June, 13 2011, 04:34pm EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Kate Fried, Food & Water Watch: (202) 683.4905, kfried(at)fwwatch(dot)org.
Advocates for Safe, Clean Water Call for Local and Federal Bans on Fracking
New Food & Water Watch Report Highlights Public Health Risks Associated With Controversial Practice
ALBANY, N.Y.
The movement to protect public health and essential natural resources escalated today when the national consumer advocacy group Food & Water Watch joined with Frack Action and New York State Senator Tony Avella (D-Queens) to call on New York State and the federal government to ban the practice of hydraulic fracturing.
"The U.S. is experiencing a boom in shale gas production, and this has come at the detriment of consumers and the environment," said Food & Water Watch Executive Director Wenonah Hauter. "Contrary to what the natural gas industry wants us to believe, fracking is not a panacea to our energy woes. It is a toxic practice that threatens essential resources, poisons people and livestock and erodes the quality of life in rural America. New York State and the federal government should take a good long look at the dangers of fracking and ban it before it inflicts any more harm on U.S. communities."
Fracking involves injecting water, sand and potentially toxic chemicals deep underground to break up dense rock formations and release natural gas. The process can pollute water supplies when fracking chemicals leak into underground wells, or when accidents spill the fluids into rivers or streams.
Public opposition to fracking has escalated in recent months. According to Food & Water Watch, at least 55 localities across the U.S. have passed measures against fracking.
Late last year, New York State passed a six-month moratorium on the practice. In late May, New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman sued the federal government for not assessing the environmental impacts of fracking near the Delaware River, which supplies drinking water for 15 million Americans. The New York State Senate is currently considering legislation that would ban fracking, as well as a bill that would require hazardous waste produced from fracking to be subject to the treatment requirements of hazardous waste.
"Since last year's moratorium battle, we've seen a near-constant stream of revelations and devastating news that has expanded our knowledge of the myriad dangers of fracking, and the extent to which this practice has only been allowed to move forward through the suppression of scientific evidence and the collusion of political leaders with oil and gas corporations," said Claire Sandberg, executive director of Frack Action. "With more damning revelations emerging every day--from the levels of radioactivity in fracking wastewater, to political pressure on the EPA, to the news that gas companies have used over 32 million gallons of diesel fuel as an injection fluid in 19 states--we see now that only a full and permanent ban on hydraulic fracturing will adequately protect New Yorkers."
This backlash against fracking is reinforced by a report also released today by Food & Water Watch that highlights why natural gas drilling poses unacceptable risks to the American public. The Case for a Ban on Gas Fracking shows how the natural gas industry's use of water-intensive, toxic, unregulated practices for natural gas extraction are compromising public health and polluting water resources necessary for human health and sanitation, businesses and agriculture.
Natural gas fracked from shale has increased in recent years as new techniques allowed drillers to access natural gas deposits that were previously considered too dense or far underground to economically extract. Shale fracking drills deep curving horizontal wells into rock formations, injecting them with a mixture of water and chemicals to extract gas. The EPA estimates that 70 to 140 billion gallons of water are pumped into 35,000 fracking wells annually.
According to Department of Energy figures, fracked shale and coalbed gas production increased nearly 150 percent between 2000 and 2010. Over the last four years, shale gas production increased an average of 48 percent annually.
The oil and gas industry lobby paved the way for the expansion of fracking. The 10 largest natural gas producers and two trade associations spent more than $370 million lobbying between 2005 and 2010, according to Food & Water Watch analysis of Center for Responsive Politics data. Fracking is exempt from regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act, which allows gas companies to inject almost any chemical into fracked wells, and they are not legally required to disclose these chemicals claiming they are proprietary "trade secrets."
In 2011, the U.S. House and Energy Commerce Committee found that between 2005 and 2009, 14 oil companies injected 780 million gallons of fracking chemicals and other substances into U.S. wells. This included 10.2 million gallons of fluids containing known or suspected carcinogens. Scientists at the Endocrine Disruption Exchange found that 25 percent of fracking fluids can cause cancer; 37 percent can disrupt the endocrine system; and 40 to 50 percent can affect the nervous, immune and cardiovascular systems.
Opponents of fracking cite the high potential for water and air pollution as a leading reason to ban the practice. Over 1,000 cases of water contamination have been reported near fracking sites. A study released by researchers at Duke University in April found methane levels in shallow drinking water wells near active gas drilling sites at a level 17 times higher than those near inactive ones. Similarly, a 2011 Cornell University study found that the process of fracking releases methane, which according to the EPA, is 21 times more damaging greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.
"Given the numerous accidents in other states, and the DEC's extremely limited resources, I have yet to be convinced that hydrofracking can be safely executed in New York State," said New York State Senator Tony Avella, who is the ranking member of the Environmental Conservation Committee. "New York's abundant clean water is our most precious resource, and it is simply too valuable to risk. If our water is polluted, it is gone forever. The science is simply not fully developed to prevent accidents that will do irreparable harm to our water supply and our farmland, and we are not prepared to handle the contamination should an incident occur. Until we can be one hundred percent assured there is no chance of any harmful contaminants leaking into our drinking water we must ban the practice completely."
Between 30 and 70 percent of the fluids used in fracking are discharged as wastewater. In 2008, a fracking wastewater pit in Colorado leaked 1.6 million gallons of fluids, which migrated into the Colorado River. Fracking operations in Pennsylvania alone are expected to create 19 million gallons of wastewater, which can contain radioactive elements, and cannot be effectively treated by municipal wastewater plants.
"The more I learn about hydrofracking, the more concerned I grow about its negative effects on our health and our environment," said New York State Senator Liz Kruger (D-Manhattan). "There is simply too much scientific evidence that this practice poses insurmountable dangers. For the safety of all New Yorkers we cannot allow hydrofracking to take place in the State of New York. There is too much at risk."
Despite the public health and environmental risks associated with the process, many states have allowed fracking in hopes that it could help boost recession-ravaged economies. Between 2006 and 2011, Pennsylvania attributed $1.1 billion in state revenue to natural gas drilling.
Yet in many places, fracking has eroded the quality of life for local residents. In Wise County, Texas properties with gas wells have lost 75 percent of their value, and residents in communities host to fracking operations have experienced headaches and blackouts from air pollution. One Texas hospital serving counties near drilling sites reported asthma rates three times higher than the state average with one quarter of the children it served suffering from the ailment. In Ohio, a house exploded after a fracked gas well leaked methane into the home's water supply.
"The public health impacts of fracking are already a reality for many of us in New York" said Natalie Brant from Collins, NY, whose family including her husband and eight children have experienced health problems since vertical fracking began at their residence three years ago. "The health problems of many families are only going to get worse unless the New York State legislature and Governor Cuomo put the well-being of the people before the profits of giant gas companies."
The Case for a Ban on Gas Fracking is available here:
https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/reports/the-case-for-a-ban-on-gas-fracking
A map of municipalities that have taken action against fracking is available here:
https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/water/fracking/fracking-action-center/map/
Frack Action is engaged in a long-term campaign to protect our water, air and public health from the dangerous practice of hydraulic fracturing. By raising awareness and empowering the public to organize in defense of their communities, we seek to expose the false claims of the gas industry and mobilize a citizen movement to protect our health and our future.
Food & Water Watch mobilizes regular people to build political power to move bold and uncompromised solutions to the most pressing food, water, and climate problems of our time. We work to protect people's health, communities, and democracy from the growing destructive power of the most powerful economic interests.
(202) 683-2500LATEST NEWS
With Food Aid Suspended for Millions of Families, Trump Brags of 'Statuary Marble' Bathroom Makeover
"He’s a psychopath, humanly incapable of caring about anyone or anything but himself," one critic said of Trump.
Oct 31, 2025
As millions of families across the US are about to lose their access to food aid over the weekend, President Donald Trump on Friday decided to show off photos of a White House bathroom that he boasted had been refurbished in "highly polished, statuary marble."
Trump posted photos of the bathroom on his Truth Social platform, and he explained that he decided to remodel it because he was dissatisfied with the "art deco green tile style" that had been implemented during a previous renovation, which he described as "totally inappropriate for the Lincoln Era."
"I did it in black and white polished Statuary marble," Trump continued. "This was very appropriate for the time of Abraham Lincoln and, in fact, could be the marble that was originally there!"
Trump's critics were quick to pan the remodeled bathroom, especially since it came at a time when Americans are suffering from numerous policies the president and the Republican Party are enacting, including tariffs that are raising the cost of food and clothing; expiring subsidies for Americans who buy health insurance through Affordable Care Act exchanges; and cuts to Medicaid and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance (SNAP) programs in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.
"Sure, you might not be able to eat or go to the doctor, but check out how nice Trump's new marble shitter is," remarked independent journalist Aaron Rupar on Bluesky.
Joe Walsh, a former Republican congressman who has become a critic of Trump, ripped the president for displaying such tone deafness in the middle of a federal government shutdown.
"Government still shutdown, Americans not getting paid, food assistance for low-income families and children about to be cut off, and this is what he cares about," he wrote on X. "He’s a psychopath, humanly incapable of caring about anyone or anything but himself."
Don Moynihan, a political scientist at the University of Michigan, expressed extreme skepticism that the White House bathroom during Abraham Lincoln's tenure was decked out in marble and gold.
"Fact check based on no research but with a high degree of confidence: This is not the marble that was originally in the Lincoln Bedroom," he wrote. "It is more likely to the be retrieved from a Trump casino before it was demolished."
Fashion critic Derek Guy, meanwhile, mostly left politics out of his criticisms of the remodeled bathroom, instead simply observing that "White House renovations are currently being spearheaded by someone with famously bad interior design taste."
Earlier this month, Trump sparked outrage when he demolished the entire East Wing of the White House to make way for a massive White House ballroom financed by donations from some of America’s wealthiest corporations—including several with government contracts and interests in deregulation—such as Apple, Lockheed Martin, Microsoft, Meta, Google, Amazon, and Palantir.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Khanna Warns Any Trump Attack on Venezuela Would Be 'Blatantly Unconstitutional'
"Congress must speak up now to stop another endless, regime-change war," said Democratic US Rep. Ro Khanna.
Oct 31, 2025
US Rep. Ro Khanna on Friday demanded urgent congressional action to avert "another endless, regime-change war" amid reports that President Donald Trump is weighing military strikes inside Venezuela.
Such strikes, warned Khanna (D-Calif.), would be "blatantly unconstitutional."
"The United States Congress must speak up and stop this," Khanna said in a video posted to social media. "No president, according to the Constitution, has the authority to strike another country without Congress' approval. And the American people have voted against regime change and endless wars."
Watch:
Trump is getting ready to launch strikes inside Venezuela per the @WSJ & @MiamiHerald.
This is blatantly unconstitutional.
Congress must speak up now to stop another endless, regime-change war. @RepThomasMassie @RandPaul. pic.twitter.com/LrnPPUVZaU
— Ro Khanna (@RoKhanna) October 31, 2025
Khanna's remarks came in response to reporting by the Miami Herald and the Wall Street Journal on internal Trump administration discussions regarding possible airstrike targets inside Venezuela.
The Herald reported early Friday that the administration "has made the decision to attack military installations inside Venezuela and the strikes could come at any moment." The Journal, in a story published Thursday, was more reserved, reporting that the administration "has identified targets in Venezuela that include military facilities used to smuggle drugs," but adding that "the president hasn't made a final decision on ordering land strikes."
Citing unnamed US officials familiar with the matter, the Journal reported that "the targets would send a clear message to Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro that it is time to step down."
Following the reports, the White House denied that Trump has finalized plans for a military strike on Venezuela. Trump himself told reporters aboard Air Force One on Friday that he has not made a final decision, signaling his belief he has the authority to do so if he chooses.
Last week, the president said publicly that land strikes are "going to be next" following his illegal, deadly strikes on boats in waters off Central and South America.
Trump has said he would not seek approval from Congress before attacking Venezuela directly.
"The American people oppose being dragged into yet another endless war, this time in Venezuela, and our constitutional order demands deliberation by the U.S. Congress—period."
A potentially imminent, unauthorized US attack on Venezuela and the administration's accelerating military buildup in the Caribbean have thus far drawn vocal opposition from just a fraction of the lawmakers on Capitol Hill, currently embroiled in a shutdown fight.
Just three senators—Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Rand Paul (R-Ky.), and Adam Schiff (D-Calif.)—are listed as official backers of a resolution aimed at preventing Trump from attacking Venezuela without congressional authorization. Other senators, including Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), have spoken out against Trump's belligerence toward Venezuela.
"Trump is illegally threatening war with Venezuela—after killing more than 50 people in unauthorized strikes at sea," Sanders wrote in a social media post on Friday. "The Constitution is clear: Only Congress can declare war. Congress must defend the law and end Trump's militarism."
Dylan Williams, vice president of government affairs at the Center for International Policy, wrote Friday that "most Americans oppose overthrowing Venezuela's leaders by force—and an even larger majority oppose invading."
"Call your senators and tell them to vote for S.J.Res.90 to block Trump's unauthorized use of military force," Williams added. "The Capitol switchboard can connect you to your senators' offices at 202-224-3121."
A similar resolution led by Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colo.) in the US House has just over 30 cosponsors.
Rep. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.) announced his support for the House resolution on Thursday, saying in a statement that "Trump does not have the legal authority to launch military strikes inside Venezuela without a specific authorization by Congress."
"I am deeply troubled by reports that suggest this administration believes otherwise," said Neguse. "Any unilateral directive to send Americans into war is not only reckless, but illegal and an affront to the House of Representatives' powers under Article I of our Constitution."
"The American people oppose being dragged into yet another endless war, this time in Venezuela, and our constitutional order demands deliberation by the U.S. Congress—period," Neguse added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'No Question' More People Will End Up With Fake Insurance If ACA Subsidies Expire: Expert
"This is what happens when we design systems for insurance companies instead of humans."
Oct 31, 2025
Time on Thursday published reporting about "how fake health insurance is luring people in," and along with sharing stories of Americans tricked into paying for plans that aren't compliant with the Affordable Care Act, the article features an expert's warning that more could be fooled if Congress lets ACA subsidies expire.
The ongoing federal government shutdown stems from congressional Democrats' efforts to reverse recent GOP cuts to Medicaid and extend the ACA tax credits, which set to expire at the end of the year. Open enrollment for 2026 plans sold on ACA marketplaces starts Saturday, and Americans who buy insurance through these platforms now face the looming end of subsidies and substantial monthly premium hikes.
"Confusion about navigating insurance writ large and the Affordable Care Act marketplace in particular has led many people to end up with plans that they think are health insurance which in fact are not health insurance," Time reported. "They mistakenly click away from healthcare.gov, the website where people are supposed to sign up for ACA-compliant plans, and end up on a site with a misleading name."
ACA plans are required to cover 10 essential benefits, the outlet detailed, but consumers who leave the official website may instead sign up for short-term plans that don't span the full year, fixed indemnity plans that pay a small amount for certain services, or "healthcare sharing ministries, in which people pitch in for other peoples' medical costs, but which sometimes do not cover preexisting conditions."
Claire Heyison, senior policy analyst for health insurance and marketplace policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, told Time that "there's no question that more people will end up with these kinds of plans if the premium tax credits are not extended."
According to the outlet:
These non-insurance products "have increasingly been marketed in ways that make them look similar to health insurance," Heyison says. To stir further confusion, some even deploy common insurance terms like PPO (preferred provider organization) or co-pay in their terms and conditions. But people will pay a price for using them, Heyison says, because they can charge higher premiums than ACA-compliant plans, deny coverage based on preexisting conditions, impose annual or lifetime limits on coverage, and exclude benefits like prescription drug coverage or maternity care.
Often, the websites where people end up buying non-ACA compliant insurance have the names and logos of insurers on them. Sometimes, they are lead-generation sites... that ask for a person's name and phone number and then share that information with brokers who get a commission for signing up people for plans, whether they are health insurance or not.
To avoid paying for misleading plans, Heyison advised spending a few days researching before buying anything, steering clear of companies that offer a gift for signing up, and asking for documents detailing coverage to review before payment.
On the heels of Time's reporting and the eve of open enrollment, Data for Progress and Groundwork Collaborative published polling that makes clear Americans across the political spectrum are worried about skyrocketing health insurance premiums.
The pollsters found that 75% of voters are "somewhat" or "very" concerned about the spikes, including 83% of Democrats, 78% of Independents, and 66% of Republicans. While the overall figure was the same as last week, the share who said they were very concerned rose from 45% to 47%.
As the second-longest shutdown ever drags on, 57% of respondents said they don't believe that President Donald Trump and Republican majorities in both chambers of Congress are focused on lowering healthcare costs for people like them and their families. More broadly, 52% also did not agree that Trump and GOP lawmakers "are fighting on behalf of" people like them.
A plurality of voters (42%) said that Trump and congressional Republicans deserve most of the blame for rising premiums, while 27% blamed both parties equally, and just a quarter put most of the responsibility on elected Democrats.
"While President Trump focuses on the moodboard for his gilded ballroom and House Republicans refuse to show up for work in Washington, a ticking time bomb is strapped to working families’ pocketbooks," said Elizabeth Pancotti, Groundwork Collaborative's managing director of policy and advocacy, in a Friday statement.
Pointing to the Trump administration's legally dubious decision not to keep funding the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program during the shutdown, she added that "healthcare premiums are set to double and food assistance benefits are on the brink of collapse in a matter of hours, and voters know exactly who's to blame."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


