

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.

Raviya Ismail, Earthjustice, (202) 667-4500, ext. 221
A 60 Minutes investigation Sunday night underscored the danger of coal ash and the need for federal regulation of the toxic, hazardous substance. While the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recently revealed crucial data about 584 coal ash dump states across the country -- data the agency released after Earthjustice and other environmental groups filed Freedom of Information Act requests -- they have yet to regulate the mix of toxic pollutants and leave that up to states. Earthjustice attorney Lisa Evans has spent the last decade tracking this issue:
"60 Minutes revealed to a national television audience what we've been stating for years: plain and simple, coal ash is dangerous and must be regulated. Releasing information about these sites is an important first step but we need strict monitoring and regulation of coal ash to protect communities across the country from another disaster like the TVA spill in Tennessee.
"With news reports digging up the dirty truth on these sites, we're hopeful the EPA will follow suit with appropriate regulation. Just last month, the EPA finally released data on 584 coal ash ponds in 35 states. The data show that there is capacity in these aging ponds to store enough toxic ash to flow continually over Niagara Falls for three days straight, or fill up over 700 Empire State buildings. That coal ash remains unregulated is a travesty we hope the Obama administration will soon resolve.
"The data reveal that the majority of dump sites are nearly four decades old - at the end of their estimated life spans -- raising questions about the structural integrity of their dams. In addition, about 95% of these old ponds are unlined or inadequately lined -- thus they cannot prevent the migration of harmful chemicals to drinking water. The data also reveal that regulatory inspections of these dams by state and federal agencies are infrequent or non-existent. These conditions pose real threats that the utility industry has refused to admit and that the EPA must now address."
Some quick facts about the 584 U.S. coal ash ponds:
Total surface area for 495 coal ash ponds: 29,350 acres (this number does not include 74 large ash ponds for which no data was given due to Confidential Business Information claims made by Duke Energy and Southern Company, among others -- thus the total surface area for all coal ash ponds is significantly higher).
Coal ash in these ponds could completely cover an area twice the size of Manhattan, or the entire City of San Francisco, about 46 square miles.
Total storage in gallons for all reported coal ash ponds: 204,316,071,573.
Coal ash storage could fill up approximately 263 Dallas Cowboys stadiums with wet ash.
21 coal ash ponds are larger than the Tennessee Valley Authority site that spilled in December 2008; only one of them is less than 19 years old, and 2 of them were built in 1951. The Greene County Power Station and James H. Miller Power Station in Alabama are 5 million and 5.5 million acre feet in size, respectively--and Alabama has no laws pertaining to the disposal of coal ash in ponds.
EPA's data did not include information on the size, volume and location of the hundreds of dry coal ash dump sites throughout the U.S--which are likely to be similar in volume and size to the ponds.
The ash in these ponds is nothing like common "dirt." For example, according to the EPA's Report to Congress, the coal ash in surface impoundments leaches arsenic at a mean level 160 times the federal drinking water standard and actual arsenic leaching reached a level of 964 times that standard.
Below is a chart detailing statistics on the 584 wet ash ponds spanning 35 states:
State | # of Coal Ash Ponds | Storage Capacity: Acre Ft. | Storage Capacity: Gallons |
IN* | 53 | 1,179 | 384,178,329 |
KY* | 44 | 54,843 | 17,870,646,393 |
IA | 43 | 13,825 | 4,504,890,075 |
CO | 40 | 2,109 | 687,219,759 |
MO | 32 | 29,807 | 9,712,640,757 |
OH* | 28 | 59,830 | 19,495,665,330 |
NC* | 26 | [No Data Provided] | |
TX | 26 | 4,938 | 1,609,052,238 |
SC* | 22 | 9,398 | 3,062,347,698 |
IL | 21 | 15,754 | 5,133,456,654 |
MN | 18 | 6,083 | 1,982,151,633 |
TN | 18 | 54,214 | 17,665,686,114 |
WI | 18 | 137 | 44,641,587 |
WY | 17 | 20,497 | 6,678,967,947 |
PA* | 16 | 68 | 22,157,868 |
AZ | 15 | 21,537 | 7,017,852,987 |
AL* | 14 | 31,083 | 10,128,426,633 |
KS | 13 | 9,126 | 2,973,716,226 |
VA | 12 | 27,590 | 8,990,229,090 |
LA | 11 | 4,257 | 1,387,147,707 |
MI | 11 | 10,326 | 3,364,737,426 |
GA* | 10 | [No Data Provided] | |
WV | 10 | 19,536 | 6,365,825,136 |
FL* | 9 | 164 | 53,439,564 |
MT | 9 | 22,479 | 7,324,804,629 |
NM | 9 | 2,824 | 920,203,224 |
ND | 8 | 656 | 213,758,256 |
MA | 7 | 183,302 | 59,729,140,002 |
NY | 6 | 77 | 25,090,527 |
UT | 6 | 7,272 | 2,369,588,472 |
OK | 5 | 2,052 | 668,646,252 |
DE | 3 | 0 | 0 |
MD | 2 | [No Data Provided] | |
AR | 1 | 484 | 157,711,884 |
MS* | 1 | [No data provided] | |
TOTAL | 584 | 615,447 | 200,544,020,397 |
*Power companies in these states had Confidential Business Information claims for some or all of the coal as ponds within that state. Information about size, storage capacity, number of ponds were incomplete, confidential, or blank.
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"We cannot take those protections for granted," said Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, who helped to legalize same-sex marriage nationwide a decade ago.
In one of vanishingly few US Supreme Court rulings protecting equal rights, the majority-conservative court on Monday rejected efforts to overturn the decade-old precedent of marriage equality.
Without issuing a comment, the court denied an appeal from Kim Davis, the former Kentucky county clerk who was ordered to pay $360,000 in compensation after she refused to issue a marriage license to a same-sex couple in defiance of the precedent set by the 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision.
Amid a flurry of rulings that have rolled back sexual and reproductive freedom in other realms—including for the LGBTQ+ community—the court's refusal to hear Davis' appeal was considered a small but still invigorating victory.
“The bar is in hell,” wrote Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz on social media. “But this is a win for decency and compassion.”
The ruling came as a relief to advocates for equal rights, who long feared that marriage equality might soon become the next target as the conservative movement grows increasingly hostile to the LGBTQ+ community.
In 2022, as the court's right-wing majority overturned the right to an abortion in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization case, the archconservative Justice Clarence Thomas signaled in a concurring opinion that it should be the start of efforts to fully revise the court's recognition of "substantive due process," that is, the recognition of rights not explicitly granted by the US Constitution.
He questioned not just the right of same-sex couples to marry, but the court’s entire recognition of the right to privacy established by the 1965 Griswold v. Connecticut ruling, which has been the basis for rulings against bans on homosexual relationships and the right to contraception.
Thomas was one of the four conservative justices who dissented from the majority's ruling in Obergefell. Two others—Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito—also still serve on the court. The other three conservative justices who have been appointed since, all by President Donald Trump during his first term—Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett—have remained relatively coy on how they’d rule if marriage equality were to come back up, though they have sided with conservatives in cases that pitted religious liberty against discrimination protections for LGBTQ+ people.
In 2023, the six conservatives ruled that a Christian web designer was allowed to decline services to same-sex weddings, overturning a Colorado law that banned discrimination against gay people. Notably, the designer who brought the case had not actually been asked to design a website for any gay couple, but the court's right-wing majority accepted her case regardless.
This apparent zealousness to intervene in favor of discrimination appeared to be a red flag, but as Harvard University law professor Noah Feldman wrote for Bloomberg, Monday's ruling "is best read as a signal that the conservative majority has little interest in revisiting gay marriage," even as "the conservative constitutional revolution at the Supreme Court remains underway."
He notes that just four justices are required for a case to be heard by the court. And while it has aggressively rolled back the rights of transgender people, ended affirmative action, and recognized unprecedented executive authority for President Donald Trump, when it comes to same-sex marriage, "their silence is noteworthy."
Public support for marriage equality has grown considerably in the decade since Obergefell. In July 2015, a month after the court legalized same-sex marriage nationwide, 58% of Americans said in a Gallup poll that they agreed that same- sex couples should have the same rights as opposite-sex pairs. That number ballooned to a high of 71% in 2023, and even as attacks on LGBTQ+ people have ratcheted up intensely within the conservative movement, support for marriage equality remains stubbornly steady—68% of Americans still say gay marriages should be valid.
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, who represented two of the plaintiffs in the 2015 case, said that while she welcomes the court's decision Monday not to erode the hard-won rights of gay people further, advocates should not become complacent.
"I am relieved for today’s decision reaffirming same-sex couples’ continued right to dignity and protection under the law, but we cannot take those protections for granted," Nessel said in a news release. “Members of this Supreme Court have already told us they are willing to overturn Obergefell. It’s only a matter of time before they do.”
Her state of Michigan is one of more than two dozen in which same-sex marriage would become illegal or face restrictions if Obergefell is overturned. She said that Monday's decision "allows us a reprieve, an opportunity to bring our state Constitution into alignment with the protections our residents are entitled to and have enjoyed for more than a decade. Now is the time to act."
The GOP "should evaluate whether Trump’s push to ignite a redistricting arms race may have made it easier for a blue wave to wipe out more Republicans than if they had left their maps alone," wrote one analyst.
President Donald Trump's push for mid-decade redistricting to prevent Republicans from losing control of the US House of Representatives appears to be on the verge of backfiring.
The latest blow to Trump's nationwide redistricting efforts came in Utah, where District Court Judge Dianna Gibson shot down a proposed map drawn by Utah Republicans because it failed to abide by a 2018 ballot measure that restricted partisan gerrymandering in the state.
As reported by NBC News, Gibson instead approved a map that created "a solidly Democratic seat ahead of next year's midterm elections," thus giving Democrats a likely net gain of one seat in the US House.
Democratic National Committee Chairman Ken Martin hailed Gibson's ruling and vowed that Democrats weren't finished fighting Trump's efforts to rig next year's elections in his favor.
"Utah Republicans gerrymandered the maps because they knew they were losing power in the state," he said. "Republicans doubled down when they chose to submit another gerrymandered map, but today, they were once again thwarted by impartial Courts. Democrats will continue to fight for fair maps in Utah, regardless of what Donald Trump and Utah Republicans try next. Every seat counts, and Democrats everywhere are fired up and ready to take back the House in the midterms in 2026."
Dave Wasserman, a senior elections analyst at Cook Political Report, wrote in a post on X that the Democrats' Utah victory, along with California voters' approval of newly gerrymandered maps and reported plans to redraw maps in Virginia, have "pushed the mid-decade redistricting war closer to a draw."
In a lengthy analysis published in Bloomberg on Tuesday, columnist Mary Ellen Klas argued that Republicans should take a deep breath before going all-in on Trump's unprecedented mid-decade redistricting crusade, which began in Texas and subsequently spread to Missouri and North Carolina.
The issue, Klas explained, is that Republicans in those states have carved out more GOP-friendly districts based on assumptions that Republican gains among Latino voters and young men would hold in 2026. As last week's sweeping Democratic victories showed, however, the GOP now appears to be hemorrhaging support among these two demographics.
"In New Jersey, 68% of Latino voters broke for Democrat Mikie Sherrill," wrote Klas. "So did 56% of men under the age of 30. In Virginia, 67% of Latino voters went for Democrat Abigail Spanberger. So did 57% of men under 30. Many of these voters had voted for Trump last year. The exit polls show that both Sherrill and Spanberger won 7% of Trump’s 2024 voters, with Sherrill getting a whopping 18% of Trump’s Hispanic support in the state."
If those trends hold over the next year, it could wipe out advantages the GOP had hoped to gain with its Texas gerrymander, which assumed that Latino voters who swung to Trump in the state would remain loyal partisan soldiers.
"Republicans are hardly going to admit it, but they should evaluate whether Trump’s push to ignite a redistricting arms race may have made it easier for a blue wave to wipe out more Republicans than if they had left their maps alone," argued Klass.
In fact, some Republican strategists are already fretting about Trump's gerrymandering plan, as one anonymous GOP insider told NBC News that if the endgame of the plan was "to net one seat across the country, then it will not have been worth it."
A second anonymous GOP insider told NBC that there was "some concern" about whether Texas Republicans may have made themselves more vulnerable to a blue wave next year.
"In Texas, I do think there is some sense those seats will be ours, but nothing is guaranteed, so some concern there," they said.
"Tragically, eight Democrats caved," said Sen. Bernie Sanders. "But the struggle continues. Short term, we must not allow health care premiums to double for more than 20 million Americans."
Millions of Americans hoping for legislative action to prevent their health insurance premiums from skyrocketing will find no reprieve in the all-but-finalized deal to end the federal government shutdown.
The agreement, supported by eight Democratic senators with the tacit approval of Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), includes nothing concrete regarding the enhanced Affordable Care Act tax credits that help more than 20 million Americans afford health insurance.
Rather, Democrats secured a pledge from the Senate Republican leadership to hold a vote on the tax credits next month—a vote that's almost certain to fail amid GOP opposition. Even if a tax credit extension passed the Senate, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has refused to commit to a vote.
That leaves millions of people across the United States facing massive premium increases; in some congressional districts, monthly costs could surge more than 600%.
"The fact is that if Republicans and the president refuse to extend the premium tax credit enhancements, millions of people will face astronomical premium increases, including small business owners, young adults, and workers without affordable employer coverage," said Sharon Parrott, president of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP).
"Many will decide that they can't afford to sign up for coverage at all; that's why the Congressional Budget Office projects that nearly 4 million people will become uninsured," Parrott added.
In an analysis released last week, CBPP emphasized that "people with lower incomes will tend to face the largest percentage increases in premium costs" if the ACA tax credits are allowed to lapse at the end of the year.
A family of four with an annual income of $66,000, according to CBPP, will see monthly insurance premiums rise from $121 to $373 in 2026. That amounts to $3,204 extra for next year—a price many will be unable to afford.
“I have to face the reality that I am probably going to become a late-stage cancer patient who’s uninsured,” Sunni Montgomery, a 63-year-old battling lung cancer, told CNN, noting her premium is set to rise to $1,758 per month.
"I have fought this so hard," Montgomery added. "I want to live."
Politico reported Tuesday "fractured conversations among Republicans are promising to bog down negotiations" on the ACA subsidies "as Obamacare beneficiaries begin to lock in their rates for the year ahead."
"Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are starting to privately admit it’s likely too late to avert a major premium hike for millions of Americans in 2026," the outlet added.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), the most prominent proponent of Medicare for All in Congress, said Monday that while eight Democrats "tragically" caved to Republicans, "the struggle continues."
"Short term, we must not allow health care premiums to double for more than 20 million Americans," said Sanders. "Long term, we must provide health care to all as a human right."