

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.

Mollie Matteson, (802) 318-1487
In the face of rapidly expanding shipments of highly explosive crude oil through Albany and along the Hudson River, the Center for Biological Diversity today filed a formal notice of intent to sue the U.S. Coast Guard and Environmental Protection Agency for failing to update oil spill plans. The existing antiquated protocols -- developed before the oil transport boom that now funnels billions of gallons through the region annually -- fail to adequately protect endangered species and people dependent on the river.
The notice, required under the Endangered Species Act, identifies 17 federally protected endangered species, including Atlantic sturgeon, sea turtles and piping plovers, that are threatened by the increased risk of spills.
"The Hudson River is the life blood of New York -- its past, its future, its identity. It's also a natural treasure. A major oil spill here would be a disaster for wildlife and people alike," said Mollie Matteson, a senior scientist with the Center.
Trains began bringing North Dakota crude oil through Albany in late 2011. In two years' time, crude oil shipping through that city has gone from zero to a permitted capacity of 2.8 billion gallons per year. Some of the oil is loaded on ships or barges at Albany and taken down the Hudson River. Much of the rest continues by train along the shore of the Hudson to refineries in New Jersey. The rapid expansion of oil transport through the city and in the Hudson Valley has occurred, until recently, with essentially no public notification and minimal governmental oversight.
"Given the volume of oil now being transported by train, ship, and barge through the Hudson River corridor, and the terrible safety record we've seen for crude-by-rail shipments, it's a matter of when, not if, there will be a major spill," said Matteson. "And right now we're just not prepared."
A recent series of catastrophic train accidents has sharply increased public attention to the issue of "crude-by-rail" transport. In July 2013 an oil train carrying "Bakken" crude from North Dakota derailed and exploded in the small town of Lac-Megantic, Quebec, killing 47 people, incinerating part of the downtown, and spilling 1.5 million gallons of oil, much of it into the nearby lake. Since then, fiery derailments of huge oil trains, sometimes pulling 100 tanker cars or more, have also occurred in North Dakota, Alabama and New Brunswick.
In response to this spate of explosive train wrecks, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration issued a safety alert in early January warning that Bakken crude poses a particular risk because of its flammability. Later the same month, the National Transportation Safety Board and Transportation Safety Board of Canada issued a joint statement that expressed concern "that major loss of life, property damage and environmental consequences can occur when large volumes of crude oil or other flammable liquids are transported on a single train involved in an accident."
In addition to Bakken crude, trains and ships in the Hudson River corridor may soon be transporting Alberta tar sands. An oil storage and transport company, Global Partners, recently applied for a permit to install seven oil heating units in Albany to facilitate transfer of oil from tanker cars to ships or barges. Light Bakken crude has not required heating.
Despite repeated inquiries from the public and media regarding where the new crude oil will come from, Global has not disclosed the source of the heavy crude that will require heating. Many observers believe the oil will be tar sands, a heavy, thick substance mined from the boreal forest region of western Canada that requires heating or addition of diluents in order to be made more fluid.
Transport of tar sands on or along the Hudson would be particularly risky for the river's aquatic life, as tar sands spilled in water sink to the bottom and is expensive and difficult to remove. A 2010 spill of tar sands in the Kalamazoo River in Michigan has cost nearly $1 billion to remove and the cleanup is still not complete. Dredging -- which has been done in the Kalamazoo River -- could be particularly harmful to fish and other wildlife in the Hudson.
Atlantic and shortnose sturgeons spawn in the riverbed of the Hudson, and young sturgeon find shelter in gravel-bottomed areas as they migrate downriver. Sea turtles that ply the mouth of the river in the warmer months forage on the river bottom, and could be killed by dredging, or their food sources could be damaged.
Federally protected species in the Hudson River, New York Bay and nearby coastal waters include the two species of sturgeon, as well as green sea turtles, loggerhead sea turtles, humpback whales and North Atlantic right whales. Piping plovers and roseate terns nest on beaches on Long Island, where an endangered plant, the seabeach amaranth, is also found. The red knot, which makes one of the longest migrations known in the world, from wintering areas in Tierra del Fuego to breeding grounds in the Canadian Arctic, makes an important stopover in the mid-Atlantic region, including the New York Bay area. The red knot is proposed for addition to the federal list of threatened species. An oil spill in the bay could affect these shore birds and the beach-dwelling amaranth. In all the lawsuit names 17 species that may be harmed by oil-spill response activities.
The Center's legal challenge focuses on the New York/New Jersey Area Contingency Plan, an emergency response document that lays out how emergency management and environmental protection agencies will respond to an oil spill in the Hudson River and New York Bay area. The lead federal agencies on the plan must formally consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service with regard to potential harm emergency response and cleanup activities may cause to species protected under the Endangered Species Act. The recent dramatic changes in the amount and type of oil being transported in the Hudson River Valley necessitates an update in emergency plans, according to the lawsuit.
At the Center for Biological Diversity, we believe that the welfare of human beings is deeply linked to nature — to the existence in our world of a vast diversity of wild animals and plants. Because diversity has intrinsic value, and because its loss impoverishes society, we work to secure a future for all species, great and small, hovering on the brink of extinction. We do so through science, law and creative media, with a focus on protecting the lands, waters and climate that species need to survive.
(520) 623-5252"Senate Democrats will not help pass the SAVE Act under any circumstances," vowed the Senate Minority Leader.
The extremes to which the Republican Party will go to sway the 2026 elections in their favor was highlighted again on Sunday after US President Donald Trump said he will sign no other legislation into law this year until the SAVE Act—a bill that would deeply erode voting rights and threatens ballot access for tens of millions of Americans—is passed by Congress.
"It must be done immediately," Trump declared in a characteristically unhinged social media post on Sunday, referring to the SAVE Act, versions of which have passed the Republican-controlled House but so far stalled in the Senate.
"It supersedes everything else. MUST GO TO THE FRONT OF THE LINE," Trump continued in an all-caps tantrum. "I, as President, will not sign other Bills until this is passed, AND NOT THE WATERED DOWN VERSION - GO FOR THE GOLD: MUST SHOW VOTER I.D. & PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP: NO MAIL-IN BALLOTS EXCEPT FOR MILITARY - ILLNESS, DISABILITY, TRAVEL: NO MEN IN WOMEN’S SPORTS: NO TRANSGENDER MUTILIZATION FOR CHILDREN! DO NOT FAIL!!!"
Voting rights experts and Democratic lawmakers have denounced the SAVE Act as a dangerous threat to millions of eligible voters, calling it a clear effort by the GOP to tip the scales in their favor by depressing voter turnout in 2026 and beyond.
"In every form, the SAVE Act would require American citizens to show documents like a passport or birth certificate to register to vote. Our research shows that more than 21 million Americans lack ready access to those documents," warned Eliza Sweren-Becker and Owen Bacskai of the Brennan Center for Justice, which advocates for robust voting rights, in a blog post last week.
"Roughly half of Americans don’t even have a passport," Sweren-Becker and Bacskai continued. "Millions lack access to a paper copy of their birth certificate. The SAVE Act would disenfranchise Americans of all ages and races, but younger voters and voters of color would suffer disproportionately. Likewise, millions of women whose married names aren’t on their birth certificates or passports would face extra steps just to make their voices heard."
In response to Trump's threat on Sunday, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) characterized the SAVE Act as "Jim Crow 2.0" as he condemned the president and his GOP allies.
"If Trump is saying he won’t sign any bills until the SAVE Act is passed, then so be it: there will be total gridlock in the Senate," said Schumer. "Senate Democrats will not help pass the SAVE Act under any circumstances."
Melanie D'Arrigo, executive director of the Campaign for New York Health, said Sunday that the SAVE Act—which Trump said last week must be passed "at the expense of everything else"—is not a voter ID bill, but rather "voter suppression" legislation bill masquerading as a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.
"If it was a voter ID bill, it would provide people with the proper IDs to vote, with no barriers — but it doesn’t," noted D'Arrigo. "The voter fraud rate is .0001%, and this bill would potentially prevent up to 69 million women, 40 million who don’t have access to their birth certificate, and 140 million without a passport, from voting."
"The American people don't want this war," said Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut. "Virtually nothing good happened from sending thousands of Americans to die in Iraq in the 2000s and if we don't learn that lesson then shame on every single one of us."
Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut offered immediate push back on Sunday when CNN anchorJake Tapper said a vote against an expected $50 billion request by President Donald Trump to fund his attack on Iran would be seen as "voting against the troops."
"Oh come on," said Murphy, incredulous. "I mean, the American people don't want this war. They don't want this war—they have seen what happens when American troops go into places like Iraq, places like Afghanistan. Ultimately we get a lot of people killed, we waste a lot of dollars. The one thing the people of the American people have been clear about is that they don't want the United States dragged into another long-term war in the Middle East."
Polling has shown that Murphy is correct, with only one out of four people—a mere 25%—in a Reuters/Ipsos poll released last week showing any kind of support for Trump's war of choice against Iran.
"If you support the troops," said Murphy, "then you should vote against this war so that we get our troops out of harm's way. Virtually nothing good happened from sending thousands of Americans to die in Iraq in the 2000s and if we don't learn that lesson then shame on every single one of us."
TAPPER: "You have said you're a 'hell no' on funding the war. We have seen this movie before. We know that vote will be cast as - especially if you run for higher office - you voting against the troops."
MURPHY: "Oh come on I mean, the American people don't want this war." pic.twitter.com/lTB5isM8I7
— State of the Union (@CNNSOTU) March 8, 2026
Trump has yet to make the formal request for the $50 billion in funding, but estimates for just one week of fighting have put the cost of the military operations thus far at something close to $1billion per day.
Murphy has said he is a "hell no" on any additional funding and other members of the Democratic caucus have echoed that message.
"Trump is already spending $1 BILLION PER DAY on his illegal regime change war of choice in Iran," said Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) on Thursday. "Now, he's going to ask Congress to give him up to $50 BILLION MORE. My vote: hell NO."
"We could be lowering the cost of health care, but instead Trump is spending BILLIONS on his reckless war with Iran," said Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) on Thursday. "Trump is blowing YOUR taxpayer dollars on war and causing gas prices to spike while he's at it."
Senator Susan Collins, said Platner outside the Republican senator's office in Portland, Maine, is more interested in the profits of weapons contractors "than the shame that we bring upon ourselves when we kill children."
Graham Platner, the Democratic hopeful running for the US Senate in Maine to unseat Republican Sen. Susan Collins, delivered a sharp rebuke Saturday to the war of choice launched against Iran last week by President Donald Trump—the kind of messaging, say anti-war progressives, that every lawmaker or politician seeking office should be giving in the face of a military campaign that a majority of Americans, across the political spectrum, adamantly oppose.
"We can all see what is happening right now," said Platner outside Collins' offices in downtown Portland, Maine on Saturday. "At least with the war in Iraq, they had the decency to try to trick us for months. At least they made Colin Powell go sully his name in front of the UN to try to trick us into thinking WMDs were real. At least then they tried to convince us that it was necessary. This time around, they're just doing it."
And the Trump administration is doing it, he continued, "because we have a system that does not hold people accountable. We have a Congress that for decades has abdicate its constitutional role in war making. It never should have been an option that a president can just start a huge regional conflict because he's afraid we're going to find out he might be a pedophile."
In a vote in the Senate on Wednesday, Collins sided against a War Powers Resolution that would have curbed Trump's ability to wage the war that has already killed more than 1,300 civilians, a large portion of them children. While the joint US-Israeli operation has unleashed chaos across the Middle East and been denounced as a criminal war of aggression by experts, Collins argued that passing the resolution "would send the wrong message to Iran and our troops."
"At least with the war in Iraq, they had the decency to try to trick us for months... This time around, they're just doing it."
Platner, who served multiple tours of combat duty in Afghanistan and Iraq as both a Marine and Army infantry soldier, expressed outrage at how willing politicians like Collins are to send young Americans off to kill and die for wars that bring such horror and carnage abroad while costing US taxpayers billions at home.
"Susan Collins is more interested in protecting the wealthy and the powerful. She is more interested in protecting the profits of the defense industry. She's more interested in protecting the interests of her AIPAC donors," Platner told the crowd, ripping Collins for her vote against the resolution. "She is more interested in all of that, than in protecting the sacred resource that is the lives of young American men and women who are willing to put their lives on the line for this country. She is more interested in their profits than the shame that we bring upon ourselves when we kill children."
On the first day of US bombing last week, a school in the southeastern town of Minab was struck, killing an estimated 165 civilians, most of them young students.
"She [Susan Collins] is more interested in their profits [AIPAC donors and the defense industry] than the shame that we bring upon ourselves when we kill children."
Watch Maine Democratic U.S. Senate candidate @grahamformaine confront Republican Senator Susan Collins. pic.twitter.com/9uaKqBcKix
— Zeteo (@zeteo_news) March 7, 2026
Norman Solomon, national director of the progressive advocacy group RootsAction, said "the content and location" of Platner’s remarks made them "doubly vital" and that other lawmakers and politicians would be wise to follow his lead and that others in the US should replicate such rallies where they live.
Across the country, Solomon told Common Dreams, "members of Congress who’ve voted for more high-tech slaughter in Iran are smugly going on with routine business in their offices, insulated from the murderous effects of their political positions. They do not deserve insulation, they deserve nonviolent and militant confrontation."
Showing up at local district offices of their members of Congress, "to protest with clear moral messaging" like those in Maine over the weekend, said added Solomon, "is long overdue and should become widespread. Most of us don’t live far from such offices. Why should politicians who enable mass murder from the skies be able to run their offices every day as though nothing is amiss?"
"Antiwar speeches and picket lines with moral clarity should become standard aspects of the political environment at the decentralized congressional offices," he said, "that for far too long have been aloof from the carnage and human anguish that craven elected officials continue to inflict."
Platner has emerged as potent anti-war voice in the week since Trump launched the US assault on Iran, repeatedly invoking the trauma he suffered and the horrors of war he witnessed as a soldier as a way to condemn repeating history, especially by lawmaker like Collins who appeared to have learned no lessons from the experience of the disasters in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Talking to reporters after Saturday's rally, Platner referred to both Trump and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth as "morons" with no plan to get out of the mess they've created.
"I don't think these people have any idea what they're doing," Planter said. "And the problem with that is that that incompetent leadership is going to result in dead Americans—and it already has—and it's going to result in a region thrust into chaos and bloodshed."
If lawmakers won't stand up to stop Trump's war, Platner told News Center Maine in an interview that it will ultimately be up to the American people to organize and force an end to the conflict.
"The people who are going to send their sons and daughters off to fight, the people who are going to see their friends and families maimed and killed in combat, the people who are going to have to pay for all of this instead of getting health care," said Platner, "we need to stand together and show the political class in this country that we are not going to stand another foreign war."
In a separate post on Saturday, Platner reached out to Trump voters who may be disappointed or disillusioned after the warmongering of a president who told voters he would act to end wars in his second term, not start them.
"To all of those who voted for Trump," said Platner, "hoping for an end to stupid foreign wars: We may not agree on everything, but I promise to never waste your hard-earned money on a pointless quagmire in the Middle East."