

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.
Kristin Schafer 415-981-1771
Heather Pilatic 415-694-8596
Hundreds of government officials, industry groups, and public interest observers will
gather next week in Geneva to assess global progress on phasing out a set of
dangerous chemicals. Many are looking to the new U.S. Administration to demonstrate
renewed leadership in international efforts to address these priority pollutants.
"For toxic chemicals, this is the Obama Administration's debut on the international
stage," says Daryl Ditz of the Center for International Environmental Law. "The world
will be watching for signals that the U.S. will emerge as a strong leader, committed to
protecting children and future generations from chemical contamination."
Governments that are party to the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic
Pollutants (POPs) will convene May 4-8 for the fourth Conference of the Parties, or
COP-4. The treaty sets global phase out schedules for a targeted list of toxic chemicals
that build up in the food supply, accumulate in the tissue of humans and other animals,
persist in the environment for years and travel the globe on wind and water currents.
Under President Bush, the United States signed but never ratified the treaty, yet
participated in meetings as an active and influential observer.
A key focus of the Geneva meeting will be adding other pollutants to the original list of
12 POPs, which includes dioxins, PCBs, DDT, and others. An international scientific
review panel has recommended adding nine new chemicals to the treaty - each
warranting global action because of the danger they pose to human health and the
environment. Governments will now decide whether use of these chemicals will be
banned worldwide. Some of the chemicals being considered for addition include
pentabromodiphenyl ether, pentachlorobenzene, chlordecone and perfluorooctane
sulfonic acid (see below for link to full list).
The organochlorine pesticide lindane, nominated for addition to the treaty by Mexico,
provides one test for the Obama Administration. Lindane's agricultural uses were
withdrawn in the U.S. in 2006, with its only remaining uses now being pharmaceutical
shampoos and lotions to control lice and scabies. Under the Bush Administration, the
U.S. government pressed for an exemption to allow continued pharmaceutical use of
lindane, while most other countries supported a full phaseout of the pesticide.
"We've heard the U.S. position on lindane is shifting under the new Administration to
support phaseout of all uses," says Kristin Schafer of Pesticide Action Network. "This is
very good news - lindane production is extremely dirty, lindane-based products are
unnecessary and can be dangerous, and other countries have been using safer
alternatives for years."
California phased out pharmaceutical uses of lindane in 2001, and Michigan is
considering similar restrictions. While the United States is expected to support listing of
lindane in the POPs Convention with no exemptions, the Food and Drug Administration
still allows pharmaceutical use here.
"Persistent chemicals like lindane are contaminating the Arctic environment and
poisoning the traditional foods of indigenous communities," says Shawna Larson-
Carmen of Alaska Community Action on Toxics, who will be coordinating a delegation of
indigenous leaders at the Geneva meeting. "The United States must act now to phase
out use of these chemicals here at home and support a global ban as well. POPs
chemicals pose a serious threat to the health of families and communities that don't
even use them - addressing this injustice has been a core purpose of the Stockholm
Convention from the beginning."
Governments will also report in Geneva on progress toward phasing out the use of DDT
for malaria control. The iconic pesticide has been targeted for phaseout under the
treaty, with a limited exemption for malaria control under WHO guidelines for those
countries that demonstrate a need for its continued use. The international community
is encouraged to help those countries battling malaria to reduce their reliance on DDT
spraying by adopting more sustainable, effective solutions.
The Stockholm Convention meeting in Geneva will be immediately followed by another
important international chemical policy meeting, the International Conference on
Chemicals Management. Observers will closely watch positions of the United States in
this forum as well.
Available for interviews from the Geneva meeting
(email to arrange phone interviews):
Karl Tupper, Staff Scientist, Pesticide Action Network North America, karl@panna.org
Pam Miller, Executive Director, Alaska Community Action on Toxics,
pkmiller@akaction.net
Shawna Larson-Carmen, Environmental Justice Director at Alaska Community Action on
Toxics and staff member of Resisting Environmental Destruction on Indigenous Lands,
shawna@akaction.org
Daryl Ditz, Ph.D., Senior Policy Advisor, Center for International Environmental Law,
dditz@ciel.org
Joseph DiGangi, Ph.D., Director, Global Chemical Safety Program, Environmental Health
Fund, digangi@environmentalhealthfund.org
Resources:
Stockholm Convention documents re: recommended new chemicals:
https://chm.pops.int/Convention/POPsReviewCommittee/Recommendationsofthe...
/tabid/440/language/en-US/Default.aspx
Pesticide Action Network information on lindane: www.panna.org/lindane
CIEL information on persistent organic pollutants and Stockholm Convention:
https://www.ciel.org/Chemicals/chem_POPs.html
New report: Persistent Organic Pollutants in the Arctic: https://www.akaction.org
Pesticide Action Network information on DDT use for malaria control, including
Pesticide Action Network Germany report on DDT and the Stockholm Convention:
www.panna.org/ddt
PANNA (Pesticide Action Network North America) works to replace pesticide use with ecologically sound and socially just alternatives. As one of five autonomous PAN Regional Centers worldwide, we link local and international consumer, labor, health, environment and agriculture groups into an international citizens' action network. This network challenges the global proliferation of pesticides, defends basic rights to health and environmental quality, and works to ensure the transition to a just and viable society.
Content creator María Teresa Felipe Sosa hailed Cubans as "a people who refuse to submit to the true regime of horror, which the United States represents, as it goes around starting wars throughout the world."
As the team at Tehran-based Explosive Media keeps churning out viral artificial intelligence-generated Lego-style animated videos condemning the US-Israeli war on Iran, a Cuban version of the clips reacting to President Donald Trump's threats to attack the island appeared Monday on social media.
First posted by Havana art historian and digital content creator María Teresa Felipe Sosa, the video was shared by users including US investigative journalist Ryan Grim and Explosive Media, which added, "Welcome to the #LRF Cuba," or Lego Resistance Front.
"The threat that Cuba represents to the United States is the dignity and principles of a people who refuse to submit to the true regime of horror, which the United States represents, as it goes around starting wars throughout the world," Felipe said Tuesday on social media.
According to the video's lyrics:
They seek to stifle the lifeblood of this land with the talons of empire and the drums of war, from the north they unleash their poisonous breath seeking to seize what belongs to others. But this soil has roots of steel and a people who cannot be bought with money.
They raise walls of hatred and lies while the island, relying on its own strength, breathes amid 60 years of constant hostile siege—yet we continue to march forward with a firm step. There is no threat that can break our faith; the Cuban knows well how to stand tall.
Here dignity has neither price nor master; we are the guardians of our own dream. My people, stand tall, with fists held high against the invader and their dark assault.
There's no surrender beneath this burning sun, for it's known that the homeland must be defended. Resist my brother with your head held high for every victory in the battle-hardened struggle, your love is the compass of our people, for you know that the homeland must be defended.
The video comes amid more than 65 years of US-based terrorism, assassination attempts, and a tightened economic embargo targeting Cuba, as well as Trump's threats to attack or "take" the island. Despite extreme hardship caused or exacerbated by these internationally condemned policies, the Cuban people have been resolute in their resistance to US aggression.
With no victory in sight in the US-Israeli war on Iran and the American people increasingly wary of yet another war of choice waged by the self-described "president of peace" who's now attacked 10 countries over the course of his two terms in office, even some Republican lawmakers are warning Trump against attacking Cuba.
Asked if he would support such an attack, Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) told The Hill on Tuesday, "No, I would not."
"There’s a lot of economic pressure you can put on Cuba that makes a big difference by itself,” the hawkish senator added.
Numerous Democratic lawmakers have consistently opposed any attack on Cuba; however Democratic Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) recently helped sink a Senate war powers resolution aimed at blocking Trump from attacking the country.
More than 6 in 10 Americans surveyed by multiple pollsters in recent months said they oppose a US war on Cuba.
Responding to the renewed US menace under Trump, Felipe recently wrote that "the current threats aren't anything new, they only confirm a dangerous insistence—that of replacing international law with the law of the strongest."
"In the face of that, Cuba responds with an uncomfortable and persistent idea—its people does not give up," she continued. "Cuba is not seeking confrontation. It demands respect. And history, although some prefer to ignore it, has been clear—independence is not negotiated under threat."
"Once again," Felipe added, "and against all imperial odds, Cuba will win."
"These numbers tell the real story," said one campaigner. "His administration has failed to address—and in many cases, worsened—an historic cost-of-living crisis that is crushing everyday Americans."
While inflation hit a three-year high on Tuesday and President Donald Trump publicly confessed that he doesn't consider how his illegal war on Iran impacts Americans' finances, a Federal Reserve bank revealed that US household debt has risen to a record high of $18.8 trillion.
The Federal Reserve Bank of New York's Center for Microeconomic Data found that household debt increased by $18 billion in the first quarter of this year.
It specifically found that by the end of March, mortgage balances increased by $21 billion to $13.19 trillion, home equity line of credit balances jumped by $12 billion to $446 billion, and automobile loan balances rose by $18 billion to $1.69 trillion.
The center further found that "while student loan balances remained essentially flat, decreasing by $6 billion and standing at $1.66 trillion," the delinquency rate "increased to 10.3% of balances 90+ days delinquent, up from the 9.6%" in the last quarter of 2025.
The analysis notes that credit card balances dropped by $25 billion to $1.25 trillion, a seasonal decline that generally occurs after the winter holidays. However, in its coverage of the New York Fed's findings, CNBC highlighted another report out Tuesday that shows how Americans are struggling with current economic conditions.
As CNBC detailed:
More than half—53%—of consumers carry credit card balances to cover essential expenses, according to a report released Tuesday by debt management company Achieve.
"For many households, higher balances are less a sign of economic optimism and more a sign that wages and savings are struggling to keep pace with essential expenses like groceries, utilities, and housing," Austin Kilgore, analyst for the Achieve Center for Consumer Insights, said in a statement.
Among respondents in Achieve's survey of 2,000 consumers, 57% of borrowers said it would take six months or longer to pay off all their credit card debt.
According to ABC News, "On a call with reporters Tuesday morning, researchers at the New York Fed described Americans' overall credit as 'stable,' but noted there are weaknesses among younger consumers and lower-income households."
Mike Pierce, co-founder and executive director of the advocacy group Protect Borrowers, was far more scathing, declaring in a statement that "working families are at a breaking point and desperately need relief. Instead, President Trump is bragging about his plans for a new White House ballroom while his head economist touts families' surging debts as a sign of a booming economy."
"These numbers tell the real story: Trump's economy has driven up costs," Pierce continued. "His administration has failed to address—and in many cases, worsened—an historic cost-of-living crisis that is crushing everyday Americans under stagnant wages and rampant price gouging by grocery conglomerates, data centers, corporate landlords, and private equity firms."
"Making matters worse, Trump's war with Iran is pushing inflation to record levels and forcing Americans to feel the economic pain at the pump," he added, as gasoline prices topped $4.50 a gallon on Tuesday. "It is clear that President Trump is not only failing to 'Make America Affordable Again' but is actively pushing millions of families further into the red."
Last week, Pierce's group and The Century Foundation published an analysis about soaring US auto loan debt. Report co-author and Protect Borrowers senior fellow Tara Mikkilineni said at the time that "for millions of working families, a car is not a luxury, it is an essential economic lifeline. Working families deserve relief, and they deserve to have a government that is watching out for them, not allowing lenders and auto dealers to rake in record profits at their expense."
Meanwhile, Trump—who is facing intense disapproval from the US public, particularly regarding the economy—has repeatedly made clear he doesn't care how his policies, from sweeping tariffs to the Iran War, impact Americans' pocketbooks.
Trump's assault prompted Iran to restrict ship traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, a key trade route, which has driven up the prices of fossil fuels worldwide. Speaking with journalists outside the White House last month, Trump suggested that $4 a gallon for gas is "not very high."
Asked about the war's impact on the US public's finances again on Tuesday, Trump said that "the only thing that matters when I'm talking about Iran—they can't have a nuclear weapon. I don't think about Americans' financial situation. I don't think about anybody. I think about one thing—we cannot let Iran have a nuclear weapon. That's all."
Those remarks came just hours after the latest consumer price index from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, which shows that prices increased by 3.8% on an annual basis in April—above economists' expected 3.7% jump—and the cost of living rose above average monthly wage gains. Various experts responded by taking aim at the president.
University of Michigan economist Justin Wolfers said that "Trump campaigned on bringing down the cost of living 'starting on day one,' and then: started a trade war; deported much of the farm workforce, bombed Iran, allowed healthcare subsidies to expire, cut food assistance, ran an interest-rate boosting deficit, and attacked Fed independence."
Sen. Jeff Merkley called the project “nothing more than a massive giveaway to defense contractors paid for entirely by working Americans.”
The Congressional Budget Office on Tuesday released a report estimating that President Donald Trump's proposed "Golden Dome" missile defense system would cost $1.2 trillion to create, deploy, and operate over the first 20 years of its existence.
The CBO report projects that acquisition costs for the proposed national missile defense (NMD) system would account for the vast majority of the $1.2 trillion total, including "costs for the system’s major components—namely, the interceptor layers and a space-based missile warning and tracking system."
In fact, the report says that the NMD system's space-based interceptor layer will be so expensive that it "accounts for about 70% of acquisition costs and 60% of total costs."
The CBO also questioned whether this massive investment would successfully protect the US from a foreign missile attack.
"Although the notional NMD system... would be far more capable than defenses the United States fields today," the report states, "it would not be an impenetrable shield or be able to fully counter a large attack of the sort that Russia or China might be able to launch."
"The strategic consequences of deploying an NMD system with the capacity considered here are unclear," the report continues, "because they hinge on an adversary’s perception of the defense's capability and how that adversary chose to respond."
The CBO's estimate on the missile system's cost was nearly seven times the projection Trump made last year, when he said it would cost just $175 billion.
And because the US Department of Defense still hasn't delivered key details about the proposed system, the CBO wrote, it is currently "impossible to estimate the long-term cost" of the initiative.
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), a longtime critic of the "Golden Dome" proposal, said the CBO report shows the Trump-backed project is "nothing more than a massive giveaway to defense contractors paid for entirely by working Americans."
"Just like the president’s symbolic renaming of the Department of Defense or deploying National Guard troops to our cities," added Merkley, who is the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, "this move to fund the ‘Golden Dome’ will be far more effective at squandering money than protecting American lives."
The Oregon Democrat vowed to "continue to work with my colleagues in the Senate to prevent another dime from flowing to this racket."
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), also a longtime critic of the president's proposed missile system, wrote in a social media post that "Trump’s Golden Dome is a $1.2 trillion golden sieve that won’t stop a nuclear attack, but will balloon the deficit and boost the bottom lines of billionaires."
Tommy Vietor, former National Security Council staffer under President Barack Obama and current co-host of Pod Save America, was even blunter in his criticism of the "Golden Dome" plan.
"$1.2 TRILLION for this dumb fucking Golden Dome missile defense system," he wrote in a social media post. "The initial estimate was $175 billion! Madness. No one wants this."
Daniel Larison, contributing editor at Antiwar.com and former senior editor at The American Conservative magazine, wrote that the CBO report exposed Trump's dome as a "trillion-dollar boondoggle."
Trump has said that he was inspired to develop such a missile system after being impressed by Israel’s “Iron Dome," despite the fact that Israel has a vastly smaller landmass to defend compared to the US and has historically faced far more danger from missile and rocket attacks.