August, 12 2015, 09:45am EDT

Petition Urges Obama Administration to Ban Natural Gas Exports
WASHINGTON
Environmental groups filed a groundbreaking legal petition with the U.S. Department of Commerce today seeking an immediate ban on natural gas exports from the United States, which have seen a dramatic surge on the heels of a fracking boom around the country.
The U.S. Energy and Policy Conservation Act was passed by Congress in 1975 to conserve domestic energy supplies, specifically natural gas and crude oil, by prohibiting the export of both unless specifically covered by an allowable exemption. Although the Department of Commerce has instituted such a ban on crude oil, it has failed to address natural gas exports despite an exponential increase in such exports over the past decade.
"The time is now to end the environmental and economic disaster of natural gas exports," said Bill Snape, senior counsel at the Center for Biological Diversity and primary author of the petition. "Exporting natural gas worsens global warming, harms local communities, raises domestic energy prices and benefits only multinational fossil fuel corporations. If the Obama administration's really serious about addressing the climate crisis, it has to rein in the gluttonous natural gas industry."
Most natural gas exports from the United States are in the form of liquefied natural gas (LNG), which is usually easier to transport but entails its own hazards and requires significant energy use. Since the late 1990s, natural gas exports have increased by roughly 1,000 percent, from 163,415 million cubic feet in 1999 to the most recent high of 1,618,828 million cubic feet in 2012. Almost all of this natural gas has been extracted utilizing new hydraulic fracturing technologies that are causing environmental and public health problems throughout the country.
"With scientists demanding that we keep fossil fuels in the ground to avert climate disaster, fracking more natural gas puts corporate profits above the American people," said Ben Schreiber, climate and energy program director at Friends of the Earth. "The Obama administration needs to comply with the law and not export a fuel that has higher carbon emissions than coal."
"We know a clean energy future is within our reach, but fossil fuel exports are not part of that future," said Kyle Ash, senior legislative representative at Greenpeace. "The Obama administration's support of drilling and exporting fossil fuels undermines the president's climate legacy from the start."
"The primary purpose of allowing natural gas exports is to boost the profits of domestic frackers who want to raise gas prices at the expense of the rest of us," said Tyson Slocum, director of Public Citizen's energy program. "Natural gas exports are bad for the American landscape and bad for American consumers."
"If the Department of Commerce does not expeditiously move to end these illegal natural gas exports, we'll go to court to make sure this law is enforced," Snape said. "This petition is an opportunity for the Obama administration to do the right thing and stop the severe damage done by natural gas exports."
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) 623-5252LATEST NEWS
Trump Tariffs Seen as 'Baby Tax' as Costs Soar for Parenting Essentials
"His tariff policies are making it harder and more expensive to prepare for a new baby or raise kids, and his solution is to tell parents to buy fewer toys for their children," said the head of the Groundwork Collaborative.
May 06, 2025
The progressive think tank Groundwork Collaborative on Tuesday highlighted how U.S. President Donald Trump's sweeping tariffs are effectively a "baby tax" paid by parents, given rising prices of everything "from car seats to sippy cups."
"President Trump's economic policies are an affront to young families," said Groundwork Collaborative executive director Lindsay Owens in a statement. "His tariff policies are making it harder and more expensive to prepare for a new baby or raise kids, and his solution is to tell parents to buy fewer toys for their children."
"While the president works overtime to give his billionaire donors a massive tax giveaway, he's placing a baby tax on every parent across the country," added Owens, referencing an effort to get a package containing more tax cuts for the rich—paid for by gutting the social safety net—through the GOP-controlled Congress.
"He's placing a baby tax on every parent across the country."
Citing the Juvenile Products Manufacturers Association (JPMA)—which has directly pressured Trump to "exclude all juvenile products" from tariffs on Chinese imports—The New York Timesreported Friday that "about 90% of durable baby and children's products sold in the United States are manufactured overseas, with the vast majority produced in China."
Noting that statistic, Groundwork focused on the costs of some essentials for babies and young children, including clothes, cribs, high chairs, sippy cups, and toys. For example, the group pointed out, the car seat and stroller companies Evenflo, Nuna, and UPPAbaby have recently announced price hikes.
"This represents a major challenge for parents, as car seats—which can run over $400—are required by law in all 50 states and should be bought new due to safety concerns," Groundwork said. "New parents spend, on average, $1,000 on baby safety gear."
As for strollers—or, as Trump put it, "the thing that you carry the babies around in"—UPPAbaby's Vista "just increased from $900 to $1,200," Groundwork continued. "Or, for a cheaper option, Bombi's flagship stroller now costs $225 instead of $199."
Some companies, including UPPAbaby, have made clear that the price increases are a direct result of Trump's evolving tariff policy.
"Due to rising import tariffs, updated pricing will go into effect on May 5th, 2025 across most UPPAbaby products," the company explained in a blog post last month. "If tariffs are reduced or lifted, we'll reassess pricing as quickly as business operations allow."
UPPAbaby is also among 13 U.S.-based companies that launched an advertising campaign calling tariffs a "baby tax," as The Washington Postreported last week. The ad declares that "becoming a parent is one of life's greatest joys, one our country should champion, not tax."
In addition to UPPAbaby chief executive Bob Monahan, the ad is signed by the CEOs of Babylist, Ergobaby, Frida, Guava Family, Hatch Baby, Lalo, Million Dollar Baby Co., Mockingbird, Munchkin, Nanit, Owlet, and Willow Innocations.
Groundwork highlighted Tuesday that "the CEO of popular baby accessory brand Munchkin, Steve Dunn, said the company will increase prices on about 90% of products, likely by at least 20%. Their cheapest high chair is currently $170."
Crib costs are also a concern. "Three-quarters of all baby furniture is made in China," Groundwork noted. "Get ready for some sleepless nights: the popular smart bassinet SNOO is manufactured in China and might soon cost more than its current $1,695 price tag."
Additionally, the clothing giant "Carter's has already raised prices on many items," which often come from Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, and Vietnam, and "Mattel CFO Anthony DiSilvestro has warned of possible price hikes as 40% of Mattel toys come from China," the think tank added.
Groundwork's statement was released as a bipartisan group called the Cost Coalition officially launched on Tuesday. Its goal, according toThe Associated Press, is "to highlight Trump's struggle to control rising costs."
"In 100 days, Donald Trump put the best-performing economy in the world on a crash course toward recession. Trump's tariffs—the biggest middle class tax hike in modern history—are making everyday prices skyrocket and wreaking havoc for businesses large and small," said Terry Holt, a former spokesperson for Republican leaders, and Andrew Bates, who was a Democratic spokesperson, in a joint statement to the AP.
"Next up are grossly inflationary tax cuts for the wealthy that will only saddle future generations with staggering debt," Holt and Bates continued. "Whether you're a Republican, Democrat, or anything else, Donald Trump's agenda is an economic crisis threatening your livelihood and standard of living."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'They Just Made Sh*t Up': Declassified Spy Memo Undercuts Trump Pretext for Deportations to El Salvador
"Sunlight remains the best disinfectant for falsehoods," said one open government advocate.
May 06, 2025
A memo released Monday by the Trump administration in response to a Freedom of Information Act request confirmed that U.S. intelligence agencies never agreed with President Donald Trump's claim in March that Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro controls the criminal gang Tren de Aragua—an assertion that was used to justify sending hundreds of migrants to a notorious Salvadoran prison.
The document said that "while Venezuela's permissive environment enables TDA to operate, the Maduro regime probably does not have a policy of cooperating with TDA and is not directing TDA movement to and operations in the United States."
Trump's claim about Maduro's connection to the group had been called into question by The New York Times in March, after Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act for only the fourth time in U.S. history. The law empowers the federal government to summarily expel citizens of a country that is at war with or invading the United States.
The Times reported at the time, based on interviews with officials, that the intelligence community's findings about Tren de Aragua were "starkly at odds" with Trump's claims. The anonymous officials said the gang was not taking orders from Maduro's government.
That reporting prompted the U.S. Justice Department to open a criminal investigation into the "selective leak of inaccurate" information to the Times, with the Trump administration criticizing the Times for its "misleading" report.
Attorney General Pam Bondi also said in an April memo that the department would roll back press freedom protections in leak investigations after The Washington Postreported on the memo that was declassified Monday. The Post reported on the document from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in mid-April when it was still classified.
"The declassification proves that the material should have been public from the start—not used as an excuse to suppress sharing information with the press," Lauren Harper, the Daniel Ellsberg chair on government secrecy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation, told the Times. The group filed the FOIA request for the memo, dated April 7, to be released.
A declassified ODNI memo disclosed in response to a @Freedom.Press FOIA request confirms a @nytimes.com report from March: U.S. intel agencies rejected the claim Trump made to justify deporting Venezuelans to a prison in El Salvador. www.nytimes.com/2025/05/05/u...
[image or embed]
— Alexander Howard (@digiphile.bsky.social) May 5, 2025 at 10:27 PM
The memo noted that the FBI partially dissented with the intelligence community's findings about Tren de Aragua.
Analysts at the FBI agreed with the agencies' overall assessment but believed "some Venezuelan government officials facilitate [Tren de Aragua] members' migration from Venezuela to the United States and use members as proxies in Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and the United States to advance what they see as the Maduro regime's goal of destabilizing governments and undermining public safety in these countries."
"Most" of the intelligence community "judges that intelligence indicating that regime leaders are directing or enabling [Tren de Aragua] migration to the United States is not credible," the memo reads.
Intelligence agencies also noted in the memo that detainees accused of being members of the gang could have been motivated "to make false allegations about their ties to the Venezuelan regime in an effort to deflect responsibility for their crimes and to lessen any punishment by providing exculpatory or otherwise 'valuable' information to U.S. prosecutors."
Analysts said they had not collected information about communications or funding exchanges between Venezuelan officials and leaders of Tren de Aragua.
"So you mean kidnapping folks off the streets and sending them to a foreign gulag was not justified by our own intelligence?" said the Arkansas Justice Project. "They just made shit up to dog whistle their base. The AEA argument was never legitimate and they knew it all along."
After the memo was released, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said it was "outrageous that as President Trump and his administration work hard every day to make America safe by deporting these violent criminals, some in the media remain intent on twisting and manipulating intelligence assessments to undermine the president's agenda to keep the American people safe."
Courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, have blocked the Trump administration from sending more migrants to El Salvador under the Alien Enemies Act, and the ACLU last month asked a federal judge to facilitate the return of all Venezuelans sent to the country's Terrorism Confinement Center to ensure they have due process via immigration hearings.
But judges hearing cases regarding Trump's mass deportations under the Alien Enemies Act have not yet questioned the administration's debunked claims about Tren de Aragua and the Maduro government.
Writer and open government advocate Alexander B. Howard said the release of the memo proves that "sunlight remains the best disinfectant for falsehoods."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Florida Sued Over DeSantis' 'Ultimate Cowardly Act' Against Direct Democracy
"We believe in democracy, and we believe that when politicians fail to act, the people have the right to step in," said the campaign manager of Florida Decides Healthcare, a plaintiff in the suit.
May 06, 2025
Florida Decides Healthcare, a political committee and nonprofit that is fighting for expanded Medicaid eligibility in the Sunshine State, on Sunday sued the Florida secretary of state and other state officials, challenging a law Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis signed last week that makes it tougher for citizens to get constitutional amendments on the ballot.
According to the lawsuit, which was filed in federal court, Florida Decides Healthcare (FDH) is working to qualify a ballot measure to appear on the 2026 general election ballot that, if voted through, would expand Medicaid coverage in Florida.
Provisions in H.B. 1205 include decreased time for organizers to submit signed petitions and increased monetary penalties for violations. The law also makes it a third-degree felony for anyone other than a registered petition circulator to collect or physically possess more than 25 signed petition forms beyond ones own and immediate family members.
"Because of H.B. 1205's punitive and onerous restrictions, set to go into effect in the middle of FDH's ongoing petition drive, the organization faces the real and imminent threat of being unable to continue its operations," according to the suit. "H.B. 1205 creates intolerable uncertainty, exposes FDH to ruinous civil and criminal penalties, and could ultimately force FDH to shut down its campaign entirely."
According to a statement from FDH, the lawsuit contends that the bill is a "direct assault" on the citizen-led constitutional amendment process in Florida, "a vital democratic tool that gives everyday Floridians the power to propose ballot initiatives."
H.B. 1205 creates "vague" and "punitive" restrictions around the process that will have a chilling impact on political speech and dissuade civic engagement, according to the group.
The Elias Law Group, a prominent Democratic law firm, and the Southern Poverty Law Center, a racial justice and legal advocacy group, are lending legal support to FDH.
This targeting of the citizens amendment process comes less than one year after two ballot initiatives in Florida narrowly failed. Amendment 4 sought to ensure the right to an abortion up until fetal viability. The measure narrowly failed, falling short of the 60% majority needed to pass, meaning Florida will remain under a six-week abortion ban. Amendment 3 sought to legalize marijuana and also failed. Groups backing the initiatives raised tens of millions of dollars.
According to the Orlando Sentinel, the DeSantis administration used public money to run ads targeting the initiatives, and defended the ad campaigns as educational.
"Floridians have a constitutional right to change policy themselves. State legislators have now effectively silenced their constituents, all in order to maintain their chokehold on policymaking," said Kelly Hall, executive director of the Fairness Project, in a statement on Tuesday. The Fairness Project was among the groups that backed Amendment 4 last fall.
"It's the ultimate cowardly act—for politicians to enact minority rule when they know their policies don't align with the will of the majority," Hall added. "Sadly, this is nothing new for DeSantis, who used extraordinarily undemocratic means to block the will of the people during the 2024 election."
Mitch Emerson, campaign manager for Florida Decides Healthcare, similarly called the law "cowardly." Emerson is also a plaintiff in the suit.
"It's not reform—it's repression. We are filing this lawsuit because we refuse to let them silence the people of Florida," said Emerson in a statement on Monday. "We believe in democracy, and we believe that when politicians fail to act, the people have the right to step in. Floridians are ready to vote for Medicaid expansion—and we intend to make sure they get that chance."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular