

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.

Valerie Holford, Earthjustice, valerieholford@starpower.net or (202) 365-5336
Tom Pelton, Environmental Integrity Project, tpelton@environmentalintegrity.org or (443) 510-2574
A new, close review of the Trump EPA's draft plan to gut federal coal ash regulations established in 2015 reveals that it would encourage states to ignore risks to children and remove the requirement that polluters immediately clean up their coal ash spills. The analysis was done by the Environmental Integrity Project and Earthjustice.
EPA will hold a hearing on the proposed coal ash rule rollback on Tuesday in Arlington, VA, and Congress will hold a briefing Wednesday at which experts and people living near coal plants will testify.
Environmental, health and safety experts had previously highlighted other detrimental aspects of the EPA proposal, which was first unveiled last month. But the Environmental Integrity Project and Earthjustice only recently found in the fine print the problem about the risk to children and the lack of immediate cleanup requirements for polluters.
"EPA knows that the health risks from coal ash pollution hit children the hardest, yet EPA's new proposal allows states and polluters to ignore risks to children and leave them in harm's way," said Abel Russ, attorney with Environmental Integrity Project.
Coal ash, the byproduct of burning coal at power plants, is loaded with toxic pollutants like arsenic, lead, and even radioactivity, and EPA in 2015 released the first federal regulations designed to help control the escape of these pollutants from coal ash dumps.
In the Trump Administration's proposed revision of the coal regulations, the agency shifts the responsibility of setting groundwater protection standards for many toxic coal ash pollutants, such as lead, boron, cobalt, lithium, and molybdenum, into the states' (and even the polluters') hands for the first time. To make this change, the EPA cut and pasted language from existing regulations for municipal solid waste landfills (household trash dumps), but deliberately omitted a critical reference to the consideration of the health of "sensitive subgroups," which includes children.
"The EPA has, for years, made a point of paying special attention to children's health, and has in fact protected children from toxic pollution in countless ways. But apparently Scott Pruitt doesn't think that's EPA's job," said Russ. "If you own a municipal landfill, you have to make sure that you are protecting children. If you are a coal plant owner? EPA knows that you pose a special risk to children, but hey, don't worry about it. This is not the EPA Americans have come to depend on. It's truly shameful."
In its new draft rule, EPA also turns its back on hundreds of communities living near dangerous coal ash dams. Across the nation, nearly 700 earthen impoundments hold back tens of millions of tons of toxic coal ash sludge. The largest toxic waste spill in the U.S. occurred at the TVA Kingston Fossil Plant in 2008, when an earthen dam broke in Harriman, Tennessee and released over a billion gallons of toxic sludge into a riverfront community. The EPA's recent proposal deliberately ignores these risks and removes the requirement for industry to immediately respond to a disaster and control the toxic flood.
Dam safety expert Jack Spadaro has never seen anything like it in his decades of dam oversight for the U.S. government. "High hazard coal ash dams will kill people if they break," said Spadaro, former administrator of the National Mine Health and Safety Academy. "Removing the duty to immediately respond to a disaster places communities near coal ash dams in great jeopardy."
The EPA proposal is the biggest giveaway to polluters this year.
"The draft rule is gratuitously anti-public health and safety, and it shows who Pruitt is really protecting--and it's the polluters," said Lisa Evans, Senior Administrative Counsel at Earthjustice and former Assistant Regional Counsel at the EPA. "The Trump EPA has completely abandoned its mission to protect communities and the environment from future coal ash disasters."
Background
Coal ash has historically been dumped in unlined landfills and ponds without concern for water quality or safety. In fact, many of these ash dumps are dug so deep that the coal ash is sitting in the water table, which often is a source of drinking water. It should be no surprise that groundwater near coal plants is frequently contaminated with unsafe levels of multiple chemicals. At hundreds of dump sites, coal ash is also impounded behind aging earthen dams. When these dams break or the pipes underlying them fail, the spills can be catastrophic, as seen in 2008 in Kingston, TN and at the Duke Energy Dan River Plant in 2014, where a broken pipe caused a spill that fouled 70 miles of the Dan River in North Carolina and Virginia.
In the course of the 2015 rulemaking, EPA determined that certain pollutants posed unacceptable risks at unregulated coal ash dumps. These include boron, which can harm fetal development and reproductive health; cobalt, which can cause blood and thyroid disorders; and several others. EPA also determined that these noncancer risks were highest for infants.
In 2015, after years of pressure and litigation from the public interest community, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency finally issued first-ever federal regulations for the disposal of coal ash. The 2015 regulations required owners of coal plants take many steps to ensure that deadly coal ash pollutants would not contaminate drinking water and dams would not break.
Exposing children to harm
Fast-forward to March of 2018. Now, upon industry's bidding, EPA is proposing to roll back the 2015 federal rule and gut critical health protections. EPA wants to allow the states, and even the polluters themselves, to set their own drinking water standards for pollutants without maximum contaminant levels (MCLs), including boron, cobalt, lead, lithium, and molybdenum. EPA copied and pasted the language for "alternative groundwater protection standards" from the regulations that apply to municipal solid waste landfills. But EPA deliberately left something out. This is what the municipal landfill regulations say:
For systemic toxicants, the [groundwater standard] represents a concentration to which the human population (including sensitive subgroups) could be exposed on a daily basis that is likely to be without appreciable risk of deleterious effects during a lifetime. 40 C.F.R. SS 258.55(i)(4) (emphasis added).
And this is what EPA is proposing in the re-write of its coal ash regulations:
For systemic toxicants, the [groundwater standard] represents a concentration to which the human population could be exposed on a daily basis that is likely to be without appreciable risk of deleterious effects during a lifetime. 83 Fed. Reg. 11613.
"Sensitive subgroups" includes, of course, children. Everything was copied and pasted, but the language protecting children was struck out.
Earthjustice is a non-profit public interest law firm dedicated to protecting the magnificent places, natural resources, and wildlife of this earth, and to defending the right of all people to a healthy environment. We bring about far-reaching change by enforcing and strengthening environmental laws on behalf of hundreds of organizations, coalitions and communities.
800-584-6460The president of the AFL-CIO warned of a large-scale revolt if corporate leaders use artificial intelligence to "put people out on the street with no path forward."
The leader of the AFL-CIO, the largest union federation in the United States, told elites and others gathered at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland on Wednesday that rapid advances in artificial intelligence risk turbocharging the worst inequities of the existing economic order, displacing workers en masse while enriching those at the very top.
Liz Shuler, the AFL-CIO's president, said during a panel discussion that if the billionaires and corporate titans currently directing AI developments are "looking to just deskill, dehumanize, replace workers" and "put people out on the street with no path forward—then absolutely you’re gonna have a revolution."
The economy in the US and around the world "isn't working for working people now," Shuler noted, citing unprecedented levels of inequality, workers being forced to take on multiple jobs to make ends meet, and widespread economic instability.
“Now, put AI on top of that," she continued. "The insecurity that we’re all experiencing—the fact that people are waking up and some new technology is landing on them in their jobs, without training, without them having a say. Of course they’re going to be anxious, of course they're going to be feeling insecure about what the future holds."
“I think we really need to stop, and say: ‘Who are we doing this for, what are the results we want, and how we get there?’" said Shuler. "We get there by including workers in the process."
The International Monetary Fund has estimated that roughly 40% of global employment is "exposed to AI." In advanced economies, according to the analysis, around 60% of jobs could be impacted by AI, either positively or negatively—with some jobs expected to disappear entirely.
Multinational corporate behemoths such as Amazon are actively planning to replace many of their workers with robots, efforts that have sparked the kinds of dire warnings that Shuler expressed at Davos, where AI is a centerpiece of this year's gathering.
In a letter to Amazon's billionaire founder, Jeff Bezos, late last year, US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) asked, "Are you going to simply dump these workers out on the street, or will you treat them with the dignity they deserve?"
"If Amazon succeeds on its massive automation plan," Sanders warned, "it will have a profound impact on blue-collar workers throughout America and will likely be used as a model by large corporations throughout America, including Walmart and UPS, to displace tens of millions of jobs.”
"Democrats have no obligation to support a bill that not only funds the dystopian scenes we are seeing in Minneapolis but will allow DHS to replicate that playbook of brutality in cities all over this country."
As congressional negotiators on Tuesday released a proposed spending bill for the US Department of Homeland Security, with the January 30 funding deadline rapidly approaching, critics of President Donald Trump's deadly immigration operations renewed calls for Democrats to oppose any new money for Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
"You can't count on Dem leadership to do much, but you can for sure trust these warriors for democracy to hustle like hell to pass a bipartisan deal to fully fund the Gestapo currently attacking our cities, rather than using this one moment of leverage to try to stop them. Bravo!" quipped progressive organizer Aaron Regunberg on social media.
Since an immigration agent fatally shot Renee Good in Minneapolis earlier this month, congressional Democrats have faced mounting pressure to significantly rein in DHS and its agencies, including ICE and Customs and Border Protection (CBP). While some progressive lawmakers have embraced such calls, neither Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) nor House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) has shown serious interest in using the appropriations process to that end.
Both Senate Appropriations Committee Vice Chair Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and House Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) tried to frame the DHS bill released on Tuesday as taking "several steps in the right direction," in the words of DeLauro, who also acknowledged that "it does not include broader reforms Democrats proposed."
"I understand that many of my Democratic colleagues may be dissatisfied with any bill that funds ICE. I share their frustration with the out-of-control agency," DeLauro said, while also stressing that the bill "is more than just ICE." She specifically pointed to funding for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Transportation Security Administration, and the US Coast Guard.
As a bill summary from Murray's office states, the legislation funds those and "other critical programs Americans count on" while cutting "funding for CBP by $1.3 billion relative to fiscal year 2025, providing $18.3 billion in total."
It also "flat-funds ICE at $10 billion, preventing any growth to ICE's annual budget, and it cuts ICE's enforcement and removal budget," the document details. "The bill provides $949 million (-15%) less in funding for ICE enforcement and removal operations than House Republicans' and $708 million (-11%) less than Senate Republicans’ proposed bills—and $114 million less than the fiscal year 2025 level."
After the murder of Renee Nicole Good, some influential Democrats seem to finally be willing to throw down. They're saying they'll vote NO on the upcoming DHS funding bill.Email and call your Senators right now. Tell them to block funding for ICE!!!www.fightforthefuture.org/actions/no-f...
[image or embed]
— Evan Greer (@evangreer.bsky.social) January 20, 2026 at 11:20 AM
Taking aim at the DHS secretary, Murray said in a statement that "what we have seen from Kristi Noem's Department of Homeland Security is frankly sick and un-American. ICE is out-of-control, terrorizing people, including American citizens, and actively making our communities less safe."
Sometimes, when members of Congress can't strike a deal before a funding deadline, they'll pass a continuing resolution that provides short-term funding to prevent a federal government shutdown and keep up negotiations. However, Murray suggested in a Tuesday statement that a CR is not a viable option because of the $75 billion for ICE included in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act that Trump signed last July.
"ICE must be reined in, and unfortunately, neither a CR nor a shutdown would do anything to restrain it, because, thanks to Republicans, ICE is now sitting on a massive slush fund it can tap whether or not we pass a funding bill," Murray said. "The suggestion that a shutdown in this moment might curb the lawlessness of this administration is not rooted in reality: Under a CR and in a shutdown, this administration can do everything they are already doing—but without any of the critical guardrails and constraints imposed by a full-year funding bill."
Murray also nodded to Republican control of Congress that the November midterms, arguing that "the hard truth is that Democrats must win political power to enact the kind of accountability we need... "If you believe that we should be putting more of our taxpayer dollars towards healthcare and that our immigration enforcement should be focused on actual criminals instead of tear-gassing American children, then we need to speak up again and again—and we must take our fight to the ballot box."
Other Democrats in Congress swiftly rejected the proposal. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said that it "puts no meaningful constraints on the growing lawlessness of ICE, and increases funding for detention over the last appropriations bill passed in 2024."
"I understand Democrats in these negotiations had a hard job—no new budget for DHS is going to cure all the rampant illegality happening within the department. But this bill doesn't put CBP agents back at the border where they belong and doesn't put checks on ICE’s out-of-control arrest and enforcement operations," he explained. "Democrats have no obligation to support a bill that not only funds the dystopian scenes we are seeing in Minneapolis but will allow DHS to replicate that playbook of brutality in cities all over this country."
The leadership of the nearly 100-member Congressional Progressive Caucus last week vowed to "oppose all funding" for US immigration enforcement in any upcoming appropriations bills without substantial reforms. CPC Chair Emerita Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) made her personal opposition to Tuesday's proposal clear, declaring that "it simply does not meet the moment we face in this country with the lawlessness" of ICE and CBP agents.
"We have seen ICE and DHS descending on cities across this country, racially profiling, and rounding up immigrants and US citizens alike—many of whom have committed no crimes," said Jayapal, an immigrant herself. "We have watched in horror as they have dragged people out into the snow and as they have shot and killed US citizens. As they foment this terror and chaos on our streets, 37 people have died in ICE custody since Trump came back to office."
"Meanwhile, across the country, over 70,000 people are being incarcerated in immigration jails run by private, for-profit prison contractors and being denied due process and bond hearings in Trump's mass detention effort that dozens of judges have said is not lawful," she stressed. "All of this is dangerous—not just for immigrants but for every single American worried about the erosion of Constitutional rights."
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), one of several Democrats expected to run for president in 2028, also spoke out against the bill, telling NBC News that "it is a surrender to Trump's lawlessness. I will be a strong no and help lead the opposition to it."
The progressive group Indivisible has urged voters across the country "to light a fire under Democrats to demand they use their leverage on the DHS appropriations bill to rein in ICE and deny the Trump regime one penny more for its mass deportation machine."
"While most Republicans continue to rubber-stamp Trump's atrocities, some are becoming bolder in criticizing ICE's lawlessness and pattern of shredding constitutional protections," notes the group's webpage on reining in ICE. "The louder we are and the more we organize our communities to take action, the harder it will be for Republicans to continue backing Trump's terror campaign."
"Democrats need to stop whining about the limits of minority power and start fighting as hard as their constituents are to stop this regime’s mounting atrocities," the Indivisible page adds. "We're not accepting excuses, and we will hold every member of Congress accountable who chooses complicity and cowardice over courage."
Some critics of recent immigration actions have suggested that any Democrat who still supports funding ICE should be primaried. Philadelphia Inquirer columnist Will Bunch made that case Tuesday, writing that "the lack of appetite for utterly dismantling the DHS regime—despite its culture of violence and disrespect for law-abiding refugees—reminds too many voters of the cowardice that branded the Dems as losers in the first place."
"Dismantling the ICE regime needs to be the floor, not the ceiling" he added, "and any Democrat in Congress who doesn't get with the program can—and should—be replaced in the primaries to avoided another debacle with alienated or apathetic voters in November."
The MV Sagitta is at least the second Chinese-owned tanker seized during Trump's nearly monthlong "quarantine."
US forces on Tuesday seized a seventh oil tanker in the Caribbean Sea linked to Venezuela as President Donald Trump's military campaign to control the source of the world's largest petroleum reserves continued.
According to US Southern Command (SOUTHCOM), troops boarded and seized the MV Sagitta Tuesday morning "without incident."
"The apprehension of another tanker operating in defiance of President Trump’s established quarantine of sanctioned vessels in the Caribbean demonstrates our resolve to ensure that the only oil leaving Venezuela will be oil that is coordinated properly and lawfully," SOUTHCOM said.
The Sagitta is a Liberian-flagged vessel owned and managed by a company in China. It is at least the second Chinese-owned tanker taken by US forces since Trump's announcement last month of a "quarantine" on Venezuelan oil exports. Regional and world leaders have condemned the seizures as acts of "piracy."
International law experts contend that the blockade, sanctions, and strikes on boats allegedly transporting drugs—which have killed more than 120 people—are all illegal, as are the US bombing and invasion of Venezuela and kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores.
The US Department of Justice indicted Maduro for alleged conspiracy to commit narco-terrorism, conspiracy to import cocaine into the United States, conspiracy to possess machine guns and destructive devices, and possession of such weapons. Maduro has pleaded not guilty to all charges, and has called himself a “prisoner of war.”