toxic organophosphate pesticides. The decision comes after almost
a decade of legal wrangling between salmon advocates and the federal
government.
In the biological opinion, federal wildlife scientists
comprehensively reviewed the science regarding the impacts of
pesticides on salmon and ultimately concluded that current uses of the
insecticides chlorpyrifos, diazinon, and malathion jeopardize the
existence of these imperiled fish. The biological opinion prescribes
measures necessary to keep these pesticides out of water and to protect
salmon populations in Washington, Oregon, California, and Idaho.
The new mitigation measures must be implemented within one year. They include:
"Keeping these pesticides out of the water is a major step toward
protecting our salmon stocks and revitalizing the fishing industry,
which can generate hundreds of million of dollars in the region," said
Glen Spain of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations
(PCFFA).
The three pesticides at issue in the biological opinion are known to
contaminate rivers and streams throughout California and the Pacific
Northwest and poison salmon and steelhead (see background below).
"The federal government has a duty to protect imperiled salmon from
these deadly pesticides," said Joshua Osborne-Klein, an attorney for
Earthjustice, the environmental law firm that represented the salmon
advocates. "We are very pleased that the government has finally taken
these steps to protect salmon, the icon of the Pacific Northwest's
natural heritage."
In addition to jeopardizing salmon, these pesticides pose serious
risks to public heath - especially the health of young children. A
number of recent studies have linked prenatal exposure to
organophosphate insecticides with behavioral problems including
attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. A 2006 study published in
Pediatrics, compared the risks of chlorpyrifos to prenatal cocaine
exposure.
"This decision will have a lasting impact that benefits our
grandchildren. Their rivers will provide cleaner drinking water, be
safer for swimming and more habitable for thriving runs of salmon,"
said Aimee Code, the Water Quality Coordinator at the Northwest
Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides.
In 2002, Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations
(PCFFA), the Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides, and
other salmon advocates, with legal representation from Earthjustice,
obtained a federal court order declaring that the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency had violated the Endangered Species Act by failing to
consult with NMFS on the impacts that certain pesticides have on salmon
and steelhead in the Pacific Northwest and California. As a result of
that lawsuit, EPA began consultations, but NMFS never issued biological
opinions or identified the measures needed to protect salmon and
steelhead from the pesticides. In 2007, the salmon advocates filed a
second lawsuit and entered into a settlement agreement with NMFS that
establishes a schedule for issuing the required biological
opinions. The biological opinion released today is the first of several
decisions that will be released over the next three-and-a-half years
and will assess a total of 37 pesticides.
The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) determined that
accepted uses of chlorpyrifos, diazinon and malathion are likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of 27 species of endangered or
threatened salmon and steelhead. NMFS's biological opinion of the three
pesticides, released today, stated that current uses were likely
reducing the number of salmon returning to spawn (BiOp at 292). These
three pesticides are all organophosphates (a class of neurotoxic
chemicals). They are used in both agricultural and/or urban insect
control. Recent research has found that in combination they can have
"synergistic effects" on salmon. In other words, the effect of
organophosphate mixtures is greater than the effect of each of the
chemicals' effects when added together. These chemicals are often found
together.
Chlorpyrifos
Diazinon
Malathion
Read the biological opinion (PDF)
Earthjustice is a non-profit public interest law firm dedicated to protecting the magnificent places, natural resources, and wildlife of this earth, and to defending the right of all people to a healthy environment. We bring about far-reaching change by enforcing and strengthening environmental laws on behalf of hundreds of organizations, coalitions and communities.
800-584-6460"Remember back when the national media said our campaign was dead?" said the Democratic Senate candidate.
At a campaign event over the weekend, Democratic US Senate candidate Graham Platner repeated a message that's been central to his campaign since it launched last August: that his goal of serving in the Senate is about "movement politics" more than attaining a position of power for himself.
“If we win this race, with this kind of politics and building this kind of organizational capacity,” Platner told the crowd that had packed into the AmVets hall in Yarmouth, Maine on Saturday, “then we get to point to this and show them it works. We get to inspire others in other states. We get to show them that you can win Senate seats with a working-class movement.”
On Monday, new fundraising numbers released by the progressive candidate's campaign on social media showed that Maine voters are responding to Platner's call to help build people-powered movement.
In the fourth quarter of 2025, the veteran and oyster farmer's campaign brought in $3.2 million from people who donated less than $200—about three times the amount collected by Platner's top competitor in the Democratic primary, Gov. Janet Mills, and Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) combined.
Mills brought in $822,000 in the fourth quarter while the longtime Republican senator reported $230,000 in donations.
Teachers had the most common occupation among Platner's small-dollar donors, according to the campaign.
Platner released the fundraising data soon after announcing the "207 Tour"—a statewide tour currently scheduled to go until at least May with stops in the southern coastal town of York, Fort Kent on the Canadian border, and tiny inland towns like Liberty and Appleton.
Collins has not faced Mainers at a town hall in over two decades, Platner has noted.
"I don't know how we've reached a time when Mainers cannot count on politicians to show up in their communities and openly and honestly answer questions. Our campaign is doing things differently because I'd actually like to hear from you," said Platner last week. "Wherever you are, I'll see you there."
Beyond small-dollar fundraising, the Platner campaign is aiming to mobilize a grassroots army of volunteers across the state and that’s what the slate of town halls in dozens of communities is designed to help build.
The 207 Tour so far appears to offer more proof that Platner's campaign platform—which demands a Medicare for All system to replace for-profit health insurance, a repeal of Citizens United to "ban billionaires buying elections," and a billionaire minimum tax—is resonating with Maine voters.
He spoke to 500 people in Yarmouth, a town of 9,000 people. That same day, 100 people crowded into a venue in South Paris (population: 2,000), and 85 people joined him Sunday at a town hall in Isleboro, a town of fewer than 600 people which is accessible only by ferry.
In Liberty, Platner was greeted with a standing ovation on Sunday.
"Remember back when the national media said our campaign was dead?" he said on social media, referring to stories that broke just as Mills entered the Democratic primary race in October, pertaining to a tattoo that resembled a Nazi symbol—which had never before raised alarm and which Platner subsequently had covered up—and old Reddit posts he had written that he said no longer reflected his worldview.
The controversies did not slow his momentum, with voters at his campaign events responding positively to Platner's candid comments about how his views have changed throughout his life.
Organizer and attorney Aaron Regunberg said Sunday that Democratic consultants and pundits who wrote off Platner last fall "shouldn’t be allowed to keep being so wrong all the time and still have jobs."
In overall fundraising in the last quarter of 2025, Platner outpaced both of his rivals, reporting $4.6 million in total donations. He has $3.7 million in cash on hand.
Mills reported $2.7 million for the period and has $1.3 million in available cash after the fourth quarter, and Collins raised $2.2 million and has $8 million in cash on hand.
A number of recent polls have also shown Platner favored to win in the primary and general election.
In recent weeks, Platner has taken Collins to task for supporting a funding bill for the Department of Homeland Security even as President Donald Trump's mass deportation campaign came to Maine and swept up numerous people who had not committed any crimes—and for taking credit when Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents were ending "enhanced" operations in the state.
In Yarmouth, Platner acknowledged he has built a reputation as a bit of a "bomb-throwing populist" with some of his campaign rhetoric—"and I am," he promised.
But he also said he does not want to go to Washington, DC just to "get in fights with people" with whom he disagrees—but to push for policies that his growing "movement" is demanding by working with anyone he can.
"When we're talking about policy that impacts people's lives and livelihoods," he said, "things don't happen just because you're holding grudge against somebody."
"The point is to go down there and pass things and build power," said Platner. "Sometimes it's not going to work, but that's also why we need to build that secondary power—the movement power—to impose [our power] at those times when relationships won't work."
"His outbursts are real threats, but they come from weakness," said one critic of the president. "Tough shit, he's going down."
President Donald Trump on Monday declared that the Republican Party should "nationalize the voting" in the US and take away individual states' power to administer their elections.
While speaking with Dan Bongino, a former FBI deputy director and current podcaster, Trump rehashed the false allegations he's made in the past about Democrats only winning elections through the help of undocumented immigrants.
"These people were brought to our country to vote, and they vote illegally!" Trump falsely claimed. "Amazing that the Republicans aren't tougher on it. The Republicans should say... 'We should take over the voting in at least... 15 places.' The Republicans ought to nationalize the voting."
Trump: "These people were brought to our country to vote, and they vote illegally. The Republicans should say, we should take over the voting in at least 15 places. The Republicans ought to nationalize the voting. We have states that I won that show I didn't win. You're gonna see… pic.twitter.com/H5hT3OvtLE
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) February 2, 2026
Trump then continued to rehash his lies about winning the 2020 election that he lost to former President Joe Biden.
"We have states that are so crooked, and they're counting votes, we have states that I won that show I didn't win!" he said. "Now, you're going to see something in Georgia, where they were able to get with a court order the ballots, you're going to see some interesting things come out. But, you know, the 2020 election, I won that election by so much. And everybody knows it!"
In fact, Trump lost the 2020 election to Biden at both the national level and in the state of Georgia, which has a Republican governor, a Republican secretary of state, and a Republican-run Legislature.
Last week, the FBI executed a search warrant at Georgia's Fulton County election hub and hauled out boxes of ballots as part of an investigation related to the 2020 election.
Some Trump critics reacted to his latest outburst about "nationalizing" the vote by noting how incredibly unlikely the president would be to succeed in such an endeavor.
"Neither Trump nor the GOP in Congress have this power, and the only way they do this is if we decline to stand up for our rights," wrote Ezra Levin, co-executive director of Indivisible, in a social media post. "He's had a string of electoral defeats and rightfully fears the midterms. His outbursts are real threats, but they come from weakness. Tough shit, he's going down. No Kings."
MS NOW contributor Philip Bump also expressed skepticism about Trump's scheme, which conflicts with Article I of the US Constitution.
"Trump doesn't have the power to federalize elections, which obviously doesn't mean it's OK that he's saying things like this," he wrote. "The stuff about ginning up bullshit in Atlanta—we'll see."
Political strategist Murshed Zaheed likewise advised his social media followers to "take a deep breath" before panicking over Trump's plans.
"Trump cannot change election/voting rules with [executive orders]," he wrote. "Of course they are going to try crazy stuff—but this is desperate attempt to gin up fear."
Other critics, however, said that Trump's remarks needed to be taken as a direct threat to democratic governance.
"He’s saying the quiet part out loud," said Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.). "Trump and MAGA Republicans can’t win with their unpopular policies at the ballot box, so they want to steal the 2026 election."
Dartmouth political scientist Brendan Nyhan expressed even greater alarm.
"The last time he started talking like this, his allies minimized the risks and we ended up with January 6," he warned, referring to the deadly riots carried out by Trump supporters on the US Capitol that sent lawmakers running for their lives. "This time we must take him literally and seriously. These comments are a five-alarm fire for democracy. In a functioning republic, he would be impeached and removed from office today."
Trump's comments come as Republicans in Congress push a bill that would enable massive voter purges, impose photo ID requirements, and ban ranked-choice voting, universal mail-in ballots, and the acceptance of mailed ballots that arrive after Election Day.
The Bureau of Land Management is seeking nominations for which parts of ANWR's Coastal Plane should be offered up to fossil fuel companies for potential drilling.
The Trump administration on Monday took the first step toward holding controversial oil and gas lease sales in the Coastal Plane of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
The Bureau of Land Management announced on Monday that it was seeking nominations for which parts of ANWR's Coastal Plane should be offered up to fossil fuel companies for potential drilling, fulfilling a mandate passed by the US Senate in late 2025. However, the move goes against the wishes of Indigenous people who consider the plane sacred as well as conservationists, scientists, and many members of the American public who value US public lands for their beauty and wildlife.
“People have worked together for decades to defend the Arctic Refuge, because this unique landscape is too special to be sacrificed to the oil industry for profit," Earthjustice managing attorney Erik Grafe said in a statement. "Tripling down on oil development in the Arctic takes us in exactly the wrong direction in our existential fight to curb climate change and protect these critically important public lands."
The sales would continue US President Donald Trump's push to increase oil and gas production, including in Alaska, ramping up an agenda that has dominated both of his terms. The Senate's action in 2025 followed an October decision by the Department of the Interior (DOI) to open the Coastal Plane to drilling, overriding Biden-era protections. The DOI, led by pro-fossil fuel Doug Burgum, also reversed Biden administration protections for Alaska's Western Arctic.
"The Arctic Refuge is no place for drilling."
"The Trump administration spent 2025 waging an all-out assault on public lands in Alaska’s Arctic, while ignoring the voices of Indigenous communities that hold these lands sacred and jeopardizing the survival of Arctic wildlife," Grafe said. "We’ve already taken steps to challenge Interior’s overall leasing plan for the Arctic Refuge in court, and we’re prepared to continue the fight as this lease sale process grinds on.”
The Trump administration's plan for the Arctic faces wide opposition—public comments on nominations for portions of the Western Arctic to lease featured tens of thousands of calls for protection rather than exploitation.
However, opponents of the plan also noted it may not be as popular with the industry as Trump hopes. Lease sales in ANWR in 2021 and 2024 received little interest from oil and gas companies, with the latter not receiving a single bid.
“The Trump administration is hung up on oil and gas leasing in the Arctic Refuge because they cannot admit that the original Trump leasing plan—established following the 2017 Tax Act—was a complete and utter failure,” said Kristen Moreland, executive director of the Gwich’in Steering Committee, in a statement.
The Alaska Wilderness League appealed to the industry itself, noting that the area has some of the highest production costs on the continent while being an increasingly difficult place to work due to extreme weather and other changes caused by the climate crisis, an uncertain regulatory environment, competition from cheaper forms of renewable energy, and the fact that many Americans do not support drilling in the Arctic.
“Serious companies don’t gamble their future on the most remote, expensive, and controversial oil on Earth from one of the most unparalleled ecosystems left on this planet,” said league executive director Kristen Miller. “If companies are still looking to drill the Arctic Refuge in 2026, it’s a sign that they can’t read the writing on the wall: Smart money has already walked away.”
But whatever the decision of the oil and gas industry, Indigenous communities and their allies are determined to fight for the land that is home to polar bears, millions of birds, and the Porcupine caribou herd.
“We condemn these actions, and encourage officials in the Trump administration—and our representatives in the Alaska delegation—to acknowledge and accept what we as Gwich’in know, and what the majority of the American people agree on: The Arctic Refuge is no place for drilling," Moreland continued. "It deserves to be protected and preserved for the wildlife that depend on it, and for all our futures.”