SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
December, 11 2015, 11:30am EDT
Contact:
Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; or David Zupan, (541) 484-9167
Dow-DuPont Merger: Perpetuating GMOs, Squeezing Farmers and Consumers?
AP is reporting: "Dow Chemical and the DuPont Co. announced Friday that they are merging in a $130 billion chemical industry megadeal.
"The merger would combine two companies that sell agricultural products to millions of farmers around the world, and make a variety of chemicals for consumer and industrial products ranging from electronics, automobiles, and household goods to building materials and safety equipment.
WASHINGTON
AP is reporting: "Dow Chemical and the DuPont Co. announced Friday that they are merging in a $130 billion chemical industry megadeal.
"The merger would combine two companies that sell agricultural products to millions of farmers around the world, and make a variety of chemicals for consumer and industrial products ranging from electronics, automobiles, and household goods to building materials and safety equipment.
"The two companies will form DowDuPont, then separate into three independent publicly traded companies focused on agriculture, material science and specialty products."
The following analysts are available for interviews:
WENONAH HAUTER, via Patty Lovera, plovera at fwwatch.org, @foodandwater
Hauter is the founder and executive director of Food & Water Watch and the author of Foodopoly: The Battle Over the Future of Food and Farming in America. She said today: "Just a handful of large chemical companies including Dow and DuPont already control most of the seed supply used to grow crops like corn and soybeans, as well as the herbicides that genetically engineered seeds are designed to be grown with. Any merger that consolidates this market into fewer hands will give farmers fewer choices and put them at even more economic disadvantage. And it will make it harder for agriculture to get off the GMO-chemical treadmill that just keeps increasing in speed. The Department of Justice needs to block this merger to prevent the further corporate control of the basic building blocks of the food supply."
DIANA MOSS, dmoss at antitrustinstitute.org, @antitrustinst
Moss is president of the American Antitrust Institute. She said today: "Any merger on the agricultural inputs side of DuPont and Dow will get antitrust scrutiny. Some of the markets for biotech and seeds are highly concentrated, which has been driven by Monsanto having made so many acquisitions in the past. If you put a new merger in the this mix, it's going to raise concerns about leaving only two or maybe three firms. That's a market landscape that doesn't promote competition, entry, and innovation. Farmers could be squeezed even more and consumers could pay higher prices."
A nationwide consortium, the Institute for Public Accuracy (IPA) represents an unprecedented effort to bring other voices to the mass-media table often dominated by a few major think tanks. IPA works to broaden public discourse in mainstream media, while building communication with alternative media outlets and grassroots activists.
LATEST NEWS
In 'Major Earth Day Win,' House GOP Cancels Vote on Gutting Endangered Species Act
"At a time when we should be strengthening protections for species," said one advocate, "not weakening them, it’s clear there is growing opposition to efforts that put special interests ahead of science and conservation."
Apr 22, 2026
Republican leadership in the US House of Representatives planned to mark Earth Day with a "catastrophic" attack on the Endangered Species Act, but ultimately canceled Wednesday's vote at the last minute, a development celebrated by conservationists nationwide.
After reports of "problems" getting some Republicans to back the ESA Amendments Act and a procedural vote that "showed shaky support from party members," as The New York Times put it, the House adjourned without a final vote on the bill—which the newspaper called "an embarrassing setback" for Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.).
While the lead sponsor, House Committee on Natural Resources Chair Bruce Westerman (R-Ark.), claimed that "we just have a few provisions we've got to work through on it, and hopefully in the next couple of weeks, we'll be able to vote on it," Stephanie Kurose, deputy director of government affairs at the Center for Biological Diversity, said that "this should be a wake-up call to Rep. Westerman that not even his own colleagues support his extreme attacks on wildlife."
"It's time for him to drop this failed crusade," Kurose declared. "Good riddance."
Other wildlife defenders joined Kurose in enthusiastically welcoming the blow to what Bradley Williams, the Sierra Club's deputy legislative director for wildlife and lands protection, called "extremely harmful legislation."
"We are encouraged to see that the House of Representatives has pulled this bill after outcry from Republicans and Democrats," Williams said in a statement. "By rejecting a bill that would have gutted protections for endangered and threatened species across the country, Congress is sending a clear message that protecting wildlife is a shared American value, not a partisan issue."
Jewel Tomasula, policy director for the Endangered Species Coalition, which has hundreds of member organizations, said that "given the more than 58,000 emails sent to elected officials, along with hundreds—if not thousands—of calls made in just the past few days, it is clear that the American people support the Endangered Species Act, understand its value, and want its protections for threatened and endangered wildlife to remain in place."
"This is a welcome sign that efforts to gut protections for imperiled species are not moving forward on Earth Day," Tomasula continued. "We're glad Congress is hearing their constituents' concerns about Westerman's harmful bill and taking pause to listen. For now, the important work to protect endangered species can continue. This Congress should leave the ESA alone."
Major #EarthDay win 🎉: H.R. 1897, aka the Endangered Species Act Amendments Act was just pulled from house floor consideration following outcry from both Republicans and Democrats who oppose the bill.
[image or embed]
— Center for Biological Diversity (@biologicaldiversity.org) April 22, 2026 at 2:36 PM
Sara Amundson, president of Humane World for Animals Action Fund, similarly said that "on Earth Day, pulling the House vote on the deeply flawed Endangered Species Act bill is a clarion call that legislators need to stop heeding their own leadership and start doing the will of their constituents."
"At a time when we should be strengthening protections for species like grizzly bears and sea turtles, not weakening them, it’s clear there is growing opposition to efforts that put special interests ahead of science and conservation," Amundson said. "We urge Congress to abandon this harmful proposal altogether and instead focus on upholding and strengthening the Endangered Species Act for future generations."
Defenders of Wildlife legislative director Mary Beth Beetham proclaimed that "now we can really celebrate Earth Day!"
"The public defeat of the Westerman bill is a direct result of sustained constituent pressure," she stressed. "Congress is finally listening to the majority of Americans who support the Endangered Species Act, rather than centering politics and money in its policy decisions."
"The decision to not advance the vote keeps current safeguards in place, which have protected 99% of species from extinction," Beetham added. "While there is still much more work to secure lasting protections for wildlife, today's outcome is a meaningful victory for conservation."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump FCC Chair Hints at TV Warnings for Kids' Content That Acknowledges Existence of Transgender People
"This is a solution in search of a problem, and another example of this commission prioritizing culture war politics over the real issues that affect consumers every day," said the only Democratic FCC commissioner.
Apr 22, 2026
In the Trump administration's latest attempt to push transgender people out of public life, Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr said Wednesday that his agency is weighing whether ratings on television shows should be modified to warn viewers when trans people are acknowledged.
Carr posted a public notice on social media that the FCC's Media Bureau would be seeking public comment on whether the TV Parental Guidelines age rating system—established under the Telecommunications Act of 1996—should include notices for "transgender and gender nonbinary programming" in a similar fashion to existing labels for sex, violence, and other content that parents could consider "harmful" to children.
Carr wrote: "Recently, parents have raised concerns with the industry’s approach... They argue that New York and Hollywood programmers are promoting controversial issues in kids' programming without providing any transparency or disclosures to parents."
Neither Carr nor the FCC's notice elaborated on what supposedly harmful content children were being exposed to or which programs it would seek to warn families about.
The FCC notice also asked for public comment on whether other changes should be made to ensure that the TV Oversight Management Board, which oversees the rating system, represents a "range of family values." It also inquired about whether it should add board members from religious organizations.
While the FCC does not directly implement the programming ratings, it does have a role in overseeing them. As FCC chairman, Carr has brought an unusually heavy hand down on the rights of broadcasters to air content critical of President Donald Trump.
He has threatened to strip the broadcast licenses of networks that cover Trump's war in Iran unfavorably. Before that, he was briefly successful in his efforts to bully ABC into pulling the Trump-critical late-night host Jimmy Kimmel's show from the air.
By labeling transgender and nonbinary representation as dangerous to children, Carr would be taking yet another action to bring the media landscape into conformity with the Trump administration's agenda, which has consisted of systematic attempts to push transgender Americans to the margins of society and portray them as deviant and dangerous, particularly to children.
Among a slew of other anti-LGBTQ+ policies, the administration has reinstated a full ban on transgender people in the military, attempted to punish medical establishments that provide gender-affirming care, withheld passports and other legal documents from transgender people containing their preferred gender identifiers, and aggressively sought to pressure school districts into adopting policies that refuse to recognize trans students.
FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez, the agency’s only Democratic commissioner, criticized Carr's push to revise TV ratings.
“American families are worried about affordability, access, and rising costs, not whether the TV ratings system has enough warnings about gender identity,” Gomez said in a statement. “The FCC’s own record shows the existing system is working fine."
While Carr claimed there had been many complaints about "ratings creep" from parents, Gomez noted that the most recent report from the TV Parental Guidelines Monitoring Board said it received just 11 complaints about ratings guidelines in 2025 and that only two resulted in a ratings change.
Gomez said, "This is a solution in search of a problem, and another example of this commission prioritizing culture war politics over the real issues that affect consumers every day."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'What Are They Hiding?' Trump's Secret Contract for White House Ballroom Revealed
"At every turn, President Trump has sought to conceal the facts about his monstrous multimillion-dollar ballroom,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal.
Apr 22, 2026
While the financing of President Donald Trump's planned $400 million White House ballroom has been shrouded in mystery for months, government watchdog Public Citizen has obtained important new information about the project's funding.
Public Citizen on Tuesday unveiled a copy of the funding agreement the Trump administration has used for the ballroom project after months of legal wrangling that forced the group to file a lawsuit to compel enforcement of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request it made last year.
As summarized by The Washington Post, the ballroom contract's provisions "allow wealthy donors with business before the federal government to contribute anonymously to a sitting president’s pet project, while exempting the White House from key conflict of interest safeguards and limiting scrutiny by Congress and the public."
While dozens of big-name corporate donors—including Amazon, Apple, Lockheed Martin, Google, Altria, and Union Pacific Railroad—have been public about their donations to the project, the fact that some donors can choose to remain anonymous is raising serious concerns among ethics experts.
Charles Tiefer, a retired law professor at the University of Baltimore with a long history of scrutinizing government contracts, told the Post that the contract's anonymity provisions could give the Trump administration an escape hatch from future congressional scrutiny.
"If Congress knocks on the door," Tiefer said, "the White House is going to slam it shut and say, ‘You’re not allowed to know these donors.'"
This means that there is no way to know whether these donors have business before the government, and no way to know if they expect to get something in return for their donations.
Kathleen Clark, a government ethics lawyer and law professor at Washington University in St. Louis, told the Post that the contract's very narrow scope of reviewing for conflicts of interest among donors renders it "nothing more than a sham."
Jon Golinger, democracy advocate for Public Citizen, said the key takeaway from the newly unearthed documents is that "anonymous donations are the heart of this agreement."
"The questions this raises are, of the hundreds of millions being funneled in secret, who are these anonymous donors, and what are they hiding?" Golinger added. "The American people deserve answers, and we’ll keep fighting until they get them."
Wendy Liu, Public Citizen attorney and lead counsel on the lawsuit to obtain the contract, said the administration's initial refusal to comply with a FOIA request was "flatly unlawful," and "the American people are entitled to transparency over this multimillion-dollar project, and this win gets us a bit closer to knowing the truth."
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) blasted the Trump administration's efforts to hide the contract in a statement given to the Post.
“At every turn, President Trump has sought to conceal the facts about his monstrous multimillion-dollar ballroom,” Blumenthal said. “His administration has kept the contract under wraps, the identities of big dollar donors secret, and the American people in the dark about what big corporations have to gain by funding this boondoggle.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular