

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.
Frank Holleman, SELC, 919-967-1450 or fholleman@selcnc.org
In response to today's announcement from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency regarding new federal coal ash protections, Senior Attorney Frank Holleman of the Southern Environmental Law Center released this statement:
As we've seen over the past six years, irresponsible storage of coal ash by big utilities has caused unprecedented disasters and threatened the health and safety of Americans around the country. While there are some new tools for addressing our nation's coal ash problem in these new federal protections, there are glaring flaws in the EPA's approach.
In response to today's announcement from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency regarding new federal coal ash protections, Senior Attorney Frank Holleman of the Southern Environmental Law Center released this statement:
As we've seen over the past six years, irresponsible storage of coal ash by big utilities has caused unprecedented disasters and threatened the health and safety of Americans around the country. While there are some new tools for addressing our nation's coal ash problem in these new federal protections, there are glaring flaws in the EPA's approach.
Most problematically, the absence of federal oversight and enforcement means that any meaningful protective action will continue to fall to our states and local communities. In recent years our states have failed to adequately address the widespread threat of coal ash, and we are concerned that state decision-makers will not do their part in protecting waterways and the health of citizens. We have seen how this issue plays out in North Carolina, where the state has not done enough to address Duke Energy's irresponsible handling of coal ash, despite the disastrous Dan River spill earlier this year.
Another major omission is the rule's failure to clearly require a cleanup of existing and outdated coal ash lagoons. EPA has created a long and uncertain path for addressing these sites when clearly we need to take action immediately.
In the Southeast, almost every major river system has at least one set of these lagoons on its banks - threatening communities with catastrophic failure, polluting rivers, lakes, and groundwater, and contaminating drinking water supplies. The Dan River spill showed dramatically how dangerous old lagoons are. Our litigation and the work of local conservation and riverkeeper groups have forced utilities in the Carolinas to clean up lagoons, and we will continue to enforce existing clean water laws to protect the Southeast's rivers and communities by requiring clean ups of these aging coal ash sites, but this is a problem EPA's rule should have been addressed more directly.
Over the past six years, the Southern Environmental Law Center has taken the lead in both statehouses and courthouses to require Southern utilities to clean up their coal ash. While our work has resulted in some successes, stronger federal and state oversight is crucial to ensure utilities safely and effectively deal with their coal ash disposal.
In order to protect communities from coal ash pollution, we need action that requires accountability from states and from utilities.
SELC is partnering with conservation groups throughout the region to protect communities and the environment from the dangers of coal ash pollution. Following lawsuits by the Southern Environmental Law Center, utilities in South Carolina are removing coal ash from unlined pits near rivers to safer, dry, lined storage facilities away from rivers and lakes.
In addition, SELC is representing a number of groups in ten different state and federal lawsuits to require clean up at all 14 of Duke Energy's leaking coal ash sites throughout North Carolina and is representing local conservation groups with respect to a Duke facility in South Carolina. In response to our litigation and the work of local conservation and riverkeeper groups, Duke Energy has agreed to clean up 4 of its 14 coal ash storage sites in North Carolina. SELC is also taking legal action at two Dominion power plants in Virginia, Possum Point and Chesapeake Energy Center, as well as TVA's Gallatin facility near Nashville, Tennessee.
Former Rep. Tom Malinowski also decried the influence of AIPAC “dark money” on the Democratic primary process.
Former Rep. Tom Malinowski on Tuesday conceded the 2026 Democratic primary race to represent New Jersey's 11th Congressional District to progressive challenger Analilia Mejía, whom he vowed to back in the general election.
In a statement posted on social media, Malinowski praised Mejía for "running a positive campaign and for inspiring so many voters," while also emphasizing that "it is essential that we send a Democrat to Washington to fill this seat, not a rubber stamp" for President Donald Trump.
Malinowski then unloaded on the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the largest pro-Israel lobbying group in the US. Through its super PAC, the United Democracy Project, AIPAC spent a significant sum hammering the former Democratic congressman with negative ads that accused him of supporting Trump and US Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) operations.
"The outcome of this race cannot be understood without also taking into account the massive flood of dark money that AIPAC spent on dishonest ads," he said. "I wish I could say today that this effort, which was meant to intimidate Democrats across the country, failed in NJ-11. But it did not. I met several voters in the final days of the campaign who had seen the ads and asked me, sincerely, 'Are you MAGA? Are you for ICE?'"
During his previous tenure serving in Congress from 2019 to 2023, Malinowski was a reliable vote in favor of sending military aid to Israel. However, AIPAC and some associated political action committees decided to target the New Jersey Democrat when he suggested putting conditions on future aid packages to Israel.
Malinowski said that no Democrat should accept support from AIPAC, which he described as a pernicious influence on US elections.
"Our Democratic Party should have nothing to do with a pro-Trump-billionaire-funded organization," he said, "that demands absolute fealty to positions that are outside of the American pro-Israel community, then smears those who don't fall in line."
Malinowski vowed to oppose any candidate that AIPAC backs "openly or surreptitiously" in future contests in the district.
"The threat unlimited dark money poses to our democracy," he emphasized, "is far more significant than the views of a single member of Congress on Middle East policy."
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who also endorsed Mejía in the Democratic primary, also congratulated her on her win, emphasizing the significant number of obstacles she needed to overcome before emerging victorious.
"Starting with almost no name recognition, Analilia Mejía took on the oligarchs, the Republican establishment and Democratic establishment—and WON," Sanders wrote on social media. "The American people want leaders who stand up to the billionaire class and fight for working families."
The progressive advocacy organization Our Revolution praised Mejía for beating New Jersey machine politics, and pointed to her past campaign work as a sign of what she could do if she wins the April general election and is sworn in as a congresswoman.
"As a grassroots organizer, she helped win a $15 minimum wage and paid sick days," Our Revolution wrote. "As national political director for Bernie 2020, she's built movements to un-rig the economy. Now, she's ready to take this fight to Washington. When we organize, we win!"
According to Drop Site News, said one organizer, "Marco Rubio is personally overseeing the starvation of an entire nation."
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has long sought regime change in Cuba, and new reporting from Drop Site News on Monday suggested he may be intentionally misrepresenting the Trump administration's current policy in the communist country to achieve his goal.
The outlet reported that, based on the accounts of five Cuban and US officials who spoke on condition of anonymity, the "deal" that President Donald Trump has said is likely to be finalized soon is not being pursued in any high-level, official diplomatic discussions.
Soon after issuing an executive order that labeled Cuba an extraordinary threat, accused it of harboring terrorists, and threatened other countries with sanctions if they provide oil to the Cuban government, Trump said his administration is "talking to the people from Cuba, the highest people in Cuba, to see what happens."
But one senior White House official explained to Drop Site that "he’s saying that because that’s what Marco is telling him."
If the public and the president himself believe that high-level negotiations are taking place, "in a few weeks or months, Rubio will be able to claim that the talks were futile because of Cuban intransigence," Drop Site reported, asserting that Rubio is "deliberately" blocking Trump from the talks and misleading him.
A lie like the one Drop Site's sources alleged, said reporter Ryan Grim, "would be a defining scandal in any other administration."
The idea that talks are taking place has been "accepted as fact" in Washington, DC, reported the outlet, which pointed to Politico's recent reporting that said the son of former Cuban President Raúl Castro traveled to Mexico for talks with the Central Intelligence Agency.
Politico's article was sourced to a Cuban dissident blogger and a "single, fantastical Facebook post made by a Spain-based Cuban journalist."
Drop Site noted that while Trump is currently threatening Cuba's economy and the lives and livelihoods of millions of people with an oil blockade, having cut off the Venezuelan oil supply to the island after ordering an invasion of the South American country over a month ago, he doesn't appear to be driven by an "ideological confrontation with Cuba" and in fact holds potential financial interests in normalizing relations with the country because he holds a registered trademark for a Trump property in Havana.
Rubio, whose family immigrated to the US from Cuba before the Cuban Revolution—but didn't flee Fidel Castro's takeover as he claimed early in his political career—has long called for regime change in the country.
The US State Department refuted the accounts of Drop Site's five sources and told the outlet that diplomatic talks—which Cuban leaders have said they are entirely open to holding—are taking place, but did not provide evidence or details.
“As the president stated, we are talking to Cuba, whose leaders should make a deal. Cuba is a failing nation whose rulers have had a major setback with the loss of support from Venezuela and with Mexico ceasing to send them oil," the State Department press office said.
That claim contradicted a comment from Carlos Fernandez de Cossio, Cuba's deputy minister of foreign affairs, who told CNN last week that the government has had "some exchanges of messages" with the White House.
"We cannot say we have set a bilateral dialogue at this moment,” he said.
Drop Site News' reporting indicates, said Cuban-American organizer and New York City Council candidate Danny Valdes, that "Marco Rubio is personally overseeing the starvation of an entire nation," while Cuban leaders "want dialogue and a way forward, without surrendering their sovereignty."
"The growth of the global economy has been at the cost of immense biodiversity loss, which now poses a critical and pervasive systemic risk to the economy, financial stability and human wellbeing."
A new report confirms that unchained economic growth driven by corporations seeking profits with too little concern for downside harm is having devastating impacts on biodiversity and natural systems across the planet while also undermining the health of the global economy in the long run.
The landmark new report published Monday by the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) was backed by over 150 nations after three years of research and analyses by 79 leading experts from 35 countries across all regions of the world.
What the research found is that "the current conditions in which businesses operate are not always compatible with achieving a just and sustainable future, and that these conditions also perpetuate systemic risks" with far-reaching implications.
"The growth of the global economy has been at the cost of immense biodiversity loss, which now poses a critical and pervasive systemic risk to the economy, financial stability and human wellbeing," warned the IPBES in a statement.
“We must place true value on the environment and go beyond gross domestic product as a measure of human progress and wellbeing. Let us not forget that when we destroy a forest, we are creating GDP. When we overfish, we are creating GDP.” —António Guterres, UN Secretary-General
With natural resources "being depleted and degraded faster now than any period in human history," the report is designed to warn humanity, equip policymakers with knowledge, and provide solutions that could mitigate the crisis of biodiversity loss.
The report notes that "unsustainable economic activity and a focus on growth as measured by the gross domestic product, has been a driver of the decline of biodiversity... and stands in the way of transformative change."
According to Alexander De Croo, an administrator with the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), an IPBES partner organization, "Businesses are inseparable from the ecosystems they operate in: they both depend on them and profoundly impact them. As significant drivers of today’s planetary crises, businesses have contributed to climate change, biodiversity loss and cultural erosion."
At the same time, he added, these companies "have a critical role to play in advancing more sustainable solutions, a role already reflected in a growing number of initiatives." The real problem, the report finds, is how intractable the business-as-usual approach has been, with corporations resistant to changing their operations to put them more in line with nature and too little pressure coming from governments to force through more sustainable practices.
According to the report:
Current conditions perpetuate business-as-usual and do not support the transformative change necessary to halt and reverse biodiversity loss. For example, large subsidies that drive losses of biodiversity are directed to business activities with the support of lobbying by businesses and trade associations. In 2023, global public and private finance flows with directly negative impacts on nature, were estimated at $7.3 trillion, of which private finance accounted for $4.9 trillion, with public spending on environmentally harmful subsidies of about $2.4 trillion.
In contrast, $220 billion in public and private finance flows were directed in 2023 to activities contributing to the conservation and restoration of biodiversity, representing just 3% of the public funds and incentives that encourage harmful business behaviour or prevent behaviour beneficial to biodiversity.
“The loss of biodiversity is among the most serious threats to business,” said Prof. Stephen Polasky, co-chair of the assessment. “Yet the twisted reality is that it often seems more profitable to businesses to degrade biodiversity than to protect it. Business as usual may once have seemed profitable in the short term, but impacts across multiple businesses can have cumulative effects, aggregating to global impacts, which can cross ecological tipping points."
But Polasky goes on to say that the report "shows that business as usual is not inevitable," and that with better policies, "as well as financial and cultural shifts, what is good for nature is also what is best for profitability."
The IPBES assessment arrived alongside fresh warnings about the disastrous results that have stemmed from obsessive allegiance to gross domestic product (GDP) as the key economic indicator by governments and businesses worldwide.
In an interview with the Guardian on Monday, UN secretary general António Guterres suggested that the obsession with GDP was driving humanity toward a cliff.
“We must place true value on the environment and go beyond gross domestic product as a measure of human progress and wellbeing," Guterres said. "Let us not forget that when we destroy a forest, we are creating GDP. When we overfish, we are creating GDP."