August, 04 2020, 12:00am EDT
Sweeping Proposal Would Protect Kids, Farmworkers - and Everyone - From Toxic Pesticides
Bill Introduced by Sen. Udall, Rep. Neguse Would Ban All Organophosphate, Neonic Pesticides
WASHINGTON
Legislation introduced today would ban or restrict scores of the most toxic pesticides, introduce health-protective restrictions on pesticide use and registration, and create new safety protections for farmworkers - the most sweeping overhaul of the nation's pesticide law in nearly 25 years.
The bill by Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) and Rep. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.) would significantly strengthen the Environmental Protection Agency's authority under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, or FIFRA, to regulate the distribution, sale and use of pesticides. The Protect America's Children from Toxic Pesticide Act of 2020 would ban some of the most toxic pesticides used in the U.S., including all organophosphates, neonicotinoids and paraquat.
Among the pesticides that would be banned are chlorpyrifos, which can damage children's brains and was slated for phaseout by the Obama administration, a proposal reversed under President Trump's EPA. The bill would also ban malathion, which has been linked to increased risk of prostate cancer, and imidacloprid, which, like other neonicotinoids, poisons bees and other pollinator insects.
Children are especially susceptible to health risks from pesticide exposure. The American Academy of Pediatrics, which urges stricter pesticide regulations, says evidence links early-life pesticide exposure to pediatric cancers, decreased cognitive function and behavioral problems.
"Numerous studies show that existing EPA regulations for pesticides fail to protect children's health," said Olga Naidenko, Ph.D., EWG vice president for science investigations. "The federal pesticide policy is in urgent need of reform."
Under the proposed legislation, the EPA would be required to immediately suspend and review the use of any pesticide that is banned in the European Union or Canada. The list of such pesticides includes the notorious herbicide atrazine, which disrupts hormones, harms the developing fetus and contaminates the drinking water of millions of Americans.
"We applaud Sen. Udall and Rep. Neguse for this bold and much-needed proposal to overhaul the nation's pesticide law that puts the health and safety of children, farmworkers and all Americans first," said EWG senior vice president for government affairs Scott Faber.
"The pesticide industry and chemical agriculture have for far too long been able to abuse legal loopholes allowing for the use of toxic pesticides that have not been adequately tested to make sure they are safe for people and the environment," Faber said. "As a result, millions of Americans are exposed to dangerous pesticides in their air, water and food. The Udall-Neguse plan will rein in this largely unchecked explosion of pesticide use by agriculture and give the EPA much stronger authority to protect the public."
The legislation would also set new restrictions on the "conditional registration" loophole within the FIFRA law that allows pesticide manufacturers to get new chemicals approved and into the marketplace before the EPA has reviewed all the available science to determine if it is safe.
The legislation also calls for measures to protect farmworkers. It would require pesticide labels to be printed in English and Spanish, require employers to report injuries to farmworkers from pesticide exposure, and require the suspension of a pesticide when it causes a death of a farmworker.
The Environmental Working Group is a community 30 million strong, working to protect our environmental health by changing industry standards.
(202) 667-6982LATEST NEWS
Vance Stuns by Calling Trump ‘Only Head of State in the Entire World Who Is Sympathetic’ to Israel
One columnist called it "probably the toughest public criticism offered by a US administration towards Israel in my lifetime."
Jun 18, 2026
Vice President JD Vance stunned observers on Thursday with some of the bluntest criticism issued to Israel by a US presidential administration in recent memory as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu continues his attempts to sabotage peace with Iran.
Noting the indignance and defiance of Netanyahu and his cabinet in response to the memorandum of understanding signed this week by Trump—which calls on Israel to withdraw from Lebanon and end its ethnic cleansing campaign there—Vance said Israel's leaders were in the midst of a “weird panic” and "freakout" during a New York Times interview on Thursday.
"You’re a country of 9 million people," he said. "You can’t just kill your way out of solving every single national security problem that you have.”
⭕️ JD Vance’s message to Israel:
“You’re a country of 9 million people. You can’t just kill your way out of solving every single national security problem that you have.”
Noting that significant segments of the Israeli population and political system are anxious about the deal,… pic.twitter.com/HD2Z9WxjEb
— Drop Site (@DropSiteNews) June 18, 2026
It comes on the heels of Trump's own criticism of Israel's tactics in Lebanon earlier this week, describing its bombing of an apartment building—one of countless attacks on civilian infrastructure—as "vicious" and "too much," before claiming that "without me, there would be no Israel."
Vance went even further later on Thursday during a press conference at the White House, reminding Israel's leaders that they've made their country an international pariah.
"My message to them would be twofold. No. 1: Donald J. Trump is the only head of state in the entire world who is sympathetic to the nation of Israel at this moment in time," Vance said. "If I was in the cabinet of the Israeli government, I might not be attacking the only powerful ally that I have anywhere left in the entire world."
In a style reminiscent of his infamous Oval Office meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy last year, he later took Israel's leaders to task over what he described as ingratitude for America's support, which has included roughly $4 billion in military assistance each year and even more since Israel began its genocidal military campaign against Gaza in 2023 in response to Hamas' October 7 attacks.
The weapons Israel uses, Vance stressed, "have been built by American hands and paid for by American tax dollars." He added, "The problem for Israel is not Donald J. Trump and anybody in Israel who thinks their biggest problem is the president of the United States needs to wake up and smell the reality of the situation that the country is in."
In a marked shift from earlier this year, when the administration had cosigned Israel's attacks on Lebanon even at the cost of ceasefire negotiations, Vance on Thursday called on Israel to "respect this peace process" and called Israel's attacks on civilians "unacceptable."
Just as observers have been bewildered by Trump's sudden acknowledgment of Iran's rights to possess ballistic missiles and to pursue nuclear energy, many were similarly caught off guard by Vance's abrupt acknowledgment of truths about Israel that have been apparent to most of the world for years.
JD Vance is not changing the conversation about Israel in the US. He is changing the entire paradigm:
He is reminding the Israelis that they are alone and - though he doesn't use this word - much disliked internationally. Israel should not undermine the only strong friend they… pic.twitter.com/ZnqVTjve9R
— Trita Parsi (@tparsi) June 18, 2026
"JD Vance is not changing the conversation about Israel in the US. He is changing the entire paradigm," said Trita Parsi, the executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. "He is reminding the Israelis that they are alone and—though he doesn't use this word—much disliked internationally. Israel should not undermine the only strong friend they have left."
Washington Post columnist Shadi Hamid agreed that it was "probably the toughest public criticism offered by a US administration towards Israel in my lifetime," adding that "we'll see if it gets translated into action or if it's just rhetoric, but it's still much more than the Biden administration could ever manage."
The naked cynicism of the flip-flop was apparent to many, given the Trump administration's slavish deference to Israel up to the point that it became political poison.
College students who have said similar things to Vance about Israel's killing of civilians have found themselves facing deportation, while International Criminal Court officials who have attempted to hold Israeli officials criminally liable for war crimes have found themselves sanctioned by the US.
That is to say nothing of Trump's willingness to follow Netanyahu's lead into a disastrous and unpopular war with Iran despite warnings from his own cabinet that he was being manipulated.
"It would be nice if they had this posture from January 2025," journalist Zaid Jilani said of Vance's comments on Thursday. "Might have helped save Trump's presidency."
Alexander Langlois, a contributing fellow at the anti-interventionist think tank Defense Priorities, described it as a deeply calculated maneuver to simultaneously show Israel who is boss in front of a nation growing wary of its influence while also reiterating America's support.
"Vance is drawing a line. The White House is absolutely trying to use its power and influence to get not only Republicans, but Israel, in line," he said.
Still, despite doubts, it was hard to overstate the gravity of the shift underway, at least rhetorically.
"It could all lead to nothing, or worse—a joint US-Israel resumption of the war," said journalist Glenn Greenwald. "But there hasn't been a week where American leaders have spoken so sternly, clearly, truthfully and decisively about Israel since... well, perhaps ever."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Good News, But It's a Low Bar': Trump Backtracks on Plan to Kill Ocean Monitoring Program
"Trump is backing off from doing something incredibly stupid, so we celebrate."
Jun 18, 2026
The Trump administration on Thursday backed off a widely criticized plan to dismantle a deep-sea monitoring system designed to provide crucial storm forecasting data while also tracking the health of coastal habitats and the impacts of the climate crisis on the world's oceans.
In an announcement posted on its website, the US National Science Foundation (NSF) said it "will not proceed with further removal or descoping of equipment" from the Ocean Observatories Initiative (OOI), less than a month after it revealed plans to remove more than 900 instruments deployed along US coastlines.
NSF also said that it would continue planned maintenance operations on the remaining systems, while also creating plans to redeploy that Endurance Array, which is a set of long-term moorings set up in the Pacific Northwest, after it undergoes equipment servicing.
"NSF remains committed to ocean sciences," the announcement concluded, "to responsible stewardship of its research infrastructure and to supporting the stakeholders that depend on it."
The decision to end OOI drew bipartisan backlash in Congress, as the Republican-controlled US Senate on Wednesday passed a measure to block the administration from further removing ocean monitoring equipment.
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), who led the Senate effort to block the Trump administration's OOI plans alongside Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), described the removal of ocean monitoring systems as "supreme stupidity" that would destroy "a vital source of climate data."
The timing of NSF’s decision to dismantle the system was particularly controversial given concerns over planetary heating and the growing threat of extreme weather, especially as the return of El Niño this year is expected to unleash larger and more damaging meteorological events in the near future.
In response to Thursday's announcement, the Democratic National Committee’s Environment and Climate Council described the reversal on OOI as a rare sensible decision for a Trump administration that has been overtly hostile to climate science.
"Good news. But it's a low bar," the council wrote in a social media post. "Trump is backing off from doing something incredibly stupid, so we celebrate."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Susan Collins Ads Brag About $190 Million for Rural Hospitals. It’s a Band-Aid on the Gaping Wound She Helped Inflict
The Republican senator running for a sixth term has postured as a champion of rural healthcare, but the Medicaid cuts she voted to advance are set to devastate vulnerable communities in Maine and across the US.
Jun 18, 2026
In recent weeks, Mainers have been inundated with ads touting Republican Sen. Susan Collins' role in securing passage of a $50 billion fund aimed at shoring up beleaguered rural healthcare systems across the US—including $190 million earmarked for her state.
But the ads, purchased by Collins' campaign directly and by the dark money group One Nation, neglect to mention a key fact: The Republican budget law that implements the Rural Health Transformation Program (RHTP) also contains the largest cuts to Medicaid in the program's history, rendering the $50 billion fund a mere Band-Aid on a massive wound.
According to one analysis, the GOP law's estimated cuts to federal Medicaid spending in rural areas over the next decade will amount to nearly triple the RHTP's funding. Maine is expected to lose nearly $3 billion in federal Medicaid funds over the next 10 years due to the Republican law—a massive hit that the pro-Collins campaign ads predictably avoid.
Collins, who is running for a sixth term against Democratic nominee Graham Platner, emphasizes that she voted against final passage of the GOP budget legislation, known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA). But Collins cast a decisive procedural vote that allowed the bill, which also delivered massive tax breaks to the wealthy and large corporations, to advance to the Senate floor, where her Republican colleagues did the rest. President Donald Trump signed the bill into law last summer.
"Susan Collins is only bipartisan when it doesn't matter," declares a 30-second ad unveiled Wednesday by the Platner campaign, which highlighted the incumbent senator's vote to advance the OBBBA and pilloried her reputation as a "moderate."
The Republican law's Medicaid cuts, which total nearly $1 trillion, are expected to cost Maine hospitals $66 million per year in revenue and strip health coverage from tens of thousands of residents—projections that Collins' ads omit.
"Maine will be forced to offset budget holes caused by this bill by terminating coverage for families, eliminating essential health services, and cutting provider rates so drastically that doctors and hospitals are forced to close their doors—particularly in rural communities," the advocacy group Families USA warned in an analysis of the Republican budget measure. "Hospitals like Cary Medical Center and Northern Light AR Gould Hospital in Aroostook County, Northern Light Maine Coast Hospital in Hancock County, and Calais Community Hospital in Washington County will be at greater financial risk of closing due to Medicaid cuts in the bill."
"While more funding for rural healthcare is always welcome, political messaging about new funding cannot obscure the reality for states."
Nationwide, the impacts of the Medicaid cuts—which include new work requirements and other bureaucratic barriers—are expected to be devastating for years to come. A tracker maintained by Protect Our Care shows that more than 1,000 hospitals, clinics, wards, and nursing homes are "facing closure or cuts" following OBBBA's passage.
Maine Family Planning, the state's largest network of reproductive health clinics, was forced to end primary care services late last year due to the Republican budget law.
“Behind each pin is a story,” Anne Shoup, senior adviser to Protect Our Care, said Wednesday, referencing the markers on the group's hospital closure tracker. "Whether it’s an expectant mother losing access to prenatal care after the nearest rural hospital was forced to close its maternity ward, or seniors driving hours each way for care that used to be down the road, or people with disabilities facing gaps in caregiving that allow them to stay in their own homes, these pins represent our neighbors, our parents, and our kids. They deserve better than to have their healthcare gutted to write a check to the ultra-wealthy.”
The health policy organization KFF has said it is "highly unlikely that any state will receive more money from the rural health fund than it will lose" from Medicaid cuts and other federal policy changes, calling into question Collins' characterization of the RHTP money as transformative for Maine's rural healthcare system.
"RHTP is like lending someone a bucket to catch rain from a leaking roof," Mark Shaffer, an analyst at the Maine Center for Economic Policy, wrote last month. "It’s too small to hold what’s falling and is taken away before the roof ever gets fixed. The cruel irony is while hospitals scramble to manage the leak, millions of Americans have simply been pushed out of the system entirely and left to fend for themselves. And this was all done to support tax cuts for the wealthy."
A 30-second pro-Collins ad released earlier this year by One Nation—a GOP-aligned dark money group that has already dropped $20 million on ads supporting the Republican incumbent—described the $190 million in RHTP funds awarded to Maine for the first year of the program as quite literally lifesaving.
The problem, as the Maine Beacon pointed out, is that "no funds had actually been distributed at the time Collins’ ad aired in mid-March 2026."
"In fact, the Maine Department of Health and Human Services did not receive full approval for the program’s budget until the end of March, weeks after the ad began running," the Beacon observed. "State officials said during a Rural Health Fund Seminar on March 31 that they are still working to finalize contracts and hire staff, with funds not expected to be distributed until later in 2026."
In a March 27 statement, Collins took credit for preserving the $190 million in federal rural health funding for Maine, claiming it was "at risk" of being rescinded and reallocated by the Trump administration. (In early April, the office of Maine Gov. Janet Mills denied the funding was ever in jeopardy.)
Earlier this week, KFF Health News reported that Maine is one of several states that have been forced to make changes to their plans to spend the rural health funds as the Trump administration exerts "tight control" over the money. One restriction imposed by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services—headed by Mehmet Oz—bars states from spending more than 15% of allotted RHTP funds on payments to rural hospitals and other providers for patient care.
Collins' ads celebrating the program as an unequivocal victory for rural healthcare include no mention of the spending limitation—which is not in the language of the GOP budget law—or the Trump administration's vice-like grip on the funds.
"It has frankly been surprising to me as a longtime observer of legislative officials, that the GOP members of Congress who were the cheerleaders of the RHTP as a rural hospital fund have not raised any substantial complaints as the Trump administration created this severe funding limit that impacts struggling rural hospitals in their own districts," Adam Searing, an associate professor at Georgetown University's Center for Children and Families, wrote in March.
"While more funding for rural healthcare is always welcome," wrote Searing, "political messaging about new funding cannot obscure the reality for states."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular