

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.
Blair Fitzgibbon, (202) 503-6141, Blair@soundspeedpr.com
A report released today by Rainforest Action Network, BankTrack, Indigenous Environmental Network, Oil Change International, Sierra Club, and Honor The Earth, endorsed by over 50 organizations around the world, reveals that in spite of the urgent climate crisis, 2017 was a year of backsliding by private banks. The report, Banking on Climate Change 2018, is the ninth annual report ranking bank policies and practices related to the financing of some of the most carbon-intensive, financially risky, and environmentally destructive fossil fuel sectors. The report also details the negative impacts of these sectors on human rights, Indigenous rights and community health and well-being.
Tracking 36 of the world's biggest banks, the report finds that the institutions funneled $115 billion into extreme fossil fuels in 2017, an increase of 11% from 2016. The single biggest driver of the increase in financing came from the tar sands sector, where financing grew by 111% from 2016 to 2017. The massive hike in bank support for tar sands to nearly $47 billion, led tar sands to overtake coal power as the most heavily funded extreme energy sector.
With some of the sharpest upticks in financing since 2016, Royal Bank of Canada, Toronto Dominion Bank, and JPMorgan Chase all passed the coal-heavy Chinese banks to become the biggest bankers of extreme fossil fuels last year. JPMorgan Chase increased funding to coal mining by a shocking 21 times and quadrupled its financing of tar sands oil.
The report finds that while some European banks have realized the risks and put policy restrictions on some of their fossil fuel financing, major players elsewhere have done little to adopt policies that would bring their activities in line with the Paris Agreement.
The case studies detailed in the report -- from Enbridge's proposed Line 3 tar sands pipeline in Minnesota, to the proposed Jordan Cove LNG export terminal and associated pipeline in Oregon, to the fleet of coal plants that Japanese company Marubeni is planning in Southeast Asia -- all highlight that banks lack effective policies to prevent them from financing these highly polluting projects and companies.
The report focuses on financing for extreme fossil fuels, defined as: tar sands, Arctic, and ultra-deepwater oil; coal mining and coal-fired power; and liquefied natural gas (LNG) export in North America.
Statements:
Alison Kirsch, Climate and Energy Research Coordinator at Rainforest Action Network:
"At a time when some European banks like BNP Paribas and ING are adopting policies that sharply restrict their lending to some of the worst fossil fuels, US and Canadian banks like JPMorgan Chase and TD are moving backwards in lockstep with their wrongheaded political leaders. If we are to have any chance of halting catastrophic climate change, there must be an end of expansion and complete phaseout of these dangerous energy sources. Banks need to be accountable and implement policies guarding against extreme fossil fuel funding."
Rainforest Action Network has a 30+ year history challenging corporate power and systemic injustice to preserve forests, protect the climate and uphold human rights through frontline partnerships and strategic campaigns. For more information, please visit: www.ran.org
Johan Frijns, Director of BankTrack:
"Despite the introduction of some restrictions in their coal financing policies over the last few years, the 14 European banks assessed in the Report Card managed in 2017 to collectively increase their financing by more than $2 billion for companies in the coal mining and coal power sectors. Europe's top banks have got to stop their coal-focused assault on the Paris Agreement, and it's now vital that they move to stamp out their financial support for companies developing new coal-fired power plants around the world. Just as the European bank AGM season gets under way, campaigners now have ample evidence to present to bank shareholders and decision-makers about exactly how deep the dirty energy financing still runs across the European banking sector, in spite of some new sustainability commitments and a blizzard of sustainability hype."
BankTrack is the global tracking, campaigning and NGO support organisation targeting the operations and investments of commercial banks. For more information, please visit: www.banktrack.org
Tom Goldtooth, Executive Director of Indigenous Environmental Network:
"Banks investing in fossil fuel development should be stripped of their social license to operate in our cities, states, provinces, tribal nations, and countries. These dirty investments are not only threatening the sacred integrity of Mother Earth, but are forcing Indigenous peoples into life or death scenarios with no adherence or accountability to human rights policies and/or Indigenous Rights protections. What is most distressing is a seemingly world-wide labeling of defenders of the environment and opposition to fossil fuel development as 'terrorists' much as was described in the report regarding Standing Rock Water Defenders. Not only in Honduras and Brazil, but in the Philippines even the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples herself is on a government list of 'terrorists'. By financing these unwanted and damaging projects, banks themselves are complicit in human rights abuses. As such, continued bank investment in fossil fuel development should only be seen as promotions of crimes against humanity and Mother Earth, and nothing less."
The Indigenous Environmental Network is an international environmental justice nonprofit that works with tribal grassroots organizations to build the capacity of Indigenous communities. www.ienearth.org
Stephen Kretzmann, Executive Director of Oil Change International:
"Every single dollar that these banks provide for the expansion of the fossil fuel industry is a dollar going to increase the climate crisis. The World Bank, which understands the deep threat that climate change poses to poverty alleviation, has gotten the message and is ending its financing of upstream oil and gas projects. Meanwhile it seems some commercial banks appear intent on going in the opposite direction. It's time banks like Chase and TD and US Bank took the World Bank's lead and stop funding fossils. Until they do, these banks will be complicit in our climate catastrophe, plain and simple."
Oil Change International is a research, communication, and advocacy organization focused on exposing the true costs of fossil fuels and facilitating the ongoing transition to clean energy. For more information, please visit: www.priceofoil.org
Kelly Martin, Sierra Club Beyond Dirty Fuels Campaign Director:
"The days of banks quietly funneling money into dirty, dangerous fossil fuel projects without the public taking notice are over. Tar sands and other fossil fuel projects threaten our climate, public health, and communities, and until they stop supporting them financially, banks like Chase and Wells Fargo are complicit in this destruction. There is a growing international movement calling on our financial institutions to do better, and we will not stop until they pull their support of dirty fossil fuels once and for all."
The Sierra Club works to safeguard the health of our communities, protect wildlife, and preserve our remaining wild places through grassroots activism, public education, lobbying, and litigation. For more information, visit https://www.sierraclub.org.
Tara Houska, National Campaigns Director of Honor The Earth:
"Since the dog attacks and water cannons used on unarmed citizens at Standing Rock, indigenous people have been heavily engaged in divestment efforts around the world. These banks fund the projects that are killing the planet, destroying indigenous sacred sites, and violating the human rights of citizens. The financial industry is on notice -- the human rights policies banks claim are in place must be enforced. Stop funding fossil fuels and move into a green economy."
Honor The Earth is an indigenous women-led organization focused on protecting Mother Earth through the arts, music, advocacy, supporting grassroots efforts and empowering tribal nations with renewable energy solutions. For more information, visit www.honorearth.org
This report was endorsed by: 350.org, 350 Eugene, 350 Seattle, Amazon Watch, Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development, Bank Information Center, Bold Alliance, Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe of Texas, Catskill Mountainkeeper, CEE Bankwatch Network, Center for Sustainable Economy, CHANGE, Christian Aid, Citizens Against LNG, Clean Water Action, Divest, Invest, Protect, DivestInvest, Earthworks, FairFin, Foundation for GAIA, Friends of the Earth Scotland, Friends of the Earth U.S., Fundacja "Rozwoj TAK Odkrywki NIE" (Foundation Development YES - Open-Pit Mines NO), Greenpeace Japan, Greenpeace USA, Hair on Fire Oregon, Indigenous Climate Action, Indigenous Peoples Law and Policy Program, Les Amis de la Terre France, Market Forces, Mazaska Talks, MN350, People & Planet, Philippine Movement for Climate Justice, Pipeline Awareness Southern Oregon, RAVEN (Respecting Aboriginal Values & Environmental Needs), Re:Common, Rogue Climate, Rogue Riverkeeper, Save RGV from LNG, Stand.earth, SumOfUs, Treaty Alliance Against Tar Sands Expansion, UK Tar Sands Network, Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs, urgewald, Waterkeeper Alliance, We Are Cove Point, WECAN (Women's Earth and Climate Action Network), West Coast Environmental Law, Western Environmental Law Center
Profundo calculated the segment adjusters to weight financial transactions according to a company's involvement in a given industry. For more information, please visit: www.profundo.nl
Additional statements from endorsing organizations:
Donna Lisenby, Clean & Safe Energy Campaign Manager, Waterkeeper Alliance:
"This report is an important tactical and strategic target list for activists worldwide. It not only has Waterkeeper Alliance's full endorsement but we intend to use it as an action plan."
Allie Rosenbluth, No Pipeline Organizer, Rogue Climate:
"This report further shows that the Jordan Cove LNG Export Terminal and Pacific Connector fracked gas pipeline, along with other new fossil fuel projects, is a bad investment. Our communities need good-paying jobs in improving energy efficiency and in the expanding clean energy industry, not new fossil fuel projects that hurt us all. Communities across the region will continue to ask Oregon's leaders to stand up against the Jordan Cove LNG proposal and for a just transition to clean energy."
Osprey Orielle Lake, Executive Director of the Women's Earth & Climate Action Network (WECAN) International:
"This report offers vital documentation to demonstrate the destructive role of financial institutions who are complicit in the violation of the rights of Indigenous Peoples, human rights, and Earth rights. Investing in dirty fossil fuels is an investment in climate chaos and against future generations.Women are building bridges across communities and across countries - committed to using our voices and actions to expose and oppose the abhorrent violations perpetuated by banks everyday that they choose to continue to finance fossil fuel extraction. It is far past time to transition to a clean energy future and care for our children's future and Mother Earth."
Chris Saltmarsh, Fossil Free Campaigns Coordinator, People & Planet:
"As fossil fuel divestment goes mainstream the industry driving climate injustice is at its weakest point in history, it is time to strip of them of the finance they need to continue operating. There can be no new fossil fuel infrastructure anywhere from Lancashire to La Guajira and everywhere in between. The People & Planet network will organise for institutional boycotts of Barclays until they show the progressive leadership they have historically avoided and ditch all fossil fuel finance."
Hong Hoang, Executive director of CHANGE:
"South-east Asia is now the final frontier for the coal industry, and many of the banks featured in this report continue to support coal power expansion in the region in spite of the huge impacts on public health and the climate. HSBC, Standard Chartered, Citi, DBS and several Japanese banks are lining up to finance various coal plant projects in Vietnam in the coming months. These banks have got to show some basic climate change common sense by cutting off, once and for all, this reckless coal financing, and by pulling out of these projects in Vietnam."
Diana Best, Senior Climate and Energy Campaigner at Greenpeace USA:
"At a time when the world must be moving rapidly away from fossil fuel expansion, we see major global banks like JPMorgan Chase doubling down on their support of extreme fossil fuels like tar sands. It is unacceptable. It is time for these banks to put their money where their mouth is. Continued financing of fossil fuel projects and infrastructure like tar sands pipelines undermines any credibility they have as leaders on climate and human rights."
Brett Fleishman, Finance Campaign Lead of 350.org:
"Major movement players are turning to focus on "the money" as there is a clear understanding that capital flow needs to shift quickly for any chance at a just transition off fossil fuels. Not a penny more! Fossil free finance! are becoming a primary part of the social movement outcry. It is clear, big banks are driving the economy in the wrong direction and it's high time we hold them accountable."
Rainforest Action Network (RAN) is headquartered in San Francisco, California with offices staff in Tokyo, Japan, and Edmonton, Canada, plus thousands of volunteer scientists, teachers, parents, students and other concerned citizens around the world. We believe that a sustainable world can be created in our lifetime and that aggressive action must be taken immediately to leave a safe and secure world for our children.
"The cost of our groceries, our utility bills, our healthcare—all of it is shaped by the people we elect and the decisions they make, which is why our participation matters," said two coalition members.
"On October 17th, No Kings: Vote Early will show the billionaire elites attempting to destroy our country that We the People have the power by mobilizing turnout to make our elections too big for the evils of fascism and oligarchy to rig," according to Sarah Parker, a spokesperson for the 50501 movement.
The movement is part of the No Kings Coalition that has held a trio of protests across the United States since President Donald Trump returned to power last year.
Now, with the midterm elections less than two months away, the coalition is planning a fourth day of action. Parker, who's also executive director of Voices of Florida Fund, declared Tuesday that "the people, united, will never be defeated."
The first round of protests was held in June 2025, on Trump's birthday. The ACLU's chief political and advocacy officer, Deirdre Schifeling, said at the time that "No Kings is really about standing up for democracy, standing up for people's rights and liberties in this country, and against the gross abuse of power that we've seen consistently from the Trump administration."
As with those first demonstrations, millions of people took to US streets again last October. Then, Lisa Gilbert, co-president of the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, told Common Dreams that "what we're seeing from this administration is authoritarian slip. We are seeing them attack judges, attack nonprofits, trying to attack the media, stifle First Amendment protected speech, and arrest sitting members of Congress for doing their oversight" of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
The third action, in March, followed ICE's deadly invasion of Minnesota's Twin Cities, and Trump launching his illegal war on Iran. The three themes of those demonstrations, said Indivisible co-executive director Leah Greenberg, were "no kings, no ICE, no war."
Her co-executive director, Ezra Levin, said Tuesday that "since the first No Kings in June of last year, millions of people have demonstrated they are not afraid and they will not bow to any would-be American king. We've sent that message loud and clear—but we're not just sending a message with this next No Kings."
"We're taking back power for the people using our constitutional right to organize and our constitutional right to vote," Levin stressed. "While corrupt politicians and elected officials line their pockets, families across America are struggling to put food on the table and gas in the car. No Kings: Vote Early is about making sure every eligible voter has a plan to vote, knows their options, and is ready to make their voice heard."
Schifeling, from the ACLU, noted that "this year, voters are facing coordinated efforts from their own government to make it harder for eligible voters to vote and have their vote counted. That's why this next chapter of No Kings is focused on encouraging all voters to make a plan to vote as early as possible."
"In a democracy, elected officials are supposed to be accountable to their constituents; voting is one of the best ways to ensure they are," she continued. "No Kings will be on the ground in communities across the country making sure that all eligible voters can and do vote."
Public Citizen's Gilbert said that "the importance of as many people as possible voting early cannot be overstated."
"Early voting can make the difference between voting and not voting for people who are traveling, who are working on Election Day, who need options for childcare while voting, and more," she highlighted. "Voting is democracy in action at a time when authoritarianism and oligarchy are looming large, and standing together to cast our vote is one of the most patriotic things we can do right now."
In addition to Trump's authoritarian policies, US voters are contending with high prices tied to the president's policies, from the Iran War to his legally dubious tariffs. Cliff Albright and LaTosha Brown, co-founders of Black Voters Matter Fund, noted that "the cost of our groceries, our utility bills, our healthcare—all of it is shaped by the people we elect and the decisions they make, which is why our participation matters."
"America belongs to the people—not to kings, billionaires, or politicians," Albright and Brown emphasized.
Other coalition members include the American Federation of Teachers, MoveOn, State Voices, and Voto Latino, whose executive director, Beatriz Lopez, vowed that "on October 17th, we will show up, vote early, and vote like our future depends on it because American democracy has no kings."
The creators of the long-running animated show quipped that the move was "inspired by the bravery and patriotism of Apple and Google," which complied with the president's renaming requests.
For 28 seasons, viewers of one of history's most iconic animated television shows were greeted with the twangy, dissonant strains of a Primus-penned theme song with lyrics beginning, "Going down to South Park, gonna have myself a time." But that might be about to change.
That's because "South Park" creators Matt Stone and Trey Parker announced Tuesday that, for the Comedy Central series' 29th season, the show will be renamed "South America" in a dig at US President Donald Trump's unauthorized rechristening spree—in which the Gulf of Mexico is now the Gulf of America and Lake Ontario is Lake America—as well as the complicity of tech titans like Google and Apple that comply with the changes.
“Inspired by the bravery and patriotism of Apple and Google, we are changing the name of South Park to SOUTH AMERICA,” Parker and Stone said in a statement. "We especially want to thank our parent company Paramount—a Skydance Capitulation.”
In addition to renaming the Gulf of Mexico and Lake Ontario, Trump has floated changing the name of New Mexico to New America, a curious proposal given that both old and New Mexico—as well as everywhere from Greenland to Tierra del Fuego—are part of the Americas. He has also proposed rechristening the Strait of Hormuz the Trump Strait, even as Iran continues to control the vital waterway amid an increasingly protracted US-Israeli war of choice.
Apple and Google have adopted Trump's preferred geographic terminology on their mapping platforms, giving Parker and Stone an irresistible opportunity to lampoon both the president and the companies' obsequiousness.
It's far from the first time that "South Park" has turned Trump into a punch line. Recent episodes have reportedly incensed the president and some of his senior officials, including the Emmy-winning “Sermon on the Mount,” in which a comically under-endowed Trump has a romantic affair with Satan.
Last year, "South Park" went after both Trump and its own corporate parent after Paramount agreed to a $1.5 billion streaming deal with Parker and Stone. The season premiere depicted Trump suing South Park residents over protests, while the episode also mocked media organizations and corporations cowering in fear of presidential retaliation.
Paramount Skydance—whose CEO David Ellison is a Trump ally—could become an even larger media conglomerate if its Federal Communications Commission-approved $111 billion merger with Warner Bros. Discovery moves forward. A trial is scheduled for March.
"In utter defiance of the Constitution, President Trump is attempting to use the Postal Service to decide who can and cannot receive a ballot just days before mail-in voting begins in some of the states," said Rep. Jamie Raskin.
With the midterm elections less than two months away, more than 250 current and former Members of Congress came together on Tuesday to pressure the US Supreme Court to block Republican President Donald Trump's March executive order on voting and its resulting United States Postal Service rule.
All 47 members of the Senate Democratic Caucus, over 90% of the party's members in the House of Representatives, and 15 former GOP lawmakers submitted an amicus brief to the nation's top court—whose right-wing supermajority includes three Trump appointees—just two days after the administration asked the justices to pause a judge's ruling that blocks parts of the USPS rule.
The 261 Americans behind the brief "took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States—including its guarantee of the separation of powers," and they "have a particular interest in defending the institutional role of the legislative branch under Article I of the Constitution and in vindicating the long-settled principle that the Constitution commits ultimate regulatory authority over federal elections to Congress," the filing states.
"The Constitution does not contemplate the executive branch acting unilaterally to assert power over federal elections," the document continues. "Yet that is what the order and final rule do. The district court correctly concluded that respondents are likely to succeed on the merits of their claims that USPS lacked authority to issue the final rule, that the final rule unconstitutionally imposes mail-ballot requirements on the states, and that the final rule unconstitutionally bars noncompliant state and local election officials from using USPS to mail ballots at all."
"The order and final rule unconstitutionally infringe on Congress' authority under the elections clause and the postal clause and unlawfully direct federal agencies to act beyond—and in conflict with—what Congress has clearly authorized by law," the filing asserts, urging the high court to deny Trump's request to allow the new USPS policy for the midterms.
The Supreme Court last month cleared the way for Trump's order by concluding that the Democratic state attorneys general—just one of the coalitions challenging the order—had sued too early. However, the justices did not weigh in on the legality of the order or the rule, and in the wake of USPS publishing its policy, the legal battles have continued.
The lawmakers' brief came a day before Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's deadline for new filings and as the Department of Justice—which is fighting District Judge Indira Talwani's preliminary injunction that blocks USPS from enforcing the rule—argued to the US Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit that the policy is "modest" and lawful.
In a statement announcing the brief, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) pointed to the drawn-out legal battles over the order and related rule, saying that "Donald Trump is once again asking the highest court in the land to silence voters and destroy the precious integrity of the American electoral process."
"Mail-in voting is proven safe and secure, and Trump's continued efforts to obstruct America's free and fair elections are blatant, unconstitutional attempts at interfering with the November midterms," he declared. "Trump's message to the American people is clear: He isn't worried about voter fraud, he's afraid of voter accountability. I urge the court to uphold the Constitution and reject Trump's baseless attempt at poisoning our democracy."
On the Senate side, in addition to Schumer, the brief is led by the ranking members of three key panels: Sens. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) of the Committee on Rules and Administration, Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) of the Judiciary Committee, and Gary Peters (D-Mich.) of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.
“The law is clear: States and Congress have authority over our elections—not the president and certainly not the Postal Service. Protecting the right to vote-by-mail is critical to ensure every eligible voter can make their voices heard in the November midterm elections and in future elections," said Padilla.
"Despite the Trump administration's attempts to eliminate vote-by-mail and suppress voter participation, voting by mail remains one of the safest and most secure ways to vote, especially for service members, rural voters, and Americans living abroad," he noted. In fact, despite trying to strip millions of Americans of the right to mail their ballots, even Trump has repeatedly voted this way, including in Florida's August Republican primary.
In the lower chamber, the brief was spearheaded by Committee on House Administration Ranking Member Joe Morelle (D-NY) along with the co-chairs of Democrats' Litigation Task Force: Assistant Leader Joe Neguse (D-Colo.), Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), and Oversight Committee Ranking Member Robert Garcia (D-Calif.).
Like his colleagues, Raskin—a constitutional scholar who led Trump's historic second impeachment after the president's supporters stormed the US Capitol on January 6, 2021—stressed that "the Constitution is clear that the states and Congress make the rules for federal elections, not the president."
"Yet, in utter defiance of the Constitution, President Trump is attempting to use the Postal Service to decide who can and cannot receive a ballot just days before mail-in voting begins in some of the states," he said. "This is a naked power grab by a historically unpopular president—who himself regularly votes by mail—to inject confusion and chaos into our elections in a last-ditch effort to keep his party in power."
"It will not work," Raskin added. "I'm proud to stand with a strong bipartisan, bicameral group of current and former colleagues in urging the court to continue rejecting this lawless election interference."
"Trump and his regime have made corruption impossible to ignore, so Democrats should connect the administration’s self-dealing and abuses of power to the economic pressures voters are feeling."
Two leading progressive organizers on Tuesday argued that Democratic candidates don't need to choose between campaigning on affordability issues or against President Donald Trump's unprecedented corruption.
Ezra Levin and Leah Greenberg, co-executive directors of Indivisible, wrote in an op-ed published by The Guardian that a recent survey conducted with Lake Research Partners finds that the issues of affordability and government corruption are deeply intertwined.
"Affordability is essential," wrote Levin and Greenberg, "but our polling shows that the case for lowering costs becomes more compelling when paired with a clear commitment to take on corruption and special interests."
The reason for this, the organizers said, is that majorities of Americans are concerned about politicians rigging the political system to benefit themselves and about corruption costing taxpayers money.
Additionally, wrote Levin and Greenberg, vows to lower costs are more credible with voters when they come with concrete plans to take on corrupt corporate interests that are blamed for gouging consumers.
On top of that, they argued, "Trump and his regime have made corruption impossible to ignore, so Democrats should connect the administration’s self-dealing and abuses of power to the economic pressures voters are feeling."
In sum, the organizers emphasized that combining messages about affordability and corruption is "more persuasive than either message alone."
The Indivisible leaders' arguments echo those made by Dustin Guastella, director of operations for Teamsters Local 623 in Philadelphia, and Erica Etelson, president of the Rural Urban Bridge Initiative, who advocated for what they described as "kitchen-table populism" in an op-ed published in The Guardian last month.
Like Indivisible, Guastella and Etelson's organizations commissioned a poll conducted by Verasight testing progressive messages for the 2026 midterms, and came away with similar conclusions.
"The top-performing messages we tested have a simple formula," they wrote. "They promise to bring costs down, make the biggest corporations pay their fair share, and crack down on the people who game the system. Ultimately, they tell a simple story: Hard work should pay off."
With midterm elections less than two months away, there are signs of wide dissatisfaction with the state of the US economy.
Elections analyst Charlie Cook told The New Republic in an interview published Tuesday that he's seeing data indicating that worries about the economy are giving Democrats openings in places that would have once been solidly Republican.
The biggest driver of this economic anxiety, said Cook, appears to be Trump's illegal war with Iran, both because it broke a key 2024 campaign promise about no new wars in the Middle East, and because it has raised the price of countless consumer goods, including diesel fuel and fertilizer, which are both vitally important for US farmers.
“I mean, you take Iran—after promising no more wars and all that—but fuel, fertilizer, no more wars, you take tariffs,” Cook said, “and all this goes to the heart of his base, of, you know, small-town, rural, farm, all of that.”
“To have the people that are generally the most enthusiastic for you uniquely hurt,” Cook added, “now, that’s new territory.”
One group said that the proposal "puts poor and working families that rely on HUD assistance at greater risk of danger, displacement, and homelessness."
Housing and environmental advocates on Tuesday condemned the Trump administration’s planned rollback of flood protections for federally funded housing, warning that the move will leave low-income households exposed to increasingly severe climate-driven flooding while shifting more costs to taxpayers.
In July, the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) proposed rescinding key portions of the Federal Flood Risk Management Standard (FFRMS), a Biden-era policy that required federally financed projects in areas prone to flooding to account for current and future inundation risks.
Proponents of the move, which would strip a layer of federal flood requirements, argue that local governments know their flood conditions better than Washington bureaucrats.
However, the National Housing Law Project (NHLP), a San Francisco-based advocacy group, warned Tuesday that the proposal "puts poor and working families that rely on HUD assistance at greater risk of danger, displacement, and homelessness by reducing notification and mitigation requirements for homes that are vulnerable to flooding."
NHLP called the move "part of the Trump administration’s attempt to dismantle the government programs that keep people housed, safe, and healthy."
On Tuesday, NHLP submitted a comment to HUD noting that “flooding events have become more frequent and widespread, and put the health, safety, and livelihood of low-income families at risk."
"Tenants displaced from federally subsidized housing face an even more acute crisis, because they often endure temporary or permanent loss of their housing assistance,” the group added. “Due to the personal and societal harm of extreme flooding events, HUD should work toward increasing the resilience of HUD-assisted properties. This proposed rule does the opposite.”
The proposed FFRMS rescission is part of the broader regulatory rollback that began during President Donald Trump's first term. In 2017, Trump repealed Obama-era executive orders that had updated the federal flood standard for the first time since the Carter administration and established regulations meant to ensure that federally funded infrastructure projects were climate-resilient.
In March, Trump issued an executive order directing federal agencies to identify and eliminate regulations deemed unnecessarily costly or burdensome to housing construction.
Responding to HUD's proposed FFRMS rollback, Liz Zepeda, federal regulatory director at the Virginia-based legal advocacy group Southern Environmental Law Center, said in July that “it’s discouraging to see the federal government ignore climate science and put some of our most vulnerable communities at greater risk, especially as we head into hurricane season."
"Reckless deregulation like this is why we need Congress to step up and pass reasonable emergency management policies,” Zepeda added.
In 2021, an NPR investigation revealed that, dating back to at least the Obama administration, the federal government sold homes it had previously purchased after repeated flooding to new buyers—often without adequately informing them about the properties’ flood histories and risks.
Historical data compiled by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration show 45 billion-dollar flooding disasters between 1980-2024 that caused an estimated $215 billion in combined damages, adjusted for inflation. As the climate emergency worsens, the frequency and severity of such flooding have increased dramatically, from an average of 3.3 billion-dollar disasters in the 1980s, to 6.7 in the 2000s, to 23 in the 2020s.
"I will not be intimidated into silence," said MP Zarah Sultana. "If anything, this ban only strengthens my resolve to keep speaking out."
Zarah Sultana, a member of the UK Parliament, said she won't stop speaking about the rights of Palestinians after Israel banned her from entering the country on Tuesday.
"Given that this is a fascist government presiding over genocide, apartheid and an illegal occupation, I’ll wear it as a badge of honor," she said in a post to X. "I will not be intimidated into silence. I will continue to speak out against Israel’s genocide and against the UK’s complicity. If anything, this ban only strengthens my resolve to keep speaking out."
Sultana, who represents Coventry South and is a co-founder of the left-wing Your Party, was one of 11 members of Parliament whom Israel announced it was blocking from entry in retaliation after the UK joined Canada, France, and other nations to announce an import ban on goods from Israeli settlements in the West Bank, which are considered illegal under international law.
Following a year of record violence against Palestinians in the territory, UK Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband said the import ban was in response to the "ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in areas of the West Bank—perpetrated by settler terrorists."
Israel has reacted with fury at the move, closing the British consulate in East Jerusalem, which handles relations with Palestinians in East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and Gaza.
Also banned from the country are UK Labour MPs Diane Abbott, Richard Burgon, John McDonnell, and Naz Shah; Green MPs Siân Berry, Ellie Chowns, Carla Denyer, Adrian Ramsay, and Hannah Spencer; as well as Jeremy Corbyn, who led the Labour Party from 2015-20 before co-founding Your Party with Sultana in 2025.
Remarking on his and his colleagues' ban from the country, Corbyn said Israel's treatment of Palestinians was "the real scandal."
"I have visited all parts of Palestine on several occasions, where I have witnessed the horrors of occupation, as well as the resilience and humanity of the Palestinian people," Corbyn wrote on X. "They are the ones who suffer from Israel's apartheid. It is their freedom which is egregiously curtailed, alongside thousands of Palestinian refugees who are denied the right of return."
He added: "As the world wakes up to the genocide in Gaza, it is shocking that Israel continues to deny entry to UN investigators and international journalists. Israel doesn't want the world to see what it is doing—but we can never give up in our attempts to expose the truth."
Israel also banned Fahad Ansari, a lawyer who has represented Hamas’ political wing in court in the UK and—like Sultana—said on X, “I am neither British nor an MP but do take this as a badge of honor (although pretty sure I’m already a persona non grata in the apartheid state).”
"He created a fictitious event featuring himself, who did nothing, as the hero of 9/11."
While Republicans express "offense" at plans for New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani to attend September 11 remembrances this week due to his Muslim faith, President Donald Trump provoked outrage on Tuesday when he told what seems to be a fabricated story about his heroism following the terrorist attack.
Before a crowd that included over 100 first responders, Trump described being at ground zero with a construction crew he said he'd deployed to help with the aftermath of the attack. He described walking beneath the US Steel building, now known as One Liberty Plaza, which was believed to be at risk of collapsing.
“The United States Steel Building was creaking, really creaking, and we thought it was going to fall down. The truth is, it creaked a lot. It creaked. It still creaks, but it never came down,” Trump recalled. “And I'll never forget two firemen. We thought it was coming down on top of us, and two firemen, big, strong guys—and I'm not the smallest guy in the world—they grabbed me under the arm, said, ‘Got to get out of here!’ And they literally lifted me up."
“This is not easy to do. I'm big," Trump continued. "They lifted me up, and they started running with me. I said, ‘Fellas, I can run myself,’ but they were amazing. But they thought it was coming down. It didn't come down."
Trump has claimed on multiple occasions to have been present in the immediate aftermath of the attacks and has told a version of the same story before, including on the 2016 campaign trail.
But many aspects of the tale are in doubt or contradicted by both the public record and others known to be involved in the recovery.
Trump said he saw the attacks happen from his office in Trump Tower, about four miles away from the World Trade Center. In an interview with WWOR-TV that day, he infamously boasted (incorrectly) that he now had the tallest building in downtown Manhattan after the collapse of the World Trade Center.
While Trump himself was documented on September 13 to have been a few blocks from ground zero and said he'd visited the site, his claim to have sent over 100 of his construction workers in the immediate aftermath of the attack and to have "helped a little" himself has been disputed.
In 2019, Richard Alles, a New York City Fire Department battalion chief on the day of the attack, who said he was on the scene about 20 minutes after the second tower collapsed, told PolitiFact that he had no knowledge of Trump sending a crew of men to help with the wreckage.
“I was there for several months—I have no knowledge of his being down there," Alles said, adding that if Trump had sent a crew of 100 workers, "there would be a record of it. Everybody worked under the direct supervision of the police and fire department and the joint commander for emergency services. Is there a chance he was ever down there by himself and I didn’t know it? It’s possible, but I know of no one who ever witnessed him there.”
Other outlets, including The Associated Press and The Washington Post, said they contacted Trump's 2016 campaign to ask for details about his activity following the attacks, but received no response.
Neither of the two firefighters who supposedly carried Trump to safety has ever publicly come forward to discuss their run-in with the famous New York developer, and Trump did not mention the incident during interviews at the time.
Trump has a history of lies surrounding 9/11, including that he saw "thousands" of Muslims "cheering" in Jersey City as the towers fell and that he personally "predicted" the attacks in one of his books.
He has also been found to have misled the public about his philanthropy related to the tragedy: In 2001, he pledged to donate $10,000 to a recovery fund for victims and first responders, which the city comptroller's office ultimately found was never delivered. More than 15 years later, his foundation gave $100,000 to the National September 11 Memorial and Museum.
His business empire also received $150,000 from a post-9/11 recovery program meant for businesses affected by the attacks, which Trump has claimed was reimbursement for allowing victims to use his building at 40 Wall Street to take shelter. But the application made no mention of shelter and instead stated that the request was for compensation for lost rent, cleanup, and repairs following the attacks, according to a 2016 investigation by the New York Daily News.
Journalist Ron Filipkowski described Trump's tale about the firefighters as yet another instance of what he's called "stolen valor," but was astonished by its specificity.
"I know he's lied about his non-role in 9/11 rescue and recovery before, but never this level of detail," he said. "Trump could have made the ceremony with 9/11 first responders today about the many heroes who died attempting to rescue people and others who risked their lives and long-term health. But instead, he created a fictitious event featuring himself, who did nothing, as the hero of 9/11."
Making it more offensive, other commentators said, was the double standard from Republicans, like former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who have claimed "offense" at the fact that Mamdani, as a Muslim, was planning to attend 9/11 memorials on Friday.
"The people mad about the Mayor of New York attending the 9/11 event must be ENRAGED that Trump just lied about being at ground zero on 9/11," wrote Tim Fullerton, a former digital strategist for the Obama administration, on X. "This is all about honoring the victims and not just to score points. Right???"
Mamdani on Tuesday released around 170,000 pages of records indicating that Giuliani's administration had misled New Yorkers about the severity of air quality risks near ground zero after the attacks.
"Come on down! All this could be yours... except the price is WRONG because of Trump's tariffs."
Modeled on the familiar logo of a long-running daytime game show, US Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed displayed a hand-drawn picture of a dollar sign along with the words "The Price Is Wrong" in a video posted to his official social media accounts Tuesday—and offered Michigan voters the chance to play his version of the game, inspired by President Donald Trump's policies.
"This is probably true of everything you're buying right now," said El-Sayed, who is running against former Republican Rep. Mike Rogers after winning the Democratic primary election last month, as he pointed to the handmade sign. "We're going to ask Michiganders about just how much everything has gotten more expensive over the last year because of Trump's tariffs and his war in Iran."
First up, a voter learned that a container of 100 Tide detergent pods, which now costs nearly $30, cost just under $22 a year ago at this time—before Trump joined Israel in attacking Iran, leading to the retaliatory measure of Iran's closure of the Strait of Hormuz and the resulting spike in oil and gas prices.
"That's almost a 30% increase in price for the same Tide pods," said El-Sayed.
A package of Target brand toilet paper cost $6 last year, and another voter guessed it's currently marked at $8.50—off by 50 cents, said El-Sayed, who revealed the package would now cost $9 at a Target store in Michigan.
Target-branded protein powder cost $40 last year, and Trump's policies have raised the price to $54 this year, said El-Sayed, while a one-pound bag of coffee beans from Tim Hortons is nearly a dollar more than it was last year, priced now at $9.32.
El-Sayed released the video as Canada imposed its new retaliatory tariffs targeting about $20 billion in US imports, in response to the 50% tariffs Trump announced late last month on a range of Canadian goods including dairy products, paper, and cement.
According to a June poll by Epic-MRA, 63% of Michiganders—including 35% of Republicans—opposed Trump's tariffs on Canadian goods, which he first announced last year along with levies on numerous other countries that he said had treated the US unfairly in trade.
About three-quarters of voters in that poll said they thought Trump's tariff policy was fueling higher prices for everyday goods.
The Midwest Economic Policy Institute found in July that due to Michigan's shared border with Canada and the close ties shared between the auto industries in Michigan and Ontario, Michigan households were paying as much as $3,200 in extra costs due to Trump's tariffs—about 142% more than the rest of the US.
“Donald Trump is launching this trade war for his own vanity, and he’s asking Michigan families to pay the price,” El-Sayed said in a statement last month. “Trump has been failing Michigan through these chaotic tariffs and bad trade deals for far too long, and Mike Rogers won’t do anything but rubber-stamp them.”
At Michigan Advance, columnist Rick Haglund warned last month that Michigan would likely "pay a steep price for Trump’s reckless actions."
"Canada is Michigan’s largest trading partner with about $70 billion in goods flowing across their borders in 2024, the latest available data," said Haglund. "Thousands of jobs are connected to Michigan auto parts manufacturers, farmers, and others who export goods to Canada."
Trump's unprovoked war on Iran has also been linked to spiking diesel prices, which is driving up transportation costs—and as a result, consumer prices—for many everyday goods like those featured in El-Sayed's mock game show.
"Americans are paying way more for everyday goods they have to buy at the grocery store, all because of this insane war that is spiking the price of gas, spiking the price of diesel, spiking the price of your everyday goods," said El-Sayed. "And now, a trade war that's expanded with Canada."
"Americans are sick and tired of playing 'The Price Is Wrong,'" he added. "I think it's time for us to play 'The Price Is Right.'"
"War is driving Sudan’s needs; funding cuts are shrinking the response."
The renowned humanitarian group Doctors Without Borders said Tuesday that the Trump administration's destruction of the US Agency for International Development has contributed to the collapse of the war-torn nation's healthcare system, forcing clinics to close and leaving millions of people without access to lifesaving treatment.
The organization, known internationally as Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), said the closure of USAID last year at the behest of President Donald Trump and the world's richest man, Elon Musk, left many healthcare providers in Sudan "unable to find alternative funding to continue providing services," leaving facilities with no option but to shut down in the midst of a worsening humanitarian catastrophe.
"War is driving Sudan’s needs; funding cuts are shrinking the response,” Muhammad Ibrahim, MSF's head of mission in Sudan, said in a statement on Tuesday. “MSF’s work in Sudan is privately funded. But when funding disappears from other health services, clinics close, patients have fewer places to go, and pressure shifts to the facilities that remain, including ours.”
MSF said its hospital in Um Rakuba, a refugee camp in eastern Sudan, is now "the only lifeline left" for locals and refugees.
"The cuts here go well beyond healthcare," emphasized Fabrizio Locuratolo, MSF humanitarian affairs manager. "Food rations are shrinking and protection programs are being dismantled, pulling away the last safety nets and leaving refugees completely exposed.”
The dismantling of USAID by Musk's wrecking crew at the so-called US Department of Government Efficiency has already killed hundreds of thousands of people—most of them children—according to experts tracking the impacts on humanitarian aid around the world. Musk and the Trump administration have continued to deny that the aid cuts have killed any children.
A study published in The Lancet earlier this year estimated that the gutting of USAID—whose surviving programs were mostly transferred to the US State Department—could result in more than 14 million additional deaths by the end of the decade. The US Department of Agriculture took over USAID's Food for Peace program—and subsequently omitted Sudan from the list of countries that would receive shipments of US grain.
MSF said Tuesday that "just as health providers faced the impending removal of US support, many European governments also reduced their assistance to people in Sudan."
The results have been horrific. MSF said that "malaria and malnutrition cases are already rising despite limited rainfall, ahead of the peak of the rainy season—and we expect numbers to increase as the rain intensifies."
"In August, our teams admitted 191 children under five with severe malnutrition to our inpatient feeding center, and nearly 22% also tested positive for malaria," the group said Tuesday. "The UN reports that 825,000 children under five are expected to suffer severe acute malnutrition and 19.5 million people faced crisis-level hunger earlier this year. Yet the UN’s $2.87 billion response plan is barely 41 per cent funded, and 37 per cent of Sudan’s health facilities are estimated to be completely out of service."
"As world leaders gather at the UN General Assembly, governments and institutional donors must protect funding for essential health services in Sudan and provide flexible transitional financing where facilities are at risk of closure," the organization pleaded.
"This is not merely a matter of semantics. This is a matter of international law."
Amid Israeli settlers and soldiers' unprecedented violence against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank, Member of Parliament Jeremy Corbyn was among those arguing on Tuesday that the United Kingdom's new "sanctions on illegal settlements are welcome, but not enough," and calling on Prime Minister Andy Burnham to condemn Israel's war on the Gaza Strip as genocide.
On behalf of the UK's ruling Labour Party, Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband announced a ban on trade with illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank. He was joined by leaders from Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Iceland, Ireland, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain, and Sweden, who confirmed "their intention to introduce national and/or support European restrictions" on trading with Israeli West Bank settlements.
Corbyn, a former Labour leader from Islington North who has since co-founded Your Party, declared that "Britain must end all arms sales, all military cooperation, and all forms of support that sustain Israel’s system of apartheid, occupation, and genocide."
In addition to speaking in Parliament on Tuesday, Corbyn wrote to Burnham that "for three years, we have witnessed the abominable destruction of human life in Gaza," where "Israel has killed at least 73,000 people, excluding an untold number of people lost under the rubble."
While welcoming Burnham's recent admission that Labour "got it wrong" and its "initial response to the treatment of Gaza caused huge hurt," Corbyn said that "it is extremely disappointing that these words have not translated into meaningful action."
"It has not gone unnoticed that, 50 days into your premiership, you have declined to call 'the treatment of Gaza' what it really is: a genocide," the MP stressed, noting that the term has long been used by scholars and human rights advocates globally. "This is not merely a matter of semantics. This is a matter of international law."
"Far from preventing genocide, the British government has facilitated genocide through ongoing military, economic, and political cooperation," Corbyn charged, pointing to his call for an independent public inquiry into the UK's complicity. "The question is not whether Labour got it wrong. The question is what your government will do now."
Corbyn asked Burnham to confirm if he will establish an inquiry, end all military cooperation with Israel, impose widespread sanctions, overturn the ban on the advocacy group Palestine Action, and support the work of the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice—the ICC issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former defense minister, and the ICJ has taken up South Africa's genocide case on the Israel Defense Forces' (IDF) conduct in Gaza.
As Corbyn pushed UK leaders to go further than the new trade ban—which is largely symbolic—the Israeli government responded to the sanctions by taking aim at a dozen people, including Corbyn and his Your Party co-founder, MP Zarah Sultana, barring them from entering Israel.
Israel also banned four Labour MPs—Diane Abbot, Richard Burgon, John McDonnell, and Naz Shah, as well as five members of the Green Party: Siân Berry, Ellie Chowns, Carla Denyer, Adrian Ramsay, and Hannah Spencer. The final person barred from Israel is Fahad Ansari, a lawyer who has represented Hamas' political wing in court in the UK, according to The Times of Israel.
Ansari replied on social media Tuesday that "I am neither British nor an MP but do take this as a badge of honor (although pretty sure I'm already a persona non grata in the apartheid state)."
Meanwhile, others in the United Kingdom and around the world joined Corbyn in framing the Labour government's sanctions as progress, while also emphasizing that, as the Corbyn-founded Peace & Justice Project put it, "they should only mark the start of the process in bringing about real peace and social justice for the Palestinian people, who have been subjected to decades of unimaginable subjugation, ethnic cleansing, and genocide."
"The UK government must commit to a full arms embargo on Israel, ending all forms of military cooperation with the IDF, and supporting the ICC arrest warrants against Benjamin Netanyahu and members of his Cabinet," the project declared, calling for the full implementation of recommendations from the Gaza Tribunal report from last year.
Describing the UK's "concrete action" and recognition of "Israel's unlawful occupation and ethnic cleansing" as "hugely welcome," Kerry Moscogiuri, Amnesty International UK's chief executive, noted that Miliband "promised a 'comprehensive reset' and today could be the sea change that is needed."
“Amid ethnic cleansing, genocide, and apartheid against Palestinians, today's measures are a genuine step towards accountability for Israel's repeated and flagrant violations of international law," she said. "The commitment to ban trade in settlement goods and some services, prohibit financing of settlements, refuse arms that contribute to the occupation, and support the genocide case before the International Court of Justice represents a significant change of course."
"For years, Amnesty has worked with members, partners and parliamentarians from across the political spectrum to press for meaningful change, and today shows that campaigning for human rights works," she added. "But today is not the end of the road. The test now is whether these commitments are properly implemented and enforced, and followed by the wider action needed to hold Israel accountable for its crimes and meet the UK's obligations under international law."