SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
");background-position:center;background-size:19px 19px;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-color:#222;padding:0;width:var(--form-elem-height);height:var(--form-elem-height);font-size:0;}:is(.js-newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter_bar.newsletter-wrapper) .widget__body:has(.response:not(:empty)) :is(.widget__headline, .widget__subheadline, #mc_embed_signup .mc-field-group, #mc_embed_signup input[type="submit"]){display:none;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) #mce-responses:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-row:1 / -1;grid-column:1 / -1;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget__body > .snark-line:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-column:1 / -1;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) :is(.newsletter-campaign:has(.response:not(:empty)), .newsletter-and-social:has(.response:not(:empty))){width:100%;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col{display:flex;flex-wrap:wrap;justify-content:center;align-items:center;gap:8px 20px;margin:0 auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .text-element{display:flex;color:var(--shares-color);margin:0 !important;font-weight:400 !important;font-size:16px !important;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .whitebar_social{display:flex;gap:12px;width:auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col a{margin:0;background-color:#0000;padding:0;width:32px;height:32px;}.newsletter-wrapper .social_icon:after{display:none;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget article:before, .newsletter-wrapper .widget article:after{display:none;}#sFollow_Block_0_0_3_0_0_0_1{margin:0;}#sSHARED_-_Social_Desktop_0_0_13_0_0_1.row-wrapper{margin:40px auto;}#sBoost_post_0_0_1_0_0_0_1_0{background-color:#000;color:#fff;}.boost-post{--article-direction:column;--min-height:none;--height:auto;--padding:24px;--titles-width:100%;--image-fit:cover;--image-pos:right;--photo-caption-size:12px;--photo-caption-space:20px;--headline-size:23px;--headline-space:18px;--subheadline-size:13px;--text-size:12px;--oswald-font:"Oswald", Impact, "Franklin Gothic Bold", sans-serif;--cta-position:center;overflow:hidden;margin-bottom:0;--lora-font:"Lora", sans-serif !important;}.boost-post:not(:empty):has(.boost-post-article:not(:empty)){min-height:var(--min-height);}.boost-post *{box-sizing:border-box;float:none;}.boost-post .posts-custom .posts-wrapper:after{display:none !important;}.boost-post article:before, .boost-post article:after{display:none !important;}.boost-post article .row:before, .boost-post article .row:after{display:none !important;}.boost-post article .row .col:before, .boost-post article .row .col:after{display:none !important;}.boost-post .widget__body:before, .boost-post .widget__body:after{display:none !important;}.boost-post .photo-caption:after{content:"";width:100%;height:1px;background-color:#fff;}.boost-post .body:before, .boost-post .body:after{display:none !important;}.boost-post .body :before, .boost-post .body :after{display:none !important;}.boost-post__bottom{--article-direction:row;--titles-width:350px;--min-height:346px;--height:315px;--padding:24px 86px 24px 24px;--image-fit:contain;--image-pos:right;--headline-size:36px;--subheadline-size:15px;--text-size:12px;--cta-position:left;}.boost-post__sidebar:not(:empty):has(.boost-post-article:not(:empty)){margin-bottom:10px;}.boost-post__in-content:not(:empty):has(.boost-post-article:not(:empty)){margin-bottom:40px;}.boost-post__bottom:not(:empty):has(.boost-post-article:not(:empty)){margin-bottom:20px;}@media (min-width: 1024px){#sSHARED_-_Social_Desktop_0_0_13_0_0_1_1{padding-left:40px;}}.donation_banner{position:relative;background:#000;}.donation_banner .posts-custom *, .donation_banner .posts-custom :after, .donation_banner .posts-custom :before{margin:0;}.donation_banner .posts-custom .widget{position:absolute;inset:0;}.donation_banner__wrapper{position:relative;z-index:2;pointer-events:none;}.donation_banner .donate_btn{position:relative;z-index:2;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_16_0_0_3_1_0{color:#fff;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_16_0_0_3_1_1{font-weight:normal;}.sticky-sidebar{margin:auto;}@media (min-width: 980px){.main:has(.sticky-sidebar){overflow:visible;}}@media (min-width: 980px){.row:has(.sticky-sidebar){display:flex;overflow:visible;}}@media (min-width: 980px){.sticky-sidebar{position:-webkit-sticky;position:sticky;top:100px;transition:top .3s ease-in-out, position .3s ease-in-out;}}#sElement_Post_Layout_Press_Release__0_0_2_0_0_11{margin:100px 0;}.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper.sidebar{background:linear-gradient(91deg, #005dc7 28%, #1d63b2 65%, #0353ae 85%);}.black_newsletter{background:linear-gradient(91deg, #005dc7 28%, #1d63b2 65%, #0353ae 85%);}.black_newsletter .newsletter_bar.newsletter-wrapper{background:none;}
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.
Suzanne Struglinski, sstruglinski@nrdc.org (202)289-2387
A strong majority of registered voters across the United States - including those in all 19 key Congressional Districts polled - oppose the U.S. House votes last week to block the Environmental Protection Agency from updating clean air safeguards needed to protect the health of Americans, according to major new Public Policy Polling (PPP) survey results released today by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC).
The survey results show that all 19 of the House members - including U.S. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Tea Party leader Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn - who supported blocking the EPA are out of step with their constituents.
Nationwide, about six out of 10 Americans (58 percent) - including 55 percent of Independents and roughly half (48 percent) of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution," according to the survey of 784 registered voters conducted February18-20, 2011 by PPP for NRDC. Additionally, more than two thirds of Americans (68 percent) - including 54 percent of Republicans and 59 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
In separate surveys conducted in 19 Congressional Districts, PPP asked registered voters if they agreed with their member of Congress' decision to vote for legislation barring the EPA from updating clean air safeguards. In all 19 districts polled, respondents across the political spectrum said they oppose their representative's votes to handcuff the EPA and think instead that Congress should let the agency do its job of protecting public health and the environment.
The average level of public opposition to the anti-EPA votes across the 19 Congressional Districts was 66 percent - including 45 percent of Republicans and 62 percent of Independents. For a full overview of the 19 surveys, go to https://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/paltman/2-23%20Poll%20Table.pdf.
PPP polled registered voters in the following Congressional districts in eight states: Illinois (Reps. Joe Walsh, IL-8, Robert Dold, IL-10, and Bobby Schilling, IL-17); Michigan (Reps. Daniel Benishek, MI-1, and Mike Rogers, MI-8); Minnesota (Reps. Michele Bachmann, MN-6, and Chip Cravaack, MN-8); Montana (Rep. Denny Rehberg (MT-At Large); Ohio (House Speaker John Boehner, OH-8, and Reps. Patrick Tiberi, OH-12, and Jim Renacci, OH-16); Pennsylvania (Reps. Jason Altmire, PA-4, Jim Gerlach, PA-6, Patrick Meehan, PA-7, Lou Barletta, PA-11); Virginia (Reps. Robert Hurt, VA-5, Scott Rigell, VA-2); and Wisconsin (Reps. Reid Ribble, WI-8, and Sean Duffy, WI-7).
"The message here is as clear as clean air: In every district we polled, Americans want their elected representatives to let the EPA do its job instead of putting the profit-driven agenda of big polluters ahead of the health of their children," said Peter Altman, Climate Campaign Director for the Natural Resources Defense Council. "Politicians who are considering blocking the EPA and updates to Clean Air Act safeguards should understand that doing so is very unpopular. Americans know where these actions will lead and they want their kids to be able to grow up breathing clean air."
"Americans are clearly persuaded that their health needs should take priority over the profits of polluters" said Tom Jensen, director of Public Policy Polling. "Political affiliation doesn't appear to count for much when constituents are asked whether their representatives in Congress should be siding with the public's health or the political clout of polluters."
The national and 19 Congressional District findings are consistent with national polling released over the last few weeks by the American Lung Association https://www.lungusa.org/about-us/our-impact/top-stories/clean-air-survey.html and the Natural Resources Defense Council https://www.nrdc.org/media/2011/110210.asp and https://www.nrdc.org/media/2011/110202.asp.
The poll was timed to ask several questions about positions lawmakers took during last week's debate over the federal budget. During that debate, House members cast a number of votes that would severely limit the Environmental Protection Agency's ability to protect public health from water and air pollution. The Continuing Resolution (CR) itself cut 30 percent of the EPA's budget. The CR also contained policy provisions to block EPA from setting limits for carbon dioxide pollution. In addition, several amendments were passed that also would block the EPA from doing its job of protecting public health, including Representative Ted Poe's (R-TX) amendment to bar the EPA from taking any actions to reduce carbon dioxide pollution for any reason, Representative John Carter's (R-TX) amendment to prevent the EPA from reducing toxic pollution such as arsenic and mercury from cement kilns and Representative Mike Pompeo's amendment to prevent EPA from collecting data about carbon and other pollution.
Keeping with tradition, Speaker of the House John Boehner did not actually vote on the bill or the amendments, but supported the bill's passage as amended. Every other member whose district was polled voted for the EPA-blocking amendments, and every member except for Rep. Jason Altmire (D-PA) voted for the final package.
For more information on how individual members voted and how the votes put public health at risk, see https://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/paltman/19%20Member%20Votes%20on%20CR.pdf and https://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/paltman/strong_opposition_nationally_a.html.
FINDINGS FROM NATIONAL SURVEY
The national survey of American registered voters also showed the following
* 69 percent of Americans - including 59 percent of Republicans and 69 percent of Independents - think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
* 64 percent of Americans - including 57 percent of Republicans and 63 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only about a third of Americans (36 percent).
* One of the poll questions revealed particularly strong support for clean air updates the EPA is putting forward today: 66 percent of Americans -- including 54 percent of Republicans and 61 percent of Independents -- favor the EPA requiring stricter limits on the amount of toxic chemicals such as mercury, lead, and arsenic that coal power plants and other industrial facilities release.
* 78 percent of Americans - including 69 percent of Republicans and 74 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
* 66 percent support "requiring stricter limits on the amount of toxic chemicals such as mercury, lead, and arsenic that coal power plants and other industrial facilities release."
* 65 percent support "limiting the amount of carbon pollution that big power plants and other industrial facilities release."
* 64 percent favor "requiring stricter limits on the amount of smog that vehicles and industrial facilities release."
FINDINGS FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS
The following 19 Congressional Districts illustrate the broad public support for the Environmental Protection Agency and the EPA's planned updates to key anti-pollution safeguards for the protection of the health of Americans:
Illinois -- Rep. Joe Walsh, IL-8, 571 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 4.1%
* 68 percent - including 60 percent of Independents and 57 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
* 73 percent - including 62 percent of Republicans and 63 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
* 80 percent - including 74 percent of Republicans and 77 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
* 76 percent - including 65 percent of Republicans and 73 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 24 percent.
* 83 percent - including 74 percent of Republicans and 81 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Illinois - Rep. Robert Dold, IL-10, 690 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 3.7%
* 74 percent - including 69 percent of Independents and 53 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
* 77 percent -- including 65 percent of Republicans and 75 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
* 80 percent - including 67 percent of Republicans and 80 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
* 77 percent - including 62 percent of Republicans and 78 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 23 percent.
* 83 percent - including 75 percent of Republicans and 79 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Illinois - Rep. Bobby Schilling, IL-17, 931 registered voters, 2/19-2/20, margin of error 3.2%
* 65 percent - including 64 percent of Independents and 46 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
* 71 percent -- including 59 percent of Republicans and 61 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
* 76 percent - including 65 percent of Republicans and 75 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
* 73 percent - including 60 percent of Republicans and 65 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 27 percent.
* 81 percent - including 72 percent of Republicans and 76 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Michigan - Rep. Daniel Benishek, MI-1, 1,135 registered voters, 2/20-2/21, margin of error 2.9%
* 62 percent - including 55 percent of Independents and 42 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
* 66 percent -- including 52 percent of Republicans and 57 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
* 74 percent - including 63 percent of Republicans and 67 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
* 69 percent of Americans - including 56 percent of Republicans and 60 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 31 percent.
* 78 percent - including 69 percent of Republicans and 73 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Michigan - Rep. Mike Rogers, MI-8, 754 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 3.6%
* 64 percent - including 63 percent of Independents and 40 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
* 67 percent -- including 45 percent of Republicans and 66 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
* 77 percent - including 61 percent of Republicans and 80 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
* 74 percent - including 60 percent of Republicans and 73 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 26 percent.
* 80 percent - including 63 percent of Republicans and 82 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Minnesota - Rep. Michele Bachmann, MN-6, 956 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 3.2%
* 64 percent - including 60 percent of Independents and 35 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
* 69 percent -- including 47 percent of Republicans and 65 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
* 73 percent - including 58 percent of Republicans and 69 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
* 70 percent - including 50 percent of Republicans and 66 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 30 percent.
* 78 percent - including 60 percent of Republicans and 76 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Minnesota - Rep. Chip Cravaack, MN-8, 1,022 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 3.1%
* 67 percent - including 58 percent of Independents and 36 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
* 69 percent -- including 38 percent of Republicans and 60 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
* 73 percent - including 53 percent of Republicans and 69 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
* 71 percent of Americans - including 50 percent of Republicans and 63 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 29 percent.
* 79 percent - including 57 percent of Republicans and 74 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Montana - Rep. Denny Rehberg, MT-At Large, 1,065 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 3%
* 58 percent - including 54 percent of Independents and 32 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
* 58 percent -- including 32 percent of Republicans and 50 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
* 67 percent - including 39 percent of Republicans and 63 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
* 62 percent - including 41 percent of Republicans and 60 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 38 percent.
* 72 percent - including 56 percent of Republicans and 67 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Ohio - U.S. House Speaker John Boehner, OH-8, 805 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 3.5%
* 56 percent - including 51 percent of Independents and 37 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
* 62 percent -- including 49 percent of Republicans and 55 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
* 71 percent - including 60 percent of Republicans and 67 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
* 66 percent - including 56 percent of Republicans and 60 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 34 percent.
* 75 percent - including 66 percent of Republicans and 71 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Ohio -- Rep. Patrick Tiberi, OH-12, 729 registered voters, 2/20-2/21, margin of error 3.6%
* 65 percent - including 57 percent of Independents and 44 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
* 67 percent -- including 48 percent of Republicans and 57 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
* 73 percent - including 58 percent of Republicans and 69 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
* 69 percent - including 57 percent of Republicans and 57 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 31 percent.
* 77 percent - including 63 percent of Republicans and 72 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Ohio - Rep. Jim Renacci, OH-16, 705 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 3.7%
* 59 percent - including 48 percent of Independents and 41 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
* 64 percent -- including 48 percent of Republicans and 50 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
* 71 percent - including 57 percent of Republicans and 62 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
* 68 percent - including 52 percent of Republicans and 59 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 32 percent.
* 76 percent - including 65 percent of Republicans and 64 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Pennsylvania - Rep. Jason Altmire, P-4, 867 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 3.3%
* 61 percent - including 56 percent of Independents and 46 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
* 66 percent -- including 52 percent of Republicans and 56 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
* 72 percent - including 64 percent of Republicans and 62 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
* 70 percent - including 60 percent of Republicans and 56 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 30 percent.
* 80 percent - including 71 percent of Republicans and 66 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Pennsylvania - Rep. Jim Gerlach, PA-6, 839 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 3.4%
* 72 percent - including 69 percent of Independents and 48 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
* 76 percent -- including 57 percent of Republicans and 74 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
* 78 percent - including 62 percent of Republicans and 72 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
* 76 percent of Americans - including 58 percent of Republicans and 67 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 24 percent.
* 86 percent - including 75 percent of Republicans and 83 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Pennsylvania - Rep. Patrick Meehan, PA-7, 542 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 4.2%
* 76 percent - including 80 percent of Independents and 57 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
* 80 percent -- including 62 percent of Republicans and 76 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
* 84 percent - including 79 percent of Republicans and 79 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
* 80 percent - including 69 percent of Republicans and 77 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 20 percent.
* 87 percent - including 76 percent of Republicans and 83 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Pennsylvania - Rep. Lou Barletta, PA-11, 859 registered voters, 2/20-2/21, margin of error 3.3%
* 70 percent - including 58 percent of Independents and 53 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
* 79 percent -- including 68 percent of Republicans and 69 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
* 82 percent - including 75 percent of Republicans and 76 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
* 79 percent - including 68 percent of Republicans and 72 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 21 percent.
* 88 percent - including 82 percent of Republicans and 84 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Virginia - Rep. Robert Hurt, VA-5, 767 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 3.5%
* 68 percent - including 69 percent of Independents and 37 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
* 73 percent -- including 55 percent of Republicans and 64 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
* 74 percent - including 61 percent of Republicans and 72 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
* 73 percent - including 52 percent of Republicans and 70 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 27 percent.
* 83 percent - including 64 percent of Republicans and 80 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Virginia - Rep. Scott Rigell, VA-2, 556 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 4.2%
* 66 percent - including 67 percent of Independents and 49 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
* 74 percent -- including 62 percent of Republicans and 69 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
* 79 percent - including 75 percent of Republicans and 73 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
* 79 percent - including 70 percent of Republicans and 71 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 21 percent.
* 81 percent - including 71 percent of Republicans and 77 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Wisconsin -- Rep. Reid Ribble, WI-8, 1,398 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 2.6%
* 64 percent - including 60 percent of Independents and 46 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
* 70 percent -- including 60 percent of Republicans and 61 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
* 74 percent - including 69 percent of Republicans and 69 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
* 71 percent - including 63 percent of Republicans and 65 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 29 percent.
* 79 percent - including 72 percent of Republicans and 75 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Wisconsin - Rep. Sean Duffy, WI-7, 1,578 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 2.5%
* 62 percent - including 55 percent of Independents and 37 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
* 66 percent -- including 44 percent of Republicans and 56 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
* 74 percent - including 64 percent of Republicans and 66 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
* 69 percent - including 51 percent of Republicans and 61 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 31 percent.
* 79 percent - including 63 percent of Republicans and 74 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
The national survey by PPP for NRDC was conducted February 18-20, 2011, with a sample size of 784 registered voters and a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percent. Full reports on the national and district-level polling results, including sample sizes, polling dates and the margin of errors associated with each of the surveys can be found at https://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/paltman/2-23%20Poll%20Table.pdf and https://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/paltman/2-23%20PPP%20Poll%20National%20and%20District%20Results.zip.
For all 20 of the national and Congressional District surveys, PPP conducted automated telephone surveys of registered voters using voter lists provided by Aristotle Inc. At least three attempts were made to reach every potential respondent.
NRDC works to safeguard the earth--its people, its plants and animals, and the natural systems on which all life depends. We combine the power of more than three million members and online activists with the expertise of some 700 scientists, lawyers, and policy advocates across the globe to ensure the rights of all people to the air, the water, and the wild.
(212) 727-2700A member of his legal team noted that "the immigration prosecutor, judge, and jailer all answer to Donald Trump, and that one man is eager to weaponize the system in a desperate bid to silence Mahmoud Khalil."
Mahmoud Khalil and his lawyers on Wednesday affirmed their plan to fight an immigration court ruling that paves the way for his deportation, months after plainclothes agents accosted the lawful permanent resident and his US citizen wife outside their home in New York City.
"It is no surprise that the Trump administration continues to retaliate against me for my exercise of free speech. Their latest attempt, through a kangaroo immigration court, exposes their true colors once again," Khalil said in a statement.
"When their first effort to deport me was set to fail, they resorted to fabricating baseless and ridiculous allegations in a bid to silence me for speaking out and standing firmly with Palestine, demanding an end to the ongoing genocide," he continued. "Such fascist tactics will never deter me from continuing to advocate for my people's liberation."
While President Donald Trump has a broad goal of mass deportations, his administration has targeted Khalil, a former Columbia University graduate student with a valid green card, and other foreign scholars in the United States for criticizing Israel's US-backed genocide in the Gaza Strip.
"We have witnessed a constant lack of humanity and allegiance to the law throughout proceedings in this farcical Louisiana immigration court."
Federal agents arrested Khalil, an Algerian citizen of Palestinian descent, in March. He wasn't released from a federal immigration facility until June. During his 104-day detention, his wife, Noor Abdalla, gave birth to their son. Over the past six months, he has been a part of multiple legal battles: his challenge to being deported in a Louisiana immigration court; a civil rights case before US District Judge Michael Farbiarz in New Jersey; and a fight for $20 million in damages.
In a Wednesday letter to Farbiarz—an appointee of former President Joe Biden who has already blocked his deportation while the civil rights case proceeds—Khalil's legal team explained that on September 12, Jamee Comans, an immigration judge (IJ), "issued three separate orders denying petitioner's (1) motion for an extension of time, (2) motion to change venue, and (3) application for a waiver, without conducting an evidentiary hearing."
"In denying petitioner's request for a waiver absent a hearing, as well as his motions for extension of time and for change of venue, the IJ ordered petitioner removed to Algeria or Syria... while reaffirming her decisions denying petitioner any form of relief from removal," the letter says. Khalil now has 30 days from September 12 to start an appeal with the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA).
Noting "statements targeting petitioner by name for retaliation and deportation made by the president and several senior US government officials," Khalil's lawyers "have ample reason to expect that the BIA process—and an affirmance of the IJ's determination—will be swift," the letter continued. "Upon affirmance by the BIA, petitioner will lose his lawful permanent resident status, including his right to reside and work in the United States, and have a final order of removal against him."
"Compared to other courts of appeals, including those in the 3rd and 2nd Circuits, the 5th Circuit almost never grants stays of removal to noncitizens pursuing petitions for review of BIA decisions. As a result, the only meaningful impediment to petitioner's physical removal from the United States would be this court's important order prohibiting removal during the pendency of his federal habeas case," the letter points out, referring to Farbiarz's previous intervention.
Khalil is represented by Dratel & Lewis, the Center for Constitutional Rights, Creating Law Enforcement Accountability & Responsibility (CLEAR), Van Der Hout LLP, Washington Square Legal Services, and the national, New Jersey, New York, and Louisiana arms of the ACLU.
"When the immigration prosecutor, judge, and jailer all answer to Donald Trump, and that one man is eager to weaponize the system in a desperate bid to silence Mahmoud Khalil, a US permanent resident whose only supposed sin is that he stands against an ongoing genocide in Palestine, this is the result," CLEAR co-director Ramzi Kassem said Wednesday. "A plain-as-day First Amendment violation that also puts on sharp display the rapidly free-falling credibility of the entire US immigration system."
In addition to calling out the Trump administration for its unconstitutional conduct, Khalil's lawyers expressed some optimism.
"We have witnessed a constant lack of humanity and allegiance to the law throughout proceedings in this farcical Louisiana immigration court, and the immigration judge's September 12 decision is just the most recent example of what occurs when the system requires an arbiter that is anything but neutral to do the administration's bidding," said Johnny Sinodis, a partner at Van Der Hout LLP. "As with other illegal efforts by the government, this too will be challenged and overcome."
"The Trump administration has taken a sledgehammer to our capacity to hold sex offenders to account and undermined support and services for crime victims," said Rep. Jamie Raskin.
Congressional Democrats and victim advocates took aim Tuesday at President Donald Trump's gutting of federal programs combatcing human trafficking, belying campaign promises to aggressively target perpetrators of such crimes.
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, on Tuesday released an 18-page memo "detailing how the Trump administration has repeatedly sided with sex offenders and human traffickers over their victims—often rewarding sexual predators and elevating them to positions of power within the US government while crippling key offices, programs, and grants that combat sex crimes and support survivors."
This seemingly flies in the face of Trump's "Agenda 47" campaign platform, which vowed to aggressively crack down on human traffickers, and the groundswell of Trump supporters' unheeded calls for action and accountability in the Jeffrey Epstein case. Fighting child sex trafficking—both real and imagined—has long been an issue of passionate importance for the MAGA movement.
"Trump began his second term promising to 'make America safe again.' But safe for whom? Law-abiding citizens or dangerous criminals?"
Noting that "Trump and his supporters have gone from demanding the release of the Jeffrey Epstein files to doing everything in their power to prevent their release, openly tampering with potential witness Ghislaine Maxwell and calling the matter a 'Democrat hoax,'" the memo—titled Epstein Is the Tip of the Iceberg—begins by asking: "Trump began his second term promising to 'make America safe again.' But safe for whom? Law-abiding citizens or dangerous criminals?"
The memo notes that in the past seven months, Trump has:
Trump has also been found civilly liable for sexual abuse and has been accused of rape, sexual assault, or harassment by more than two dozen women.
Following whistleblower claims "that the Trump administration concealed information about the safety of unaccompanied Guatemalan children they tried to deport in the dead of night," Sens. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) on Tuesday called for an oversight hearing to examine the US Office of Refugee Resettlement's "mass child deportation efforts and apparent lies under oath."
"The urgent call for a hearing comes after the disclosure alleged that at least 30 of 327 unaccompanied Guatemalan children the administration attempted to deport without due process 'have indicators of being a victim of child abuse, including death threats, gang violence, human trafficking, and/or have expressed fear of return to Guatemala,'" Padilla's office said in a statement Wednesday.
An investigation published Wednesday by The Guardian also detailed how the Trump administration "has aggressively rolled back efforts across the federal government to combat human trafficking."
Jean Bruggeman, executive director of the advocacy group Freedom Network USA, told The Guardian that “it’s been a widespread and multipronged attack on survivors that leaves all of us less safe and leaves survivors with few options."
Numerous critics have warned of the dangers of Trump's diversion of federal resources and personnel dedicated to combating human trafficking to enforcing mass deportations.
As Raskin told Federal Bureau of Investigation Director Kash Patel during a charged Wednesday hearing, "When Trump decided that rounding up immigrants with no criminal records was more important that preventing crimes like human trafficking of women and girls, drug dealing, terrorism, and fraud, you ordered FBI’s 25 largest field offices to divert thousands of agents away from chasing down violent criminals, sex traffickers, fraudsters, and scammers to help carry out Trump’s extreme immigration crackdown."
"You ordered hundreds of FBI agents to pore over all the Epstein files," Raskin said, "but not to look for more clues about the money network or the network of human traffickers, pulled these agents from their regular counterterrorism, counterintelligence, or anti-drug trafficking duties to work around the clock, some of them sleeping on their office desks, to conduct a frantic search to make sure Donald Trump’s name and image were flagged and redacted wherever they appeared."
"Put on your big boy pants and let us know who the pedophiles are," Raskin added.
"Trump promised to lower prices on day one and be 'the champion of the American worker,' yet his economic agenda has delivered higher prices, a stalled job market, and sluggish growth," said another economist.
As working-class Americans contend with a stalled labor market and rising prices under US President Donald Trump, economist Alex Jacquez warned Wednesday that the Federal Reserve's "small rate cut will do little to address Trump's economic turmoil."
"Driven by a stagnant job market, the Fed's move offers no real relief to American households, consumers, or workers—all of whom are paying the price for Trump's economic mismanagement," said Jacquez, who previously served as a special assistant to former President Barack Obama and is now chief of policy and advocacy at the think tank Groundwork Collaborative. "No interest rate tweak can undo that damage."
Jacquez's colleague Liz Pancotti, managing director of policy and advocacy at Groundwork, similarly said Wednesday that "President Trump promised to lower prices on day one and be 'the champion of the American worker,' yet his economic agenda has delivered higher prices, a stalled job market, and sluggish growth. He's leaving families and workers high and dry—and no move by the Fed will save them."
The president has been pressuring the US central bank to slash its benchmark interest rate, taking aim at Fed Chair Jerome Powell, whom Trump appointed during his first term. Powell remained in the post under former Democratic President Joe Biden.
The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) voted to lower the federal funds rate by 0.25 percentage points, from 4.25-4.5% to 4-4.25%. It is the first cut since December 2024, and Powell said the decision reflects a "shift in the balance of risks" to the Fed's dual mandate of price stability and maximum employment.
Daniel Hornung, who held economic policy roles during the Obama and Biden administrations and is now a policy fellow at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research, said in a statement that "beyond the Fed's September cut, the main story from the Fed's projections is a cloudy outlook for the economy and monetary policy over the rest of the year."
The cut came after Trump ally Stephen Miran was sworn in to a seat on the Fed's Board of Governors on Tuesday—which made this FOMC gathering "the most politically charged meeting in recent memory," as Politico reported.
The new appointee "was the only Fed official to dissent from the decision," the outlet noted. "Miran called for twice as large a cut in borrowing costs, and the Fed's economic projections suggest that one official—likely Miran—would support jumbo-sized rate cuts at the next two meetings as well—an estimate that is conspicuously lower than the other 18 estimates."
Hornung highlighted that "an equal number of members favor hiking, no further cuts, or one cut to the number of members who favor two more cuts, and one outlier member—presumably, President Trump's current Council of Economic Advisers chair—favors the equivalent of five cuts."
"Besides Miran’s outlier status, which sends concerning signals about continued Fed independence," he added, "the wide range of views on the committee is a reaction to the real risks that tariff and immigration policy pose to both sides of the Fed's mandate."
Federal immigration agents across the United States are working to deliver on Trump's promised mass deportations, despite warnings of the human and economic impacts of rounding up immigrants living and working in the country. The president is also engaged in a global trade war, imposing tariffs that have driven up prices for a range of goods.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) announced last week that overall inflation rose by 2.9% year-over-year in August and core inflation rose by 3.1%. Jacquez said at the time: "Make no mistake, inflation is accelerating and American families continue to feel price pressures across the board from children's clothing, to groceries, to autos. Rate cuts will not ease the inescapable financial pain that the Trump economy is inflicting on households across the nation."
That came less than a week after BLS revealed in its first jobs report since Trump fired the agency's commissioner that the US economy added only 22,000 jobs in August, and the number of jobs created in July and June were once again revised downward.
Jacquez had called that report "more evidence that Trump’s promises to working families have fallen flat."
Recent polling has also exposed how working people are suffering under Trump's second administration. One survey—conducted by Data for Progress for Groundwork and Protect Borrowers—shows that "American families are trapped in a cycle of debt," with 55% of likely voters reporting at least some credit card debt, and another 18% saying they “had this type of debt in the past, but not anymore.”
The poll, released last week, also found that over half have or previously had car loan or medical debt, more than 40% have or had student debt, and over 35% are or used to be behind on utility payments. Additionally, nearly 30% have or had “buy now, pay later” debt through options such as Afterpay or Klarna.