

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.
Valerie Langer, Director of BC Forest Campaigns, ForestEthics – (604) 307-6448
New B.C. guidelines for forest carbon offsets are "fake climate
change action" and will fail to reduce carbon emissions quickly or
protect vulnerable ecosystems, nine environmental groups said today.
The
guidelines released by the Pacific Carbon Trust (PCT) promote forest
carbon credits for activities like fertilization that are not being
considered credible in other jurisdictions, like California.
"This
package of activities is fake climate change action," says Jens
Wieting, Forest Campaigner with Sierra Club BC. Wieting adds,
"Minister Bell claims his goal is to take a leadership position on
climate change but the Pacific Carbon Trust announcement positions B.C.
as a laggard instead."
The Pacific Carbon Trust's goal is to
buy offsets to help BC achieve a carbon neutral government by 2010. The
April 15 $3 million Request for Proposals targets the forest-based
activities of afforestation (tree-planting on non-forested lands),
select-seed (better quality seeds) and fertilization projects, on Crown
and private land.
"Questionable offset activities like
select-seed and fertilization represent business-as-usual, status quo
forestry, and do not provide a meaningful contribution in the fight
against climate change. High quality forest carbon offsets must both
provide real and immediate carbon emission reductions and have
demonstrable benefits for biodiversity and species. The new guidelines
fail on both accounts," says Valerie Langer, BC Forest Campaigns
Director with ForestEthics.
BC's forests have some of the
highest carbon storage per hectare on the planet. Forest carbon credits
for conservation, missing from this protocol, would allow for a
financial incentive for offset projects with immediate emission
reductions and allow species a better chance to adapt to a changing
climate.
The new guidelines are based on the Ministry of
Forests draft protocol that went out for public comment in 2009. Ten
environmental groups provided detailed comments at that time, but their
input has been ignored and the original draft protocol, in the PCT's
own words, has been "reworked" -- essentially dressed up and presented
again now, as an appendix to the BC Forest Offset Guide.
READ OUR RESPONSE TO THEIR DRAFT PROTOCOL HERE >>
The
views expressed herein, are shared by BC Spaces for Nature, CPAWS,
Ecotrust, ForestEthics, Greenpeace, Land Trust Alliance of BC, Sierra
Club BC, Wildsight and West Coast Environmental Law.
Founded in 2000, ForestEthics is a nonprofit environmental organization with staff in Canada, the United States and Chile. Our mission is to protect Endangered Forests and wild places, wildlife, and human wellbeing--one of our focus areas is climate change, which compromises all of our efforts if left unchecked. We catalyze environmental leadership among industry, governments and communities by running hard-hitting and highly effective campaigns that leverage public dialogue and pressure to achieve our goals.
"A military sending armed soldiers into US cities to fight 'the enemy within' at a president's behest is not one to embolden with more funding."
Nearly two dozen advocacy groups warned Thursday that a Republican-led effort to give President Donald Trump an additional $32 billion in Pentagon funding for the coming fiscal year would enable his administration to accelerate its lawless use of the military, both in US communities and overseas.
"We are seeing the administration intensify its National Guard domestic deployments, an authoritarian move that is plainly designed to clamp down on dissent and chill Americans' First Amendment expression," Public Citizen, Demand Progress, Peace Action, and other organizations wrote in a letter to the top Democrats on the House and Senate Armed Services Committees as lawmakers in both chambers work to hash out differences between their versions of the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).
"A military sending armed soldiers into US cities to fight 'the enemy within' at a president's behest is not one to embolden with more funding," the groups added.
The letter also notes that Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth are "unconstitutionally and dangerously" using the US military "to carry out assassinations in the Caribbean."
"Providing additional funding to the Pentagon at such a time would be seen as an implicit endorsement of this reckless activity," the groups wrote.
"Hegseth is a key enabler of Trump's authoritarianism, as Pentagon resources are being used in reckless and illegal actions domestically and internationally."
The House version of the NDAA, approved in September in a mostly party-line vote, would authorize $892.6 billion in military spending for the coming fiscal year.
But the Senate-passed version would increase that top line number by just over $32 billion, even as the Pentagon fails to pass an independent audit and remains rife with fraud and abuse.
In a separate letter also backed by Public Citizen, a coalition of advocacy groups called the proposed $32 billion increase in the Senate legislation "fiscally ill-advised and strategically counterproductive."
"Before this year's increases," the groups observed, "the Pentagon budget had already grown by nearly 50% adjusted for inflation since the turn of the 21st Century."
Robert Weissman, co-president of Public Citizen, said in a statement that "Hegseth is a key enabler of Trump's authoritarianism, as Pentagon resources are being used in reckless and illegal actions domestically and internationally."
"Under his leadership, the Pentagon is further entrenching military policing in Americans' daily lives via a National Guard 'rapid response force' and actively attacking international vessels without congressional authorization," said Weissman. "Lavishing Hegseth's Pentagon with $32 billion in extra spending will only fuel Trump's authoritarian agenda. It is particularly galling to consider in the wake of dire cuts to the social safety net imposed by the tax and budget reconciliation bill and Trump administration unilateral action."
"Mike Johnson's callousness is appalling," said one healthcare campaigner.
Americans are skipping meals and falling behind on bills, lines at food banks are expanding, and millions are watching with alarm as their health insurance premiums skyrocket, but Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson said Thursday that he's prepared to "let this process play out" rather than negotiate with Democrats to end the longest government shutdown in US history.
During a news conference, Johnson (R-La.) said he would not agree to hold a vote on extending Affordable Care Act (ACA) subsidies in exchange for Democratic votes to end the shutdown.
"I am not promising anybody anything," said Johnson, confirming Democrats' warnings that the GOP can't be trusted to uphold what would amount to a pinkie promise for an ACA vote.
"I am going to let this process play out," he added.
Johnson's remarks drew swift backlash. Leslie Dach, chair of the advocacy group Protect Our Care, said in a statement that "as Trump-GOP policies devastate Americans from coast to coast, and congressional Republicans continue the longest government shutdown in history, Mike Johnson's callousness is appalling."
"He won't even agree to allow a vote in the House to restore the healthcare tax credits that Republicans stripped away from millions of Americans," said Dach. "He'd rather more small businesses be financially annihilated, more hospitals vanish out of thin air, and more Americans—including in his own district—empty out their life savings just to go to a doctor."
"It's unconscionable," Dach added, "and voters, as they demonstrated in the November 4th bellwether elections across the nation, will hold the GOP to account for playing with their lives and selling out the American people—all so Republicans can provide more tax breaks to their billionaire buddies."
On Friday, as shutdown chaos and pain continues to spread nationwide, Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) is planning to call a vote on a plan that would temporarily fund the government and advance several appropriations bills. The proposal also includes a promise of a future vote on the ACA tax credits, which expire at the end of the year.
It's unlikely that Senate Democrats, who convened for a lengthy meeting Thursday afternoon, will accept the proposal, as they've demanded more concrete concessions from Republicans on the ACA subsidies. Republicans need at least seven Democratic senators to break ranks for the bill to pass.
Politico reported Friday that "Senate Democrats are splintered over how much stock to put into Thune's commitment, given the South Dakota Republican has also said he cannot guarantee an outcome of any such vote."
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) told the outlet that Democrats shouldn't "proceed without knowing that these healthcare premiums are not going to go up by 200%."
"Steve Bannon motivating Democratic voters," said one historian in response to comments by the former Trump White House advisor.
Far-right podcaster and former top presidential advisor Steve Bannon told a crowd of aspiring conservative staffers on Capitol Hill this week that the job of Republicans between now and the midterm election next year is to seize complete control of government institutions and turn as many of President Donald Trump's executive orders as possible into law as a way to avoid politic defeat in the coming years and, ultimately, keep MAGA loyalists from being tried and sent to jail.
"I'll tell you right, as God as my witness, if we lose the midterms and we lose 2028, some in this room are going to prison," Bannon told the crowd Wednesday at an awards event hosted by the Conservative Partnership Academy. This group offers training and certifications to aspiring right-wing ideologues working in politics and government.
Bannon, who has already served time in prison for refusing to submit to a congressional subpoena related to his role as a top aide to Trump during his first term, included himself among those who might be targeted if Republicans lost power.
In his remarks, Bannon said Tuesday's election results in New York City, Virginia, New Jersey, and elsewhere—where Democrats swept the GOP—should be seen as a warning to Trump's MAGA base, but called for an intensification of the agenda, not a retreat.
Steve Bannon: If we lose the midterms and we lose 2028, some in this room are going to prison, myself included.
pic.twitter.com/O1iyPipz0n
— Republicans against Trump (@RpsAgainstTrump) November 6, 2025
"They're not gonna stop," Bannon said of Democrats and progressives aligned against Trump's authoritarian push and Republican economic policies that have focused on lavishing ever-larger tax cuts for corporations and the rich while gutting government programs, including cuts to Medicaid, food assistance for the poor, devastating environmental policies, and dismantling of healthcare subsidies leading to a surge in monthly premiums for millions of families.
Trump's opponents, warned Bannon, are "getting more and more and more radical, and we have to counter that."
His advice to Republicans in power and the right-wing movement that supports them is to counter "with more intense action" and more "urgency" before it's too late. "We're burning daylight," Bannon said. "We have to codify what Trump has done by executive order."
In what seemed like a reference to Trump's recent talk of going "nuclear" on the filibuster in the US Senate and other efforts, Bannon said, "We have to get beyond these structural barriers" in Washington, DC, that he believes are hindering the president from consolidating his power even further.
Speaking about discussions behind the scenes, Bannon said he has been in touch with Republicans in the Senate who he says are asking him to go through for them what he means and that in the coming days people may be surprised by who "in the conservative movement" are coming around to his thinking, mentioning "institutionalists" like Sens. Josh Hawley of Missouri and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, as those he's been speaking with.
"These are what I would call heavy-hitters on the limited-government constitutionalists, in our movement," Bannon said of other unnamed individuals, "and they're about to come out in the next couple of days and make this argument because I said, 'Look, we have to understand that if we don't this to the maximum—the maximalist strategy—now, with a sense of urgency, and in doing this, seize the institutions... if we don't do this now, we're going to lose this chance forever, because you're never going to have another Trump."
In an interview with Politico following Tuesday's elections, Bannon said the win by democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani to become New York City's next mayor "should be a wakeup call" to Trump's right-wing nationalist movement. "These are very serious people," Bannon said of Mamdani and others who support his affordability agenda that focuses on the needs of working people, "and they need to be addressed seriously."
As such, Bannon called for the Justice Department, the State Department, and the Department of Homeland Security to target Mamdani specifically by going after his US citizenship and calling for him to be deported. Mamdani is a naturalized US citizen who came to the United States with his parents when he was seven years old.
As the video clip of Bannon's remarks about jail time if the Republicans lose in the upcoming elections made the rounds online Thursday, reactions were predictable along partisan lines.
"Steve Bannon motivating Democratic voters," said Aviel Roshwald, a Georgetown University professor of history with a focus on nationalist movements.
Bannon's call for "seizing the institutions" has been a mainstay on his popular War Room podcast for months, but critics warn that his open embrace of the demand should not make it any less shocking or worrisome.
"He’s preparing his audience to see violence and institutional takeover as 'necessary.' And he’s counting on Democrats and independents being too divided or too polite to call it what it is," warned Christopher Webb, a left-leaning political writer on his Substack page last month.
Bannon and his allies, continued Webb, "do not give a damn about the law, the Constitution, or democracy. They only care about control. And if we keep treating their words as 'just talk,' it will be too late when it stops being talk."
He concluded: "This isn’t going to end well."