

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.

Stefanie Spear, sspear@asyousow.org, 216-387-1609
Shareholder proposals brought by As You Sow will challenge two of the world's largest oil and chemical producers, ExxonMobil and DowDuPont at annual meetings on May 29 and June 25, respectively, to issue a report assessing the public health risks of expanding their petrochemical operations and investments in areas increasingly prone to climate change-induced storms, flooding, and sea level rise, and the risks such operations pose to public health. Major hazardous chemical leaks from existing petrochemical operations have already occurred during extreme weather events like Hurricane Harvey, which are becoming more frequent and intense as a result of climate change.
Petrochemical operations include ethane cracking plants ("crackers") and other facilities that produce dangerous pollutants, including benzene, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and sulfur dioxide. Such plants can become inundated during extreme weather events and release toxic chemicals as they experience upsets and malfunctions.
During Hurricane Harvey, roughly two million pounds of hazardous air pollutants were emitted from local oil refineries and chemical plants. Following the storm, local community members reported health impacts such as respiratory illness, nausea, and headaches, among others. Some health impacts may be long-term and worse than captured by initial incident reports.
A recent report found that Exxon and DowDuPont experienced some of the largest chemical releases during the event, indicating that their existing risk management systems are proving inadequate. Such practices must evolve to meet the new challenges and risks climate change brings including litigation, financial penalties, clean-up costs, loss of social license to operate, and reputational damage, all of which negatively impacts shareholder value. Financial institutions like BlackRock are increasingly warning that financial assets are underpricing the impacts of weather events like hurricanes.
"Petrochemical industry giants like ExxonMobil and DowDuPont are demonstrating that they are alarmingly underprepared to deal with the increasing severity of extreme weather events exacerbated by climate change," said Lila Holzman, energy program manager of As You Sow. "More must be done to assure stakeholders that community health will not be sacrificed as a result of poor planning and insufficient risk management."
Available disclosures from both companies lack sufficient information on if and how the companies are considering evolving climate change-related threats in their decision-making regarding where and how to invest in the buildout of sensitive infrastructure. Exxon and DowDuPont currently have significant operations on the Gulf Coast in Texas and Louisiana and are intending to spend tens of billions of dollars over the next decade on expanding petrochemical operations in this region. Climate change is already impacting the area, and impacts will continue to intensify. Houston has experienced an increase of 167 percent in heavy downpours since the 1950s and three 500-year floods in three years from 2015 to 2018. Reports show that land loss from sea level rise in Louisiana is occurring at an alarming rate, threatening up to $136 billion in infrastructure. Moreover, proposed petrochemical operations will further contribute to the problem of climate change, as they involve highly energy- and carbon-intensive processes.
"As industry puts its foot on the gas to accelerate buildout of expensive petrochemical infrastructure, investors are asking: what are the risks?" said Holzman. "Shareholders are concerned that companies are allocating significant resources to risky petrochemical investments at a time when trends show that plastic use must be limited and high-carbon operations must reduce their footprint. This concern is heightened when companies do not clearly account for increased storms, flooding, and sea level rise in their planning processes, thereby exposing themselves, their shareholders, and their communities to preventable and unacceptable risks."
The reporting requested by shareholders will help investors assess to what extent the companies are evaluating and mitigating critical risks posed by climate change to their operations and the communities where they are located.
As You Sow is the nation's non-profit leader in shareholder advocacy. Founded in 1992, we harness shareholder power to create lasting change that benefits people, planet, and profit. Our mission is to promote environmental and social corporate responsibility through shareholder advocacy, coalition building, and innovative legal strategies.
One Democratic lawmaker said the legislation "puts trans youth in harm's way and censors content that acknowledges trans people’s existence."
The Republican-controlled US House of Representatives on Wednesday passed legislation that critics warn would force public schools receiving federal funding to "out" transgender students to their parents without or without their consent, a policy that advocates warn could endanger many trans youth.
HR 2016, the Stopping Indoctrination and Protecting Kids Act—but dubbed the "Don't Say Trans" bill by some critics—was introduced by Reps. Tim Walberg (R-Mich.) and Burgess Owens (R-Utah) and passed by a vote of 217-198, with eight Democrats joining every Republican and one Independent present in voting for the legislation.
The bill—which faces an uncertain future in the Senate—requires federally funded elementary and middle schools to obtain parental consent before changing a student's gender markers, pronouns, or preferred names on school forms. It also mandates parental consent for a student's access to sex-based accommodations, such as locker rooms or bathrooms.
The legislation also prohibits federal elementary and secondary education funds from being used to advance concepts of so-called "gender ideology"—an inaccurate term that GLAAD says is "deployed by opponents to undermine and dehumanize transgender and nonbinary people"—in the classroom. The term features prominently in a day-one executive order signed by President Donald Trump in what critics say is an effort to effectively erase trans people from public existence.
"Too many schools are keeping parents in the dark about what’s happening in their own children’s classrooms, even going so far as to withhold critical information about their kids’ well-being and development," Walberg said.
"Families deserve honesty, not secrecy—especially when it comes to issues like gender identity," he continued. "Simply put, parents should never be the last to know—that’s not political, it’s common sense."
"Meanwhile, political and ideological agendas are being pushed through curriculum without parents’ knowledge or consent, sidelining the very people responsible for raising these children," Walberg added.
However, Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.)—whose daughter is transgender—accused Republicans of "targeting trans kids with a bill that would require public schools to forcibly out students who want to use certain pronouns or accommodations, even if it would put them in danger."
"I'm a hell no," Jayapal said of the bill. "Trans kids deserve better."
Other House Democrats echoed Japayal's objections, with Rep. Robin Kelly of Illinois warning that the "Republicans’ extreme bill puts trans youth in harm's way and censors content that acknowledges trans people’s existence."
"I will always stand up for student safety, and I am voting NO," Kelly added.
Rep. Christian Menefee of Texas said that "instead of making sure America’s schools have the resources and support they need to ensure every student is given the same shot at success, Republicans are bringing a 'Don't Say Trans' bill to the floor today to forcibly out trans students, even if doing so would put students in immediate physical danger."
"Parents across the country want their children to learn in safe, affirming environments, without worrying about their kids being outed for their gender identity," he added. "I won’t vote to put those kids in danger."
Rep. Laura Friedman of California lamented: "This week, congressional Republicans could have spent their time working with us to help Americans afford groceries and pay their rent. Instead, they spent their time advancing a bill meant to demean trans youth."
"I voted no and urge them to focus on the real needs of Americans," Friedman added.
The eight Democrats who voted for the bill are: Reps. Vicente Gonzalez and Henry Cuellar of Texas, Don Davis of North Carolina, Cleo Fields of Louisiana, Laura Gillen of New York, Marcy Kaptur of Ohio, Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington, and Eugene Vindman of Virginia.
The Human Rights Campaign (HRC) called HR 2616 part of "MAGA’s weird obsession with trans people."
"When the going gets tough for Republicans in Congress—when they have no answers to soaring gas prices from Trump’s illegal war with Iran, rampant corruption, or spiking health premiums—they can’t help but fall back on their favorite strategy: fearmongering," HRC's Jennifer Pike Bailey wrote on Tuesday. "And unfortunately, the transgender community is still the scapegoat du jour."
"Policies that denigrate trans youth don’t succeed in erasing these students, they just make their lives immeasurably harder," she continued. "It’s the job of schools to keep youth safe. And as we’ve seen, LGBTQ+ students are in physical danger when harmful policies are implemented. Recent FBI data shows that in states that have passed these types of laws, anti-LGBTQ+ hate crimes in schools have quadrupled."
"Opponents of LGBTQ+ equality are creating a lot of noise, and the only way to stop them is to be louder," Pike Bailey stressed. "We need phone calls, emails, letters to every member of Congress telling them to stop these attacks. And then we need to show up at the ballot box."
BREAKING: The House of Representatives just voted to require teachers to forcibly out transgender youth against their will.Censoring "gender ideology" does nothing to advance the basic promise that every child deserves the same opportunity to thrive, and that includes transgender students.
— ACLU (@aclu.org) May 20, 2026 at 2:32 PM
Tyler Hack, executive director of the trans political advocacy group Christopher Street Project, said in a statement that “HR 2616 is yet another escalation in Republicans’ sick obsession with criminalizing queer people and trans youth."
"This ‘Don’t Say Trans’ bill does not protect kids—it is government-mandated forced outing," Hack added. "Mandating that teachers act as agents of the state and out their own students is not protection; it’s cruelty."
According to the Trans Legislation Tracker, "an independent research organization tracking bills that impact trans and gender-diverse people across the United States," there are currently 778 state-level and 126 national bills under consideration "that would negatively impact" targeted people.
One of the most recently approved bills, signed into law Friday by Republican South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster, forces trans and nonbinary students who need to use public school restrooms to go outside to porta-potties. LGBTQ Nation's Greg Owen slammed the law as a "latter-day 'separate but equal' attack on trans rights."
The Campaign for Southern Equality (CSE) said that “this bill will do nothing to make our schools safer."
"Rather," CSE added, "it will make using the bathroom a difficult and even dangerous experience for trans and nonbinary youth, who are extremely likely to be bullied and harassed when using the bathroom."
"The court must stand firmly on the side of truth, fairness, and the basic principle that we should not take a life while serious questions of innocence remain unanswered."
The ACLU on Wednesday urged the US Supreme Court to intervene and block the state of Tennessee from executing a man who could be exonerated by DNA evidence.
In its plea to the court, the ACLU said that Tennessee is "sitting on unidentified DNA and fingerprint evidence" that could prove the innocence of Tony Carruthers, who has been on death row for three decades after being convicted of kidnapping and murdering three people in 1996.
The ACLU has repeatedly asked for Carruthers' execution, which is scheduled for Thursday, to be postponed so that investigators can take between two and three weeks to examine potentially exculpatory forensic evidence.
Lucas Cameron-Vaughn, legal director of the ACLU of Tennessee, said the state had a duty to ensure that it had convicted the right man, and he pointed to troubling aspects of the case that should give courts pause before signing off on his execution.
“Mr. Carruthers was forced to represent himself at trial, and now faces death based on flimsy circumstantial evidence and unreliable witnesses," Cameron-Vaughn said. "Forensic evidence the state refuses to test could change everything. The Supreme Court must act now to stop Tennessee from taking an irreversible step while so many critical questions remain unanswered.”
Maria DeLiberato, senior counsel at the ACLU’s Capital Punishment Project, argued that the Supreme Court is "the final safeguard between Tennessee and this irreversible injustice" that would come from executing someone for a crime they may not have committed.
"We are only hours away from the state of Tennessee executing a potentially innocent man while they are sitting on evidence that could prove who really committed this crime," DeLiberato said. "The court must stand firmly on the side of truth, fairness, and the basic principle that we should not take a life while serious questions of innocence remain unanswered and while readily available forensic testing could answer those very questions."
Republican Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee on Tuesday said he would not intervene to stop Carruthers' execution, even after local faith leaders and past exonerees delivered a petition signed by more than 130,000 Americans asking him to reconsider.
The president's tirade—which even the Senate majority leader called "concerning"—came as the GOP decided to exclude the funding from the package amid opposition from both Republican and Democratic senators.
As President Donald Trump on Wednesday publicly called for firing the Senate parliamentarian because she ruled against a GOP plan to include $1 billion in taxpayer dollars for the White House ballroom in the next budget reconciliation package, an upper chamber Republican confirmed that the proposal has been dropped from the bill.
"Shockingly, Republicans have kept the very important position of 'Parliamentarian' in the hands of a woman, Elizabeth MacDonough, who was appointed, long ago, by Barack Hussein Obama and a vicious Lunatic known as Senator Harry Reid, who ran the Senate for the Dumocrats with an 'iron fist,'" Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform.
"Over the years, she has been brutal to Republicans, but not so to the Dumocrats—So why has she not been replaced? There are many fair people who would be qualified for that vital job," the president continued. "The Republicans play a very soft game compared to the Dumocrats. It is their single biggest disadvantage in politics. The Dumocrats cheat, lie, and steal, especially when it comes to Votes in Elections, but stick together, whereas the Republicans allow the Elizabeth MacDonoughs of the World to stay in power, and brutalize us. We need THE SAVE AMERICA ACT passed, and NOW—And, likewise, kill the Filibuster, which would give us everything! If we don’t pass at least one of these two provisions quickly, you will never see another Republican President again."
"The Dumocrats will end up with 2 additional States, DC and Puerto Rico, and all that entails, including 4 Senators, many Congressmen, and many additional Electoral Votes, and they will also get their dream of a packed United States Supreme Court with their most favorite number—21 Justices," he added. "The Dumocrats will eliminate the Filibuster on the First Day that they get an opportunity to do so. The Republicans aren't doing it because they say the Dumocrats will never do it, but the Republicans are WRONG. Get smart and tough Republicans, or you'll all be looking for a job much sooner than you thought possible!"
While former President Barack Obama was in office when MacDonough was appointed to her current role in 2012, that decision was made by then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). She has angered both parties with her decisions over the years.
Trump's post followed reporting early this week that the president was pressuring US Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) to fire MacDonough for her weekend ruling. The Hill reported that when asked about the post on Wednesday, Thune said that "I didn't read it, so I need to look at it."
"Obviously, it's concerning when anybody gets targeted like that. But it's, I guess, his opinion," the Senate majority leader said. "We'll make sure everybody's got security around here."
The proposed $1 billion in taxpayer funding would go toward security-related enhancements to the ballroom project, which has already involved tearing down the East Wing of the White House and former first lady Jacqueline Kennedy's Rose Garden. Standing outside the construction site trying to promote the project on Tuesday, Trump bragged about a planned "drone empire" on the roof.
As Common Dreams exclusively reported earlier Wednesday, 50 state legislators condemned the GOP's attempt to spend $1 billion in taxpayer money on the project in a letter to the president. They called on him "to reject this $1 billion boondoggle and instead direct those resources toward the affordability crisis your policies have created."
Thune signaled Wednesday that GOP lacked the support needed to get the ballroom funding through, telling reporters that "there may be some issues related to the parliamentarian, but most of the issues we have here are votes. The things we're dealing with here is vote count."
He suggested that firing MacDonough "would create even more vote issues here if we were to try to do something like that."
Later Wednesday, Politico reported that after a GOP lunch meeting, Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) said, "We were told that the ballroom money is out" of the proposal, and he would "like to read the text."
As the outlet noted: "Several GOP senators aired public concerns about including any ballroom funding in a bill otherwise dedicated to immigration enforcement. A larger swath of Republicans were privately opposed, with the mood souring further Tuesday amid anger over Trump's decision to endorse Ken Paxton over incumbent Sen. John Cornyn in the upcoming GOP primary runoff in Texas."