

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.

Suma Peesapati, Earthjustice, (415) 217-2000
Miya Yoshitani, APEN, (510) 417-1775
Andres Soto, Communities for a Better Environment, (510) 282-5363
Eddie Scher, Sierra Club, (415) 815-7027
Diane Bailey, NRDC, (650) 281-7073
Environmental justice and conservation groups today filed a lawsuit against Kinder Morgan and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) to halt the shipment of highly explosive and toxic crude oil into the City of Richmond, a community already burdened by intense pollution caused by the fossil fuel industry.
Earthjustice filed the complaint and injunction request on behalf of Communities for a Better Environment (CBE), the Asian Pacific Environmental Network, the Sierra Club, and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) in the San Francisco Superior Court on Thursday.
The Air District (BAAQMD) issued Kinder Morgan a permit to operate its crude-by-rail project in early February, without any notice to the public or environmental and health review. The case asks the court to halt operations immediately while the project undergoes a full and transparent review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Members of the Richmond community, perhaps even members of the BAAQMD's Board of Directors, did not know that a permit to transport crude oil had been issued for over a month. According to longtime resident of Richmond and CBE organizer Andres Soto, the community is tired of being blind-sided and ignored.
"If the BAAQMD Board knew nothing about the permit, it should be embarrassed, and it should actually exercise its authority and hold its staff accountable to the community," CBE organizer Andres Soto said. "The BAAQMD's hush-hush permitting process for the Kinder Morgan permit reinforces the high level of distrust that the community has towards the BAAQMD staff. They lied to us during the Chevron fire, and now we are seeing them make backroom deals with industry in their permitting."
"Richmond residents are already over-burdened when it comes to pollution in our community and toxins in our bodies," said Sandy Saeteurn, an APEN Richmond Organizer. "The idea of trains carrying explosive Bakken crude oil in and out of our neighborhoods is outrageous. It's like BAAQMD just pulled the pin off of a bomb, allowing it to roll all around town, knowing it's only a matter of time before it stops ticking, and explodes on all of us."
"There are environmental and health laws on the books to protect people from the harmful effects of industrial activities, but those laws can't work if agencies ignore them, or worse, deliberately skirt them," said Suma Peesapati, the Earthjustice attorney handling the case. "The air district has violated the rights of the people of Richmond - and beyond - by failing to examine the harms and hazards of crude-by-rail."
Earlier this week, the Berkeley and Richmond city councils voted to oppose crude-by-rail plans that involved trains running through their cities. The number of trains carrying crude oil around the country has risen dramatically in the last two to three years, due to the increased drilling in both the Alberta tar sands in Canada and the Bakken shale oil area of North Dakota.
The California Public Utilities Commission, office of Rail Safety, released a report in November 2013 listing a number of alarming railway safety concerns associated with the increased movement of crude oil by rail through California. The report specifically identifies California's railroad bridges as a significant rail safety risk.
"Even the National Transportation Safety Board says that crude oil trains should stay out of urban areas," said Diane Bailey, senior scientist at the Natural Resources Defense Council. "This dirty and dangerous project does not belong in Richmond."
Bakken crude is extremely explosive and toxic. In January, the U.S. federal agency that regulates hazardous materials on the rails issued an alert, stating that Bakken crude may be more flammable than other types of crude. In both the U.S. and Canada, as the number of train cars carrying crude oil has quadrupled over the past six years, accidents, explosions and derailments have dramatically increased. Last July, a train carrying crude oil derailed and exploded in a town in Quebec, Canada, killing 47 local residents and destroying most of the downtown area.
Earthjustice is a non-profit public interest law firm dedicated to protecting the magnificent places, natural resources, and wildlife of this earth, and to defending the right of all people to a healthy environment. We bring about far-reaching change by enforcing and strengthening environmental laws on behalf of hundreds of organizations, coalitions and communities.
800-584-6460"No matter how Republicans design their plan, their promise to take money out of the hands of big insurance companies and put it in the hands of patients will go unfulfilled."
US President Donald Trump and his Republican allies in Congress have made a show of criticizing insurance company greed as they stand firm against extending Affordable Care Act tax credits and offer ill-formed alternatives.
But a report published Wednesday by the office of Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) explains how a scheme endorsed by Trump and some top Republicans would further enrich insurance giants and big banks.
The report focuses on growing GOP support for a proposal that would give Americans money in tax-advantaged vehicles such as health savings accounts (HSAs) to help cover out-of-pocket costs. Last week, Trump championed the idea in the Oval Office, characterizing the proposal as a way to "forget this Obamacare madness."
In a social media post on Tuesday, Trump railed against "BIG, FAT, RICH INSURANCE COMPANIES" and doubled down on the idea of funding health savings accounts instead of extending the enhanced ACA tax credits.
But Wyden's report argues that "no matter how Republicans design their plan, their promise to take money out of the hands of big insurance companies and put it in the hands of patients will go unfulfilled, because the very arrangements they tout are administered by large financial institutions and the same big insurance companies."
The report notes that Optum Bank, a subsidiary of the corporate behemoth UnitedHealth Group, is one of the nation's largest administrators of HSAs and would be well-positioned to profit from the Republican plan.
"The numerous fees OptumBank charges, including a $20 Outbound Transfer Fee, a several-dollar monthly account maintenance fee, and a $2.50 ATM Transaction fee, flow directly out of consumers’ and patients’ pockets and into the coffers of the nation's largest health insurer," the report observes. "Even a fraction of these revenues adds up to massive profits."
"While some big insurance companies own HSA providers directly, others partner with large financial institutions to operate similar arrangements. Centene, for example, partners with Fidelity; Anthem partners with Bank of America," the report continues. "The common theme across these arrangements is massive profits for financial institutions and big insurance companies."
Wyden's report came as congressional Republicans worked to translate Trump's all-caps social media ramblings into coherent policy. Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), chair of the Senate committee with jurisdiction over healthcare, is leading the effort as tens of millions of people brace for massive premium increases stemming from Republicans' refusal to extend enhanced ACA subsidies.
Cassidy has explained to reporters that the emerging GOP plan would entail Americans using existing ACA tax credits—not the enhanced subsidies that are set to lapse at the end of the year—to purchase high-deductible "bronze" plans on the insurance marketplace.
HSA funding from the federal government would then help enrollees cover out-of-pocket costs (HSA funds generally cannot be used to cover monthly premiums). Under the recently enacted Trump-GOP budget law, tax-advantaged HSAs are now available to everyone who buys a bronze plan on the ACA marketplace.
The average deductible for a bronze plan is $7,476 in 2026.
"Half-baked ideas that put more taxpayer dollars into health tax accounts will enrich big banks and insurance companies while saddling Americans with high premiums and deductibles," Wyden said in a statement on Wednesday. "Sending a few thousand dollars to Americans isn’t going to do them much good when they face a giant medical bill for a serious health diagnosis or even routine but expensive care, like giving birth in a hospital."
In a Fox News appearance on Wednesday, Cassidy likened his vision of an ideal health insurance marketplace to bargain-hunting for shampoo.
"By giving the patient the money herself... she becomes a wiser consumer," said Cassidy. "If she goes and gets two types of shampoo and one's a dollar cheaper, she'll get the cheaper one and the other one lowers their price."
Cassidy: "By giving the patient the money herself, she becomes a wiser consumer. If she goes and gets 2 types of shampoo and one is a dollar cheaper, she'll get the cheaper one and the other one lowers their price. One you give her the power of making the decision, she's gonna… pic.twitter.com/52u7IMJkFk
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) November 19, 2025
Ryan Cooper, managing editor of The American Prospect, wrote in response to the GOP healthcare scramble that "the stupidity is the point."
"For decades now, the Republican Party has been dedicated to the proposition that rich people are too highly taxed and the working and middle classes get too many benefits from the government. With the passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill, they have finally caught the car," Cooper wrote Tuesday. "Medicaid and Obamacare have been slashed to free up budget headroom for tax cuts heavily slanted to the wealthy."
"Republicans don’t have a 'healthcare plan' per se because this is their plan: to take your healthcare funding and give it to Elon Musk, Donald Trump, and the rest of the fascist billionaire class," he added.
Lobbyists working to pass Pharma-backed legislation currently outnumber lobbyists working to oppose it by more than 20-to-1, estimates Public Citizen.
Government watchdog Public Citizen is warning that the pharmaceutical industry is preparing an all-out blitz aimed at sabotaging government efforts to negotiate lower prices for prescription drugs.
In a report released on Wednesday, Public Citizen said it found that the major pharmaceutical companies this year have hired more than 500 lobbyists to push for the passage of three pieces of legislation that would undermine the provisions allowing the government to negotiate lower drug prices contained in the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act.
The first piece, called the ORPHAN Cures Act, was passed by Congress in July after being stuffed into the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. According to Public Citizen, the law will "delay and exempt some of the most profitable drugs—including cancer treatments—from negotiations, representing tens of billions in annual Medicare spending."
The other two pieces of legislation—the EPIC Act and the MINI Act—have not yet been passed, and Public Citizen says that they "would lengthen the already long delay period before small molecule drugs are eligible for negotiation—effectively excluding many medicines from negotiations entirely or shortening the period patients have access to lower negotiated prices to only one or two years."
Public Citizen estimates that there are currently 501 lobbyists who are pushing to pass these laws, while just 24 lobbyists are working to block their passage. In total, notes Public Citizen, this means opponents of the legislation are outnumbered by a ratio of more than 20-to-1.
Steve Knievel, Public Citizen's access to medicines advocate, called on elected representatives to "reject the demands of pharma lobbyists and instead work to make prescription drugs more affordable" for their constituents.
"Instead of handing drug corporations billions of dollars by helping them evade price negotiations," Knievel said, "Congress should pass legislation to empower Medicare to negotiate lower drug prices on all costly medicines and allow all patients to access lower, negotiated prices, even if they don’t have Medicare."
"If lawmakers are serious about AI governance, they must create strong, enforceable national protections as a regulatory floor—not wipe out state laws so Big Tech can operate without consequence," said one consumer advocate.
A Republican push to stop state legislatures from regulating artificial intelligence, including chatbots that have been found to pose harm to children, resoundingly failed over the summer, with 99 out of 100 senators voting against the provision in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act—but the previous rejection of the idea isn't stopping President Donald Trump and GOP lawmakers from trying again to impose a moratorium.
On Tuesday, Trump posted on his Truth Social platform that House Republicans should take action against "overregulation by the States" in the AI field.
Claiming that "DEI ideology" in AI models in some states will "undermine this Major Growth 'Engine'" and that "Investment in AI is helping to make the U.S. Economy the 'HOTTEST' in the World"—despite tech industry leaders' warnings that the value of AI investments may have been wildly overestimated and the bubble may be on the cusp of bursting—Trump called on Republicans to include the state regulations ban in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), "or pass a separate Bill."
Also on Tuesday, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) told Punchbowl News that the GOP is considering adding language to the NDAA that would effectively ban state AI regulations, which have been passed in both Democratic- and Republican-led states. Those laws would be nullified if Republicans follow through with the plan.
Since the annual defense spending bill is considered a must-pass package by many lawmakers, inserting amendments related to other legislative goals is a common strategy used in Congress.
Trump previously tried to circumvent Congress' rejection of the moratorium in July, when he announced his AI Action Plan.
Emphasizing that the anti-regulatory effort has been rejected by "an alliance of Democrats, Republicans, social conservatives, parents rights groups, medical professionals, and child online protection groups," the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen on Tuesday called Trump's renewal of the push "highly inappropriate" and said it "would risk stripping away vital civil rights, consumer protection, and safety authority from states without putting any federal guardrails in place."
JB Branch, Big Tech accountability advocate at Public Citizen, said that "AI preemption strips away the safeguards states have enacted to address the very real harms of AI."
"Big Tech and its allies have spent months trying to ban states from protecting their own residents, all while refusing to support any meaningful federal AI safeguards," said Branch. "Congress should reject this maneuver outright. If lawmakers are serious about AI governance, they must create strong, enforceable national protections as a regulatory floor—not wipe out state laws so Big Tech can operate without consequence.”
On Tuesday, the Republican-controlled House Committee on Energy and Commerce held a hearing on "AI Chatbot Advantages and Disadvantages," where one witness, psychologist Marlynn Wei, warned that "AI chatbots endorse users 50% more than humans would on ill-advised behaviors."
In September, several grieving parents testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee that their children had died by suicide after being encouraged to take their own lives by AI chatbots.
At Tuesday's hearing, Ranking Member Frank Pallone (D-NJ) said that "Congress must be sure to allow states to put in place safeguards that protect their residents."
"There is no reason for Congress to stop states from regulating the harms of AI when Congress has not yet passed a similar law," he said.
Rep. Lori Trahan (D-Mass.) also addressed the issue, suggesting it was surprising that the Republican members would bother holding a hearing on the harms of AI when they are planning to strip state lawmakers of their ability to protect their constituents from those harms.
"I'm having real difficulty in reconciling this hearing and all that we've heard about the risks of AI chatbots, especially to our children, with the attempt by the House Republican leadership to ban state-level AI regulations," said Trahan. "Republicans' push for this regressive, unconstitutional, and widely condemned AI policy is real and it's unrelenting."
👀MUST WATCH: @RepLoriTrahan takes down House GOP’s efforts to slip the disastrous AI preemption into the NDAA — wiping out state laws that protect kids, seniors, and veterans. It’s a big handout for Big Tech. pic.twitter.com/8NxdkcDgul
— The Tech Oversight Project (@Tech_Oversight) November 18, 2025
"Let's just say in public what you are pushing in private," she added. "Don't be holding these hearings about the risks of AI chatbots while behind closed doors you kneecap state legislatures from protecting their constituents. I mean, if the AI moratorium is the topic in the speaker's office let's make it so in this hearing room, because the American people deserve to know where you truly stand on AI regulation."