October, 22 2014, 11:15am EDT
CREW Sues EPA for Documents Regarding 2014 Renewable Fuel Standards
WASHINGTON
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) today sued the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for failing to provide documents regarding oil industry efforts to influence the 2014 Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS).
Last May, following a Reuters article describing how the Carlyle Group and Delta Airlines had lobbied members of Congress and the administration to reduce the amount of renewable fuel required to be blended into transportation fuel, CREW asked for an investigation by the EPA's Office of Inspector General and filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for records. It took months for the EPA to release even the documents the agency already had provided to Reuters, and it has yet to hand over all relevant documents.
Based on a follow-up Reuters article, CREW also has concerns that oil companies leveraged high-level political connections to convince the White House and the EPA to insert special waivers into the RFS that could potentially allow oil companies to refuse to sell biofuels.
"It certainly seems as if the administration has backtracked on its commitment to renewable fuels. The question is why. Was there a back room deal orchestrated by big oil and high ranking officials in the Obama administration?" asked CREW Executive Director Melanie Sloan. "Even though it is nearly 2015, the renewable fuel standards for 2014 still haven't been released. Is this to avoid potential political fallout in the mid-terms for siding with the oil industry over the biofuel industry?"
Each year, the EPA sets the RFS for how much renewable fuel must be blended into transportation fuel supplies. The most recent standards were proposed in November 2013 and were expected to be finalized last summer. For the first time since the RFS was created, the EPA proposed lowering the renewable fuel amounts. Also, earlier this month, Senators Ed Markey (D-MA) and Barbara Boxer (D-CA) sent a letter to the White House expressing their concerns about EPA potentially inserting a waiver into the RFS, which would allow oil companies to refuse to distribute renewable fuel. Carlyle and Delta lobbied heavily for both of these modifications to the program and would benefit financially from the change. As Reuters revealed, they persuaded Reps. Robert Brady (D-PA) and Patrick Meehan (R-PA) to lobby administration officials, including Vice President Joe Biden, White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough, National Economic Council Director Ronald Minsk, and former National Economic Council Director Gene Sperling to weaken the RFS.
"Is the EPA slow-walking its release of these documents because it does not want the public to learn how political the RFS has become? The RFS should be based on sound energy policy, not politics. CREW's lawsuit will shed light on what really went on at the EPA," Ms. Sloan said.
Read CREW's Complaint.
Read CREW's initial FOIA to the EPA.
Read CREW's letter to the EPA inspector general.
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization dedicated to promoting ethics and accountability in government and public life by targeting government officials -- regardless of party affiliation -- who sacrifice the common good to special interests. CREW advances its mission using a combination of research, litigation and media outreach.
LATEST NEWS
Poll Shows 3 in 4 Oppose Medicaid Cuts as GOP Targets Program to Fund Tax Breaks for Rich
A majority also said the the Trump administration "is recklessly making broad cuts to programs and staff, including some that are necessary for agencies to function."
May 01, 2025
As congressional Republicans consider slashing the federal safety net to fund tax giveaways for the wealthy, polling published Thursday by KFF shows that a large majority of Americans oppose cuts to health programs, including Medicaid.
The research group asked respondents about potential funding cuts for various programs, and found that 84% oppose cuts to Social Security, 79% oppose cuts to Medicare, and 76% oppose cuts to Medicaid, a key target for the GOP's tax ambitions.
There is also strong opposition to slashing funds for mental health and addiction prevention services, tracking infectious disease outbreaks, medical research, HIV prevention, and helping people with Affordable Care Act premiums.
KFF found that 61% generally oppose "major cuts to staff and spending at federal government health agencies," a figure that rose to 72% after respondents heard arguments that the reductions "would negatively impact these agencies' abilities to serve the public."
Pollsters also asked about actions by President Donald Trump's so-called Department of Government Efficiency, led by billionaire Elon Musk. A majority (54%) said the administration and DOGE had gone "too far" with cuts at federal health agencies.
Similarly, 59% of respondents—including 92% of Democrats, 65% of Independents, and 18% of Republicans—agreed that "the administration is recklessly making broad cuts to programs and staff, including some that are necessary for agencies to function."
Majorities said they oppose staffing cuts at the Department of Veterans Affairs, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Social Security Administration, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Food and Drug Administration, National Institutes of Health, and the Department of Health and Human Services' Office of Infectious Disease and HIV/AIDS Policy.
Sharing the poll on social media, KFF CEO and president Drew Altman said: "Everyone—Dems, R's, Independents—are against big Medicaid cuts. Not really surprising. What is: MAGA supporters are divided on cutting Medicaid."
"As Steve Bannon said: 'lots of MAGAs on Medicaid,'" Altman added, referring to the far-right media executive and former Trump adviser.
The fact that so many residents of "red states" rely on Medicaid could be a problem for GOP leaders attacking the program that provides healthcare for low-income Americans in hopes of lowering taxes for the rich. Some Republicans in both chambers have expressed concern about how major cuts would impact their constituents—and, as a result, their reelection chances.
Congressman Don Bacon (R-Neb.), a critical swing vote in the House of Representatives, said Tuesday that his "red line" for Medicaid cuts in the GOP's reconciliation package is $500 billion—a figure that, as Families USA executive director Anthony Wright noted, would be "the biggest cut in the history of Medicaid, one that would force millions of Americans to lose coverage."
Bacon also expressed support for adding work requirements to Medicaid, despite evidence that they strip coverage from people in need. A Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) analysis from February found that imposing such mandates for Medicaid recipients could put 36 million Americans, or 44% of the program's enrollees, at risk of losing their health insurance.
"Senate Republicans are closely watching how their House colleagues restructure federal funding for Medicaid, and will likely propose changes when the entire 11-bill package comes over from the House later this year," States Newsroom reported Thursday. "Several GOP senators told reporters at the Capitol on Wednesday they will judge the package based on how changes to Medicaid will impact their constituents."
States Newsroom shared remarks from Republican Sens. Susan Collins (Maine), Josh Hawley (Mo.), Jerry Moran (Kan.), and John Hoeven (N.D.), who said that said "the challenge is going to be to find savings in line with what the president has described."
"He said he doesn't want any cuts to Medicaid," Hoeven continued. "But how do you make sure that you eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse? And that the folks that should be getting it are getting it, rather than an able-bodied person who should be out there working and is able to do that and take care of themselves."
Politico similarly reported Wednesday that "while Trump has agreed to target waste, fraud and abuse, he remains profoundly wary about pursuing anything that might be construed as 'cuts' to a program he has vowed over and over again to protect, according to six White House officials and top allies of the president."
Medicaid isn't the only program for the poor in the GOP's crosshairs. Republicans are also considering cuts to and work requirements for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).
CBPP said Wednesday that "nearly 11 million people—about 1 in 4 SNAP participants, including more than 4 million children and more than half a million adults aged 65 or older and adults with disabilities—live in households that would be at risk of losing at least some of their food assistance" under Congressman Dusty Johnson's (R-S.D.) proposal.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Grotesque Spectacle' on May Day: CEO Pay Up 50% Since 2019 Compared to 0.9% for Workers
"This isn't a glitch in the system—it's the system working exactly as designed, funneling wealth ever upwards while millions of working people struggle to afford rent, food, and healthcare."
May 01, 2025
As people worldwide filled the streets Thursday to celebrate International Workers' Day and mobilize against attacks on the working class, a new analysis showed that average global CEO pay has surged 50% since 2019—56 times more than the pay of ordinary employees.
The Oxfam International analysis examined figures from nearly 2,000 corporations across 35 countries where CEOs were paid more than $1 million on average last year, including bonuses and stock options. Across those companies, the average pay of chief executives reached $4.3 million in 2024, up from $2.9 million just five years ago.
By contrast, average worker pay in those 35 nations rose just 0.9% between 2019 and 2024.
"Year after year, we see the same grotesque spectacle: CEO pay explodes while workers' wages barely budge," said Amitabh Behar, Oxfam's executive director. "This isn't a glitch in the system—it's the system working exactly as designed, funneling wealth ever upwards while millions of working people struggle to afford rent, food, and healthcare."
According to Oxfam, global billionaires "pocketed on average $206 billion in new wealth over the last year," or $23,500 an hour. That's more than the average annual income globally—$21,000—in 2023.
To begin redressing global economic inequality, Oxfam called for top marginal tax rates of at least 75% on the highest earners and wage increases to ensure worker pay keeps up with inflation.
"It's time to end the billionaire coup against democracy and put people and planet first."
Luc Triangle, general secretary of the International Trade Union Confederation, said in a statement that the "outrageous pay inequality between CEOs and workers confirms that we lack democracy where it is needed most: at work."
"Around the world, workers are being denied the basics of life while corporations pocket record profits, dodge taxes, and lobby to evade responsibility," Triangle added. "Workers are demanding a New Social Contract that works for them—not the billionaires undermining democracy. Fair taxation, strong public services, living wages, and a just transition are not radical demands—they are the foundation of a just society."
"It's time to end the billionaire coup against democracy and put people and planet first," he added.
In addition to spotlighting the growing chasm between CEO and worker pay, the Oxfam analysis warned that the global working class "is now facing a new threat" in the form of U.S. President Donald Trump's tariff regime. The humanitarian group argued that "these policies pose significant risks for workers worldwide, including job losses and rising costs for basic goods that would stoke extreme inequality everywhere."
"For so many workers worldwide, President Trump's reckless use of tariffs means a push from one cruel order to another: from the frying pan of destructive neoliberal trade policy to the fire of weaponized tariffs," said Behar. "These policies will not only hurt working families in the U.S., but especially harm workers trying to escape poverty in some of the world's poorest countries."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Wyden Decries 'New Low' as GOP Senators Shield Trump's Massive Tax on Working Class
"In any sane world, it would be a scandal that the vast majority of one political party would vote for a pointless tax on the American people, one that is hiking prices and destroying jobs, all to please one man."
May 01, 2025
Nearly every Senate Republican on Wednesday voted against a resolution aimed at terminating the national emergency that U.S. President Donald Trumpdeclared last month to impose his sweeping tariffs, which are wreaking economic havoc across the globe.
Just three Republicans—Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Susan Collins (R-Maine), and Rand Paul (R-Ky.)—joined every voting Democrat in supporting the resolution led by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.). The measure deadlocked at 49 in favor and 49 against, and U.S. Vice President JD Vance subsequently cast a tie-breaking vote to table the resolution—which Trump had threatened to veto.
"In any sane world, it would be a scandal that the vast majority of one political party would vote for a pointless tax on the American people, one that is hiking prices and destroying jobs, all to please one man," Wyden said in a statement following the votes. "The only winner from Donald Trump's trade chaos is China, which is scooping up markets and trading partners that Trump has driven away. This vote represents a new low for the Republican Party."
Wyden said in a floor speech Wednesday that Trump's "senseless global tariffs" are "a major culprit" in the first U.S. economic contraction since 2022, as shown in a Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) report published earlier in the day.
"If this continues to be our tariff policy," the Oregon senator warned, "every major economist and forecaster is unfortunately predicting recession, job losses, and the misery that was all over our news feeds this morning."
Trump's tariffs currently stand at 10% on imports from most U.S. trading partners, and 145% on Chinese imports, as the White House negotiates bilateral deals behind closed doors.
Melinda St. Louis, Global Trade Watch director at Public Citizen, said Wednesday that "while strategic tariffs can be an important tool to support domestic manufacturing, Trump's inappropriate use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to push through sweeping and reckless tariffs actually has nothing to do with protecting U.S. workers."
"He's rolling back investments and support for domestic businesses and undermining workers' rights at home and likely pushing the agenda of Big Tech, Big Pharma, and other billionaire buddies in his secretive trade talks," St. Louis added.
The progressive advocacy group Americans for Tax Fairness (ATF) said Wednesday that Trump's tariffs have already hit U.S. households with a "$14 billion price hike," pointing to BEA data showing that "taxes on foreign imports spiked to $96.3 billion just in the first quarter of 2025, up $14 billion, or 17%, from the same period in 2024." Corporations often pass import tax costs to consumers in the form of price increases.
"Lower and middle-income households will bear a disproportionate share of the Trump Tariff Tax," ATF said. "While the bottom 60% of households take home roughly one-fifth of national income, they will pay nearly one-third of the price of Trump's tariff regime. Meanwhile, the top 1% highest-income households—those that take in over $940,000 a year—will pay only one-tenth of the Trump Tariff Tax, even though they get well over one-fifth of national income."
"This is all part of Trump and congressional Republicans' radical agenda to rig the tax code further in favor of the wealthy while sticking low- and middle-income families with the bill," the group added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular