Support Common Dreams Today
Journalism that is independent, non-profit, ad-free, and 100% reader-supported.
#
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Tom Pelton, Environmental Integrity Project , (443) 510-2574
Nydia Gutierrez, Earthjustice, ngutierrez@earthjustice.org, (202) 302-7531
In a victory for clean water, EPA announced yesterday that it will update water pollution control standards for the slaughterhouse industry following a December 2019 lawsuit from community and conservation organizations.
"It's a great first step that EPA has decided to finally modernize the standards for meat and poultry plants across the country, which had not been updated since at least 2004," said Sylvia Lam, Attorney for the Environmental Integrity Project. "We now expect EPA to let us know when they plan to propose updated standards to protect our waterways and communities, since the current limits are allowing an excessive amount of pollution."
Earthjustice attorney Alexis Andiman added: "Slaughterhouses are leading sources of nitrogen and phosphorus pollution, and their pollution disproportionately harms under-resourced communities, low-income communities, and communities of color. We applaud EPA for recognizing that it's time to update the outdated standards governing pollution from slaughterhouses. Together with our partners, we look forward to working with EPA to ensure that the new standards adequately protect people and the environment."
"We are glad that the EPA will finally strengthen its outdated, unprotective water pollution standards for the slaughterhouse industry. These facilities are a major source of pollution in communities across the country," said Food & Water Watch Legal Director Tarah Heinzen. "But our work is far from over - we will participate in EPA's rulemaking and are prepared to hold the agency accountable if its new standards again fall short of protecting communities directly impacted by water pollution."
In a press release issued late Wednesday afternoon, EPA announced that it will initiate a rulemaking process to reduce pollution from three industries: Meat and poultry processing plants, which include slaughterhouses; metal finishing businesses; and manufacturers of organic chemicals that discharge polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).
Along with its announcement, EPA reported that 74 percent of slaughterhouses that discharge pollution directly into rivers and streams are within one mile of under-resourced communities, low-income communities, or communities of color.
"This finding makes it even more imperative for EPA to issue standards that protect the public as soon as possible," said Lam.
In December 2019, the Environmental Integrity Project and Earthjustice filed a federal lawsuit against EPA on behalf of Cape Fear River Watch, Rural Empowerment Association for Community Help, Waterkeepers Chesapeake, Animal Legal Defense Fund, Center for Biological Diversity, Environment America, Food & Water Watch, The Humane Society of the United States, and Waterkeeper Alliance. The lawsuit challenged EPA's prior refusal to modernize pollution standards for slaughterhouses, in light of evidence demonstrating that revision is necessary.
More than 8 billion chickens, 100 million pigs, and 30 million cattle are processed each year in more than 7,000 slaughterhouses across the country. An estimated 4,700 of these slaughterhouses discharge polluted water to waterways, including the iconic Chesapeake Bay, either directly or indirectly through municipal sewage treatment plants.
The federal Clean Water Act requires EPA to set industry-wide water pollution standards for slaughterhouses and other industries and to review those standards each year to decide whether updates are appropriate to keep pace with advances in pollution-control technology.
During the Trump Administration, EPA announced that it would not revise the federal water pollution standards for slaughterhouses that discharge pollution directly into waterways, and it would not create standards for slaughterhouses that send their pollution to sewage plants before discharging into rivers or streams. This is despite the fact that EPA identified slaughterhouses as the largest industrial source of nitrogen water pollution without updated standards.
An October 2018 report from the Environmental Integrity Project and Earthjustice, "Water Pollution from Slaughterhouses," reviewed the records of 98 meat and poultry processing plants across the U.S. and found that the median facility released an average of 331 pounds of total nitrogen per day into local rivers and streams, about as much as the amount contained in in raw sewage from a town of 14,000 people.
Many slaughterhouses released far more, with the JBS USA pork processing plant in Beardstown, Illinois, for example, releasing 1,849 pounds of nitrogen a day in 2017 to an Illinois River tributary--equivalent to the load in raw sewage from a city of 79,000 people. This showed that the national standards were no longer driving the industry to reduce its water pollution, as intended by the Clean Water Act.
In its September 8 announcement, EPA also identified slaughterhouses as the largest industrial source of phosphorus water pollution in the nation. Moreover, EPA expressed a need to develop pretreatment standards for slaughterhouses--finding that 73 percent of local sewage plants that receive wastewater from slaughterhouses have violated pollution limits in their Clean Water Act permits for pollutants found in slaughterhouse effluent.
Food & Water Watch mobilizes regular people to build political power to move bold and uncompromised solutions to the most pressing food, water, and climate problems of our time. We work to protect people's health, communities, and democracy from the growing destructive power of the most powerful economic interests.
(202) 683-2500"Never before has a single private institution concentrated so much power and control over so many corners of our nation's political economy," said one anti-monopoly expert.
Anti-monopoly advocates on Tuesday praised the Biden administration and eight states for launching a federal antitrust lawsuit that could break up Google, which is accused of illegally dominating the digital advertising market.
"Competition in the ad tech space is broken, for reasons that were neither accidental nor inevitable," states the complaint filed by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), California, Colorado, Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Tennessee, and Virginia in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.
"We're thrilled to see the Department of Justice finally demand a breakup of Google's advertising monopoly."
"One industry behemoth, Google, has corrupted legitimate competition in the ad tech industry by engaging in a systematic campaign to seize control of the wide swath of high-tech tools used by publishers, advertisers, and brokers, to facilitate digital advertising," the complaint continues.
"Having inserted itself into all aspects of the digital advertising marketplace, Google has used anti-competitive, exclusionary, and unlawful means to eliminate or severely diminish any threat to its dominance over digital advertising technologies," the document adds, urging the court to force the Alphabet-owned company to sell off its ad tech products.
Echoing the complaint, Demand Progress executive director David Segal pointed out that "Google's monopoly in the advertising technology market functionally forces publishers and advertisers to use its services."
"We're glad to see the Department of Justice demand a breakup of this tech giant, directly taking on its unfair, anti-competitive practices," he said. "This move is critical to protect our democracy, increase innovation, and strengthen small businesses."
\u201c\ud83d\udea8NEW: @JusticeATR is holding @Google accountable for illegally monopolizing the market for online ads. \n\nWe applaud the DOJ for pushing a pro-competition agenda that actually enforces laws on the books and protects the general public from Big Tech.\nhttps://t.co/2syPzCm3wp\u201d— The Tech Oversight Project (@The Tech Oversight Project) 1674585403
American Economic Liberties Project director of research Matt Stoller also welcomed the suit, declaring that "we're thrilled to see the Department of Justice finally demand a breakup of Google's advertising monopoly."
"As the Justice Department's suit meticulously documents, Google is a buyer, broker, and digital advertising exchange with pervasive conflicts of interest," Stoller said. "Google regularly abuses this power, manipulating markets, muscling out any form of competition, and inspiring fear across the commercial landscape."
"The DOJ's suit, which comes alongside a similar suit from a coalition of state attorneys general and efforts in Congress to bring fairness to digital ad markets, shows clearly that Google's days of unbridled dominance are numbered," he asserted.
Bloombergnoted Tuesday that "state attorneys general have filed three separate suits against Google, alleging it dominates the markets for online search, advertising technology, and apps on the Android mobile platform in violation of antitrust laws."
This is the DOJ's first case against the tech giant under President Joe Biden but follows another filed just months before he took office. In response to the new filing, a Google spokesperson said that "today's lawsuit from the DOJ attempts to pick winners and losers in the highly competitive advertising technology sector. It largely duplicates an unfounded lawsuit by the Texas attorney general, much of which was recently dismissed by a federal court. DOJ is doubling down on a flawed argument that would slow innovation, raise advertising fees, and make it harder for thousands of small businesses and publishers to grow."
\u201cJUST IN: AG Merrick Garland announced the Justice Department, along with 8 states, filed a civil antitrust lawsuit against Google. \n\n\u2018Google has used anticompetitive, exclusionary, & unlawful conduct to eliminate or severely diminish any threat to its [digital ad] dominance.'\u201d— NowThis (@NowThis) 1674587389
Meanwhile, Open Markets Institute executive director Barry Lynn argued that "today's lawsuit by the Department of Justice against Google for the monopolization of advertising will be remembered as one of the most important antitrust cases in American history. No previous corporation has ever posed such a direct threat to U.S. democracy, or to individual freedom of expression, action, and thought."
Along with heaping praise on the DOJ's Antitrust Division, Lynn highlighted the impacts of Google's dominance:
The breadth and scope of Google's threat to the American way of life is astounding. Never before has a single private institution concentrated so much power and control over so many corners of our nation's political economy. But the most dangerous threat of all is Google's theft of advertising dollars through large-scale and pervasive surveillance that, since before the Revolution, have ensured the independence and economic health of America's free press. The cost has been enormous. Tens of thousands of journalism jobs destroyed. Thousands of newspapers and other news outlets bankrupted. Every publisher, no matter how big, made fearful of speaking out.
Stacy Mitchell, co-director of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, stressed that "by picking the pocket of small businesses, small newspapers, and other publishers, Google actively extracts resources from communities that need them most and threatens a free, local press that lies at the heart of our democracy,"
"After decades in which enforcers looked the other way as the tech giants amassed market power, this lawsuit is yet another sign that our antitrust enforcers are again embracing their responsibility to safeguard American liberty and democracy by breaking up monopolies like Google," she said. "We applaud the Justice Department's action today."
U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, who joined other DOJ leaders for a Tuesday press conference about the case, pledged that "no matter the industry and no matter the company, the Justice Department will vigorously enforce our antitrust laws to protect consumers, safeguard competition, and ensure economic fairness and opportunity for all."
"Ongoing climate change is keeping many people in the Global South in poverty, making it more difficult for them to migrate," said the co-author of a new study. "Thus climate change deprives people of an important way to adapt to its impacts and increases the gap between rich and poor."
As the worsening climate emergency creates an increasing number of migrants around the world, the economic effects of the planetary crisis are paradoxically making millions of people throughout the Global South too poor to escape its ravages.
That's according to a study published recently in the journal Environmental Research Letters by researchers from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) in Germany.
"Climate change reduces economic growth in almost all countries of the world. But it has very divergent effects in poorer and richer countries," study co-author Jacob Schewe said Monday. "Overall, migration related to climate change has increased—but it has done so to a lesser extent than might have been expected. The reason is bitter: In poor countries, many people in need are lacking the means to migrate. They have no choice but to stay where they are."
\u201cStuck \u2013 #climatechange makes people too poor to #migrate. "Overall, migration related to climate change has increased - but it has done so to a lesser extent than expected. People in need are lacking the means to migrate," says PIKs Jacob Schewe.\n\ud83d\udc49https://t.co/cfAPjh4NUF\u201d— Potsdam Institute (@Potsdam Institute) 1674481326
Co-author Christian Otto noted that "economic growth affects national income levels, which in turn affect migration. Relatively few people migrate from high-income and from very low-income countries. In the case of poor countries, this is partly because many people simply cannot afford to leave. So very poor people often stay in their home country, even if they are in need or would like to migrate for other reasons."
Another study co-author, Anders Levermann, said that "ongoing climate change is keeping many people in the Global South in poverty, making it more difficult for them to migrate. Thus climate change deprives people of an important way to adapt to its impacts and increases the gap between rich and poor."
According to a 2017 study published by the British medical journal The Lancet, climate change could create a billion refugees by 2050. Other studies conclude the number could be even higher. Additionally, the World Bank says the planetary emergency could displace more than 200 million people within their home countries by mid-century.
"Thulani Maseko was a key pillar in the struggle for freedom in Eswatini. His death, which has already sent a chilling message to pro-democracy activists across the country, may signify an escalation in attacks against those who are openly seeking political reforms."
Human rights advocates on Monday implored Eswatini authorities to launch a swift, rigorous, and independent investigation into the recent killing of renowned pro-democracy lawyer Thulani Maseko.
Unknown gunmen murdered Maseko at his home in the city of Luhleko on Saturday, just hours after Eswatini's unelected leader, King Mswati III, "warned those calling for democracy that more trouble was coming for them," according to a local newspaper. Since protests against Eswatini's absolute monarchy erupted in May 2021, dozens of people peacefully struggling for political reforms in the country formerly known as Swaziland have been killed by Mswati's security forces.
Numerous human rights experts have condemned Maseko's apparent assassination and demanded accountability.
"Thulani Maseko was a stalwart of human rights who, at great risk to himself, spoke up for many who couldn't speak up for themselves," United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk said in a statement. "His cold-blooded killing has deprived Eswatini, Southern Africa, and the world of a true champion and advocate for peace, democracy, and human rights."
"Thulani Maseko was a stalwart of human rights who, at great risk to himself, spoke up for many who couldn't speak up for themselves."
After extending his condolences to Maseko's family, friends, and colleagues, Türk called on Eswatini officials to "ensure a prompt, independent, impartial, and effective investigation is held into his killing, in accordance with Eswatini's constitution and international human rights law, and to hold all those responsible to account in fair trials."
"Eswatini authorities must also ensure the safety and security of all Eswatini people, including human rights defenders, journalists, and political activists," the U.N. rights chief added.
Flavia Mwangovya, Amnesty International's deputy director for East and Southern Africa, echoed Türk.
A probe "should be carried out by authorities independent of the government and any institution, agency, or person who may be the subject of, or otherwise involved in, the investigation." The final results should be "made public, and aimed at ensuring that justice for Maseko's killing is not denied," said Mwangovya. "Maseko's family deserves justice; his killers must be brought to trial."
“The cold-blooded unlawful killing of Thulani Maseko offers a chilling reminder that human rights defenders, especially those at the forefront of calling for political reform in Eswatini, are not safe," she added. "If they are not being persecuted, harassed, or intimidated by the state, they are at risk of losing their lives."
\u201cThulani Maseko was a courageous human rights defender who stood up against the state's abuse of power in Eswatini. His murder is a chilling reminder that those who call for political reform in Eswatini are not safe. His killers must be brought to trial. https://t.co/5bMCHMBOSl\u201d— Amnesty International (@Amnesty International) 1674489187
Lamenting his "tragic" murder, Amnesty International Secretary-General Agnes Callamard noted that Maseko was instrumental to the "ongoing struggle for democracy in Eswatini and a wonderful steadfast partner" of the prominent rights group. "We are all devastated," she wrote on social media.
Maseko had previously been prosecuted by the state for his efforts to build a more just society. In 2014, Amnesty declared Maseko and veteran news editor Bhekithemba Makhubu "prisoners of conscience" after they were sentenced to two years behind bars on contempt of court charges stemming from the publication of articles in which they questioned the independence and integrity of the country's judicial system. Both men were acquitted on appeal and released from detention in 2015.
Following the arrest of hundreds of pro-democracy protesters in the summer of 2021, Maseko "provided legal support, crisscrossing the country to observe summary trials," Callamard pointed out.
At the time of his death, Maseko chaired the Multi-Stakeholder Forum, a coalition of trade unions, political parties, and civil society groups organizing for democratic reforms to which Mswati's autocratic regime is opposed. Eswatini's king, in power since 1986 and routinely accused of human rights violations, commands the army and police and has the authority to dissolve parliament and appoint or dismiss judges.
As Amnesty noted: "The unlawful killing of Maseko follows a spate of attacks on opposition leaders and pro-democracy activists, all of whom have been challenging the monarch and demanding political reform in the country since May 2021, including through nationwide protests. In response to the demonstrations, the government launched a brutal crackdown on human rights activism. Some politicians have been jailed merely for being suspected of joining calls for political reform."
Maseko was an attorney for two members of parliament standing trial for offenses allegedly committed during the pro-democracy uprising of 2021.
"Maseko's family deserves justice; his killers must be brought to trial."
Amnesty "will leave no stone unturned until justice has been rendered for Thulani's murder," Callamard vowed. "Those who killed and ordered his killing must be held to account."
Maseko's attackers shot through the window of his home at close range. He was reportedly struck twice and died in front of his family. According to a local newspaper, the same pair of police officers who responded to the crime scene after Maseko was killed had earlier staked out his house.
As Al Jazeerareported, "The government sent condolences to the family, saying Maseko's death was a 'loss for the nation' and that police were searching for the killers."
Southern Africa-based rights group Freedom Under Law, however, said that "no one can be misled by the cynical message of condolence put out on behalf of the government."
Maseko's death came hours after Mswati threatened pro-democracy activists with heightened repression.
"People should not shed tears and complain about mercenaries killing them," Mswati said Saturday. "These people started the violence first but when the state institutes a crackdown on them for their actions, they make a lot of noise blaming King Mswati for bringing in mercenaries."
Last week, Al Jazeera reported, the Swaziland Solidarity Network alleged that "the king had hired mercenaries, mainly white Afrikaners from neighboring South Africa, to help Eswatini's security forces suppress rising opposition to his regime."
The government has denied the accusation.
"Thulani Maseko was a key pillar in the struggle for freedom in Eswatini," said Amnesty's Mwangovya. "His death, which has already sent a chilling message to pro-democracy activists across the country, may signify an escalation in attacks against those who are openly seeking political reforms."
"The Southern Africa Development Community and the Eswatini authorities must demonstrate that they are committed to protecting everybody in the country, including human rights defenders, opposition leaders, and pro-democracy activists," she stressed. "Nobody should be attacked or threatened simply for being critical and pushing for political reforms."