

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.
Christina DiPasquale, 202.716.1953, christina@fitzgibbonmedia.com
An unprecedented network of advocacy organizations, labor unions, tech companies and environmental groups have initiated ten days of coordinated action aimed at halting the controversial "Fast Track" legislation introduced by Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) and Congressman Dave Camp (R-MI) earlier this month in an effort to ratify the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) without a full Congressional debate. The "10 Days to Stop Fast Track" campaign will run from January 22-31.
More than 60 organizations are working together to oppose the Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities Act of 2014, which threatens to remove the ability of Congress and the public to meaningfully debate trade agreements like the TPP and ensure necessary protections for basic rights.
Read over 50 reasons to oppose Fast Track here: https://StopFastTrack.com
View photos of actions across the country here: https://StopFastTrack.com/#photos
Participants include: reddit, AFL-CIO, Sierra Club, Fight for the Future, Imgur, Communications Workers of America, BoingBoing, Corporate Accountability International, the Machinists Union IAMAW, Electronic Frontier Foundation, MoveOn, Rainforest Action Network, United Students for Fair Trade, Organic Consumers Association, Popular Resistance, ThoughtWorks, Sea Shepherd, Citizens Trade Campaign, 350.org, Demand Progress, Progressive Democrats of America, OpenMedia, GMO Action Alliance, Free Press, Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch, Jobs With Justice, and more than 30 other groups.
Groups from across the political spectrum have condemned the TPP for its lack of transparency, and are now uniting to stop the Fast Track bill in the House of Representatives (HR 3830) and in the Senate (S 1900). Stopping Fast Track is the key to preventing the TPP from undermining democratic decision-making and negatively impacting communities in the U.S. and worldwide.
The StopFastTrack.com site lists logos from dozens of organizations allowing groups to articulate -- in their own words -- why they each oppose Fast Track.
"10 Days to Stop Fast Track" launched yesterday with a full day of rallies, Congressional office visits and other events across the country coordinated by the Communications Workers of America [See photos here] with support from the MoveOn National TPP team. Other groups have many actions planned during the 10-day period, including more on the ground protests, a Twitter Storm during the State of the Union, and a national call-in day on January 29th. The 10 days will culminate with an Inter-Continental Day of Action on January 31st, marking the anniversary of the passage of NAFTA, which will see hundreds of protests and events across North America.
Below are statements from several organizations participating in the 10 Days to Stop Fast Track. For a complete list, go to https://StopFastTrack.com.
For interviews, please contact Christina DiPasquale at 202.716.1953 or christina@fitzgibbonmedia.com.
AFL-CIO
"It is past time for the United States to get off the corporate hamster wheel on trade. Fast Track renews the undemocratic "trade promotion" process and completely fails to provide the transparency, accountability and oversight necessary for the far-reaching trade and investment agreements that the administration is negotiating," said Richard Trumka, president of the AFL-CIO. "It is ironic that this year, which marks the 20th Anniversary of NAFTA, the supporters of that failed model are bringing forward a fast track trade promotion bill to bring us more of the same."
BoingBoing
"There is only one reason to negotiate an Internet treaty in secret: because you want to break the Internet," said Cory Doctorow, co-editor of BoingBoing. "Moving copyright and Internet regulation out of the UN and into a series of smoke-filled rooms is a blinking red sign flashing WARNING CORRUPTION WARNING CORRUPTION for all to see. Congress must debate each substantive point in TPP, rather than abdicating its duties to the USTR."
Communications Workers of America:
"Trade agreements are no longer just about tariffs and quotas," said Communications Workers of America President Larry Cohen. "They are about the food we eat, the air we breathe, the jobs we hold. We cannot abdicate this process to non-elected representatives. We cannot let foreign policy objectives trump domestic concerns and in the process unravel our own democracy instead of strengthening others."
Corporate Accountability International:
"If Congress approves Fast Track, it's not just delegating its trade authority to the White House, it's effectively signaling its tacit approval to the largest corporate-driven trade agreement in U.S. history before even seeing it," said Jesse Bragg, spokesperson for Corporate Accountability International. "The TPP is a corporate wish list disguised as a trade agreement. The question we need to ask is: 'Do we really want to blindly approve an agreement devised by the likes of Walmart, Big Tobacco, and Chevron without even being able to amend it?'"
Electronic Frontier Foundation
"As long as the U.S. trade office treats corporate insiders as the only relevant voice in policymaking, as long as elected lawmakers are largely shut out, and as long as Internet users' concerns are considered as an after-thought (if they are considered at all), the entire trade negotiation process is undemocratic and illegitimate," said Mara Sutton, Global Policy Analyst at the EFF. "For the U.S. Trade Representative to ask for fast track authority against this backdrop is audacious, and for Congress to even consider it is irresponsible."
Fight for the Future
"Decisions that affect our most basic rights should never be made in secret," said Tiffiniy Cheng, co-director of Fight for the Future who initiated the StopFastTrack.com effort. "The Trans-Pacific Partnership would lead to a more expensive and censored Internet, and the Fast Track bill is nothing more than an anti-democratic attempt to ram it through Congress without proper debate or public scrutiny."
LabelGMOs
"We oppose Fast Track because we want our government to follow the Constitution," said Pamm Larry of LabelGMOs.org. "We believe in food sovereignty for all people and are taking a strong stand against corporate control of our food supply."
MoveOn National TPP Organizing Team
"Trade - the instrument that drives the global economy - is arguably the most influential force in determining standards of living for people the world over," notes MoveOn Regional Organizer Elizabeth Warren, coordinator for the MoveOn National TPP Team. "Driving down wages hurts everyone. Our economy can't thrive when workers don't earn enough to buy things. Any responsible trade agreement should include a mandated living wage for workers in every country - to address the problem of trade deficits and level the playing field. But it can't happen unless Congress retains its power to review, invite public comment, and revise trade agreements before they vote on them," she said. "MoveOn councils rallied when we learned about TPP. We recognized that as written it would hand multinational corporations even more rights, and accelerate the global race to the bottom. Fast Track for the TPP would circumvent the normal legislative process, prevent Congress from making changes, and shut down public debate on a whole host of issues having a direct and lasting impact on our lives," she added. "Our representatives need to know that a vote for Fast Track is a vote against democracy itself- a vote that their constituents will surely remember this fall."
OpenMedia
"We oppose Fast Tracking TPP Internet censorship because it will make the Internet more policed, expensive, and censored," said Steve Anderson, Executive Director of OpenMedia.org. "Over 125,000 people around the world have sent a message to TPP decision makers at https://openmedia.org/censorship."
Organic Consumers Association
"Congress shouldn't give President Obama fast-track trade promotion authority. Corporations like Monsanto are pushing the President to use secret, fast-tracked trade deals to force factory farming practices on the rest of the world, practices that include genetic engineering, treating poultry with chlorine and dosing animals with ractopamine," said Ronnie Cummins, International Director of the Organic Consumers Association. "GMO labels are on the trade deal hit list, too. In fact, 'Mandatory Labeling of Foods Derived from Genetic Engineering' is specifically listed in the U.S. Trade Representative's 2013 Report on Technical Barriers to Trade. Over 17,000 OCA members have sent letters to Congress through our website."
"We oppose Fast Track for the TPP because it's an undemocratic agreement that threatens the open Internet," said Erik Martin, general manager of reddit.
Sierra Club
"Across the country, Sierra Club members and supporters are ready to stand up for responsible trade that doesn't threaten American jobs, our air and water, and our climate," said Michael Brune, Sierra Club executive director. "The Sierra Club strongly opposes fast track. This bill not only undermines our democracy, it puts American families and our future at risk."
Sea Shepherd
The TPP has since its inception been kept in the shadows, negotiated without the public eye out of sight from the general public. Sea Shepherd supports the importance of biodiversity and open consultative dialogue for any trade agreements," said Omar Todd, CTO of Sea Shepherd. "The emphasis of these agreements must balance both economic and environmental priorities. Humanity's lust for commercialisation and unbridled growth, at the expense of our life support system, may cause us to fall off the precipice as a species."
"We cannot afford to sit by while our NHS is picked apart by a foreign regime," said one member of Parliament.
One member of British Parliament called on the Labour government to defend the country's revered National Health Service "with everything we have and firmly stand up to the bully in the White House" after a study published Wednesday showed the UK-US pharmaceutical trade deal brokered last year is projected to cause 229,000 excess deaths as funding is stripped away from the NHS.
“It is a complete insult to patients who are suffering and dying on hospital trolleys and waiting months for treatment," said Helen Morgan of the Liberal Democrats Party regarding the new analysis. "We cannot afford to sit by while our NHS is picked apart by a foreign regime."
The study, conducted by researchers at the University of York, the University of Liverpool, and Christchurch Hospital in New Zealand and published in the British Medical Journal, found that £44.7 billion ($59.5 billion) will have to be diverted from health services by 2036 in order to pay for new medications under the deal.
The agreement was reached last December, with recently resigned Prime Minister Keir Starmer's government agreeing to pay 25% more for new US medications over the next decade. The NHS will double the percentage of gross domestic product that it allocates for pharmaceuticals, from 0.3% to 0.6%, with the spending increasing from 10% to 12% of the universal healthcare system's budget.
In exchange, the Trump administration agreed not to impose tariffs of up to 100% that he had threatened for UK medicines being imported to the US.
Science Minister Patrick Vallance insisted in April that the deal would give NHS patients access to "life-changing new medicines that they previously would have been denied" while boosting the UK's "life sciences sector" by avoiding Trump's tariffs.
"Scandalously, this backroom deal was not subject to any scrutiny in Parliament before being rushed through—and the government refuses to say what impact it will have on the NHS."
But Sir Ciarán Devane, chief executive of the NHS Alliance, told The Guardian that the study raised "serious questions" about whether Britons will truly benefit from the agreement.
"If billions of pounds are diverted away from frontline care to meet higher medicines costs, the consequences for prevention, community services, and the treatment of long-term conditions could be profound," said Devane. "The government must urgently publish the full impact assessment and ensure there is appropriate scrutiny of the deal if it could have such far-reaching implications for population health.”
The projected avoidable death toll in the study far exceeds that which the UK saw during the coronavirus pandemic, when 137,000 excess deaths were recorded between March 2020-June 2022.
"If the indirect effect on adult social care is also included, the increase in excess deaths is even greater (291,000),” reads the study.
The greatest number of excess deaths is projected to occur in patients suffering from cardiovascular, respiratory, and gastrointestinal issues as well as cancer.
Patients with “neurological, endocrine, musculoskeletal, and mental health problems" will also face "broader effects on quality of life," the research states.
The government has assured the public that "frontline services" will be protected, notes the report, but "the NHS will need to fund this deal from allocations made six months before the deal was agreed. The evidence suggests that if additional public expenditure was available, it could be more effectively deployed within the NHS itself."
The research projected that the greatest number of deaths would occur in cardiovascular, respiratory, gastrointestinal and cancer patients.
It added that there will also be broader harm caused to quality of life for patients in those sectors as well as “neurological, endocrine, musculoskeletal, and mental health problems”.
Tim Bierley, a campaigner with the UK-based group Global Justice Now, said that the report "adds to the overwhelming evidence that the Trump medicines deal risks taking a wrecking ball to our health and our economy."
"Billions that could be spent on recruiting more NHS staff, cutting [general practitioner] waiting times, or improving our hospital care are set to be siphoned off by corporate giants in the pharma industry," said Bierley, whose group has joined the campaign Just Treatment in filing a legal challenge against the deal. "Scandalously, this backroom deal was not subject to any scrutiny in Parliament before being rushed through—and the government refuses to say what impact it will have on the NHS."
"The next prime minister," said Bierley, "must change direction, stand up for our NHS, and unpick the mess left by their predecessors.”
Those arrested in the recent surge include a 56-year-old Catholic nun from Nigeria.
Ordered by the Trump White House to aggressively increase arrest rates, federal immigration officials have reportedly detained more than 10,000 people in just the last five days, intensifying fear in communities across the United States.
The New York Times, which was first to report the new detention figures late Wednesday, noted that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials were "told that 2,000 arrests a day was the new standard for enforcement." The agency, flush with cash following President Donald Trump's signing of a reconciliation package containing another $70 billion for immigration enforcement, has been instructed to assign 80% of its officers to "arrest operations," according to the Times.
The Trump administration claims to be targeting the "worst of the worst," but available data shows that the percentage of people arrested by ICE despite having no criminal convictions has tended to rise during the agency's mass detention efforts. On Sunday, ICE briefly detained a 56-year-old nun from Nigeria as she walked to church in McAllen, Texas.
"The geniuses at ICE just arrested a Catholic nun, who practices as a nurse, as she was walking to church," Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) wrote in response to Sister Leticia Ugboaja's detention. "Our Republican colleagues think they need even more money. Had enough?"
The Times reported that immigration attorneys across the US "have been on alert" as ICE arrests surge, though much more quietly than earlier blitzes in Minneapolis—where federal immigration agents killed two US citizens—and other major cities, where groups of armed and masked officers roamed the streets and menaced neighborhoods.
"Cindy Blandon, an immigration attorney in Miami, said that one of her clients, a Nicaraguan father of two children, had an immigration court hearing set for 2027, but was arrested by ICE on Monday during a routine check-in," the Times reported. "And in Utah, Ysabel Lonazco, an immigration attorney, has noticed an uptick as well... One of her clients, Arturo, a 48-year-old Mexican man, was arrested in Salt Lake City on his way to a soccer game on Sunday, according to his wife, Veronica. She said the arrest had shattered their family."
ICE also appears to be ignoring a federal judge's order last week curtailing arrests at immigration courthouses. According to The Intercept:
On Thursday, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents arrested an Ecuadorian man at a court at 26 Federal Plaza and a man from the Dominican Republic at another court at 290 Broadway, both in Lower Manhattan. The arrests continued on Monday, when ICE agents detained a third man, originally from Guatemala, at 290 Broadway.
In legal filings challenging the detentions of the men taken Thursday, advocates with the nonprofit Make the Road New York accused ICE of not only violating their clients’ right to due process, but also of brazenly flouting a federal court order.
Murad Awawdeh, president and CEO of the New York Immigration Coalition, told The Intercept that "we’re witnessing ICE, yet again, operate in a lawless and rogue fashion and not following court orders."
“We’re supposedly a nation under the rule of law, and our judicial branch has said that this agency must stop engaging in this lawless behavior, and they continue to do so," said Awawdeh.
ICE is currently headed by Acting Director David Venturella, a former private prison executive. A record number of people have died in ICE custody under the second Trump administration.
Last week, Trump announced that he intends to nominate former Oklahoma state trooper Lance Schroyer to lead ICE in a permanent capacity.
Marcos Charles, the head of ICE’s deportation wing, cheered the recent arrest surge in an email to agency personnel earlier this week. On Saturday, ICE officers arrested 2,400 people.
“I want to personally thank each of you for your extraordinary efforts this past weekend,” Charles wrote, according to the Times. “Through your dedication, professionalism, and unwavering commitment to our mission, enforcement and removal operations achieved remarkable operational results."
Environmental and public health advocates on Wednesday ripped the US Environmental Protection Agency's fifth approval of a "forever chemical" pesticide during the current term of President Donald Trump, who campaigned on a promise to "Make America Healthy Again."
Despite that pledge, Trump's second administration—much like his first—has served the pesticide industry in various ways, including by putting out a MAHA report that echoes industry talking points, installing a former industry lobbyist in a key EPA post, backing Bayer-owned Monsanto over cancer patients at the US Supreme Court, and issuing an executive order that mandates the production of glyphosate.
Under Trump, the EPA has also approved or reapproved various controversial pesticides, from atrazine and dicamba to trifludimoxazin, which was approved late Tuesday. Like diflufenican and epyrifenacil, which were authorized by the EPA earlier Tuesday, as well as cyclobutrifluram and isocycloseram, which got a green light from the agency last November, trifludimoxazin is what some scientists and campaigners call a forever chemical pesticide.
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)—which have been used in not only pesticides but also fabrics, firefighting foam, nonstick cookware, and other household products—are widely known as forever chemicals because they don't break down naturally. They're also linked to a range of health issues, including various cancers.
"This is the PFAS presidency brought to you by Donald Trump and EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin," Nathan Donley, environmental health science director at the Center for Biological Diversity, declared Wednesday.
As with his Tuesday critique of the Trump EPA approving diflufenican and epyrifenacil, Donley pointed to the Supreme Court's recent ruling in favor of Trump-backed Bayer, rather than the thousands of Americans who argue that Monsanto's glyphosate-based weedkiller Roundup caused their cancer.
"Waiting to open the floodgates on new pesticide approvals until after the Supreme Court granted immunity to pesticide companies takes a special kind of callousness," he said.
Bill Freese, science director at Center for Food Safety (CFS), similarly said Wednesday that "with yesterday's pesticide approvals, the Trump administration's EPA is once again showing its disdain for Americans' health and the natural world."
"The EPA's pesticide division is seemingly no longer able to recognize evidence that a pesticide causes cancer, even when it's the pesticide company's own studies that show it," he continued. "And as per usual, EPA dismisses out of hand incriminating independent studies by scientists not affiliated with the pesticide industry."
In addition to the PFAS pesticides, the EPA is under fire this week for approving new uses for chlormequat, a non-PFAS pesticide tied to reproductive issues, and the fungicide fluoxapiprolin.
CFS co-executive director Sylvia Wu pointed out that the agency dismissed studies showing that fluoxapiprolin and epyrifenacil both produce tumors in laboratory rodents and classified both as "not likely to be carcinogenic to humans."
"The EPA's illegitimate rejection of the evidence that these two pesticides cause cancer is very similar to the tricks it pulled in denying glyphosate could cause cancer," Wu said. "These blatant violations of the agency's own cancer guidelines are unacceptable."
As for chlormequat, Freese said that "EPA should never have approved this endocrine-disrupting pesticide, particularly since its persistence and potential for widespread use on wheat and other widely consumed grains will mean universal exposure."
Already, "chlormequat is found in the urine of 90% of Americans, thought to come mostly from residues on imported foods where the pesticide has been used," the Center for Biological Diversity noted Wednesday. Like Freese, the group warned that "approval of its use on US wheat and oats ensures that exposure to the US population will increase dramatically."