

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.

Cat Lazaroff, Defenders of Wildlife, (202) 772-3270
Defenders of Wildlife has learned that the
Department of the Interior plans to announce today that it will let slip a
chance to ensure that threatened polar bears receive all the vital protections
they need under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
In March, Congress passed
a bill giving the Interior Department the extraordinary authority to immediately
overturn two Bush-era rules that undermined endangered species protections,
including one that weakened requirements for scientific consultation under the
ESA, and another that limited protections for the
polar bear. The bill gave Interior Secretary Ken Salazar 60 days to withdraw the
rules and immediately reinstate the more protective rules that were in place
before the Bush administration changed them.
Secretary Salazar used
that authority to overturn the damaging consultation regulations on May 4.
However, he has failed to use the authority Congress gave him to restore
protections to the threatened polar bear.
"We're very disappointed
that Secretary Salazar decided not to cut through the red tape and restore
protections for polar bears immediately," said Jamie Rappaport Clark, executive
vice president of Defenders of Wildlife and a former director of the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service. "The polar bear's Arctic sea ice habitat is melting away,
the Arctic seals which polar bears hunt for food are becoming increasingly
scarce, and the cause is clearly global warming. In spite of this, Secretary
Salazar is leaving in place a rule that says activities that cause global
warming and therefore harm polar bears will never be considered violations of
the Endangered Species Act under any circumstances. That made no sense under the
Bush administration and it certainly makes no sense for the Obama
administration."
Defenders of Wildlife has
challenged the polar bear rule in federal court to ensure that the polar bear,
which was listed as "threatened" under the ESA on May 14,
2008, receives the
protection necessary for its conservation, the standard required by the
ESA. With today's decision leaving polar bears with
only limited protection, Defenders will be forced to continue its litigation
challenging the rule.
"It is categorically not
true to say that the Marine Mammal Protection Act provides sufficient
protections for the polar bear, and the Interior Department should know that. We
will do everything we can to ensure that the Obama administration gives the
polar bear the vital protections it needs to survive," said
Clark. "The polar bear is running out of
time."
Background
Polar bears were listed
as threatened under the ESA on May 14,
2008, a move that normally
would have provided the species with protection from activities that harm the
bears themselves or their habitat. However, the Bush administration also issued
a rule under Section 4(d) of the ESA which in essence prevents the law from applying
to a variety of activities that cause global warming, the very heart of the
threat to the polar bear.
While the Bush
administration acknowledged that the polar bear warranted listing under the
ESA primarily due to the rapid melting of
its Arctic sea ice habitat caused by global warming, the 4(d) rule put
greenhouse gas polluters outside the reach of the act.
The 4(d) rule asserts
that, with respect to activities within the polar bear's current range, the
species is already adequately protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA) and the new ESA threatened status will not add to that
protection, even though the MMPA provides only limited protection for habitat.
In an attempt to preclude application of the ESA to greenhouse gas polluters such as coal-fired
power plants, the rule also directs that the incidental take prohibitions of the
ESA do not apply to any activities outside the
current range of the polar bear within the
U.S.
The polar bear is the
largest of the world's bear species and is distributed among nineteen Arctic
subpopulations - two of which, the Chukchi and the Southern Beaufort Sea
populations, are located within the United States.
Polar bears are
threatened with extinction from global warming, which is melting the Arctic sea
ice where polar bears hunt for ringed and bearded seals, their primary food
source.
The U.S. Geological
Survey has published a series of reports predicting that loss of summer sea
ice-vital habitat for polar bears-could lead to the demise of two-thirds of the
world's polar bears by mid-century, including all of Alaska's polar bears.
Read the 4(d) rule.
Learn more about what Defenders is doing to help polar bears.
Defenders of Wildlife is the premier U.S.-based national conservation organization dedicated to the protection and restoration of imperiled species and their habitats in North America.
(917) 363-4149"The new American oligarchy is here," said the CEO of Oxfam America. "Billionaires and mega-corporations are booming while working families struggle to afford housing, healthcare, and groceries."
New research published Monday shows that the 10 richest people in the United States have seen their collective fortune grow by nearly $700 billion since President Donald Trump secured a second term in the White House and rushed to deliver more wealth to the top in the form of tax cuts.
The billionaire wealth surge that has accompanied Trump's return to power is part of a decades-long, policy-driven trend of upward redistribution that has enriched the very few and devastated the working class, Oxfam America details in Unequal: The Rise of a New American Oligarchy and the Agenda We Need.
Between 1989 and 2022, the report shows, the least rich US household in the top 1% gained 987 times more wealth than the richest household in the bottom 20%.
As of last year, more than 40% of the US population was considered poor or low-income, Oxfam observed. In 2025, the share of total US assets owned by the wealthiest 0.1% reached its highest level on record: 12.6%.
The Trump administration—in partnership with Republicans in Congress—has added rocket fuel to the nation's out-of-control inequality, moving "with staggering speed and scale to carry out a relentless attack on working-class families" while using "the power of the office to enrich the wealthy and well-connected," Oxfam's new report states.
"The data confirms what people across our nation already know instinctively: The new American oligarchy is here," said Abby Maxman, president and CEO of Oxfam America. "Billionaires and mega-corporations are booming while working families struggle to afford housing, healthcare, and groceries."
"Now, the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress risk turbocharging that inequality as they wage a relentless attack on working people and bargain with livelihoods during the government shutdown," Maxman added. "But what they're doing isn't new. It's doubling down on decades of regressive policy choices. What's different is how much undemocratic power they've now amassed."
"Today, we are seeing the dark extremes of choosing inequality for 50 years."
Oxfam released its report as the Trump administration continued to illegally withhold federal nutrition assistance from tens of millions of low-income US households just months after enacting a budget law that's expected to deliver hundreds of billions of dollars in tax breaks to ultra-rich Americans and large corporations.
Given the severity of US inequality and ongoing Trump-GOP efforts to make it worse, Oxfam stressed that a bold agenda "that focuses on rebalancing power" will be necessary to reverse course.
Such an agenda would include—but not be limited to—a wealth tax on multimillionaires and billionaires, a higher corporate tax rate, a permanently expanded child tax credit, strong antitrust policy that breaks up corporate monopolies, a federal job guarantee, universal childcare, and a substantially higher minimum wage.
"Today, we are seeing the dark extremes of choosing inequality for 50 years," Elizabeth Wilkins, president and CEO of the Roosevelt Institute, wrote in her foreword to the report. "The policy priorities in this report—rebalancing power, unrigging the tax code, reimagining the social safety net, and supporting workers' rights—are all essential to creating that more inclusive and cohesive society. Together, they speak to our deepest needs as human beings: to live with security and agency, to live free from exploitation."
"Does anyone truly believe that caving in to Trump now will stop his unprecedented attacks on our democracy and working people?" asked Sen. Bernie Sanders.
US Sen. Bernie Sanders on Sunday implored his Democratic colleagues in Congress not to cave to President Donald Trump and Republicans in the ongoing government shutdown fight, warning that doing so would hasten the country's descent into authoritarianism.
In an op-ed for The Guardian, Sanders (I-Vt.) called Trump a "schoolyard bully" and argued that "anyone who thinks surrendering to him now will lead to better outcomes and cooperation in the future does not understand how a power-hungry demagogue operates."
"This is a man who threatens to arrest and jail his political opponents, deploys the US military into Democratic cities, and allows masked Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to pick people up off the streets and throw them into vans without due process," Sanders wrote. "He has sued virtually every major media outlet because he does not tolerate criticism, has extorted funds from law firms and is withholding federal funding from states that voted against him."
If Democrats capitulate, Sanders warned, Trump "will utilize his victory to accelerate his movement toward authoritarianism."
"At a time when he already has no regard for our democratic system of checks and balances," the senator wrote, "he will be emboldened to continue decimating programs that protect elderly people, children, the sick and the poor while giving more tax breaks and other benefits to his fellow oligarchs."
Sanders' op-ed came as the shutdown continued with no end in sight, with Democrats standing by their demand for an extension of Affordable Care Act (ACA) tax credits as a necessary condition for any government funding deal. Republicans have so far refused to negotiate on the ACA subsidies even as health insurance premiums skyrocket nationwide.
The Trump administration, meanwhile, is illegally withholding Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) funding from tens of millions of Americans—including millions of children—despite court rulings ordering him to release the money.
In a "60 Minutes" interview that aired Sunday, Trump again urged Republicans to nuke the 60-vote filibuster in the Senate to remove the need for Democratic support to reopen the government and advance other elements of their agenda unilaterally. Under the status quo, Republicans need the support of at least seven Democratic senators to advance a government funding package.
"The Republicans have to get tougher," Trump said. "If we end the filibuster, we can do exactly what we want. We're not going to lose power."
Congressional Democrats have faced some pressure from allies, most notably the head of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), to cut a deal with Republicans to end the shutdown and alleviate the suffering it has inflicted on federal workers and many others.
But Democrats appear unmoved by the AFGE president's demand, and other labor leaders have since voiced support for the minority party's effort to secure an extension of ACA subsidies.
"We're urging our Democratic friends to hold the line," said Jaime Contreras, executive vice president of the 185,000-member Service Employees International Union Local 32BJ.
In his op-ed on Sunday, Sanders asked, "Does anyone truly believe that caving in to Trump now will stop his unprecedented attacks on our democracy and working people?"
"If the Democrats cave now, it would be a betrayal of the millions of Americans who have fought and died for democracy and our Constitution," the senator wrote. "It would be a sellout of a working class that is struggling to survive in very difficult economic times. Democrats in Congress are the last remaining opposition to Trump's quest for absolute power. To surrender now would be an historic tragedy for our country, something that history will not look kindly upon."
"Can't follow the law when a judge says fund the program, but have to follow the rules exactly when they say don't help poor people afford food," one lawyer said.
As the Trump administration continued its illegal freeze on food assistance, the US Department of Agriculture sent a warning to grocery stores not to provide discounts to the more than 42 million Americans affected.
Several grocery chains and food delivery apps have announced in recent days that they would provide substantial discounts to those whose Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits have been delayed. More than 1 in 8 Americans rely on the program, and 39% of them are children.
But on Sunday, Catherine Rampell, a reporter at the Washington Post published an email from the USDA that was sent to grocery stores around the country, telling them they were prohibited from offering special discounts to those at greater risk of food insecurity due to the cuts.
"You must offer eligible foods at the same prices and on the same terms and conditions to SNAP-EBT customers as other customers, except that sales tax cannot be charged on SNAP purchases," the email said. "You cannot treat SNAP-EBT customers differently from any other customer. Offering discounts or services only to SNAP-eligible customers is a SNAP violation unless you have a SNAP equal treatment waiver."
The email referred to SNAP's "Equal Treatment Rule," which prohibits stores from discriminating against SNAP recipients by charging them higher prices or treating them more favorably than other customers by offering them specialized sales or incentives.
Rampell said she was "aware of at least two stores that had offered struggling customers a discount, then withdrew it after receiving this email."
She added that it was "understandable why grocery stores might be scared off" because "a store caught violating the prohibition could be denied the ability to accept SNAP benefits in the future. In low-income areas where the SNAP shutdown will have the biggest impact, getting thrown off SNAP could mean a store is no longer financially viable."
While the rule prohibits special treatment in either direction, legal analyst Jeffrey Evan Gold argues that it was a "perverted interpretation of a rule that stops grocers from price gouging SNAP recipients... charging them more when they use food stamps."
The government also notably allows retailers to request waivers for programs that incentivize SNAP recipients to purchase healthy food.
Others pointed out that SNAP is currently not paying out to Americans because President Donald Trump is defying multiple federal court rulings issued Friday, requiring him to tap a $6 billion contingency fund to ensure benefit payments go out. Both courts, in Massachusetts and Rhode Island, have said his administration's refusal to pay out benefits is against the law.
One labor movement lawyer summed up the administration's position on social media: "Can't follow the law when a judge says fund the program, but have to follow the rules exactly when they say don't help poor people afford food."