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.
Greta Anderson, Western Watersheds Project, (520) 623-1878, greta@westernwatersheds.org
Michael Robinson, Center for Biological Diversity, (575) 313-7017, michaelr@biologicaldiversity.org
Mary Katherine Ray, Rio Grande Chapter Sierra Club, (575) 537-1095, mkrscrim@gmail.com
Chris Smith, WildEarth Guardians, (505) 395-6177, csmith@wildearthguardians.org
Wildlife Services, a program of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, has released a new set of standards it will use to determine the cause of livestock deaths in Arizona and New Mexico. Conservation groups have sought such changes to ensure Mexican gray wolves aren’t unfairly blamed for livestock deaths.
The new standards require evidence, such as subcutaneous hemorrhaging, that the livestock animal was alive during the wolf encounter, and additional indicators of wolf involvement.
“Our goal has been to make sure that Mexican gray wolves aren’t being unfairly blamed for livestock depredation,” said Greta Anderson, deputy director of Western Watersheds Project. “The over-reported incidence of wolf involvement in cattle deaths in the Southwest has had negative impacts on the wolf recovery program, including the killing and capture of wild wolves. We’re hoping the new standards help prevent that from happening again.”
Today’s action follows an exposé of Wildlife Services’ unscientific and unsupportable reports, in which a former state director of the agency called out what he saw as corruption in the livestock deaths reporting program. A Western Watersheds Project review of five years of predation reports highlighted poor data collection, illogical conclusions, and an unjustifiably high rate of blaming wolves for the deaths of livestock on public lands.
“It’s appalling that the U.S. Department of Agriculture blames endangered Mexican gray wolves for killing cows that died of something completely different,” said Michael Robinson, a senior conservation advocate at the Center for Biological Diversity. “I’m glad they’re tightening standards for determining the causes of cattle mortality, but the government should go further and require that ranchers properly dispose of dead cattle to protect both wolves and livestock.”
“We’re happy to see these standards tighten, of course,” said Chris Smith, southwest wildlife advocate for WildEarth Guardians. “But extremely endangered species were wrongly killed before this improvement. And history suggests corruption and a deep-seeded antagonism to wolves within the U.S. Department of Agriculture.”
“Our small but beautiful wolf subspecies, the Mexican wolf, bears the burden of so much undeserved hatred,” said Mary Katherine Ray, wildlife chair for the Rio Grande Chapter of the Sierra Club. “Wildlife Services has a responsibility to not only accurately determine the cause of livestock death but also to help dispel the myths surrounding wolves and promote strategies that avoid conflicts.”
The new standards for the Southwest are the same standards that Wildlife Services and other state agencies, including Montana, Wisconsin, Oregon and Idaho, use to confirm gray wolf involvement in livestock deaths.
At the Center for Biological Diversity, we believe that the welfare of human beings is deeply linked to nature — to the existence in our world of a vast diversity of wild animals and plants. Because diversity has intrinsic value, and because its loss impoverishes society, we work to secure a future for all species, great and small, hovering on the brink of extinction. We do so through science, law and creative media, with a focus on protecting the lands, waters and climate that species need to survive.
(520) 623-5252One foreign policy expert said these congressional authorizations "have become like holy writ, documents frozen in time yet endlessly reinterpreted to justify new military action."
Almost exactly 24 years after the September 11, 2001 attacks, the US House of Representatives voted Tuesday to finally repeal a pair of more than two-decade-old congressional authorizations that have allowed presidents to carry out military attacks in the Middle East and elsewhere.
In a 261-167 vote, with 49 Republicans joining all Democrats, the House passed an amendment to the next military spending bill to rescind the Authorizations for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) passed by Congress in the leadup to the 1991 Persian Gulf War and 2003 War in Iraq.
The decision is a small act of resistance in Congress after what the Quincy Institute's Adam Weinstein described in Foreign Policy magazine as "years of neglected oversight" by Congress over the "steady expansion of presidential war-making authority."
As Weinstein explains, these AUMFs, originally meant to give presidents narrow authority to target terrorist organizations like al-Qaeda and use military force against Saddam Hussein, "have been stretched far beyond their original purposes" by presidents to justify the use of unilateral military force across the Middle East.
President George W. Bush used the 2002 authorization, which empowered him to use military force against Iraq, to launch a full invasion and military occupation of the country. Bush would stretch its purview throughout the remainder of his term to apply the AUMF to any threat that could be seen as stemming from Iraq.
After Congress refused to pass a new authorization for the fight against ISIS—an offshoot of al-Qaeda—President Barack Obama used the ones passed during the War on Terror to expand US military operations in Syria. They also served as the basis of his use of drone assassinations in the Middle East and North Africa throughout his term.
During his first term, President Donald Trump used those authorizations as the legal justification to intensify the drone war and to launch attacks against Hezbollah in Iraq and Syria. He then used it to carry out the reckless assassination of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani in Iraq.
And even while calling for the repeal of the initial 2001 and 2002 authorizations, former President Joe Biden used them to continue many of the operations started by Trump.
"These AUMFs," Weinstein said, "have become like holy writ, documents frozen in time yet endlessly reinterpreted to justify new military action."
The amendment to repeal the authorizations was introduced by Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.) and Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas).
Meeks described the authorizations as "long obsolete," saying they "risk abuse by administrations of either party."
Roy described the repeal of the amendment as something "strongly opposed by the, I'll call it, defense hawk community." But, he said, "the AUMF was passed in '02 to deal with Iraq and Saddam Hussein, and that guy's been dead... and we're now still running under an '02 AUMF. That's insane. We should repeal that."
"For decades, presidents abused these AUMFs to send Americans to fight in forever wars in the Middle East," said Rep. Chris Deluzio (D-Pa.) shortly before voting for the amendment. "Congress must take back its war powers authority and vote to repeal these AUMFs."
Although this House vote theoretically curbs Trump's war-making authority, it comes attached to a bill that authorizes $893 billion worth of new war spending, which 17 Democrats joined all but four Republicans Republicans in supporting Wednesday.
The vote will also have no bearing on the question of President Donald Trump's increasing use of military force without Congressional approval to launch unilateral strikes—including last week's bombing of a vessel that the administration has claimed, without clear evidence, was trafficking drugs from Venezuela and strikes conducted in June against Iran, without citing any congressional authorization.
Alexander McCoy, a Marine veteran and public policy advocate at Public Citizen, said, "the 1991 and 2002 AUMFs" are "good to remove," but pointed out that it's "mostly the 2001 AUMF that is exploited for forever wars."
"Not to mention, McCoy added, "we have reached a point where AUMFs almost seem irrelevant, because Congress has shown no willingness whatsoever to punish the president for just launching military actions without one, against Iran, and now apparently against Venezuela."
In the wake of Trump's strikes against Iran, Democrats introduced resolutions in the House and Senate aimed at requiring him to obtain Congressional approval, though Republicans and some Democratic war hawks ultimately stymied them.
However, Dylan Williams, the vice president of the Center for International Policy, argued that the repeal of the AUMF was nevertheless "a major development in the effort to finally rein in decades of unchecked use of military force by presidents of both parties."
The vote, Williams said, required lawmakers "to show where they stand on restraining US military adventurism."
"The middle-class squeeze from tariffs is here," observed one economist.
New economic data released on Thursday revealed fresh signs of stress for the US economy and working families.
A new Consumer Price Index report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) found that overall inflation rose by 2.9% year-over-year in August, while core inflation—a measure that excludes commodities such as food and energy—rose 3.1%, the highest reading recorded since this past January.
Both of these numbers were in line with economists' consensus estimates, although they still showed inflation trending in the wrong direction during a time when the US labor market is also showing signs of weakness.
Looking deeper into the report reveals that the cost of groceries continues to be a major pain point for US consumers, as food prices jumped by 0.6% on the month and 2.7% year-over-year.
The report comes days after US President Donald Trump said in a radio interview, "We have no inflation. Prices are down on just about everything."
New York Times economics reporter Ben Casselman said that the spike in food prices was notable because it came after a long period in which food inflation had been coming down.
"Grocery prices are once again rising relatively rapidly," he observed in a social media post. "Food inflation had eased significantly, and had been running well below overall prices, but that's no longer true."
Heather Long, the chief economist at Navy Federal Credit Union, singled out some particularly important household staples in the report that she argued were very likely being impacted by President Donald Trump's tariffs.
Among other things, Long said that coffee was now 21% more expensive than it was a year ago, while living room and dining room furniture saw a 10% year-over-year increase, and the price of toilet paper rose by an annualized 5%.
"The middle-class squeeze from tariffs is here," she said. "Inflation hit 2.9% in August, the highest since January and up from 2.3% in April. It's troubling that so many basic necessities are rising in price again: Food, gas, clothing, and shelter all had big cost jumps in August. And this is only the beginning."
Mike Konczal, senior director of policy and research at the Economic Security Project and a former member of President Joe Biden's National Economic Council, said that the new report shows "inflation is broadening" given that the "percent of items that had at least a 3% annualized price increase over the last month" increased to nearly 60%, which is the highest percentage seen in years.
The inflation report was not the only troubling economic indicator, however.
The BLS also revealed that jobless claims in the US jumped to 263,000 last week, which was significantly higher than the 235,000 claims expected by economists. Joe Weisenthal, the co-host of the Bloomberg "Odd Lots" podcast, noted that this was the highest total for weekly jobless claims in nearly four years.
Long also flagged the worrying jobless claims number and predicted that it was just the start of a further downturn in the US economy.
"'Cost cutting' is back among CEOs and that is corporate speak for more layoffs," she said. "It's going to be a rough few months ahead as the tariffs impacts work their way through the economy. Americans will experience higher prices and (likely) more layoffs."
With the suspect still at large and the motive unknown, the president "seized the moment of widespread mourning to spread more hatred and division."
Despite the fact that the murderer of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk remained unidentified and still at large, President Donald Trump declared the "radical left" as "directly responsible" for the assassination in remarks from the White House on Wednesday night—comments that critics say shows Trump is more than willing to exploit the killing for his own purposes while sowing more, not less, political violence in the future.
In a video address from the Oval Office, Trump said that criticism of Kirk from the left was "directly responsible for the terrorism that we’re seeing in our country today, and it must stop right now."
The president didn't specify which opponents of Kirk he believed contributed to his killing; over the years the influencer, who frequently visited college campuses to debate students, clashed with and was criticized by supporters of abortion rights, gun control, and immigrants' rights. But Trump said his administration would "find each and every one of those who contributed to this atrocity and to other political violence, including the organizations that fund it and support it."
Trump did not detail how the White House would determine what groups "contributed" to Kirk's killing.
"Radical left political violence has hurt too many innocent people and taken too many lives," he asserted, though he did not mention any of the political violence—which is statistically more pervasive—on the political right.
The president was echoing sentiments expressed by far-right influencer Laura Loomer who has played a key role in shaping the Trump administration, lobbying for the hiring and removal of certain aides.
"It’s time for the Trump administration to shut down, defund, and prosecute every single leftist organization," Loomer said Wednesday, even before Kirk was publicly pronounced dead. "We must shut these lunatic leftists down. Once and for all. The left is a national security threat."
In a Thursday op-ed for Common Dreams, author and journalist Christopher D. Cook laments how "Kirk had barely been declared dead when President Trump hideously used his killing to falsely blame and attack the left."
The president, writes Cook, "seized the moment of widespread mourning to spread more hatred and division, in a reckless, angry televised speech that hurled blame at the left despite not a scintilla of evidence about Kirk's assassin or their politics."
Trump named a number of victims of political violence in recent years, including US Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.), who was shot in 2017 by a man who opposed the president; and Trump himself, who survived two assassination attempts last year.
The president did not mention the killing earlier this year of Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman, a Democrat. The suspect in Hortman's killing was an evangelical Christian who strongly opposed abortion and LGBTQ+ rights.
Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) also asserted without any evidence that critics of the far-right agenda that Kirk embraced were to blame for his killing, specifically suggesting that her Democratic colleagues were implicated in the assassination.
"Democrats own what happened today," she told reporters. "Some raging leftist lunatic put a bullet through his neck."
Mace added that it was "ridiculous" to suggest that by her logic, Republican lawmakers "own" Hortman's assassination.
The comments from Trump and Mace, wrote Cook, only show that these are "not the people who are going to lead us out of this ugly toxic pit" of political violence now pervasive in the United States.
At Zeteo, journalist Mehdi Hasan listed several other recent acts of political violence in which the suspected or confirmed perpetrators held right-wing ideologies, including the attempted assassination of Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro earlier this year; the assault of then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's husband in 2022; and the attempted kidnapping of Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer in 2020.
"There is no equivalent or even similar list of Obama or Biden supporters who have carried out murders, attempted murders, or violent attacks against Republicans or conservatives in recent years," wrote Hasan. "In fact, according to statistics compiled by the ADL's Center on Extremism, 2024 was the third year in a row in which all of the extremist-related killings in the United States were carried out by... right-wingers."
On the social media platform X, Texas Monthly senior writer Robert Downen pointed out that some far-right white supremacists had also "reviled" Kirk.
"I'm not speculating about the shooter," said Downen. "I just have been stunned how quickly people have jumped with certainty to partisan conclusions. Because in extremism spaces, the Charlie Kirk Hater-to-Nazi pipeline is canon. It's how we got a generation of antisemitic extremists."
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) was quick to rebuke the suggestion that Democrats or left-wing groups are to blame for the rise in politically motivated attacks or the emergence of violence as a commonplace, acceptable occurrence in American culture.
"Oh, please," she said when a reporter asked her whether Democrats should tone down their rhetoric. "Why don't you start with the president of the United States, and every ugly meme he has posted, and every ugly word."
In a podcast put together Wednesday evening in the wake of Kirk's assassination, journalist David Sirota said that "what we desperately need right now in this country are leaders who lower the temperature, leaders who will try to pull us back from the brink."
Instead, Sirota warned, "we have a president right now who seems mostly interested in using the bully pulpit to actually bully people. Inflaming every cultural conflict he can stick his nose into—all for the cause of grabbing more power and money for himself and his family."
In place of more anger, hatred, and calls for political retribution, Sirota told his audience he wanted to offer a different message.
"It's a simple message whether you are a leftist, a liberal, a centrist, a conservative, or a MAGA fan," said Sirota. "Your life has value and your political opponents' lives have value too. You can hate your adversaries' ideas, and you can fight hard for your cause, but the moment we stop seeing each other as human beings and we start concluding that violence is the answer, that's the moment we let the soulless corporations, the ruthless authoritarians, and the sociopathic demagogues win."
The "nihilism" and "greed" of too many, he added, "are creating the conditions for a civil war—one that we must all do our part to stop. Before it becomes unstoppable."