

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.
Jim Puckett: 206-354-0391; Sarah Westervelt: 206-604-9024
 The toxic waste watchdog organization, the Basel Action Network
                  (BAN), is warning consumers to be extremely careful about where they take their
                  old TVs for recycling following the nationwide conversion from
                  analog-to-digital broadcasting.  They are urging consumers to only use qualified
                  e-Steward recyclers, the only list identifying electronic waste recyclers that
                  will not export toxic TVs and other electronic waste to a developing country.   
                  After today when many Americans wake up to no TV
signal without a special converter box, cable or satellite, many will
make the choice to finally upgrade their old "cathode ray tube" TV to a
slick new flat screen TV.   Their old TV is obsolete and now a waste
object for disposal, and smart consumers may believe that recycling is
a better choice than placing it in a dumpster or at the curbside.    
But BAN warns that currently, due to a lack of legislation forbidding
such trade,  about 80% of those companies calling themselves
"recyclers" in North America will simply export your old TV to
countries like China, India, or Nigeria where the toxic leaded glass,
cadmium, and brominated flame retardants which are found in materials
in old TVs will poison villagers using primitive technologies to recover some materials, and then dump or burn the rest of the electronic waste.(1)    
"There are few regulations in place and the ones that do exist are easily
                  circumvented.  So many of these so-called recyclers take your TV or computer
                  for free, or pocket your environmental fee, and then just turn around and ship
                  your old TV to China or Vietnam," said Sarah Westervelt e-Stewardship
                  Director at BAN. "There, our old entertainment devices end up causing misery
                  and disease, and ultimately contaminate the entire planet, distributing lead,
                  mercury, and cadmium into the ecosphere - not a good plan for anyone,
                  anywhere." 
                  It has been conservatively estimated by some recyclers that due to the digital
                  conversion, about one in four households will get rid of a TV this year.   If
                  that is true, it would mean 27,790,564 TVs, each containing an average of 5
                  pounds of lead, will be disposed or recycled.   And with 80% of this total
                  shunted offshore to developing countries, about 56,000 tons of toxic lead alone
                  would be transferred and dumped on some of the world's poorest communties. 
                  In 2002 and 2005, BAN released two documentary films, Exporting Harm and The Digital Dump,
shining a spotlight on the horrors of the global e-waste trade and its
very damaging impacts of toxic constituents in electronic products on
the workers and environments of communities in Africa and China.   Last
year they went with CBS's 60 Minutes program to China and
found the devastation of the environment from imported e-waste had
gotten far worse. Recent studies in Guiyu, China, ground zero of the
international waste trade, show some of the highest levels of dioxin,
lead and other cancer-causing pollutants ever recorded.   Lead in the
blood of 80 percent of the Guiyu's children is dangerously high and
already demonstrable brain impairment has been recorded.
                  
                  A
2008 report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) condemned the
EPA for not having comprehensive rules to control e-waste exports and
poorly enforcing the one law that does exist for TVs and Computer
monitors known as the "CRT Rule".(2)   Since then, the EPA has begun
welcomed enforcement of that rule, but unfortunately the law contains
loopholes, exempting much of the leaded glass from regulation.   BAN,
together with the Electronics TakeBack Coalition (ETBC), is currently
seeking national legislation to ban the export of all toxic e-waste
(not just CRTs) to developing countries as all European countries have
already done.(3)   And BAN has created the e-Stewards Initiative - a
list of responsible e-cyclers* that have agreed not to export hazardous
e-wastes to developing countries. 
                  "The
current legislative landscape is a haven for 'waste cowboys' that use
developing countries as global dumping grounds when there is a profit
to be made," said Jim Puckett, BAN's Executive Director.  "The e-Stewards are ethical recyclers that will not export toxic e-Waste under the false pretext of recycling or reuse." 
Photos, research and documentation available:
Photographs available at: www.ban.org/photogallery/ and others upon request.
                  *For a list of e-Steward Recyclers: www.e-Stewards.org. 
                  The e-Stewards recyclers are currently subject to significant desk
                  audits, verifying all of their downstream destinations throughout the
                  recycling chain of toxic wastes, as defined internationally.  However,
                  the program will soon become an accredited, third party audited,
                  certification program.  For more information check the website above. 
For more information on illegal and irresponsible e-waste export: www.ban.org
Basel Action Network's mission is to champion global environmental health and justice by ending toxic trade, catalyzing a toxics-free future, and campaigning for everyone's right to a clean environment.
"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."