

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.
“Religious readings belong in Sunday school, not in public schools," said one parent opposed to the proposal.
Less than six months after a federal judge enjoined a Texas law mandating display of the "allegedly Protestant version of the Ten Commandments" in public schools, Republican lawmakers in the Lone Star State are pushing legislation to force children to read the Bible in classrooms.
Last week, the Texas State Board of Education (SBOE) voted 13-1 to delay voting on a proposed list of mandatory reading for all K-12 public school students until April in order to provide more time for feedback and thousands of corrections to a Bible-infused elementary school curriculum approved two years ago.
"This would bring the Word of God back into schools in a meaningful way for the first time in decades," SBOE member and Christian pastor Brandon Hall said last week in support of the forced Bible reading proposal.
However, as Texas parent Kevin Jackson—who spoke against the proposed list at a public hearing last week—put it, “Religious readings belong in Sunday school, not in public schools."
The Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF), a Wisconsin-based advocacy group, said Tuesday on social media that "mandating Bible readings in public schools isn’t 'education,' it’s state-sponsored religious exercise."
"Public schools are for everyone," FFRF added. "Government has no business promoting or imposing religion on students. Church–state separation protects all Texans."
Carisa Lopez, deputy director of the Texas Freedom Network—a civil liberties and religious freedom group—said Friday that the proposal "enforces a one-size-fits-all approach in one of the largest and most diverse states in the nation."
“This kind of state micromanagement tosses aside local control and makes it harder or even impossible for teachers to tailor instruction in ways that are appropriate for their students," Lopez added. "Even worse is that this list represents another step by the state toward turning public schools into Sunday schools that undermine the right of parents to direct the religious education of their own children.”
Rabbi David Segal, policy counsel for the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty, noted that “the proposed reading list relies heavily on Protestant Christian translations and leaves out other faith traditions."
“Public schools have a duty to prepare students to participate in civic life, not to advance a particular religious viewpoint," Segal stressed. "Teaching about religion has always been appropriate in public education, but what we are seeing here verges on state-sanctioned religious instruction."
The mandatory reading list also contains texts that conservative SBOE members say represent "foundational" literature that all students should know. However, some Democratic board members object to what they say is the list's lack of racial and gender diversity.
“This list does not represent the students of Texas,” Democratic SBOE member Tiffany Clark told Education Week. “For so many years, students of color have had to endure a European-centered philosophy, history, without representation of their own history being recognized. That is exactly what we see continuing to happen with this list.”
The proposed reading list follows the SBOE's 2024 approval of Bluebonnet Learning, a Bible-infused curriculum for elementary public school students that critics say violates the US Constitution's establishment clause.
Last year, Republican Texas Gov. Greg Abbott—a devout Catholic—signed SB 10, which forces display of the Ten Commandments in all public school classrooms. This, despite an earlier ruling from a federal judge, who found that a similar law in Louisiana was an unconstitutional violation of the separation of church and state.
In an extraordinarily pointed ruling last August, US District Judge for the Western District of Texas Fred Biery issued a preliminary injunction blocking parts of SB 10.
"Imagine the consternation and legal firestorm were the following fictional story to become reality," Biery wrote. "Hamtramck, Michigan: Being a majority Muslim community, the Hamtramck City Council and school board have decreed that, beginning September 1, 2025, the following teachings of the Quran, Surah Al-An’am 6:151 and Surah Al-Isra 17:23, shall be posted in all public buildings and public schools."
"While 'We the people' rule by a majority, the Bill of Rights protects the minority Christians in Hamtramck and those 33% of Texans who do not adhere to any of the Christian denominations," he added.
I don’t know who this man is but protect him at all costs!! He finally broke it down. So much she had no come back! See the God yall worshipping is yourself and your opinions!! I love how he use the word, the one she claims to know in his argument! Sadly they still won’t get it.… pic.twitter.com/KHqrVf5SHC
— Leslie Jones 🦋 (@Lesdoggg) January 23, 2024
If the new reading list mandate is approved in April as anticipated, Texas will become the first state in the nation to force every student in the state to read the Bible. Former Oklahoma State Superintendent of Public Instruction Ryan Walters—a Republican and Christian nationalist—mandated that all public school districts incorporate the Bible—and specifically the Ten Commandments—into their curricula for grades 5-12.
It would start with a mandate to read material including "The Golden Rule” in kindergarten, "The Parable of the Prodigal Son” in first grade, and "The Road to Damascus" in third grade.
As Hemant Mehta wrote for his Friendly Atheist blog :
The readings get more specific as students get older. Seventh graders would have to read "The Shepherd's Psalm (Book of Psalms, Chapter 23)” from the Old Testament along with “The Definition of Love” from 1 Corinthians 13. High schoolers would be reading Genesis 11:1-9 about the Tower of Babel, Lamentations 3, and the story of David and Goliath as told in 1 Samuel 17.
"What makes this proposal so damning is that Christianity is the only religious book included in the required readings, and even the more secular stories are infused with more direct religious messages," Mehta wrote on Saturday. "That’s on top of the state-sanctioned curriculum itself, which is already Bible-heavy."
"The Texas Board of Education is shoving explicitly Christian narratives into a mandatory, state-sanctioned reading list and pretending it’s objective when it comes to religion," Mehta added. "They want to privilege one (and only one) religion at the expense of all others, treating biblical stories as if they’re foundational truths and the default moral framework for everyone, regardless of their families’ beliefs."
There is an alternative proposal by Republican SBOE member Will Hickman that would increase the number of more contemporary works like The Hunger Games and Ender's Game and swap biblical texts with Judeo-Christian mythology such as the story of Adam and Eve and Noah's Ark "without any Bible thumping involved," as Mehta put it.
"That might be fine! But that’s clearly not what most Republicans are aiming for," he wrote. "They don’t care if kids are culturally literate regarding the Bible; they just want those kids to accept the Bible as true."
As if on cue, the Wiley Independent School District on Tuesday issued a statement announcing an investigation into what it called the "unauthorized distribution of religious materials" on the campus of Wylie East High School. While the announcement does not specify the religion in question, Marco Hunter-Lopez, who leads the school's Republican student club, said it was Islam.
🚨 Islamic Outreach Booth Sparks Parent Concerns at Wylie East High School 🚨
Wylie, Texas — Parents and community members are raising concerns after an Islamic outreach organization set up an informational booth on the campus of Wylie East High School during the school day this… pic.twitter.com/cNpq1aPfQf
— Texan Report (@TexanReport) February 3, 2026
At the national level, President Donald Trump and his administration have pledged to "protect" prayer in public schools.
“To have a great nation, you have to have religion," the thrice-married adulterer, serial liar, and purveyor of $1,000 branded Bibles said last year. "I will always defend our glorious heritage, and we will protect the Judeo-Christian principles of our founding.”
"We must not allow ICE to kidnap children and bring them to prisons where they profit off their pain, misery, and suffering," said Rep. Joaquin Castro.
A group of Democratic lawmakers on Tuesday demanded the termination of US Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, as new footage emerged in Minneapolis of federal immigration officers drawing guns on unarmed observers.
More than a dozen Democrats serving in the US House of Representatives stood outside the Washington, DC headquarters of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) on Tuesday and demanded that President Donald Trump fire Noem, who has taken heat for making false claims in recent weeks about Minneapolis residents Renee Good and Alex Pretti, both of whom were gunned down by federal agents last month.
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) delivered a brief speech at the event where she described her home city of Minneapolis as being under "occupation" by federal agents sent by Trump and Noem.
"We do not exaggerate when we say we have schools where two-thirds of the students are afraid to go to school," she said. "We do not exaggerate when we say we have people who are afraid to go to the hospital because our hospitals have occupying paramilitary forces. We do not exaggerate when we say our restaurants are shutting down because there are not enough people to drive the employees to work and from work."
Omar went on to reiterate her past calls to abolish ICE, which she described as "not just rogue, but unlawful." She also said that “Democrats are ready and willing to impeach" Noem if Trump doesn't fire her.
Later in the event, Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-Texas) spoke of his meeting last week with Liam Ramos, a 5-year-old boy from Minneapolis who had been detained at a Texas ICE facility before a judge last weekend ordered his release.
"While detained, he became lethargic and sick," Castro said, speaking of Ramos. "His father said that he'd become depressed. He was asking about his mother and his classmates, and most of all, he wanted to go home. But he also said that he was scared of the guards... he had clearly been traumatized."
Castro emphasized that, even though Ramos and his father have been freed from detention, there are still too many children being held at the facility, including at least one as young as two years old
"This is a machinery of cruelty and viciousness that Secretary Noem has overseen, the Trump administration has built, and people like Texas Gov. Greg Abbott have been complicit in upholding," he said. "We must not allow ICE to kidnap children and bring them to prisons where they profit off their pain, misery, and suffering."
As Democrats were making their case for Noem's removal, new footage emerged of federal immigration officers in Minneapolis pulling legal observers out of their cars at gun point.
In a video posted on social media by independent journalist Ford Fischer, agents can be seen swarming a vehicle with their guns drawn and demanding and its passengers exit the car.
Just now: ICE agents pull handguns and arrest observers who had been following them this morning in Minneapolis. pic.twitter.com/s3uIwWS3AA
— Ford Fischer (@FordFischer) February 3, 2026
After the observers were pulled from the vehicle and detained by officers on the scene, one officer in the video claims that the people in question had been threatening them with "hand guns."
An observer then asks the officer if he means that the people being taken into custody were waving firearms at them, and he replies that they were making fake guns with their fingers, not brandishing actual weapons.
As the officers left the scene, they were heckled by protesters.
"Put away your weapons you douchebag, nobody is threatening you!" yelled one.
"I think the DOE's attempts to cut corners on safety, security, and environmental protections are posing a grave risk to public health, safety, and our natural environment," said one expert.
Less than a week after NPR revealed that "the Trump administration has overhauled a set of nuclear safety directives and shared them with the companies it is charged with regulating, without making the new rules available to the public," the US Department of Energy announced Monday that it is allowing firms building experimental nuclear reactors to seek exemptions from legally required environmental reviews.
Citing executive orders signed by President Donald Trump in May, a notice published in the Federal Register states that the DOE "is establishing a categorical exclusion for authorization, siting, construction, operation, reauthorization, and decommissioning of advanced nuclear reactors for inclusion in its National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) implementing procedures."
NEPA has long been a target of energy industries and Republican elected officials, including Trump. The exemption policy has been expected since Trump's May orders—which also launched a DOE pilot program to rapidly build the experimental reactors—and the department said in a statement that even the exempted reactors will face some reviews.
"The US Department of Energy is establishing the potential option to obtain a streamlined approach for advanced nuclear reactors as part of the environmental review performed under NEPA," the DOE said. "The analysis on each reactor being considered will be informed by previously completed environmental reviews for similar advanced nuclear technologies."
"The fact is that any nuclear reactor, no matter how small, no matter how safe it looks on paper, is potentially subject to severe accidents."
However, the DOE announcement alarmed various experts, including Daniel P. Aldrich, director of the Resilience Studies Program at Northeastern University, who wrote on social media: "Making America unsafe again: Trump created an exclusion for new experimental reactors from disclosing how their construction and operation might harm the environment, and from a written, public assessment of the possible consequences of a nuclear accident."
Foreign policy reporter Laura Rozen described the policy as "terrifying," while Paul Dorfman, chair of the Nuclear Consulting Group and a scholar at the University of Sussex's Bennett Institute for Innovation and Policy Acceleration, called it "truly crazy."
As NPR reported Monday:
Until now, the test reactor designs currently under construction have primarily existed on paper, according to Edwin Lyman, director of nuclear power safety at the Union of Concerned Scientists, a nonprofit environmental advocacy group. He believes the lack of real-world experience with the reactors means that they should be subject to more rigorous safety and environmental reviews before they're built.
"The fact is that any nuclear reactor, no matter how small, no matter how safe it looks on paper, is potentially subject to severe accidents," Lyman said.
"I think the DOE's attempts to cut corners on safety, security, and environmental protections are posing a grave risk to public health, safety, and our natural environment here in the United States," he added.
Lyman was also among the experts who criticized changes that NPR exposed last week, after senior editor and correspondent Geoff Brumfiel obtained documents detailing updates to "departmental orders, which dictate requirements for almost every aspect of the reactors' operations—including safety systems, environmental protections, site security, and accident investigations."
While the DOE said that it shared early versions of the rules with companies, "the reduction of unnecessary regulations will increase innovation in the industry without jeopardizing safety," and "the department anticipates publicly posting the directives later this year," Brumfiel noted that the orders he saw weren't labeled as drafts and had the word "approved" on their cover pages.
In a lengthy statement about last week's reporting, Lyman said on the Union of Concerned Scientists website that "this deeply troubling development confirms my worst fears about the dire state of nuclear power safety and security oversight under the Trump administration. Such a brazen rewriting of hundreds of crucial safeguards for the public underscores why preservation of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) as an independent, transparent nuclear regulator is so critical."
"The Energy Department has not only taken a sledgehammer to the basic principles that underlie effective nuclear regulation, but it has also done so in the shadows, keeping the public in the dark," he continued. "These long-standing principles were developed over the course of many decades and consider lessons learned from painful events such as the Chernobyl and Fukushima disasters. This is a massive experiment in the deregulation of novel, untested nuclear facilities that could pose grave threats to public health and safety."
"These drastic changes may extend beyond the Reactor Pilot Program, which was created by President Trump last year to circumvent the more rigorous licensing rules employed by the NRC," Lyman warned. "While the DOE created a legally dubious framework to designate these reactors as 'test' reactors to bypass the NRC's statutory authority, these dramatic alterations may further weaken standards used in the broader DOE authorization process and propagate across the entire fleet of commercial nuclear facilities, severely degrading nuclear safety throughout the United States."