

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.

Radioactive contamination in the forests and land of Iitate district in Fukushima prefecture is so widespread and at such a high level that it will be impossible for people to safely return to their homes, a Greenpeace Japan investigation revealed today. The findings follow the Abe Government's announcement on 12th June 2015 to lift evacuation orders by March 2017 and terminate compensation by 2018, which effectively forces victims back into heavily contaminated areas.(1)
"Prime Minister Abe would like the people of Japan to believe that they are decontaminating vast areas of Fukushima to levels safe enough for people to live in. The reality is that this is a policy doomed to failure. The forests of Iitate are a vast stock of radioactivity that will remain both a direct hazard and source of potential recontamination for hundreds of years. It's impossible to decontaminate," said Jan Vande Putte, radiation specialist with Greenpeace Belgium.
"The Japanese government has condemned the people of Iitate to live in an environment that poses an unacceptable risk to their health. Stripping nuclear victims of their already inadequate compensation, which may force them to have to return to unsafe, highly radioactive areas for financial reasons, amounts to economic coercion. Let's be clear: this is a political decision by the Abe Government, not one based on science, data, or public health," he said.
Greenpeace conducted a radiation survey and sampling program in Iitate, including in its forests. One principle finding from the investigation is that the vast majority of Iitate will never be decontaminated, with most radioactivity deposited in the vast forested hills and mountains in the district. The enormous scale of the forests was revealed by UAV footage from the investigation. Even in the limited areas that have been decontaminated around people's homes and land, and along roads, levels of radiation are still at unacceptable levels. The results show that current decontamination programs are failing to significantly reduce radiation levels, which remain high and unsafe for people to live.
Even after decontamination, radiation dose rates were measured higher than 2uSv/h on decontaminated fields, the equivalent of an annual dose higher than 10mSv/year or ten times the maximum allowed dose to the general public. In the untouched and heavily contaminated forests, radiation dose rates are typically in the range of 1-3uSv/h--high levels that will remain for many years to come.
The only forest decontamination underway in Iitate is along public roads, where thousands of workers are removing contaminated soil and plants along a 10-20 meter strip. The Japanese government plans to lift restrictions in all of Area 2(2), including Iitate, where people could receive radiation doses of up to 20mSV each year and in subsequent years.
International radiation protection standards recommend public exposure should be 1mSv/year or less in non-post accident situations. The radiation limit that excluded people from living in the 30km zone around the Chernobyl nuclear plant exclusion zone was set at 5mSV/year, five years after the nuclear accident. Over 100.000 people were evacuated from within the zone and will never return.
Supporting the Japanese government in its policy of forced return to a radioactive environment is the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which has promoted the early return of Fukushima citizens to evacuated areas. Not only is the IAEA's radiation risk assessments based on flawed science, where they are deliberately understating the risks from radioactivity, they also have misrepresented the scale and effectiveness of the limited decontamination program including in Iitate.(3)
"Even after nearly thirty years, the 30km area around Chernobyl remains an exclusion zone. It's a shocking indictment of both the IAEA and the Abe government, which reveals how desperate they are to create the illusion that returning to 'normal' is possible after a severe nuclear accident. Their position is indefensible and plans for a de facto forced return must be stopped," said Mamoru Sekiguchi, energy campaigner at Greenpeace Japan.
The district of Iitate, which covers more than 200 square kilometers, located between 28-47km northwest of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, was one of the most contaminated areas following the March 2011 catastrophe. Since 2014, tens of thousands of workers have been attempting to reduce radiation levels in some parts of Fukushima prefecture, including in Iitate, with little impact.
In early June 3.400 citizens of Iitate (more than half the population) called on the mayor of their community to reject the government's plans. At the same time, they are currently within the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) process, where they hope to secure reasonable compensation for the losses they have suffered.
"The gap between the amount of high and low compensation payments is widening drastically, and the Iitate village people will have to keep living a sad life in bitterness, separated from each other and away from their home. The Iitate people's fate is another of numerous cases in the past where Japan abandoned its people, as with the Ashio mining pollution and Minamata disease. We can not allow this to happen again," said Yasushi Tadano, the lawyer defending the people of Iitate.
Greenpeace is a global, independent campaigning organization that uses peaceful protest and creative communication to expose global environmental problems and promote solutions that are essential to a green and peaceful future.
+31 20 718 2000Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth reportedly showed the president options for military operations, including "strikes on land."
The fact that the White House has reportedly made no "final decision" regarding whether it will launch direct strikes against Venezuela offered cold comfort, suggested one policy advocate on Thursday as it was reported that top military officials had briefed President Donald Trump on "options" for attacking the South American country after weeks of US escalation.
"They're presenting options to Trump for war in Venezuela—options that Trump has already rightly expressed reservations about, and options that just days ago they told Republican allies in Congress that they do not have legal authority to do," said Erik Sperling, executive director of Just Foreign Policy and a former adviser to US Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.). "But sure, no 'final' decision made."
As CBS News reported, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dan Caine were among the senior military officials who spoke to Trump Wednesday about potential operations that could be carried out in Venezuela "in the coming days," including "strikes on land."
The meeting came as the USS Gerald R. Ford arrived in the Latin America region, accompanied by warships. The arrival of the carrier strike force brings the number of US troops in the region to 15,000.
Since September, the White House has embarked on what it has called an "armed conflict" with drug cartels in Venezuela over the strong objections of Democrats and a small number of Republicans in Congress.
The conflict has been characterized by the administration's strikes on numerous boats in the Caribbean and the eastern Pacific, that the White House has claimed were carrying drugs and operated by cartels. The administration has not released evidence that the people on board the boats were involved in drug trafficking, and legal experts and lawmakers have condemned what they call the "extrajudicial killing" of at least 76 people.
The Associated Press reported on the identities of some of the victims last week and found that they included an out-of-work bus driver and a fisherman who was desperate to feed his family. The family of one victim from Trinidad and Tobago denied that he had been involved in drug trafficking. Two people survived the strikes and were repatriated to Ecuador and Colombia; in the case of the man from Ecuador, authorities released him after finding no evidence he had committed any crime.
Lawmakers in the US Senate have introduced two war powers resolutions to stop Trump from bombing purported drug trafficking boats and from striking Venezuela, but both have been voted down.
The measure focused on Venezuela was voted down after Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio briefed "select members of Congress" and told them the administration is not planning to strike the country and did not have a legal rationale for doing so.
Trump recently told "60 Minutes" that he doubted the US would launch a military attack on the country.
Sperling said Rubio, who has long advocated regime change in Venezuela, appeared "deflated" when speaking to reporters on Thursday and declining to "discuss any possibility of striking Venezuela or arresting [President Nicolás] Maduro."
Despite the aircraft's carrier arrival to the Caribbean, Rubio seems deflated — as he declines to discuss any possibility of striking Venezuela or arresting Maduro.
Seems likely that Trump rightly rejected proposals for a Libya-style regime change or Black Hawk Down-style raid https://t.co/phPXUNIRx8 pic.twitter.com/CgP1w9OE13
— Erik Sperling 🌍 (@ErikSperling) November 13, 2025
"Seems likely that Trump rightly rejected proposals for a Libya-style regime change or Black Hawk Down-style raid," said Sperling.
But Maduro has not been convinced by claims that the US is not planning a strike, and his government announced Wednesday that it was readying its entire military arsenal and deploying 200,000 soldiers to prepare for potential acts of war from the US.
While Trump has appeared to reject proposals to attack Venezuela thus far, he said in 2023 that if he had won the 2020 election, he would have taken the country over and seized its vast oil reserves.
"If Trump rejected Rubio's plans for regime change war in Venezuela, he made the right call," said Just Foreign Policy on social media Thursday. "Former President Barack Obama reportedly wanted to stay out of Libya, but was pressured by advisers—a decision he regretted. Trump must not make the same mistake with Rubio's Venezuela war."
Organizers of the new campaign said Republicans are slashing nutrition assistance and other programs "after giving Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and other billionaires a massive tax break."
A nationwide campaign announced Thursday aims to rally Americans against US President Donald Trump and the Republican Party's unpopular effort to demolish what's left of the country's social safety net to help fund tax breaks for the ultrarich.
The Billionaires Eat First campaign officially launches Friday with events in the nation's capital and Montgomery, Alabama, where local leaders, advocates, and impacted families will gather to spotlight the harms of the GOP's cuts to federal nutrition assistance. Over the summer, congressional Republicans approved the largest-ever cuts to Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), and the Trump administration used the prolonged government shutdown to throttle food benefits for millions.
During the shutdown, which ended on Wednesday, the more than 900 billionaires in the United States saw their combined wealth grow to a record $8 trillion as tens of millions of low-income people watched the Trump administration illegally withhold their nutrition benefits.
"Trump and congressional Republicans are taking food off the table for kids, seniors, and veterans, while families already struggle with high grocery costs," said Leor Tal, campaign director of Unrig Our Economy, the coalition that organized the new campaign in partnership with local organizations.
"And they’re doing this after giving Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and other billionaires a massive tax break," Tal added. "Families need to feed their loved ones; billionaires don’t need yet another tax break. It’s wrong."
Unrig Our Economy said that the Billionaires Eat First events will feature speeches from local leaders and people directly affected by the Trump-GOP SNAP cuts. The campaign is also a mutual aid effort, with volunteers expected to donate hundreds of thousands of meals to local food banks ahead of the Thanksgiving holiday.
"Across America, kids, seniors, and veterans have lost vital food assistance. Why? Because Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress chose to give billionaires and big corporations massive tax breaks, while cutting SNAP benefits in their tax law, and heartlessly withholding SNAP benefits during the government shutdown," the campaign's website states. "We’re standing up to say: it’s callous, it’s cruel, and it’s wrong."
In addition to Friday's events, the campaign will have stops in West Virginia and Pennsylvania on Saturday, and Louisiana, New York, and Arizona next week.
The campaign was announced hours after Trump signed funding legislation that ended the government shutdown—though the impacts of the standoff are expected to linger, with SNAP benefits still in chaos and health insurance premiums set to rise further as Republicans refuse to back an extension of Affordable Care Act subsidies that expire at the end of the year.
Crystal FitzSimons, president of the Food Research & Action Center, implored the Trump administration and states to quickly deliver full November benefits to those who have not yet received them.
"It remains shocking that the administration did everything it could during the shutdown to keep much-needed food assistance from reaching those in need," said FitzSimons. "The administration went as far as the Supreme Court to keep SNAP benefits out of the hands of those in need. This unnecessary and harmful decision left millions of Americans hungry and in limbo."
"The vulnerable part of the economy is having an even tougher time making ends meet," said one finance professor.
Last month's jobs report may never be released after being delayed during the federal government shutdown, but other figures demonstrate the havoc President Donald Trump is wreaking on the US economy, including new data for subprime borrowers behind on car payments.
The share of US borrowers with low credit scores or limited credit histories who are at least 60 days past due on their auto loans rose to 6.65% in October, the highest percentage since Fitch Ratings began tracking it in the early 1990s.
"The vulnerable part of the economy is having an even tougher time making ends meet," Massachusetts Institute of Technology finance professor Christopher Palmer told Marketplace on Wednesday in response to the new data.
As Bloomberg reported Wednesday:
Miriam Neal in Atlanta is one of those struggling to afford all of her expenses. The 29-year-old lost her job as a research fellow in December and couldn't make her car payments, leading to her vehicle being repossessed. Thanks to a GoFundMe that she started in July, she was able to get her car back, but said she still can barely afford her bill.
"It's been a little bit difficult maintaining it with the car insurance, the maintenance, and my car loan," Neal said. "I'm usually about 30 days late."
She still hasn't been able to find employment and ended up having to move back in with her parents while she drives for Amazon Flex to make a little bit of money. Still, she estimates she makes only about $100 a day, which isn't enough for all of her bills.
Fitch's findings on missed car payments notably follow two key disruptions in the auto lending space.
"PrimaLend, which serves the 'buy-here-pay-here' auto financing market—where dealers sell and directly finance vehicles for customers with poor or limited credit—filed for bankruptcy protection last month," Reuters reported. "Tricolor, which sold cars and provided auto loans mostly to low-income Hispanic communities in the Southwestern United States, also filed for bankruptcy in September."
In mid-October, the credit score model development company VantageScore released an analysis showing that auto loans "have now evolved from being one of the least risky consumer credit products to one of the loan types most prone to delinquencies," as consumers struggle with rising interest rates, financing costs, and prices of cars, insurance, and repairs.
"Auto loans have not followed the trends of other credit products as delinquencies have been persistently trending up across all credit tiers and income groups over the past 15 years," said VantageScore's chief economist and strategy officer, Rikard Bandebo, in a statement. "Even after the industry tightened lending criteria three years ago, delinquencies have continued to rise."
A few days before the VantageScore analysis, Cox Automotive's Kelley Blue Book announced that in September, the average transaction price (ATP) of a new vehicle in the US had soared above $50,000 for the first time.
"It is important to remember that the new vehicle market is inflationary. Prices go up over time, and today's market is certainly reminding us of that," said Cox Automotive executive analyst Erin Keating last month. "The $20,000 vehicle is now mostly extinct, and many price-conscious buyers are sidelined or cruising in the used vehicle market. Today's auto market is being driven by wealthier households who have access to capital, good loan rates, and are propping up the higher end of the market."
"Tariffs have introduced new cost pressure to the business, but the pricing story in September was mostly driven by the healthy mix of EVs and higher-end vehicles pushing the new vehicle ATP into uncharted territory," she added. "We've been expecting to break through the $50,000 barrier. It was only a matter of time, especially when you consider the bestselling vehicle in America is a pickup truck from Ford that routinely costs north of $65,000. That's today's market, and it is ripe for disruption."
The downturn becomes more evident ...Record number of subprime borrowers miss car loan payments in October, data shows - www.reuters.com/business/aut...
[image or embed]
— Not Born Yesterday (@oatsmint.bsky.social) November 12, 2025 at 4:44 PM
Other recent findings that have shown the economic deterioration under Trump include a Thursday report from Democrats on the congressional Joint Economic Committee (JEC), which found that the average US family is spending around $700 more each month on basic items since Trump returned to office in January.
"As families across the country spend more to pay their bills and put food on the table, Democrats and Republicans should be working together to lower costs," said Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-NH), the JEC’s ranking member. "Instead, President Trump is pushing ahead with reckless tariffs that continue to fuel inflation and drive prices up even higher."
A closely watched University of Michigan survey revealed last week that since October, consumer sentiment has fallen over 6% to 50.3, the second-lowest level since 1978, and the "current economic conditions" index has dropped nearly 11% to an all-time low of 52.3.
Earlier in November, the Washington Post reported on layoff data from corporate outplacement firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas, which documented 153,000 job cuts in October, bringing the total for this year to 1.1 million.
"We haven't seen mega-layoffs of the size that are being discussed now—48,000 from UPS, potentially 30,000 from Amazon—since 2020 and before that, since the recession of 2009," said the firm's CEO, John Challenger. "When you see companies making cuts of this size, it does signal a real shift in direction."