July, 08 2010, 12:22pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Nell Greenberg Communications
Manager (415) 659-0557
Margaret
Swink Communications Manager (415) 659-0541
Brianna Cayo Cotter Communications
Manager (415) 659-0534
Activists Stage Creative Sit-In at EPA Headquarters to Call for Stronger Action on Mountaintop Removal Coal Mining
Blasting John Denver’s ‘Take me Home, Country Roads’ in the EPA HQ, activists said: “We’re sitting down so the EPA will stand up for Appalachia’s drinking water.”
WASHINGTON
Today, activists
with the Rainforest Action Network staged a sit-in at the EPA
headquarters to demand stronger protection for Appalachia's drinking
water and an end to the devastating practice of mountaintop removal
(MTR) coal mining.
After entering the EPA building, activists
sat down in the center of the lobby, locked themselves together with
metal 'lock boxes,' and began to play West Virginia's adopted state
song, John Denver's 'Take me Home, Country Roads,' mixed with
intermittent sounds of Appalachia's mountains being blown apart by MTR
explosives. An additional activist climbed to the top of the EPA front
door on Constitution Ave and blocked the door with a banner reading:
'Blowing up mountains for coal contaminates Appalachia's water, Stop
MTR.'
"We're sitting down inside the EPA to demand the EPA
stand up to protect Appalachia's precious drinking water, historic
mountains and public health from the devastation of mountaintop
removal," said Scott Parkin of Rainforest Action Network, who
participated in the sit-in. "At issue here is not whether mountaintop
removal mining is bad for the environment or human health, because we
know it is and the EPA has said it is. At issue is whether President
Obama's EPA will do something about it. So far, it seems it is easier to
poison Appalachia's drinking water than to defy King Coal."
With
the nation's eyes on the BP disaster, the EPA, without publicly
announcing the action, recently gave the green light for a major new
mountaintop removal coal mining permit in Logan County, West Virginia.
The permit would allow the destruction of nearly three miles of
currently clean streams and 760 acres of forest, in a county where at
least 13 percent of the land has already been permitted for surface coal
mining. This is the first permit decision the EPA has issued under the
new MTR guidelines, which came out last April and were anticipated to
provide tougher oversight of the practice.
"This is a
devastating first decision under guidelines that had offered so much
hope for Appalachian residents who thought the EPA was standing up for
their health and water quality in the face of a horrific mining
practice," said Amanda Starbuck of the Rainforest Action Network. "The
grand words being spoken by Administrator Jackson in Washington are
simply not being reflected in the EPA's actions on-the-ground. Moving
forward, it is clear that the EPA cannot end mountaintop removal coal
mining pollution, as it has committed to, without abolishing mountaintop
removal all together."
For decades, Appalachian residents
have been decrying the impact of mountaintop removal coal mining-the
practice of blowing up whole mountains (and dumping the toxic debris
into nearby streams and valleys) to reach seams of coal.
Environmentalists, leading scientists, congressional representatives and
even late coal state Senator Byrd have all called for the end to this
mining practice.
A paper released in January 2009 by a dozen
leading scientists in the journal Science concluded that mountaintop
coal mining is so destructive that the government should stop giving out
new permits all together. "The science is so overwhelming that the only
conclusion that one can reach is that mountaintop mining needs to be
stopped," said Margaret Palmer, a professor at the University of
Maryland Center for Environmental Sciences and the study's lead author.
Since
1992, nearly 2,000 miles of Appalachian streams have been filled at a
rate of 120 miles per year by surface mining practices. A recent EPA
study found elevated levels of highly toxic selenium in streams
downstream from valley fills. These impairments are linked to
contamination of surface water supplies and resulting health concerns,
as well as widespread impacts to stream life in downstream rivers and
streams. Further, the estimated scale of deforestation from existing
Appalachian surface mining operations is equivalent in size to the state
of Delaware.
The Pine Creek permit is currently awaiting
approval from the Army Corps of Engineers.
Hi-res photos at: https://rainforestactionnetwork.smugmug.com/Mountain-Top-Removal/epa-pine-creek-sit-in
Audio
file playing inside the EPA can be heard here: https://ran.org.s3.amazonaws.com/cr.mp3
Follow
@dirtyenergy for live
twitter updates of today's events
Rainforest Action Network (RAN) is headquartered in San Francisco, California with offices staff in Tokyo, Japan, and Edmonton, Canada, plus thousands of volunteer scientists, teachers, parents, students and other concerned citizens around the world. We believe that a sustainable world can be created in our lifetime and that aggressive action must be taken immediately to leave a safe and secure world for our children.
LATEST NEWS
Critics Shred JD Vance as He Shrugs Off Millions of Americans Losing Medicaid as 'Minutiae'
"What happened to you J.D. Vance—author of Hillbilly Elegy—now shrugging off Medicaid cuts that will close rural hospitals and kick millions off healthcare as 'minutiae?'" asked Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.).
Jul 01, 2025
Vice President J.D. Vance took heat from critics this week when he downplayed legislation that would result in millions of Americans losing Medicaid coverage as mere "minutiae."
Writing on X, Vance defended the budget megabill that's currently being pushed through the United States Senate by arguing that it will massively increase funding to Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which he deemed to be a necessary component of carrying out the Trump administration's mass deportation operation.
"The thing that will bankrupt this country more than any other policy is flooding the country with illegal immigration and then giving those migrants generous benefits," wrote Vance. "The [One Big Beautiful Bill] fixes this problem. And therefore it must pass."
He then added that "everything else—the CBO score, the proper baseline, the minutiae of the Medicaid policy—is immaterial compared to the ICE money and immigration enforcement provisions."
It was this line that drew the ire of many critics, as the Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the Senate version of the budget bill would slash spending on Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program by more than $1 trillion over a ten-year-period, which would result in more than 10 million people losing their coverage. Additionally, Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) has proposed an amendment that would roll back the expansion of Medicaid under the 2010 Affordable Care Act, which would likely kick millions more off of the program.
Many congressional Democrats were quick to pounce on Vance for what they said were callous comments about a vital government program.
"So if the only thing that matters is immigration... why didn't you support the bipartisan Lankford-Murphy bill that tackled immigration far better than your Ugly Bill?" asked Rep. Daniel Goldman (D-N.Y.). "And it didn't have 'minutiae' that will kick 12m+ Americans off healthcare or raise the debt by $4tn."
"What happened to you J.D. Vance—author of Hillbilly Elegy—now shrugging off Medicaid cuts that will close rural hospitals and kick millions off healthcare as 'minutiae?'" asked Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.).
Veteran healthcare reporter Jonathan Cohn put some numbers behind the policies that are being minimized by the vice president.
"11.8M projected to lose health insurance," he wrote. "Clinics and hospitals taking a hit, especially in rural areas. Low-income seniors facing higher costs. 'Minutiae.'"
Activist Leah Greenberg, the co-chair of progressive organizing group Indivisible, zeroed in on Vance's emphasis on ramping up ICE's funding as particularly problematic.
"They are just coming right out and saying they want an exponential increase in $$$ so they can build their own personal Gestapo," she warned.
Washington Post global affairs columnist Ishaan Tharoor also found himself disturbed by the sheer size of the funding increase for ICE that Vance is demanding and he observed that "nothing matters more apparently than giving ICE a bigger budget than the militaries of virtually every European country."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Heinrich Should Be Ashamed': Lone Senate Dem Helps GOP Deliver Big Pharma Win
The provision, part of the Senate budget bill, was described as "a blatant giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry that would keep drug prices high for patients while draining $5 billion in taxpayer dollars."
Jul 01, 2025
The deep-pocketed and powerful pharmaceutical industry notched a significant victory on Monday when the Senate parliamentarian ruled that a bill described by critics as a handout to drug corporations can be included in the Republican reconciliation package, which could become law as soon as this week.
The legislation, titled the Optimizing Research Progress Hope and New (ORPHAN) Cures Act, would exempt drugs that treat more than one rare disease from Medicare's drug-price negotiation program, allowing pharmaceutical companies to charge exorbitant prices for life-saving medications in a purported effort to encourage innovation. (Medications developed to treat rare diseases are known as "orphan drugs.")
The consumer advocacy group Public Citizen observed that if the legislation were already in effect, Medicare "would have been barred from negotiating lower prices for important treatments like cancer drugs Imbruvica, Calquence, and Pomalyst."
Among the bill's leading supporters is Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), whose spokesperson announced the parliamentarian's decision to allow the measure in the reconciliation package after previously advising that it be excluded. Heinrich is listed as the legislation's only co-sponsor in the Senate, alongside lead sponsor Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.).
"Sen. Heinrich should be ashamed of prioritizing drug corporation profits over lower medicine prices for seniors and people with disabilities," Steve Knievel, access to medicines advocate at Public Citizen, said in a statement Monday. "Patients and consumers breathed a sigh of relief when the Senate parliamentarian stripped the proposal from Republicans' Big Ugly Betrayal, so it comes as a gut punch to hear that Sen. Heinrich welcomed the reversal and continued to champion a proposal that will transfer billions from taxpayers to Big Pharma."
"People across the country are demanding lower drug prices and for Medicare drug price negotiations to be expanded, not restricted," Knievel added. "Sen. Heinrich should apologize to his constituents and start listening to them instead of drug corporation lobbyists."
The Biotechnology Innovation Organization, a lobbying group whose members include pharmaceutical companies, has publicly endorsed and promoted the legislation, urging lawmakers to pass it "as soon as possible."
"This is a blatant giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry that would keep drug prices high for patients."
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the ORPHAN Cures Act would cost U.S. taxpayers around $5 billion over the next decade.
Merith Basey, executive director of Patients For Affordable Drugs Now, said that "patients are infuriated to see the Senate cave to Big Pharma by reviving the ORPHAN Cures Act at the eleventh hour."
"This is a blatant giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry that would keep drug prices high for patients while draining $5 billion in taxpayer dollars," said Basey. "We call on lawmakers to remove this unnecessary provision immediately and stand with an overwhelming majority of Americans who want the Medicare Negotiation program to go further. Medicare negotiation will deliver huge savings for seniors and taxpayers; this bill would undermine that progress."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump-Musk Gutting of USAID Could Lead to More Than 14 Million Deaths Over Five Years: Study
"For many low and middle income countries, the resulting shock would be comparable in scale to a global pandemic or a major armed conflict," said the coordinator behind the study.
Jul 01, 2025
A study published Monday by the medical journal The Lancet found that deep funding cuts to the U.S. Agency for International Development, a main target of the Department of Government Efficiency's government-slashing efforts, could result in more than 14 million additional deaths by the year 2030.
For months, humanitarian programs and experts have sounded the alarm on the impact of cutting funding for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which is the largest funding agency for humanitarian and development aid around the globe, according to the study.
"Our analysis shows that USAID funding has been an essential force in saving lives and improving health outcomes in some of the world's most vulnerable regions over the past two decades," said Daniella Cavalcanti, postdoctoral researcher at the Institute of Collective Health and an author of the study, according to a statement published Tuesday. Between 2001 and 2021, an estimated 91 million deaths were prevented in low and middle income countries thanks programs supported by USAID, according to the study.
The study was coordinated by researchers from the Barcelona Institute for Global Health with the help of the Institute of Collective Health of the Federal University of Bahia, the University of California Los Angeles, and the Manhiça Centre for Health Research, as well as others.
To project the future consequences of USAID funding cuts and arrive at the 14 million figure, the researchers used forecasting models to simulate the impact of two scenarios, continuing USAID funding at 2023 levels versus implementing the reductions announced earlier this year, and then comparing the two.
Those estimated 14 million additional deaths include 4.5 million deaths among children younger than five, according to the researchers.
The journalist Jeff Jarvis shared reporting about the study and wrote "murder" on X on Tuesday.
In March, Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that the 83% of the programs at USAID were being canceled. In the same post on X, he praised the Department of Government Efficiency, which at that point had already infiltrated the agency. "Thank you to DOGE and our hardworking staff who worked very long hours to achieve this overdue and historic reform," he wrote.
Davide Rasella, research professor at Barcelona Institute for Global Health and coordinator of the study, said in a statement Tuesday that "our projections indicate that these cuts could lead to a sharp increase in preventable deaths, particularly in the most fragile countries. They risk abruptly halting—and even reversing—two decades of progress in health among vulnerable populations. For many low- and middle-income countries, the resulting shock would be comparable in scale to a global pandemic or a major armed conflict."
One country where USAID cuts have had a particularly deadly impact is Sudan, according to The Washington Post, which reported on Monday that funding shortages have led to lack of medical supplies and food in the war-torn nation.
"There's a largely unspoken and growing death toll of non-American lives thanks to MAGA," wrote Ishaan Tharoor, a Post columnist, of the paper's reporting on Sudan.
In reference to the reporting on Sudan, others laid blame on billionaire Elon Musk, the billionaire and GOP mega-donor who was initially tapped to lead the Department of Government Efficiency.
"In a less imperfect world, Musk and [President Donald] Trump would be forever cast as killers of children, and this would be front-page news for months and the subject of Sunday sermons in every church," wrote the journalist David Corn.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular