April, 28 2017, 12:15pm EDT
![350.org](https://assets.rbl.ms/32012661/origin.jpg)
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Lindsay Meiman,Senior U.S. Communications Specialist,lindsay@350.org,us-comms@350.org,+1 347 460 9082,New York, USA
Trump Signs Executive Order Expanding Offshore Drilling, Puts Communities at Risk
Order could direct agencies to re-do the 5-year-plan that prevented Arctic, Pacific, and Atlantic drilling
WASHINGTON
Ahead of the Peoples Climate March and nearly 7 years to the day since the BP Deepwater Horizon disaster, the Trump administration issued an executive order today directing federal agencies to revise the 5-year-plan for offshore drilling previously approved by the Obama administration. The order could expose the Atlantic, the Pacific, and Arctic coasts, which are excluded from the current plan, to future drilling.
On the Arctic, Atlantic, Pacific, and Gulf coasts, communities have been working for years to stop offshore drilling, citing the impact of fossil fuels on health, safety, and the climate. Accidents like the massive BP Deepwater Horizon disaster have devastated coastal communities and led to lasting struggles for local economies. At a time when our climate can't afford any new fossil fuel infrastructure, opening more waters to offshore drilling would exacerbate the climate crisis and drive up the risk of disaster.
###
Quote Sheet:
Trip Van Noppen, Earthjustice President, said: "When President Obama withdrew irreplaceable and sensitive waters of the Arctic Ocean and important parts of the Atlantic Ocean from offshore drilling, it was a bold step in protecting these seas for our future and girding the global community against the worst effects of climate change. Any attempt to reopen these areas or expand offshore drilling elsewhere would be a step backward on climate progress, and would once again put coastal communities, irreplaceable wildlife, and our shared future at risk."
Rhea Suh, President of the Natural Resources Defense Council, said: "This dangerous move is nothing more than a sellout to big oil and gas we've seen so much of in Trump's first 100 days. The American people don't want to abandon our oceans, coastal communities and all they support to industrial pollution and the peril of another BP oil spill catastrophe. They want these waters safeguarded. Attempting to open them to drilling chains us to dirty fossil fuels of our past and all the hazard, harm and climate damage they bring. Equally important, the president cannot, just by a stroke of his pen, with the stroke of his pen reverse the permanent, and legal, protection currently extended to these areas of the Atlantic and Arctic oceans. We--and thousands that will march on Saturday for climate action--will fight this move, for our children's future and a livable world."
Patrick Carolan, Executive Director of the Franciscan Action Network, said: "Each time President Trump signs an executive order like this one, which could potentially lead to significant increases in offshore drilling and oil and gas exploration, he is sending a clear message that the welfare of people and the planet is not important to him. With the climate in an increasingly fragile state, and millions of the world's inhabitants already vulnerable to extreme weather and the food insecurity, homelessness, and disease that comes along with it, continued fossil fuel extraction is the most dangerous move we can possibly make. And yet, President Trump continues to roll out executive orders that support his dangerous agenda. As Franciscans, our call is to be stewards of this earth, to care for the least among us, and so our faith impels us to push back against regulations that threaten the health of people and our planet, as this latest executive order so clearly does."
Nancy Pyne, Climate and Energy Campaign Director at Oceana, said: "This latest executive order is yet another indication that the Trump administration is committed to doubling down on dirty and dangerous oil and gas development, instead of moving America towards clean energy alternatives like offshore wind. Coastal communities have made it clear--they are not willing to trade their thriving tourism and fishing-based economies for the false promises of the oil industry. As of today, more than 120 municipalities, over 1,200 elected officials, and an alliance representing over 35,000 businesses and 500,000 fishing families have publicly opposed offshore drilling and/or exploration along the East Coast. On the eve of the People's Climate March, as the specter of the BP Deepwater Horizon disaster looms large, it is more important than ever to make sure that these voices are heard in Washington."
Mike Tidwell, Executive Director of Chesapeake Climate Action Network, said: "The American people have made it loud and clear that they oppose offshore drilling. It is simply not worth the risk to our precious coastal environments and economies. At a time when our coasts are being battered by sea level rise, we need to be expanding our clean energy economy -- not increasing our reliance on dangerous new sources of fossil fuels."
May Boeve, 350.org Executive Director, said: "It takes a true climate denier to say that what our disappearing coastlines need are more oil rigs. Trump is trying to lock in decades more of dirty fossil fuel extraction, while science tells us we need to keep it in the ground. Arctic, Atlantic, and Gulf coast communities have fought hard to protect their water, their health, and the climate from Big Oil, refusing to be sacrifice zones. Now it's even more important for everyone to join the Peoples Climate March, push back on polluting projects like Keystone XL, and build the renewable energy future we need from the ground up."
Leah Donahey, Senior Campaign Director, Alaska Wilderness League, said: "President Trump's executive order to expand offshore drilling and potentially reverse protections in America's Arctic and Atlantic oceans, just gives us one more reason to take to the streets. As we have seen from the Deepwater Horizon disaster, when we drill, we spill and this means disaster for our coastal waters and communities."
Gene Karpinski, League of Conservation Voters President, said: "Donald Trump is once again showing that his presidency serves the interests of giant oil companies over the health, safety, and future of people across the United States. Allowing Big Oil to expand offshore drilling to the Atlantic, Arctic, and Pacific Oceans would put coastal economies and ways of life at risk of a devastating oil spill, while worsening the consequences of climate change. We must make smarter energy choices by further investing in clean energy to leave our kids a planet not damaged beyond repair instead of staking our future in places whose oil wouldn't reach consumers for decades. We will fight any attempt to expand risky offshore drilling."
Rev. Fletcher Harper, Executive Director of GreenFaith, said: "Morally decent leadership means restricting further fossil fuel development - not actively promoting it. This executive order makes it clear that this administration has the environment, and our shared future, in their crosshairs."
Elizabeth Yeampierre, Executive Director of UPROSE, said: "This administration has proven time and time again that they have no regard for the wellbeing of people or the earth we inhabit. Increasing off-shore drilling is reckless and has already proven detrimental to the environment and communities on the frontlines of climate change, i.e. low-income communities of color already over burdened by environmental hazards. It's only been 7 years since the BP oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. Have we learned nothing from that catastrophe? We wholeheartedly reject this administration's executive order on offshore drilling and oil and gas exploration. We are committed to fighting this administration's war on climate every step of the way."
Aura Vasquez, Director of Climate Justice at the Center for Popular Democracy, said: "Trump's administration will once again be endangering communities, this time on the Arctic, Atlantic, Pacific, and Gulf coasts, all to advance the fossil fuel industry's agenda. Expanding offshore drilling would only bring more pollution and destruction, especially to those communities already feeling the impacts of the climate crisis. We can't let this administration dictate the faith of our planet. We must stand and let the world know that offshore drilling is dangerous and unnecessary. We should be supporting renewable energy infrastructure that can bring about equitable jobs and a healthy environment."
Annie Leonard, Executive Director of Greenpeace USA, said: "Opening new areas to offshore oil and gas drilling anywhere risks locking us into decades of harmful pollution, devastating spills, and a fossil fuel economy with no future. Scientific consensus is that the fossil fuel reserves off US coasts must remain undeveloped if we are to avoid the worst effects of climate change. This executive order from Trump is just the latest in a series of rollbacks that most people in this country do not want, and they only come at the behest of Trump's inner circle of desperate fossil fuel executives. Holing up at Mar-a-lago may protect Trump from an oil spill, but it will not protect his disastrous policies from the resistance and rejection of millions of Americans who demand better for themselves and their families."
Adrienne L. Hollis PhD, JD, Director of Federal Policy, WE ACT for Environmental Justice, said: "Increasing offshore drilling and oil and gas exploration is a recipe for disaster. It will dramatically increase the possibility of damaging health effects in frontline communities from water, soil, and air contamination. This Executive Order is just another in a line of legislative actions designed to strip away any protections communities may have and give more power to fossil fuel companies to control our environment. In the words of acclaimed American poet, storyteller, activist, and autobiographer Dr. Maya Angelou "when people show you who they are, believe them (the first time)." The Trump Administration has shown us that they do not care about the welfare of the people."
350 is building a future that's just, prosperous, equitable and safe from the effects of the climate crisis. We're an international movement of ordinary people working to end the age of fossil fuels and build a world of community-led renewable energy for all.
LATEST NEWS
JD Vance Doubles Down on Attack on 'Childless Cat Ladies'
Vance "meant no disrespect to cats, but he did mean to demean women and still holds the view in 2024 that they should be punished for not having children."
Jul 26, 2024
After days of condemnation from critics including actress Jennifer Aniston and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, U.S. Sen. JD Vance was given the opportunity on Thursday to clarify his remarks from 2021 in which he said the Democratic Party was run by "childless cat ladies."
Instead, the Ohio Republican and running mate of former President Donald Trump assured SiriusXM host Megyn Kelly on "The Megyn Kelly Show" that while he has "nothing against cats," he meant what he said in terms of "the substance" of his argument.
Vance made it clear, said Aaron Fritschner, deputy chief of staff for Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.), "that he meant no disrespect to cats, but he did mean to demean women and still holds the view in 2024 that they should be punished for not having children."
The comments in question were made by Vance to then-Fox News host Tucker Carlson when Vance was running for the Senate.
Calling out Buttigieg—who, the secretary disclosed this week, was struggling at the time to adopt a child with his husband—and Vice President Kamala Harris, a stepmother of two and the Democratic Party's presumptive presidential nominee, Vance said people without biological children "don't really have a direct stake in" the future of the country and therefore shouldn't hold higher office.
In separate remarks that same year, Vance said parents should "have more power" at the voting booth and that "if you don't have as much of an investment in the future of this country, maybe you shouldn't get nearly the same voice."
He also specifically categorized people who don't have children as "bad" in an interview in 2021, saying the government should "reward the things that we think are good" and "punish the things that we think are bad," with people taxed at a lower rate if they have children.
While a spokesperson for Vance told ABC News that the senator's taxation proposal was "basically no different" than the child tax credit supported by the Democratic Party, Democrats who have pushed for the credit have heralded its proven ability to slash child poverty rates and help families afford groceries, childcare, and other essentials, rather than viewing the tax savings as a way to reward people for procreating.
In his interview with Kelly on Thursday, Vance attempted to pivot away from his own comments, saying his point was to criticize "the Democratic Party for becoming anti-family and anti-child" and claiming without evidence that the Harris campaign had "come out against the child tax credit"—a signature policy of the Biden-Harris administration.
"I'm proud to stand for parents and I hope that parents out there recognize that I'm a guy who wants to fight for you," said Vance. "The Democrats, in the past five, 10 years, Megyn, they have become anti-family. It's built into their policy, it's built into the way they talk about parents and children. I don't think we should back down from it, I think we should be honest about the problem."
Vance and Kelly went on to lament the anxiety "hardcore environmentalists" and progressive lawmakers such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) have expressed about the damage fossil fuel extraction is doing the planet, accusing them of pushing people to forgo having families—but said nothing about Republican policies that have made child-rearing less accessible.
In recent years, the entire Republican caucus in Congress was joined by conservative then-Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia in blocking the extension of the enhanced child tax credit, which had been credited with cutting the national child poverty rate in half. Republicans also allowed a pandemic-era universal school meal program to expire, while several Democratic-led states have passed state-level programs to ensure all children can have meals at school, regardless of their family's income.
Under Republican abortion bans, numerous stories have cropped up of pregnant people who have been forced to carry pregnancies to term despite finding out that their fetuses had fatal abnormalities and would die soon after birth—as have stories of children who were forced to give birth or had to cross state lines in order to get abortion care.
As with his position that nonparents should be "punished" for not having children, "who else does 'pro-child/family' Vance think should 'face consequences and reality' by way of curtailing choices, rights, and freedoms?" asked writer Alheli Picazo. "Women and girls who become pregnant through rape/incest."
University of North Carolina law professor Carissa Byrne Hessick said that one could test "empirically" Vance's claim that Democratic policies are anti-family.
"But I haven't heard the GOP talk much about things that would help my family and my kids," she said, "like reducing childcare and tuition costs."
Keep ReadingShow Less
House Dems Unveil Sweeping Bill to Protect Worker Rights and Safety
"This bill will help level the playing field and, once again, restore the balance of power between workers and their employers," said Rep. Bobby Scott.
Jul 26, 2024
A group of Democratic U.S. House members on Friday unveiled legislation "aimed at bolstering protections for America's workers and ensuring accountability for employers who flout labor and employment laws."
The Labor Enforcement to Securely (LET'S) Protect Workers Act was introduced by Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Va.)—the ranking member of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce—and House Labor Caucus Co-Chairs Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.), Donald Norcross (D-N.J.), and Steven Horsford (D-Nev.).
The bill's sponsors said their legislation is based on the premise that "employment laws are a promise to our nation's workers" meant to "secure the most basic rights of work."
"That promise is broken," they contended. "Recent shocking revelations about massive increases in the number of children illegally overworked and trafficked into dangerous jobs—just over 85 years since the passage of the Fair Labor Standards Act, which was enacted to eliminate that very problem—is the latest example of the ways that this promise to America's workers is broken."
Across the U.S., Republican state lawmakers have been advancing legislation to remove restrictions on child labor, despite several high-profile workplace deaths of minors. At the federal level, Sen. James Risch (R-Idaho) and Rep. Jared Golden (D-Maine) last year introduced a bill that would allow 16- and 17-year-olds to work in the logging industry.
The LET'S Protect Workers Act sponsors highlighted rampant wage theft and overtime violations, workplace injuries, and union-busting by employers who "know that even if a resource-starved Department of Labor catches a violation, the penalties are a mere slap on the wrist."
"People should be able to come home at the end of the day—alive, well, in one piece, and with all the wages they worked hard to earn," the lawmakers asserted. "Children should be in schools, not dangerous workplaces, and workers should be able to organize a union without interference or the threat of retaliation from their employers."
According to House Education and Workforce Committee Democrats, if passed, the LET'S Protect Workers Act would:
- Increase civil monetary penalties for violations of child labor, minimum wage and overtime, worker health and safety, and farmworker protection standards;
- Improve mine safety and reliable funding of black lung benefits through new and increased civil monetary penalties and the option to shut down scofflaw operators;
- Set new penalties for retaliation against workers who exercise their family and medical leave rights;
- Strengthen enforcement of mental health parity requirements for employer-sponsored health plans;
- Close a loophole that allows employers to escape penalties for failing to keep records of workplace injuries if [the Occupational Safety and Health Administration] does not detect the violation within six months; and
- Create new penalties for violations of the National Labor Relations Act, consistent with the Richard L. Trumka Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act.
"Every American should be fairly compensated and be able to return home safely at the end of the day," Scott said in a statement Friday. "Unfortunately, shortcomings in our labor laws enable unethical employers to exploit workers, endanger children, and suppress the right to organize—with little accountability."
"That's why I'm proud to introduce the LET'S Protect Workers Act, which will hold bad actors accountable and strengthen penalties for labor law violations," he added. "This bill will help level the playing field and, once again, restore the balance of power between workers and their employers."
In a joint statement, Dingell, Horsford, Norcross, and Pocan said that "the lack of meaningful enforcement makes it all too easy for bad faith actors to get away with illegally violating workers' rights—from firing workers for organizing a union, to allowing children to work overnight shifts, or jeopardizing workers' safety by ignoring workplace regulations."
"We're proud to join Ranking Member Scott in introducing this bill to crack down on unscrupulous employers and to ensure that workers receive the protections they deserve," the lawmakers added.
Earlier this month, nearly 50 labor organizations led by the AFL-CIO and representing a wide range of U.S. workers urged congressional Democrats to resist Republican efforts to roll back rules enacted by the Biden administration to protect worker rights amid relentless attacks by abusive employers.
Specifically, the labor groups warned that Republicans are trying to use the Congressional Review Act—which was enacted to strengthen oversight of federal rulemaking—to overturn pro-worker rules enacted by the Department of Labor and other government bodies.
Meanwhile, Republicans including former President Donald Trump—the 2024 GOP nominee—have been trying to woo U.S. workers with proposals including a tax exemption for tipped employees panned as a "
hollow promise" by experts and by inviting Teamsters president Sean O'Brien to speak at the Republican National Convention last week.
In response to Republicans' dubious courting of U.S. labor, Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas)—who is a co-sponsor of the LET'S Protect Workers Act—recently called for holding what would be a largely symbolic vote on the PRO Act. The bill was revived last year by Scott and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and, if passed, would expand labor protections including the right to organize and collectively bargain.
"If Republicans wanna talk like they're pro-worker, then let's have a vote on the PRO Act next week," Casar
said on social media last week. "Let's see which politicians are for unions and which ones are all talk. Dems are ready to vote, how about you guys?"
Keep ReadingShow Less
Amnesty Urges War Crimes Probe of Landmines in Russian-Occupied Ukraine
"In every region in Ukraine that was formerly occupied by Russia, we have seen evidence of civilians killed and injured by antipersonnel mines left behind by Russian forces," said one researcher.
Jul 26, 2024
Amnesty International on Friday demanded a "prompt, thorough, independent, and impartial investigation" into the use of antipersonnel landmines, "which litter territories in Ukraine formerly and currently occupied by Russian forces."
The Landmine and Cluster Munition Monitor says that Ukraine is "severely contaminated" with antipersonnel landmines, which Russia's troops have used since 2014, but particularly since Russian President Vladimir Putin's full-scale invasion in February 2022.
"Landmines have been documented in 11 of Ukraine's 27 regions: Chernihiv, Dnipropetrovsk, Donetsk, Kharkiv, Kherson, Kyiv, Luhansk, Mykolaiv, Odesa, Sumy, and Zaporizhzhia," according to the monitor's latest update, published in November. "Russian forces have used at least 13 types of antipersonnel mines in Ukraine since February 2022."
Ukraine is a state party to the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production, and Transfer of Antipersonnel Mines and on Their Destruction of 1997 but lacks legislation to enforce its implementation. Human Rights Watch last summer gathered evidence of the Ukrainian military's use of the banned mines. Russia is not a party to the treaty.
Patrick Thompson, a Ukraine researcher at Amnesty, said Friday that "in every region in Ukraine that was formerly occupied by Russia, we have seen evidence of civilians killed and injured by antipersonnel mines left behind by Russian forces."
"They are a daily, deadly threat to civilians. Some have been deliberately placed in civilian homes where they maim and kill," Thompson highlighted. "There must be an effective investigation into all such incidents as possible war crimes."
The group shared just one survivor's story of encountering a mine:
In March 2022, Russian forces evicted Oleksandr* (not his real name) and his mother from their flat in Snihurivka, in the region of Mykolaiv. A Russian military unit took over the entire apartment block until it was forced to withdraw following fierce fighting around Snihurivka in November 2022.
After the Russian retreat, Oleksandr returned to the apartment block to assess how badly it had been damaged. Upon entering the basement, he stepped on a disguised PFM-1 antipersonnel mine that had been placed under wooden planks. The mine exploded, Oleksandr fell, and landed on other disguised mines that had apparently, had been deliberately placed to injure or kill anyone entering the building. He lost both his left leg and arm in the incident.
“The deminers working to clear Ukraine of this threat are carrying out painstaking, dangerous work every day," Thompson noted. "While the scale of the problem is undeniably huge, the biggest obstacle to clearing Ukraine of landmines is Russia's ongoing aggression."
Thompson called on the international community to "commit to sustained financial and technical assistance to help Ukraine get rid of a danger that continues to wreck lives and livelihoods," and to continue fighting for an end to the use of the weapons.
"Countries must uphold the ban on the use, production, stockpiling, and transfer of antipersonnel mines worldwide," he said. "There must be an end to the use of such indiscriminate weapons."
The most recent report from the United Nations Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine states that the war has killed at least 11,284 civilians there since 2022 and injured another 22,594—though the actual tallies are believed to be "considerably higher."
"The number of civilian casualties is likely particularly undercounted in cities such as Mariupol (Donetsk region), Lysychansk, Popasna, and Sievierodonetsk (Luhansk region), where there was protracted intensive fighting at the start of the armed attack in 2022," according to the report.
While most of the deaths and injuries in Ukraine are attributed to "explosive weapons with wide area effects," the U.N. report accounts for at least 373 deaths and 855 injuries from "mines and explosive remnants of war."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular