SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
");background-position:center;background-size:19px 19px;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-color:#222;padding:0;width:var(--form-elem-height);height:var(--form-elem-height);font-size:0;}:is(.js-newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter_bar.newsletter-wrapper) .widget__body:has(.response:not(:empty)) :is(.widget__headline, .widget__subheadline, #mc_embed_signup .mc-field-group, #mc_embed_signup input[type="submit"]){display:none;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) #mce-responses:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-row:1 / -1;grid-column:1 / -1;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget__body > .snark-line:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-column:1 / -1;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) :is(.newsletter-campaign:has(.response:not(:empty)), .newsletter-and-social:has(.response:not(:empty))){width:100%;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col{display:flex;flex-wrap:wrap;justify-content:center;align-items:center;gap:8px 20px;margin:0 auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .text-element{display:flex;color:var(--shares-color);margin:0 !important;font-weight:400 !important;font-size:16px !important;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .whitebar_social{display:flex;gap:12px;width:auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col a{margin:0;background-color:#0000;padding:0;width:32px;height:32px;}.newsletter-wrapper .social_icon:after{display:none;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget article:before, .newsletter-wrapper .widget article:after{display:none;}#sFollow_Block_0_0_1_0_0_0_1{margin:0;}.donation_banner{position:relative;background:#000;}.donation_banner .posts-custom *, .donation_banner .posts-custom :after, .donation_banner .posts-custom :before{margin:0;}.donation_banner .posts-custom .widget{position:absolute;inset:0;}.donation_banner__wrapper{position:relative;z-index:2;pointer-events:none;}.donation_banner .donate_btn{position:relative;z-index:2;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_7_0_0_3_1_0{color:#fff;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_7_0_0_3_1_1{font-weight:normal;}.sticky-sidebar{margin:auto;}@media (min-width: 980px){.main:has(.sticky-sidebar){overflow:visible;}}@media (min-width: 980px){.row:has(.sticky-sidebar){display:flex;overflow:visible;}}@media (min-width: 980px){.sticky-sidebar{position:-webkit-sticky;position:sticky;top:100px;transition:top .3s ease-in-out, position .3s ease-in-out;}}.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper.sidebar{background:linear-gradient(91deg, #005dc7 28%, #1d63b2 65%, #0353ae 85%);}
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.
We’re headed to Geneva with our hearts and minds set on a treaty that caps and controls plastic production, addresses the toxic chemicals used to make plastics, ensures supply chain transparency, and delivers the financial mechanisms needed to stop plastic pollution.
Stakes—and nerves—are high heading into what is supposed to be the final scheduled round of Plastics Treaty negotiations. From August 5 to 14, United Nations member states will meet in Geneva, Switzerland. The question on everyone’s mind: Will they deliver the treaty the world urgently needs?
The global plastics crisis is accelerating, threatening public health, ecosystems, and economies worldwide. Plastic production is on track to triple by 2050, driving 20% of global oil demand within the next two decades. Nearly 99% of plastics are made from fossil fuels—the main driver of climate change. If left unchecked, plastics could burn through one-third of the Earth’s remaining carbon budget, derailing efforts to limit global warming.
Every week, new studies uncover toxic impacts on our bodies, water, and food systems—from microplastics found in human blood and breast milk, to links between plastic chemicals and cancer, hormone disruption, and fertility issues. This is a crisis of human health, not just “a waste management problem.”
We’re headed to Geneva with our hearts and minds set on a treaty that caps and controls plastic production, addresses the toxic chemicals used to make plastics, ensures supply chain transparency, and delivers the financial mechanisms needed to stop plastic pollution and its climate and health-ravaging impacts.
When there is a suspected risk of harm—and scientific certainty is not yet established—the burden of proof should not fall on the people who may be harmed by it.
We live in a time that celebrates innovation—but too often, it’s innovation without accountability. Pesticides are sprayed where children play. Harmful chemicals are embedded in everyday products. Communities are exposed to toxic risks without warning.
The pattern is clear: Dangerous substances are allowed into our lives before their safety is truly understood. Industry profits from speed, while public protections are stuck in delay. The default approach often favors inaction until overwhelming evidence of danger is undeniable. But by then, the damage is already done. From asbestos to lead paint to Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) “forever chemicals,” history offers a grim catalog of missed opportunities to prevent harm. Each case is a reminder that early warnings were ignored, risks were downplayed, and the public was left unprotected.
That’s why we must fully embrace the Precautionary Principle and defend the Right to Know as the foundation of public health, environmental justice, and informed consent.
At its core, the Precautionary Principle is straightforward and rooted in common sense: When there is a suspected risk of harm—and scientific certainty is not yet established—the burden of proof should not fall on the people who may be harmed by it. These aren’t bureaucratic ideals—they’re essential safeguards in a world where the cost of delay is measured in illness, inequity, and lost public trust.
It’s not radical to ask what’s in our air, water, or soil. What’s radical is expecting families to live with uncertainty, secrecy, or delayed action.
When I founded California Safe Schools, it was because of one disturbing reality: Parents had no idea when or where pesticides were being used on school campuses. There was no warning, no notice, and no choice. Children and school staff were being exposed—without their knowledge or consent.
Through years of community organizing, scientific research, and policy advocacy, we helped secure a major shift in how public schools approach pesticide use. In 1999, the Los Angeles Unified School District—the second-largest in the country—adopted a groundbreaking Integrated Pest Management Policy grounded in the Precautionary Principle and the Right to Know. It required written notification of pesticide use, prioritized least-toxic alternatives, and banned broadcast spraying.
This became a model for statewide reform. In 2000, California passed the Healthy Schools Act, ensuring that all public schools would follow similar transparency and notification requirements. And in 2005, AB 405, sponsored by California Safe Schools, made California the first state in the nation to ban the use of experimental, conditional, or phased-out pesticides on school grounds.
These victories weren’t just legislative—they were lifesaving. They proved what’s possible when grassroots voices, science, and public values come together. They also reaffirmed a fundamental truth: People have a right to know what they’re being exposed to and the right to act on that knowledge.
Still, these principles continue to face resistance. The Right to Know is sometimes viewed with hesitation—treated not as a basic public good, but as a burden or threat. Communities are routinely left in the dark about nearby industrial emissions, pesticide use near schools, or the presence of toxic substances in drinking water. In Flint, Michigan residents were told their water was safe long after it had been poisoned with lead. If we’re serious about protecting public health—especially for the most vulnerable—then transparency and prevention must be the norm, not the exception. It’s not radical to ask what’s in our air, water, or soil. What’s radical is expecting families to live with uncertainty, secrecy, or delayed action.
The Precautionary Principle and the Right to Know are practical tools that remind us that safety should never be an afterthought—and that acting early, openly, and ethically is not just the right thing to do; it’s essential.
We don’t need to wait for more evidence to take meaningful steps forward. What we need is the collective courage to revisit outdated systems, to consistently put human well-being first, and to ensure that those most vulnerable are fully protected.
The good news is that each of us can play a role in advancing this work. Real change begins with awareness—and is sustained through action. Learn what chemicals are being used in your schools, parks, and neighborhoods. Ask questions. Show up to school board meetings and local government hearings. Speak out for policies that reflect transparency, precaution, and the use of least-toxic alternatives. Organize with neighbors. Support legislation that puts health before profit. And perhaps most importantly, share what you learn—because awareness leads to advocacy, and advocacy leads to change.
Every voice counts. Every action matters. Together, we can protect the places where our families live, learn, and grow—and build a future that prioritizes health, safety, and transparency.
"Trump is illegally delaying clean air laws from his desk because polluters make more money when they just dump their toxic chemicals in our air," said one critic.
Continuing a trend of prioritizing polluters over public health and the planet, U.S. President Donald Trump late Thursday signed a series of proclamations to provide what the Republican called "regulatory relief" to various industries.
While the names of Trump's four proclamations suggest they are intended to promote American "security" regarding energy, chemical manufacturing, iron ore processing, and sterile medical equipment, what they actually do is allow over 100 facilities across the country to not comply with rules put in place under Democratic former President Joe Biden.
A Trump White House fact sheet describes the rules from Biden's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as "burdensome." Meanwhile, environmental and health advocates blasted Trump over his new exemptions for coal-fired power plants, ethylene oxide commercial sterilizers, and facilities that manufacture chemicals and process taconite iron.
"If your family lives downwind of these plants, this is going to mean more toxic chemicals in the air you breathe."
Patrice Simms, vice president of litigation at Earthjustice's Healthy Communities Program, said in a Friday statement that "Trump is illegally delaying clean air laws from his desk because polluters make more money when they just dump their toxic chemicals in our air."
"Trump's action on behalf of big corporate polluters will cause more cancer, more birth defects, and more children to suffer [from] asthma," Simms warned. "The country deserves better."
The proclamation is not the first handout Trump has given the coal industry since returning to office in January. As Earthjustice noted:
In April 2025, the Trump administration exempted 68 coal-fired power plants from pollution limits set in the strengthened MATS rule, even though pollution controls are widely available and already in use. These came after EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin invited corporations to email the agency to request exemptions from clean air standards. Companies were told they could cite "national security" or "lack of available technology" as justification.
John Walke, clean air director for the environmental group Natural Resources Defense Council, told The Associated Press that Trump's claims about national security concerns and technology issues were "pretexts" to further enrich large corporations.
"President Trump just signed a literal free pass for polluters," Walke said of the new proclamations. "If your family lives downwind of these plants, this is going to mean more toxic chemicals in the air you breathe."
The AP reported that "in a related development, the EPA said Thursday it will give utility companies an additional year to inspect and report on contamination from toxic coal ash landfills across the country," which Zeldin also called "regulatory relief."
Earthjustice senior counsel Lisa Evans told The New York Times on Thursday that while it may not seem like a lengthy delay, "a year's time is not irrelevant when you are living next to a coal plant."
"It's one more year of hazardous contaminants getting into the groundwater," Evans said. "And the more chemicals that get into the groundwater, the more difficult and expensive it is to remediate."