SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
food water watch
Swing State Polls Show Harris 'Must Change Course' on Climate and Gaza, Says Sunrise
"The polls we're seeing unfortunately tell the same story we're hearing from the 900,000 young swing state voters we've contacted in the past two months," said one organizer.
Oct 16, 2024
The youth-led climate action group Sunrise Movement said Wednesday that the latest polling numbers in swing states—showing Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump leading Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris in all but one—demonstrate what they've been hearing in their massive voter mobilization push, and reiterated their demand that Harris course-correct on key issues.
"The polls we're seeing unfortunately tell the same story we're hearing from the 900,000 young swing state voters we've contacted in the past two months," said Stevie O'Hanlon, communications director for Sunrise. "VP Harris is losing ground with young people. To win this election, VP Harris must change course. The campaign urgently needs to work to energize and turn out millions of young voters."
The RealClearPolitics polling average on Wednesday showed Trump pulling ahead in every swing state except Wisconsin, where Harris has 48.3% support compared to Trump's 48%.
Trump is beating Harris by one percentage point in Michigan—the state with the largest share of Arab American voters, where campaigners have been warning for months that Harris' support for continued arms sales to Israel amid its assault on Gaza and Lebanon is a political liability. In Arizona, he is winning by 1.1 points, and in North Carolina by 1.2 points.
"We can look at the math. In every swing state, the number of young voters dwarfs the anticipated margins of victory," said O'Hanlon. "In my home state of Pennsylvania, [President] Joe Biden won the state by 80,000 votes in 2020. More than 80,000 people turn 18 in Pennsylvania and become newly eligible voters each year."
Sunrise has been contacting young voters in swing states since Harris was officially nominated to replace Biden as the Democratic candidate, and in mid-September, the group issued a warning about what they were hearing from voters.
"People are fired up and getting engaged with the election, but there is a sizable number of young people who don't want to get out the vote for Kamala Harris until she backs an arms embargo and puts forward a real climate plan," said Noah Foley-Beining, an organizer with the group, at the time.
A month later, said O'Hanlon, Harris appears to be "splitting hairs for a small fraction of the undecided middle-aged, white, conservative voter base" instead of "electrifying the Democratic base by talking about how she will take on big corporations, tackle the climate crisis, and end U.S. military support for Israel's assault on Gaza."
"VP Harris is losing ground with young people... The campaign urgently needs to work to energize and turn out millions of young voters."
Harris has won applause from progressives for speaking frankly and unequivocally about her support for abortion rights and for unveiling economic justice proposals like a federal ban on food industry price gouging and an expansion of Medicare to cover home healthcare, vision, and hearing care.
But as Israel has expanded its U.S.-backed military operations to Lebanon—killing more than 2,000 people—and cut off northern Gaza from humanitarian aid in what advocates warned appeared to be an ethnic cleansing campaign, the Harris campaign has refused to support an arms embargo on the Middle Eastern country.
Harris has also boasted about the Biden administration's expansion of oil production and her support for fracking.
In an op-ed at Common Dreams on Wednesday, Mitch Jones, managing director of policy and litigation for Food and Water Watch, wrote that the "conventional wisdom" among pundits that politicians must embrace fossil fuels is misinformed, as evidenced by polling in swing states including Pennsylvania.
"A recent survey from the Ohio River Valley Institute showed that 74% of Pennsylvanians support stricter regulations on fracking due to concern about health risks, while 90% or more want expanded setbacks from schools and hospitals, stronger air monitoring, and more rigorous regulation on transportation of fracking waste. Ignoring these concerns and instead framing fracking as a virtue makes little political sense in the Keystone State," wrote Jones.
"Further, in Pennsylvania and beyond, Harris needs a groundswell of support from young and progressive voters—people most likely to care deeply about climate change and preventing it," Jones added. "In a recent survey of young people in swing states from the Environmental Voter Project, 40% said that 'a candidate must prioritize "addressing climate change" or else it is a "deal breaker."' More significantly, 16% said they would definitely not support a candidate that talks about 'increasing U.S. use of fossil fuels like oil, gas, and coal,' yet this is exactly what Harris has been bragging about. This election will be decided at the margins, and these are the type of hesitant voters we need to be motivated and engaged to put Harris over the line."
With just 20 days left until Election Day, said O'Hanlon, Sunrise Movement campaigners are "giving everything we've got to contact millions of people and turn out young voters to elect Harris."
"What we're asking," O'Hanlon said, "is that the Harris campaign help us do that."
Keep ReadingShow Less
EPA Sets 'Landmark' Clean Water Rule—But Trump Victory Would Put It At Risk
The Biden-Harris administration's new rule mandating the replacement of lead pipes provides "yet another example of the stark difference between the two presidential candidates," an advocate said.
Oct 08, 2024
The Biden administration on Tuesday set a final rule requiring the replacement of nearly all of the nation's lead pipes within ten years, a clean drinking water initiative that drew praise from public health experts and advocacy groups.
The new rule, which The New York Times and The Washington Post both called "landmark," was brought forth by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and requires the replacement of an estimated 9.2 million lead service lines serving millions of people across the country. Lead is a neurotoxin that can cause long-term damage to the brain and nervous system, particularly to children.
The administration of former President Donald Trump, the Republican nominee, had "slowed the pace of lead service line replacements," according to Food & Water Watch, an advocacy group.
"We applaud the Biden-Harris administration for strengthening the rule to remove lead from our drinking water," Mary Grant, a campaign director at Food & Water Action, said in a statement. "These long-awaited improvements will replace the weak regulation adopted by Donald Trump, and in doing so, will protect millions of people from lasting harm from this dangerous neurotoxin."
Grant said the new rule highlighted the stakes of the upcoming presidential election, in which Trump faces Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee.
"Today's action is yet another example of the stark difference between the two presidential candidates," she added. "Only Vice President Kamala Harris is serious about the safety of our drinking water. A Trump reelection could reverse progress on safe water."
This is a historic victory for public health. Lead pipes have poisoned American drinking water for decades, affecting as many as two-thirds of children under 6 in cities like Chicago.
Clean water is a RIGHT, not a privilege. Thank you, @EPA @POTUS! 👏💧https://t.co/ZQyTt0mMI4
— Progressive Caucus (@USProgressives) October 8, 2024
Lead, prized for its durability, has been used in water pipes since Ancient Rome—the English word "plumbing" descends from the Latin word "plumbum," meaning lead.
Congress banned the construction of new lead pipes in the U.S. in 1986 and passed the Safe Drinking Water Act, which includes regulations on lead, in 1991.
However, phasing out the use of older pipes has gone very slowly, to the frustration of public health experts. There has been "no meaningful improvement in protecting communities" in three decades, until now, according to a statement from Earthjustice, an advocacy group.
"Lead contamination is a longstanding public health emergency, and the Biden-Harris administration's rule is a monumental step forward in addressing the urgent need for safe, clean drinking water," said Patrice Simms, Earthjustice's vice president of litigation for healthy communities.
People of color and on low incomes are disproportionately affected by lead contamination, which is often found in big cities. Chicago has more lead pipes than any other U.S. city.
Flint, Michigan—a majority Black city—faced a public health crisis caused by lead pipes starting in 2014. Then-President Barack Obama signed an emergency declaration and sent aid to the city in 2016. More than 100,000 residents were exposed to elevated lead levels.
Still, the federal government didn't move to tighten lead rules until November 2023, when the EPA issued a proposal to do so. The announcement of the final rule on Tuesday was accompanied by an outpouring of support—and relief.
"A game changer for kids and communities, EPA's finalized lead and copper rule improvements will ensure that we will never again see the preventable tragedy of a city, or a child, poisoned by their lead pipes," Mona Hanna, a pediatrician in Flint and a public health professor at Michigan State University whose research helped expose the crisis there, said in the EPA statement announcing the rule change.
Betsy Southerland, the former director of science and technology in the EPA's water division, also celebrated the agency's move, according to an Environmental Protection Network statement:
The American people have known for over 30 years that there is no safe level of lead and have waited too long for lead pipes to be replaced. Finally, the lead pipes that deliver water to over 9 million homes will be replaced before they damage the mental and physical development of another generation of children. Today is the first time there is an actual deadline for lead pipe replacement to happen and significant financial and technical assistance to get the job done.
The White House is counting on the initiative being popular, especially in swing states in the Midwest. President Joe Biden is scheduled to visit Wisconsin to "tout" the new policy, the Timesreported. The EPA's statement says it will "create good-paying local jobs."
Natalie Quillian, a White House deputy chief of staff, said that "all Americans, no matter where they come from, should have access to their most basic needs, including being able to turn on the tap and drink clean drinking water without fear," according to the Post.
The new rule, in addition to mandating the replacement of pipes, establishes a stricter standard for lead contamination, moving it from 15 parts per billion to 10 ppb and requiring public utilities to provide filters if that level is exceeded. Some advocates had called for a standard between 0 and 5 ppb.
Utilities are expected to challenge the new rule in court, as they've done with the EPA's regulations on "forever chemicals" in drinking water.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Cornell Study Shows LNG Worse for Climate Than Coal
"LNG is not a bridge fuel to clean energy," said one expert. "It's a highway to climate hell."
Oct 03, 2024
On the heels of Hurricane Helene devastating the U.S. Southeast and sparking fresh calls for action on the fossil fuel-driven climate emergency, a long-awaited study revealed Thursday that the planet-heating pollution from liquefied natural gas is worse than that of coal.
"Liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports from the United States have risen dramatically since the LNG-export ban was lifted in 2016, and the United States is now the world's largest exporter," wrote Cornell University scientist Robert Howarth, who analyzed the greenhouse gas footprint of LNG produced in and exported from the U.S.
Howarth found that "the greenhouse gas footprint for LNG as a fuel source is 33% greater than that for coal" in terms of its 20-year global warming potential, and "even considered on the time frame of 100 years after emission... which severely understates the climatic damage of methane, the LNG footprint equals or exceeds that of coal."
Advocates of bold climate action welcomed the formal publication of what Third Act founder Bill McKibbencalled a "crucial paper."
"LNG exports present HUGE risks to our planet and climate—and we need to reject any attempts to expand them!"
The study, published online by the journal Energy Science & Engineering, follows U.S. President Joe Biden pausing approvals for all LNG exports to non-fair trade agreement countries and comes a month out from the presidential election, in which Democratic Vice President Kalama Harris is facing Big Oil-backed Republican former President Donald Trump.
"This is a HUGE deal for the Biden administration's ongoing review of LNG exports," said Jamie Henn, executive director of Fossil Free Media and a founder of 350.org, sharing Howarth's findings on social media. Climate campaigners are calling on the Biden-Harris administration to make the January pause permanent.
"This should be the final nail in the coffin for the false narrative that LNG was somehow a climate solution," Henn added in a statement. "This now peer-reviewed paper demonstrates that LNG is worse for the climate than coal, let alone clean energy alternatives. Approving more LNG exports is clearly incompatible with the public interest."
As Henn and others acknowledged, Howarth's research has been targeted by journalists and the fossil fuel industry.
"This paper has been widely discussed, revised, and is now peer-reviewed and published," said Jason Rylander, legal director for the Center for Biological Diversity's Climate Law Institute. "LNG is not a bridge fuel to clean energy. It's a highway to climate hell."
Alex Walker, climate finance program manager at the Canadian group Environmental Defense, also responded to the research by stressing that, contrary to claims by the fossil fuel industry and its political allies, "LNG is not a bridge fuel."
Congressman Sean Casten (D-Ill.) said on social media that "there is no environmental case for increased U.S. LNG exports."
Howarth is on the board of directors of the Food & Water Watch, which similarly pointed to the paper as further proof that "LNG exports present HUGE risks to our planet and climate—and we need to reject any attempts to expand them!"
Cassidy DiPaola, communications director at Fossil Free Media, declared Thursday that "the science is clear."
"There's no place for LNG in a clean energy future," DiPaola said. "It's time to double down on truly clean alternatives like wind, solar, and energy efficiency."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular