August, 24 2022, 08:55am EDT
Over 650 Groups Call on Congressional Leaders to Reject Manchin's Dirty Pipeline Deal
More than 650 climate, environmental justice, public health, youth, and progressive organizations sent a letter to Congressional leadership today to oppose the fossil fuel expansion deal proposed by West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin to Democratic leadership in exchange for his support of the Inflation Reduction Act.
WASHINGTON
More than 650 climate, environmental justice, public health, youth, and progressive organizations sent a letter to Congressional leadership today to oppose the fossil fuel expansion deal proposed by West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin to Democratic leadership in exchange for his support of the Inflation Reduction Act.
The letter was signed by a broad range of environmental and climate groups, including Oil Change International, the Center for Biological Diversity, Food & Water Watch, Indigenous Environmental Network, Michigan Environmental Justice Coalition, Oxfam America, the Sierra Club, the Sunrise Movement, and WE ACT for Environmental Justice, along with progressive political organizations Center for Popular Democracy, Indivisible, MoveOn, NAACP, Our Revolution, People's Action, and Public Citizen. The letter was also officially endorsed by the Climate Justice Alliance, Green New Deal Network, and the People vs Fossil Fuels Coalition steering committee.
According to a leaked draft, the proposed dirty infrastructure bill would fast-track fossil fuel projects like the Mountain Valley Pipeline, and undercut basic environmental protections.
"This fossil fuel wish list is a cruel and direct attack on environmental justice communities and the climate," the group's letter said. "This legislation would truncate and hollow-out the environmental review process, weaken Tribal consultations, and make it far harder for frontline communities to have their voices heard by gutting bedrock protections in the National Environmental Policy Act and Clean Water Act."
The proposal also requires the president to create a list of at least 25 projects deemed to be of "strategic national importance"; at least five of the priority items "shall be projects to produce, process, transport, or store fossil fuel products, or biofuels, including projects to export or import those products." The United States must reject new fossil fuel projects to meet President Biden's emissions reduction goals and comply with what science says is necessary to keep warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius.
The Mountain Valley Pipeline alone would lead to annual emissions equivalent to over 89 million metric tons of carbon dioxide, according to analysis by Oil Change International. This is equal to the emissions from 26 coal plants or 19 million passenger vehicles per year.
"Prolonging the fossil fuel era perpetuates environmental racism, is wildly out of step with climate science, and hamstrings our nation's ability to avert a climate disaster," the letter highlights. "Supporting this legislation would represent a profound betrayal of frontline communities and constituents across the country who have called on you to prevent the multitude of harms of fossil fuels and advance a just, renewable energy future."
Reports indicate that Congressional leadership plan to introduce the legislation in September with the hope of a final vote before the end of the month. But some Democratic leaders, including House Natural Resources Committee Chair Rep. Raul Grijalva, have spoken out against the deal and called for it not to be included in the federal spending resolution, which also must pass before the end of September.
Full Text of Letter: https://priceofoil.org/dirty-side-deal-letter
Quotes
"Appalachia is home to many people, but more specifically, the home of my ancestors of the Occaneechee, Monacan and Saponi and many other Indigenous peoples. This is a dirty deal made at the expense of us," said Dr. Crystal Cavalier of 7 Directions of Service. "It is an erasure of my people and ancestors again, with no regard for the water, nature and people. We refuse to be a sacrifice."
"Here in Appalachia, on the frontline of the Mountain Valley Pipeline, we refuse to be sacrificed for Senator Manchin's political gain and to prop up the dying fossil fuel industry," said Russell Chisholm, Mountain Valley Watch Coordinator. "We stand in solidarity with all frontlines to say 'no' to this dirty deal that puts our communities in more danger."
"The so-called 'permitting reform' deal is nothing but a deadly fossil fuel industry wishlist," said Collin Rees, United States Program Manager at Oil Change International. "The Mountain Valley Pipeline is a fracked gas disaster that won't be built, and we won't allow Joe Manchin and Chuck Schumer to attack environmental justice communities by removing some of their only tools to oppose destructive projects. Congress must kill this dangerous bill immediately and empower frontline communities to confront the climate crisis."
"In Michigan, no matter our race or zip code, we all want clean and healthy neighborhoods where our families can thrive. But Senators Manchin and Schumer, and the American Petroleum Institute are threatening our rights to clean air and clean water with their 'side-deal,'" said Juan Jhong-Chung, Climate Justice Director at Michigan Environmental Justice Coalition. "This bill would fast track toxic projects in Black, Brown, Indigenous and poor communities. We should not be forced to host more oil pipelines or dirty infrastructure for false solutions like carbon capture, hydrogen, and nuclear power. We demand that our elected officials stop sacrificing our people for the financial gain of polluters."
"I have more than five years of experience in the solar industry and I am passionate about helping people reduce their reliance on fossil fuels. People's lives will change as our world embraces renewables. That is my dream. I am grateful I discovered a passion and purpose in life so our future children may live in a clean and green world," said Serina Morena, a member of the Green Workers Alliance. "Taking away environmental reviews of pipelines and other fossil fuels projects is a terrible idea. Instead we need more renewable energy and the jobs they create."
"It's atrocious that Congress is even considering dismantling bedrock environmental protections just to please one senator," said Brett Hartl, government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity. "Democrats must expose this measure for what it is -- a total giveaway to the fossil fuel industry. This backroom deal would sacrifice frontline communities, ensure decades' more toxic extraction and turn up the fossil-fueled broiler that's heating the whole planet. This poisonous plan must be stopped."
"The proposal from Senator Manchin is nothing more than a wish list from Big Oil, whose only goal is more profit at the expense of people and the planet," said Thomas Meyer, national organizing manager at Food & Water Watch. "Members of Congress who fought for clean energy incentives in the Inflation Reduction Act must now speak up strongly and swiftly against this massive rollback of public health and environmental protections that will fast track fossil fuel projects."
"This dirty side deal is nothing short of a wholesale giveaway to the fossil fuel industry to the detriment of frontline communities, Tribal nations, and Mother Earth," said Joye Braun, National Pipelines Organizer of the Indigenous Environmental Network. "The world is on fire and negotiating the amount of fuel for those flames is not acceptable. Congress needs to understand that there is no compromise when it comes to protecting the next seven generations of life and beyond."
Oil Change International is a research, communications, and advocacy organization focused on exposing the true costs of fossil fuels and facilitating the ongoing transition to clean energy.
(202) 518-9029LATEST NEWS
'This Needs to Stop': UN Envoy Condemns Israeli Military's Advance on Syria
"What we are seeing is a violation of the disengagement agreement from 1974," said Geir Pedersen, the United Nations' special envoy to Syria.
Dec 10, 2024
The United Nations' special envoy to Syria said Tuesday that the Israeli military's rapid move to seize Syrian territory following the Assad government's collapse is a grave violation of a decades-old agreement that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claims is now dead.
"What we are seeing is a violation of the disengagement agreement from 1974, so we will obviously, with our colleagues in New York, follow this extremely closely in the hours and days ahead," Geir Pedersen said at a media briefing in Geneva.
Hours earlier, Pedersen told Zeteo's Mehdi Hasan that "this needs to stop," referring to Israel's further encroachment on the occupied and illegally annexed Golan Heights.
"This is a very serious issue," Pedersen said, rejecting Netanyahu's assertion that the 1974 agreement is null. "Let's not start playing with an extremely important part of the peace structure that has been in place."
"The message to Israel is that this needs to stop, What we are seeing in the Golan is a violation of the 1974 agreement. This is a very serious issue."
The UN's Syria Special Envoy tells me on 'Mehdi Unfiltered' that Israel's unlawful actions in Syria need to stop. pic.twitter.com/G7jSWJ8oP0
— Mehdi Hasan (@mehdirhasan) December 9, 2024
Netanyahu, who took the stand for the first time Tuesday in his long-running corruption trial, made clear in the wake of Assad's fall that he views developments in Syria as advantageous for Israel, writing on social media that "the collapse of the Syrian regime is a direct result of the severe blows with which we have struck Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran."
The prime minister also thanked U.S. President-elect Donald Trump for "acceding to my request to recognize Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights, in 2019," adding that the occupied territory "will be an inseparable part of the state of Israel forever."
The Washington Postreported late Monday that "within hours of rebels taking control of Syria's capital, Israel moved to seize military posts in that country’s south, sending its troops across the border for the first time since the official end of the Yom Kippur War in 1974."
"Israeli officials defended the move as limited in scope, aimed at preventing rebels or other local militias from using abandoned Syrian military equipment to target Israel or the Golan Heights, an area occupied by Israel after the 1967 Arab-Israeli war," the Post added. "On Monday, more troops could be seen outside this Druze village adjacent to the border, preparing to cross."
The United States, Israel's main ally and arms supplier, also defended the Israeli military's actions, with a State Department spokesman telling reporters Monday that "every country, I think, would be worried about a possible vacuum that could be filled by terrorist organizations on its border, especially in volatile times, as we obviously are in right now in Syria."
Watch StateSpox justify Israel’s invasion of Syria based on hypotheticals.@shauntandon: Israel has gone across the Golan Heights, the UN said it’s a violation, does the US agree
Miller: Every country would be worried about a possible vacuum that could be filled by terrorist… pic.twitter.com/AA7lNhfSt1
— Assal Rad (@AssalRad) December 9, 2024
On Tuesday, Israel denied reports that its tanks reached a point roughly 16 miles from the Syrian capital as it continued to bomb Syrian army bases.
"Regional security sources and officers within the now fallen Syrian army described Tuesday morning's airstrikes as the heaviest yet, hitting military installations and airbases across Syria, destroying dozens of helicopters and jets, as well as Republican Guard assets in and around Damascus," Reutersreported. The U.S. also bombed dozens of targets in Syria in the aftermath of Assad's fall.
The governments of Iraq, Qatar, Iran, and Saudi Arabia have each denounced the Israeli military's seizure of Syrian land, with Qatar's foreign ministry slamming the move as "a dangerous development and a blatant attack on Syria's sovereignty and unity as well as a flagrant violation of international law."
"The policy of imposing a fait accompli pursued by the Israeli occupation, including its attempts to occupy Syrian territories, will lead the region to further violence and tension," the foreign ministry warned.
Keep ReadingShow Less
New Jersey Governor Signs Freedom to Read Act Barring Book Bans
The law, said the Democrat, "cements New Jersey's role on the forefront of preventing book bans and protecting the intellectual freedom of our educators and students."
Dec 09, 2024
Democratic New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy on Monday signed legislation protecting librarians and prohibiting public schools and libraries from banning books—a move that came as Republican state lawmakers are proscribing a record number of titles, many of them works addressing sexual orientation, gender identity, and racial injustice.
Flanked by educators, librarians, and other advocates, Murphy signed
A.3446/S.2421—known as the Freedom to Read Act—in the Princeton Public Library.
"The Freedom to Read Act cements New Jersey's role on the forefront of preventing book bans and protecting the intellectual freedom of our educators and students," said Murphy. "Across the nation, we have seen attempts to suppress and censor the stories and experiences of others. I'm proud to amplify the voices of our past and present, as there is no better way for our children to prepare for the future than to read freely."
According to a statement from Murphy's office:
Under the law, boards of education and governing boards of public libraries are barred from excluding books because of the origin, background, or views of the material or of its authors. Further, boards of education and governing boards of public libraries are prevented from censoring library material based on a disagreement with a viewpoint, idea, or concept, or solely because an individual finds certain content offensive, unless they are restricting access to developmentally inappropriate material for certain age groups.
The legislation "also provides protections for library staff members against civil and criminal lawsuits related to complying with this law."
New Jersey Association of School Librarians President Karen Grant said that "the Freedom to Read Act recognizes the professionalism, honor, work ethics, and performance of school and public library staff" and "promotes libraries as trusted sources of information and recognizes the many roles that libraries play in students' lives."
"The bill will protect the intellectual freedom of students as well as acknowledge that school libraries are centers for voluntary inquiry, fostering students' growth and development," Grant added. "Additionally, we are grateful for the broad coalition of support from so many organizations for this legislation."
The leader of one of those groups—Garden State Equality executive director Christian Fuscarino—said, "Gov. Murphy just made it clear: In New Jersey, censorship loses, and freedom wins."
"At a time when access to diverse and inclusive materials is under attack across the nation, this legislation sends a powerful message that New Jersey will stand firm in protecting intellectual freedom and fostering a culture of understanding and inclusion," Fuscarino added.
The New Jersey law comes amid a near-tripling in the number of books banned or challenged by Republican state lawmakers and right-wing organizations over the past year, with PEN America counting over 10,000 such titles during the 2023-24 academic year—up from 3,362 titles during the previous scholastic year.
With Murphy's signature, New Jersey joins Minnesota and Illinois in passing state legislation to counter GOP book-banning efforts.
As the Chicago Tribunereported Sunday, "a number of school districts, many of them in deeply conservative areas of south and central Illinois," are giving up state grants rather than adopting principles against book-banning."Keep ReadingShow Less
'Completely Un-American': Progressives Slam Trump Plan to End Birthright Citizenship
"Emboldened by a Supreme Court that would use its power to uphold white supremacy rather than the constitution of our nation, Trump is on a mission to weaken the very soul of our nation," said Rep. Delia Ramirez.
Dec 09, 2024
Progressives in Congress and other migrant rights advocates sharply criticized U.S. President-elect Donald Trump for his comments on immigration during a Sunday interview, including on his hopes to end birthright citizenship.
During a 76-minute interview with NBC News' Kristen Welker, Trump said he "absolutely" intends to end birthright citizenship, potentially through executive order, despite the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Among many lies the Republican told, he also falsely claimed that the United States is the only country to offer citizenship by birth; in fact, there are dozens.
In response,
outgoing Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) said on social media Monday: "This is completely un-American. The 14th Amendment guarantees birthright citizenship. Trump cannot unilaterally end it, and any attempt to do so would be both unconstitutional and immoral."
Congresswoman Gwen Moore (D-Wis.) similarly stressed that "birthright citizenship is enshrined in the Constitution as a cornerstone of American ideals. It reflects our belief that America is the land of opportunity. Sadly, this is just another in the long line of Trump's assault on the U.S. Constitution."
Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.), the daughter of Guatemalan immigrants, said in a statement: "'Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.' It is important to remember who we are, where many of us came from, and why many of our families traveled here to be greeted by the Mother of Exiles, the Statue of Liberty."
Ramirez argued that "the story of our nation wouldn't be complete without the sweat, tears, joy, dreams, and hopes of so many children of immigrants who are citizens by birthright and pride themselves on being AMERICANS. It is the story of so many IL-03 communities, strengthened by the immigration of people from Poland, Ukraine, Italy, Mexico, and Guatemala, among others. It is the story of many members of Congress who can point to the citizenship of their forebears and ancestors because of immigration and birthright."
"Let's be clear: Trump is posing the question of who gets to be an American to our nation. And given that today's migrants are from Africa, Asia, the Caribbean, and Latin and Central America, it is clear he is questioning who are the 'right' people to benefit from birthright citizenship," she continued. "Questioning birthright citizenship is anti-American, and eliminating it through executive action is unconstitutional. Donald Trump knows that."
"But emboldened by a Supreme Court that would use its power to uphold white supremacy rather than the Constitution of our nation, Trump is on a mission to weaken the very soul of our nation," she warned. "I—like many sons and daughters of immigrants and first-generation Americans—believe in and fight for a land of freedom, opportunities, and equality. To live into that promise, we must stand against white nationalism—especially when it is espoused at the highest levels of government."
Although Republicans are set to control both the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives next year, amending the Constitution requires support from two-thirds of both chambers of Congress and three-fourths of the state legislatures, meaning that process is unlikely to be attempted for this policy.
Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.) highlighted the difficulties of passing constitutional amendments while discussing Trump in a Monday appearance on CNN. The incoming chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus was born in the Dominican Republic and is the first formerly undocumented immigrant elected to Congress.
As Mother Jones reporter Isabela Dias detailed Monday:
Critics of ending birthright citizenship for the U.S.-born children of undocumented immigrants argue it would not only constitute bad policy, but also a betrayal of American values and, as one scholar put it to me, a "prelude" to mass deportation.
"It's really 100 years of accepted interpretation," Hiroshi Motomura, a scholar of immigration and citizenship at UCLA's law school, told me of birthright citizenship. Ending birthright citizenship would cut at the core of the hard-fought assurance of equal treatment under the law, he said, "basically drawing a line between two kinds of American citizens."
Trump's NBC interview also addressed his long-promised mass deportations. The president-elect—whose first administration was globally condemned for separating migrant families at the southern border and second administration is already filling up with hard-liners—suggested Sunday that he would deport children who are U.S. citizens with undocumented parents.
"I don't want to be breaking up families, so the only way you don't break up the family is you keep them together and you have to send them all back," Trump told Welker.
Responding in a Monday statement, America's Voice executive director Vanessa Cárdenas said, "There's a growing consensus that the Trump mass deportation agenda will hit American consumers and industries hard, but the scope of what Trump and his team are proposing goes well beyond the economic impact."
"Trump and allies are making clear their mass deportation agenda will include deporting U.S. citizens, including children, while aiming to gut a century and a half of legal and moral precedent on birthright citizenship," she added. "In total, their attacks go well beyond the narrow lens of immigration to the fundamental question of who gets to be an American."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular