

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.
A Wisconsin-based farm policy research group, The Cornucopia Institute,
announced this week that it is filing a formal legal complaint in an attempt to
immediately halt the USDA from allowing factory farms producing
"organic" milk from bringing conventional dairy cattle onto their farms.
Cornucopia claims the practice, which places family-scale farmers at a
competitive disadvantage, is explicitly prohibited in the federal regulations
governing the organic industry.
Conventional replacement dairy calves, typically bought at auctions,
likely receive antibiotics, toxic insecticides and parasiticides as well as
conventional feed during their first year of life before being
"converted" to organics-all practices strictly prohibited in
organic production.
"Real organic farmers don't buy replacement heifers," said
Mark A. Kastel, Senior Farm Policy Analyst at the Wisconsin-based Cornucopia
Institute. "Real organic farmers sell [surplus] heifers."
Demonstrably lower levels of stress, superior health and improved
vitality of the cows separates authentic organic dairy farms from factory farms
masquerading as organic, according to the farm policy research group.
"In the factory farm model, the animals are pushed for such high
production that, just like in the conventional confinement model, after as few
as 1 to 2 years they are so sick, or they are not healthy enough to breed, that
they are slaughtered," Kastel clarified. "Organic cows are
generally so healthy, and live such long lives, that many of the baby calves
born can be sold to other farmers, creating an alternative revenue stream for
organic farmers."
"We have very healthy
young stock,"
said Dave Minar, an organic dairy farmer from New Prague, Minnesota. A
calf on Minar's farm stays with its mother for 6-8 weeks after its birth.
The calves also become acclimated to the milking parlor (as its mother comes in
to be milked every day) and "they are building antibodies when
nursing," Minar added.
Reportedly, because of the illegal practice of bringing conventional
heifers onto organic farms, many organic producers cannot receive a premium
when selling their surplus certified organic calves and heifers.
Policy experts ask the question as to how federal bureaucrats, starting
during the Bush administration, could have possibly blessed a practice that is
explicitly banned in the USDA federal organic standards.
Former USDA National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) Chairman Jim
Riddle, currently with the University of Minnesota, states, "To allow the
continuous introduction of conventional heifers onto organic farms is contrary
to a holistic, systems-based approach; plus, it allows animals that may have
been given antibiotics or hormones, fed genetically engineered feed, or
consumed slaughter by-products [to be brought onto organic farms]."
All the practices referenced by Riddle are banned in the organic standards.
The current federal livestock standards (SS205.236
Origin of Livestock) state: "Once an entire, distinct herd has been
converted to organic production, all dairy animals shall be under organic
management from the last third of gestation." Meaning, before the
calf is even born, it must be managed organically.
New York farmer Kathie Arnold, a recognized leader in the organic dairy
community, made her feelings clear, "Now that a tough pasture rule is in
place, the next very important and needed piece of organic dairy standards work
is the realm of dairy replacement animals, in order to have a fair and
equitable standard that is the same for all farms."
For years, the USDA allowed giant organic factory dairies, milking as
many as 10,000 cows, to confine their animals in huge feedlots and buildings
instead of providing them "access to pasture" as required by federal
law. Sparked by Cornucopia's legal complaints against Aurora Dairy,
Dean Foods and others operating phony "organic" feedlot dairies, a
movement began to close loopholes and clarify pasture requirements for feed and
grazing. The USDA's release of strict new pasture rules this past
February counts as a major victory for organic family farms and consumers.
But bringing in yearling heifers and "converting them to
organic," by managing them organically (organic feed and no banned drugs)
during the second year of their life has become standard operating practice at some
of the same large industrial dairies.
"Another highly-objectionable facet of the illegal laundering of
conventional calves is they are likely fed 'milk replacer' instead of fresh
organic milk," noted Kastel.
Feeding milk replacer instead of milk further pads the bottom line of
the giant factory dairies. Rather than feed fresh organic milk to their
calves, they instead sell that milk to dairy processors. Milk replacer
might also contain risky materials tied to bovine spongiform encephalopathy
(BSE) that are also explicitly banned in organic production and produces cows
with weaker immune systems, more susceptible to disease.
Cornucopia's latest formal legal complaint, in defense of
family-scale farmers, spotlights the Natural Prairie Dairy in Dalhart, Texas.
The dairy, milking over 7000 cows in two barns, is thought to be the largest
certified organic dairy in the United
States.
"They are likely selling well over $1 million worth of milk a
year, at wholesale farmgate pricing, that would otherwise be legally required
to be fed to their calves," Kastel affirmed. "This illegal and
unfair competition has to be stopped immediately."
Just as they delayed the enforcement requiring pasture, and precluding
the feedlot confinement of organic dairy cows, the USDA has claimed they need
new rulemaking in order to close loopholes allowing conventional cattle to be
brought onto organic operations.
Although it appears that the new administration at the USDA recognizes
the impropriety of the current practice, their proposed solution has also been
to develop new tighter regulations. Many industry observers are concerned
that the rulemaking process could take another two years, or longer, until
tighter regulations go into effect.
"The market for organic milk is tightening right now, in late
2010. If major industrial producers are able to continue to bring in
conventional cattle, they will force down prices paid to family farmers,
endangering their livelihoods," Kastel said. "That's why the timing
of this enforcement, by the USDA, is so critical."
Cornucopia contends that protecting
consumer confidence in organics is possibly the most important reason to take
action on these abuses, which undermine the credibility of the organic label.
"One of the reasons that almost every
member-owned natural foods cooperative in the nation no longer sells Horizon
dairy products [owned by the dairy giant Dean Foods] is they were allowing the
same troubling practice of bringing in conventional cattle," said Natasha
Gill, of the Marquette Food Cooperative in Michigan.
"When they spend extra on organic
milk, consumers feel they are supporting both humane animal husbandry and
economic fairness for the farmers who produce their food. These illegal
practices have to stop now," Gill added
MORE:
The Cornucopia Institute has published a
comprehensive report on organic dairy, including a scorecard rating over 120
brands of organic dairy products (milk, cheese, butter, ice cream etc.).
It is designed to empower consumers and wholesale buyers so that they can make
good purchasing decisions, rewarding the true organic farming heroes in the
marketplace: www.cornucopia.org
A copy of the formal legal complaint filed
by The Cornucopia Institute can be found at: https://www.cornucopia.org/USDA/NaturalPrairieComplaint.pdf
The Cornucopia Institute, a Wisconsin-based nonprofit farm policy research group, is dedicated to the fight for economic justice for the family-scale farming community. Their Organic Integrity Project acts as a corporate and governmental watchdog assuring that no compromises to the credibility of organic farming methods and the food it produces are made in the pursuit of profit.
The group's leader called for rejecting "attempts to curtail funding for renewable energy projects" along with "the bullying efforts by the USA and others to weaken policies and regulations to combat climate change."
Nearly 10 months after President Donald Trump ditched the Paris Agreement for a second time, a leading human rights organization on Wednesday urged the remaining parties to the landmark treaty to defy his dangerous example when they come together next week for the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Belém, Brazil.
"Amnesty International is urging governments to resist aligning with the Trump administration's denial of the accelerating climate crisis and instead demonstrate true climate leadership," said the group's secretary general, Agnès Callamard, in a statement. "In the face of President Trump's rejection of science coupled with the intensified lobbying for fossil fuels, global leaders must redouble their efforts to take urgent climate action—with or without the US."
Callamard, who plans to attend COP30, stressed that "the global climate crisis is the single biggest threat to our planet and demands a befitting response. The effects of climate change are becoming more pronounced across the whole world. We confront increasingly frequent and severe storms, wildfires, droughts, and flooding, as well as sea-level rise that will destroy some small island states."
"COP30 in Brazil presents an opportunity for collective resistance against those trying to reverse years of commitments and efforts to keep global warming below 1.5°C," she continued, referring to a primary goal of the Paris Agreement. "The fact that levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere soared by a record amount last year should ring alarm bells for world leaders at COP30."
Further elevating fears for the future, the UN Environment Programme warned Tuesday that Paris Agreement parties' latest pledges to cut greenhouse gas emissions—officially called Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs)—could push global temperatures to 2.3-2.5°C above preindustrial levels, up to a full degree beyond the treaty's key target for this century.
Greenpeace demands world leaders agree on a global response plan at #COP30 as a new major UN report warned the global temperature is projected to rise to 2.3-2.5°C above pre-industrial era global temperatures, putting the Paris Agreement limit of 1.5°C at risk in the short-term.
[image or embed]
— Greenpeace International 🌍 (@greenpeace.org) November 4, 2025 at 11:20 AM
Oil Change International highlighted in a report released last week that the United States—which is responsible for the biggest share of planet-heating pollution since the Industrial Revolution—plus Australia, Canada, and Norway are now "overwhelmingly responsible for blocking global progress on phasing out oil and gas production."
The group's global policy lead, Romain Ioualalen, said that "10 years ago in Paris, countries promised to limit warming to 1.5°C, which is impossible without putting an end to fossil fuel expansion and production. The rich countries most responsible for the climate crisis have not kept that promise. Instead, they've poured more fuel on the fire and withheld the funds needed to put it out."
"The fact that a handful of rich Global North countries, led by the United States, have massively driven up their oil and gas production while people around the world suffer the consequences is a blatant mockery of justice and equity," Ioualalen added. He called on governments attending COP30 "to deliver a collective roadmap for equitable, differentiated fossil fuel phaseout dates, and address the systemic barriers preventing Global South countries from transitioning to renewable energy, including finance."
Some experts are concerned that Trump—who's pursuing a pro-fossil fuel agenda that includes but is far from limited to exiting the Paris Agreement—may interfere with the talks, even though a White House official confirmed to Reuters last week that he doesn't plan to send a delegation to Belém.
The official said that Trump made his administration's views on global climate action clear in his September speech at the UN General Assembly—during which the president said the fossil fuel-driven crisis was "the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world," and the scientific community's predictions about the global emergency "were wrong" and "were made by stupid people."
Pointing to Trump's global tariff war that was debated before the US Supreme Court on Wednesday, the official added that "the president is directly engaging with leaders around the world on energy issues, which you can see from the historic trade deals and peace deals that all have a significant focus on energy partnerships."
As CNN reported Tuesday:
This practice of linking trade and climate so closely is an innovation of the Trump administration, said Kelly Sims Gallagher, dean of the Fletcher School at Tufts University who worked on US climate negotiations with China for the Obama administration.
In the absence of US leadership, she said that China, which is the world's top emitter, may seek to assume more of a prominent, steering role at the talks. The European Union is also likely to take a strong role, though internal rifts have emerged within the EU regarding how aggressively to cut its own emissions.
While Gallagher and other experts who spoke with CNN don't necessarily expect that COP30 will feature the same kind of disruptive behavior that Trump engaged in during last month's International Maritime Organization meeting to delay a new set of global regulations to slash shipping industry emissions, they acknowledged that it is possible. Already, the Tufts professor suggested, Trump's abandonment of the Paris treaty appears to be having an impact.
"I think there's an undeniable fact, which is that with the US withdrawal for a second time, it's definitely seeming to undermine ambition," Gallagher said. "I think it's just getting harder to make the case that global ambition is going to rise without pretty substantial engagement from the United States."
Despite not sending a high-level delegation to the COP30 Climate Summit in Brazil, the presence of the US will still be felt by negotiators there. The US will be the elephant in the room, and could seek to disrupt the talks from afar, depending on how they're trending... www.cnn.com/2025/11/04/c...
[image or embed]
— Andrew Freedman (@afreedma.bsky.social) November 4, 2025 at 9:42 AM
Callamard argued Wednesday that those attending COP30 "must push back against attempts to curtail funding for renewable energy projects and resist the bullying efforts by the USA and others to weaken policies and regulations to combat climate change."
"Humanity can win if states commit at COP30 to a full, fast, fair, and funded fossil-fuel phase-out and just transition to sustainable energy for all, in all sectors, as recently confirmed by the International Court of Justice's recent advisory opinion," she said. "These commitments must go hand-in-hand with a significant injection of climate finance, in the form of grants, not loans, from states that are the worst culprits for greenhouse gas emissions."
"Crucially, states must take steps to protect climate activists and environmental defenders," the Amnesty leader added. "This is the only way to secure climate justice and protect the human rights of billions of people."
According to an annual Global Witness report published in September, at least 142 people were killed and four were confirmed missing last year for "bravely speaking out or taking action to defend their rights to land and a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment," bringing the total to at least 2,253 land defenders slaughtered or disappeared since the group started tracking such cases in 2012.
“To limit new weapons development in China or Russia, one of the best things the US can do is maintain the taboo on testing and ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty," said one expert.
More than a dozen US senators on Wednesday urged President Donald Trump to abort plans for a resumption of nuclear weapons testing, a call that came as Russian President Vladimir Putin directed his senior officials to draft proposals for possible new nuke tests in response.
“We write to you today to express grave reservation about any action to resume nuclear weapons testing," 14 Democratic senators led by Sens. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) and Martin Heinrich (D-NM), ranking member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, said in a letter to Trump.
"We request that you personally provide clarification," the lawmakers added. "The decision to resume nuclear weapons testing would be geopolitically dangerous, fiscally irresponsible, and simply unnecessary to ensure the ability of the United States to defend itself."
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.)—who signed the letter—also introduced emergency legislation last week aimed at preventing Trump from resuming nuclear weapons tests.
Although no country is known to have tested a nuclear weapon since North Korea last did so in 2017, Trump last month ordered the Pentagon to prepare for a resumption of reciprocal testing.
“The United States has more Nuclear Weapons than any other country,” Trump falsely wrote on social media. “Because of other countries testing programs, I have instructed the Department of War to start testing our Nuclear Weapons on an equal basis.”
TASS reported Wednesday that Putin instructed the Russian Foreign Ministry, Defense Ministry, intelligence agencies, and civilian bureaus to submit proposals "on the possibility of preparing for nuclear weapons tests" in the event that other countries resume testing.
Russia has not tested a nuclear weapon in its modern history. The former Soviet Union's final nuclear test took place in 1990 and the successor Russian state has adhered to a moratorium ever since.
Last week, Congresswoman Dina Titus (D-Nev.) introduced a bill to prohibit new US nuclear weapons testing. Titus accused Trump of putting "his own ego and authoritarian ambitions above the health and safety of Nevadans."
Supporting Titus' bill, Tara Drozdenko, director of the Global Security Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said in a statement Wednesday that “there is no good reason for the United States to resume explosive nuclear testing and it would actually make everyone in this country less safe."
"We have so much to lose and so little to gain from resuming testing," she continued. "New explosive testing by the United States would be to make a political statement, with major consequences: It would shatter the global freeze on nuclear testing observed by all but North Korea and give Russia, China, and other nuclear powers the green light to restart their own nuclear testing programs."
“The United States has not conducted a nuclear detonation test since 1992," Drozdenko noted. "Even those advocating for testing acknowledge there is no scientific need to test to maintain the US nuclear arsenal. In fact, Energy Secretary Chris Wright recently said that the updated systems can be tested without conducting full nuclear detonations."
“To limit new weapons development in China or Russia, one of the best things the US can do is maintain the taboo on testing and ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty," she added. "This treaty with on-site verification measures would be the best way to ensure that countries are not clandestinely testing nuclear weapons.”
The United States and Soviet Union came dangerously close to nuclear war on multiple occasions during the Cold War, most notably amid the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis and, later, during then-President Ronald Reagan's first administration in the early 1980s.
Weeks after becoming the first country to develop nuclear weapons in 1945, the United States waged the world's only nuclear war, dropping atomic bombs on the defenseless Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and killing hundreds of thousands of people, mostly civilians.
According to the International Campaign for the Abolition of Nuclear Weapons, Russia leads the world with 5,449 nuclear warheads in its arsenal, followed by the US with 5,277 warheads, China with around 600, France with 290, and the United Kingdom with 225. Four other nations—India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea—also have nuclear arsenals of between 50-180 warheads each.
If funding is not restored to the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, said one expert, "pipes will freeze, people will die."
As more than 40 million households that rely on federal food aid are forced to stretch their budgets even further than usual due to the Trump administration only partially funding the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program under a court order, many of those families are facing another crisis brought on by the government shutdown: a loss of heating support that serves nearly 6 million people.
President Donald Trump has sought to eliminate the $4 billion Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP), proposing zero funding for it in his budget earlier this year and firing the team that administers the aid.
Though Congress was expected to fund the program in the spending bill that was supposed to pass by October 1, Democrats refused to join the Republican Party in approving government funding that would have allowed healthcare subsidies to expire and raised premiums for millions of families, and Trump and congressional Republicans have refused to negotiate to ensure Americans can afford healthcare.
The government shutdown is now the longest in US history due to the standoff, and energy assistance officials have joined Democratic lawmakers in warning that the freezing of LIHEAP funds could have dire consequences for households across the country as temperatures drop.
Mark Wolfe, executive director of the National Energy Assistance Directors Association (NEADA), told the Washington Post on Wednesday that even if the shutdown ended this week, funding would not reach states until early December—and more families will fall behind on their utility bills if lawmakers don't negotiate a plan to open the government soon.
“You can imagine in a state like Minnesota, it can get awfully cold in December. We’re all just kind of waiting, holding our breath.”
"People will fall through the cracks,” Wolfe told the Post. “Pipes will freeze, people will die.”
With heating costs rising faster than inflation, 1 in 6 households are behind on their energy bills, and 5.9 million rely on assistance through LIHEAP.
The Department of Health and Human Services generally released LIHEAP funds to states in the beginning of November, but energy assistance offices in states where the weather has already gotten colder have had to tell worried residents that there are no heating funds.
Officials in states including Vermont and Maine have said they can cover heating needs for families who rely on LIHEAP for a short period of time, and some nonprofit groups, like Aroostook County Action Program in northern Maine, have raised money to distribute to households.
But states and charities can't fill the need that LIHEAP has in past years. Minnesota's Energy Assistance Program received $125 million from the federal government last year that allowed 120,000 families to heat their homes.
Aroostook County Action Program has provided help to about 200 households in past years, while LIHEAP serves about 7,500 Maine families.
The state has already received 50,000 applications for heating aid and would be preparing to send $30 million in assistance in a normal year.
“You can imagine in a state like Minnesota, it can get awfully cold in December,” Michael Schmitz, director of the program, told the Post. “We’re all just kind of waiting, holding our breath.”
NEADA told state energy assistance officials late last month to plan on suspending service disconnections until federal LIHEAP funds are released, and US Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) led more than four dozen lawmakers in urging utilities to suspend late penalties and shutoffs for federal workers who have been furloughed due to the shutdown.
States reported that they'd begun receiving calls from people who rely on LIHEAP as Americans across the country went to the polls on Tuesday and delivered Democratic victories in numerous state and local races.
The president himself said the shutdown played a "big role" in voters' clear dissatisfaction with the current state of the country.