

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.

Sarah McMillan, Conservation Director, WildEarth Guardians (406) 549-3895, smcmillan@wildearthguardians.org
Erik Molvar, Executive Director, Western Watersheds Project, (307) 399-7910, emolvar@westernwatersheds.org
In the very last moments of 2020, the Bureau of Land Management issued a proposed decision to award grazing privileges to Hammonds Ranches, Inc., despite the history of abuses of grazing privileges by these public land's ranchers--including actions leading to arson convictions. The BLM notified interested parties of the decision on New Year's Day, a federal holiday.
"Giving the permit to the Hammonds shows a flagrant disregard for the rule of law, both by the former permittees and by Secretary Bernhardt, and is clearly a political move rather than a responsible allocation of public lands," said Erik Molvar, Executive Director of Western Watersheds Project. "There is a documented history of permit violations, criminal convictions, and overgrazing of allotments as recently as 2019."
The proposed grazing decision was posted late in the day on December 31, 2020, and the online planning site states that the Hammonds Ranches, Inc. "will be apportioned preference due to their extensive historic use of these allotments, past proper use of rangeland resources, a high level of general need, and advantages conferred by topography." The Hammonds past "proper" use of the allotments has included arson, unauthorized livestock use, overgrazing, and alleged intimidation of federal employees. Just six years ago, the Bureau of Land Management refused to reissue the same permits because, "The Hammonds' malicious disregard for human life and public property shows contempt for BLM regulation of public lands."
"It's reminiscent of Secretary Ryan Zinke's decision to give the Hammonds permits on his very last day in office on January 2, 2019," said Sarah McMillan, Conservation Director for WildEarth Guardians. "That decision was unlawful and rightly overturned by the courts. With one foot out the door, the Trump Administration is trying, again, to allow these bad-actor permittees to run roughshod over public lands."
The groups plan to protest the proposed decision.
WildEarth Guardians protects and restores the wildlife, wild places, wild rivers, and health of the American West. Driven by passion, we've tackled some of the West's most difficult and pressing conservation challenges over the past three decades. We've celebrated small victories (banning leghold trapping in the state of Colorado), monumental triumphs (ending logging on more than 21 million acres in the Southwest), and everything in-between.
(206) 417-6363"If an economic policy will make life harder for American families, you can count on President Trump to try it," said one leading House Democrat.
A key federal inflation measure released Thursday shows that US prices jumped to a three-year high last month as President Donald Trump's illegal Iran war and tariffs continued to push up consumer costs at gas pumps and grocery stores across the country.
The personal consumption expenditures (PCE) index, closely watched by the Federal Reserve, rose at an annualized clip of 3.8% in April, the fastest pace since May 2023. Even when food and energy prices were stripped out of the measurement, the index rose 3.3% last month compared to a year ago—the highest level since November 2023.
"Today’s numbers tell the story: Families are paying more for gas, food, and housing and utilities," said Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). "Donald Trump promised to lower costs ‘on day one,' but instead inflation is running ahead of wages as his failed economic agenda hollows out Americans’ paychecks."
The US Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) also found that Americans' personal savings rate fell to its lowest level since June 2022, plummeting to 2.6% as higher prices force households to spend more on basic necessities.
"This is stunning," Heather Long, chief economist at Navy Federal Credit Union, wrote on social media, noting that the personal savings rate was 5.5% in April of last year. "That's a sharp plunge. It underscores how squeezed Americans are right now with higher prices and incomes not keeping up."
Consumer spending grew by $111.1 billion last month, according to BEA data, with "gasoline and other energy goods" making up the largest portion of the increase. Trump administration officials have attempted to spin rising consumer spending as evidence of broad optimism about the US economy, even with consumer sentiment at an all-time low.
"Prices remain stubbornly high because President Trump refuses to bring down the cost of living for working families," said Breyon Williams, chief economist at the Groundwork Collaborative. "Trump is making Americans pay more, first via his tariffs and now because of his war in Iran, causing prices at the pump to skyrocket. At the same time, he remains fixated on his lavish billion-dollar ballroom that the taxpayers will fund and a $1.8 billion slush fund for his supporters.”
"Unless you can cut a check for his ballroom, Donald Trump clearly couldn’t care less about you."
Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.), the ranking member of the House Budget Committee, similarly ripped Trump for focusing on securing private and taxpayer funding for his White House ballroom project as families struggle with unnecessarily high costs throughout the economy.
“If an economic policy will make life harder for American families, you can count on President Trump to try it," Boyle said in a statement following the PCE data. "His tariff taxes were bad enough, but now his disastrous Iran war has sent prices at the pump skyrocketing. By driving up fertilizer and transportation costs, Trump’s Iran war is also making Americans pay even more at the grocery store."
"Americans are struggling, but Trump and Republicans in Washington can’t be bothered to help," he added. "Unless you can cut a check for his ballroom, Donald Trump clearly couldn’t care less about you."
“This administration is rushing toward another disastrous war, putting countless American and foreign lives at risk," said Rep. Nydia Velázquez. "Congress must reassert its constitutional authority."
With US military forces prepared to launch an unprovoked attack on Cuba, a group of congressional Democrats on Wednesday introduced a new war powers resolution in a bid to block President Donald Trump from launching yet another illegal war of choice.
Reps. Nydia Velázquez and Gregory Meeks, both of New York, introduced the resolution, which would bar US forces from hostilities within or against Cuba without congressional authorization, as required under the 1973 War Powers Act. The measure is cosponsored by Reps. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts and Joaquin Castro of Texas.
“Donald Trump's belligerent foreign policy is creating new wars and conflicts across the world. As our country is already embroiled in a new war with Iran, the president has now set his sights on regime change in Cuba,” Velázquez said in a statement. “This administration is rushing toward another disastrous war, putting countless American and foreign lives at risk. Congress must reassert its constitutional authority if the president continues down this illegal path.”
Meeks, the ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said that “the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress are hellbent on starting another war, this time with Cuba, to distract from the president’s failure in Iran, weak economy, and mass deportation of 500,000 Cubans legally in the United States."
It is the second Cuba war powers resolution introduced by lawmakers since Trump began threatening to attack and "take" the island earlier this year. Last month, senators voted 51-47—with Democratic Sen. John Fetterman joining all but two of his Republican colleagues, Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Rand Paul of Kentucky—to block a war powers resolution introduced in March by Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), and Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.).
The new resolution's introduction follows months of escalating aggression against Cuba by the Trump administration, including preparation and threats to attack, an oil blockade that critics say is causing the deaths of infants and sick people, and last week's Department of Justice (DOJ) indictment of former President Raúl Castro for his alleged role in the 1996 shoot-down of planes operated by a hostile US-based counterrevolutionary group following repeated warnings that they had violated Cuban airspace.
On Wednesday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio—who has falsely claimed that his parents fled communism in Cuba when they actually emigrated during an earlier US-backed dictatorship—said that the island is "in a lot of trouble."
“Having a failed state 90 miles from our shores is a threat to the national security of the United States," Rubio added.
An article published Wednesday by Politico highlighted US military preparations for various war scenarios for Cuba, including bombing, an invasion, or a mission to enforce the DOJ indictmebnt by kidnapping Castro in a manner similar to January's illegal abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.
According to Politico's Paul McLeary:
The armada in the region is slightly smaller than it was in January when the US captured Maduro. But the USS Nimitz aircraft carrier strike group entered the Caribbean in May, along with several guided missile destroyers and cruisers that can launch precision missiles at targets onshore. An array of advanced American drones and surveillance aircraft have also circled Cuba for months, according to flight tracking sites. The USS Kearsarge amphibious ships and escorts, which carry 2,500 Marines, are off the coast of Virginia preparing for a new deployment, and could replace some ships heading home.
The surge provides a variety of military options, although the Pentagon would need additional troops for a massive ground invasion.
The Politico piece drew fierce rebuke from Havana.
"There are politicians in the United States pushing the drumbeat of war against Cuba, trying to fabricate excuses, trying to portray Cuba as a threat, and trying to push the US president to take military action, even with the understanding that military action would lead to bloodshed, mostly of Cubans, but also of Americans," Deputy Foreign Minister Carlos Fernández de Cossío told The Los Angeles Times.
"The question is: How does a government convince American citizens that it is in their interest to cause death, cause destruction and suffering to a neighboring nation simply to satisfy the ambitions of a small cabal of wealthy, influential people who enjoy the ear of politicians and powerful people in Washington?" Fernández added.
Cuba has been shoring up international support amid the growing threat of US attack. On Tuesday, Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez met with United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres, who said earlier this month that “there is no military solution to be sought for Cuba."
On Wednesday, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said during a meeting with Rodríguez at United Nations headquarters in New York that "China will continue to uphold justice and speak up for Cuba, support the Cuban people’s just cause, and contribute to Cuba’s economic development and people’s livelihood."
Also on Wednesday, the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) Council for Foreign and Community Relations issued a statement affirming "Cuba’s sovereign right to import and receive fuel" and condemning "the obstruction of energy supplies to Cuba, which has precipitated a grave humanitarian crisis."
"Cuba poses no threat to any nation... it stands as a peaceful and cooperative member of the international community... [and] the continued application of these unilateral coercive measures constitutes an unjustifiable violation of human rights, the principles of free trade, and the fundamental norms governing relations among sovereign states," the council stated.
If the US launches military action against Cuba, it will be the 11th country attacked during Trump’s two terms in office. The president—who has repeatedly said that he deserves a Nobel Peace Prize—has ordered attacks on Afghanistan, Ecuador, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Nigeria, Pakistan, Somalia, Syria, Venezuela, and Yemen, and has bombed dozens of boats accused without evidence of transporting drugs in international waters in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean.
Last week, tens of thousands of Cubans rallied in Havana to denounce the indictment of Castro and US aggression against their homeland, which dates back to the revolution that overthrew Fulgencio Batista, one in a series of dictators backed by the United States after it granted Cuba conditional independence after conquering the island along with Puerto Rico, the Philippines, and Guam during an 1898 war against Spain waged on a dubious pretext.
Since then, the United States has tried to assassinate former Cuban President Fidel Castro, backed the ill-fated Bay of Pigs invasion, served as a base for perpetrators of some of the hemisphere’s worst terror attacks, and even hatched a plan to detonate a nuclear bomb high above the island to convince its people that the return of Jesus Christ was nigh and the only thing standing in the way of the long-awaited “Second Coming” was Castro.
Cuba has endured this aggression and more without retaliating against the United States. Despite this, the Trump administration has responded by inflicting more and more pain upon people it claims it is trying to liberate from oppression.
“If Donald Trump and Marco Rubio are serious about a new relationship with the Cuban people," Meeks said Wednesday, "they would reverse 65 years of failed US policy toward Cuba, end the oil blockade and the humanitarian crisis it caused, and work with Congress to modify the draconian and outdated US sanctions that disproportionately harm the Cuban people.”
The lead author of the new report noted that predicted weather patterns could mean the record is shattered as soon as next year.
Global temperates are likely to hit their highest average level ever within the next four years, according to a report published Thursday by the United Nations' World Meteorological Organization.
Overall, WMO's report projects an 86% chance that the world will experience its warmest year ever between 2026 and 2030, with a 91% chance that "the global mean near-surface temperature will temporarily exceed 1.5°C above the 1850-1900 average levels for at least one year between 2026 and 2030."
Exceeding temperatures from the pre-industrial average by 1.5°C "risks unleashing ever more severe climate change impacts and extreme weather, and decreases adaptation option," the report notes.
Leon Hermanson, lead author of the report, said there's a good chance that 2027 will break all-time temperature records set in 2024 given that meteorologists are predicting an El Niño weather pattern to develop this summer and continue through the end of this year.
One particularly troubling finding in the report is that "Arctic temperatures over the next five extended northern hemisphere winters (November-March) are predicted to be 2.8°C above average temperatures for 1991-2020, an anomaly more than three and half times that of global mean temperature anomaly over the same period."
These higher Arctic temperatures mean likely further reductions in ice in the Barents Sea, Bering Sea, and Sea of Okhotsk, the report warns.
Simon Stiell, executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, said in a Thursday interview with The Guardian that Europe's current heatwave is a preview of what's to come the longer the global climate crisis goes unaddressed.
"Protecting human lives, businesses and economies from extreme heat and the many other soaring costs of climate change is core business for every nation," said Stiell, "and it starts with kicking the fossil fuel addiction much faster."