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.
Khan accused the administration of "letting off the hook oil executives caught trying to collude with foreign countries to inflate how much people pay at the pump."
A ban imposed last year by top antitrust enforcer Lina Khan under the Biden administration had stopped two fossil fuel CEOs accused of colluding on oil prices from serving on powerful corporate boards, with the Federal Trade Commission saying at the time that the order would "help ensure American consumers benefit from lower prices at the pump."
But the Trump administration on Thursday signaled no interest in ensuring oil companies won't engage in price-fixing and collusion to boost profits at the expense of working families as the FTC overturned the order that prevented former Pioneer Natural Resources CEO Scott Sheffield and Hess CEO John Hess from serving on the boards of ExxonMobil and Chevron, respectively.
Exxon bought Pioneer for $59.5 billion last year, while Chevron's purchase of Hess was announced Friday after months of arbitration proceedings.
The FTC, now led by pro-corporate Republican Andrew Ferguson, said the commission's complaints about Sheffield's and Hess's communications with the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) did not "plead any antitrust law violation" or show that the acquisitions of the smaller companies and the CEO's positions on the boards "would be anticompetitive."
The decision, said Elyse Schupak, a policy advocate with Public Citizen's Climate Program, "undermines accountability for the CEOs accused of illegally colluding with OPEC to increase profits by driving up energy prices for American families and businesses."
Khan's investigation last year found the Sheffield had communicated with OPEC about slashing oil production and driving up consumer prices while claiming Biden administration policies were to blame, prompting U.S. Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) to say "jail time should seriously be considered" for the CEO.
"The FTC needs to be doing more to fully rout out Big Oil's anticompetitive behavior. But Ferguson has moved the FTC in the complete opposite direction."
The FTC also found that Hess "stressed the importance of oil market stability and inventory management and encouraged [OPEC] officials to take actions on these issues and speak about them at different events."
One analysis by Matt Stoller of the American Economic Liberties Project found that price-fixing schemes by corporations—not inflation—were to blame for 27% of the higher prices American families faced in 2021.
Khan on Thursday accused President Donald Trump's FTC of "letting off the hook oil executives caught trying to collude with foreign countries to inflate how much people pay at the pump."
The commission's three Republican members voted to allow Sheffield and Hess to serve on the boards—even as one of them, Commissioner Mark Meador, said that OPEC operates "as a de facto cartel" and warned the FTC "should not hesitate to bring enforcement actions against actual collusion."
Ferguson, meanwhile, claimed that banning Sheffield and Hess from the company boards "would damage the FTC's credibility and undermine its mission"—a statement that was denounced by the government watchdog Revolving Door Project.
"Banning a C-suite executive who tried to inflate oil prices isn't the move that 'damages' the FTC's credibility. It's Andrew Ferguson's willingness to absolve such actions that undermines the agency's mission to promote competition," said the group.
"The FTC needs to be doing more to fully rout out Big Oil's anticompetitive behavior," added Revolving Door Project. "But Ferguson has moved the FTC in the complete opposite direction—signaling to corporate America that they won't be held accountable for fleecing the public."
Schupak said that "while the Trump administration feigns interest in bringing energy prices down, its policies—fast-tracking export projects, rolling back regulatory safeguards, and halting enforcement actions for corporate wrongdoing—reveal the administration is far more interested in boosting the profitability of the oil and gas industry than providing Americans any relief or safeguarding them against corruption."
The deep connections between Line 5 and Gaza serve as a stark reminder of the urgent need for united, organized resistance to defend justice, the land, and human and nonhuman life.
In the United States, we are fighting a rapid descent into authoritarianism that is already having disastrous consequences for people, communities, and the environment. At the same time, grassroots movements across the globe are fighting to defend life, water, and land. These fights may seem worlds apart, but they are in fact intertwined at their roots. Here we will explore two examples that are not unique, but have been chosen because they make visible the underlying structural and political forces that link seemingly disparate struggles across the world. We believe that recognizing these links is necessary for building the powerful coalitions we need to resist in these critical times.
In Wisconsin, the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa—a sovereign Indigenous nation—is leading a battle that resonates far beyond its borders. In coalition with local, national, and international organizations and activists, the Band is saying no to the exploitation of its land and people by fossil fuel giants; saying no to pipelines that endanger waterways, wetlands, and wild rice beds essential to their culture and survival; and saying no to fossil fuel extraction that accelerates the climate crisis.
At the heart of this struggle lies Enbridge’s Line 5—a 645-mile pipeline transporting crude oil and natural gas liquids from Wisconsin to Ontario. Line 5 does not stand alone but is linked to a much larger network of pipelines that begin in the tar sands fields of Canada and transport one of the dirtiest forms of fossil fuel. The aging Line 5 cuts directly through the Bad River Band’s reservation, but easements for this pipeline expired in 2013. Enbridge now plans to reroute the pipeline around the reservation despite years of legal battles and overwhelming public opposition. Enbridge has a well-documented history of spills and environmental destruction and, as an investor in the Dakota Access Pipeline, supported the violent attacks on Indigenous activists at Standing Rock. Enbridge’s reroute of Line 5 remains a direct threat to fragile ecosystems and Indigenous sovereignty.
At the same time, thousands of miles away, millions of Palestinians are being displaced and tens of thousands killed by an all-out military assault in Gaza that targets the entire population and infrastructure for life. This is accompanied by accelerating state-supported violence by Israeli settlers against Palestinians in the West Bank. The relentless bombings, mass displacement, deliberate starvation, and destruction of civilian life carried out by Israel and the U.S. against the Palestinian people amounts not to a conventional war but to genocide. The U.S. and Israel are now openly discussing a plan to permanently remove Palestinians and take over Gaza and the West Bank, completing a process of ethnic cleansing that has been ongoing for over 100 years.
What links a battle over a pipeline in Wisconsin to the crisis in Gaza and the West Bank? Everything. The fight against Line 5 isn’t merely about fossil fuels—it’s a stand against a global system of colonialism, militarism, and capitalism that drives the climate crisis. The ethnic cleansing and genocide directed at Palestinians represent the advancement of a long-term colonial project that uses violence and militarism to secure access to land and resources. In a critical moment when we face a rising tide of fascism in the U.S. and abroad, the deep connections between Line 5 and Gaza serve as a stark reminder of the urgent need for united, organized resistance to defend justice, the land, and human and nonhuman life.
Colonialism is about dominance and control. Whether imposed on Indigenous nations in the United States or on Palestinians abroad, its purpose is to grant powerful states and corporations unfettered access to land and resources, fueling profits and increased power for ruling elites.
In Gaza—and increasingly in the West Bank, southern Lebanon, and Syria—the brutal legacy of settler colonialism is on display. Since at least 1947, Israel has pursued colonization in Palestine, displacing native inhabitants and instituting an apartheid system to control those who remain. Military force and state-sponsored violence have systematically stripped Palestinians of their land, water, property, and freedom, a process bolstered by political, financial, and military support from Western powers. In particular, Israel is critical to strategic U.S. military and political presence in the Middle East; in other words, it is central to U.S. imperialism. The current crisis in Gaza is an escalation of this long-term project.
Climate justice movements in the U.S. must recognize not only the moral imperative but the strategic necessity of centering struggles for immigrant rights, Indigenous and Palestinian sovereignty, and struggles against militarism and fascism.
The systems at work in Gaza are the same as those that drive projects like Line 5. The history of the U.S. is one of colonial expansion, of violently appropriating land and resources from native inhabitants and transferring it to the U.S. government and settlers. Even now, the U.S. government and powerful corporate interests ignore the rights of Indigenous sovereign nations and ram through pipelines, mines, and other projects despite their environmental and social dangers and opposition from tribes. Projects like Line 5 are a continuation of a multi-century colonial project that stretches from from the Indian Wars in the 19th century to the militarized response to the Indigenous-led resistance to the Dakota Access Pipeline at Standing Rock.
Whether it manifests through violent repression of protest or the displacement of entire ethnic groups, the same colonial logic is at work. Israel’s occupation and blockade of Gaza aims to secure access to land, water, and offshore natural gas reserves for themselves and their corporate and political allies. The same drive for control and access to resources underpins Line 5, linking these two struggles in a broader fight against colonialism, exploitation, and global corporate power.
Militarism fuels colonialism. It is also essential to the fossil fuel industry, the core driver of the climate crisis. The U.S. military extends across an estimated 750 overseas bases in 80 countries. This web of influence props up transnational fossil fuel networks that depend on protection and the threat of force to extract and transport oil and gas around the globe. The paramilitary response to activists protesting the Dakota Access Pipeline and Line 3 in Minnesota are local examples that illustrate this relationship. The U.S. invests $800 billion into the military each year, money that could be spent on the public good but is instead used to underwrite a global system of extraction and exploitation.
The U.S. military also contributes to the climate crisis in more direct ways. The U.S. Department of Defense is the world’s largest institutional consumer of fossil fuels and is responsible for more greenhouse gas emissions than many nations. Wars and conflict contribute significantly to carbon emissions and also drive widespread environmental devastation that destroys local livelihoods. U.S. military bases are ranked as among the most polluted in the world, damaging land and water in surrounding areas with past nuclear testing and toxic chemicals.
Militarism is also deeply intertwined with corporate interests. Big defense contractors such as Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Oshkosh Defense, and Raytheon profit from the devastation in Gaza. Such contractors are also deeply intertwined with private security firms like Blackrock. These security firms are deployed by fossil fuel companies to protect fossil fuel infrastructure projects like Line 5, harming Indigenous communities and intensifying climate collapse. In short, the U.S. military reinforces a system that prizes profit over human life.
The struggles in Gaza and against Line 5 are two sides of the same coin. Palestinians resisting occupation and Indigenous nations opposing pipelines face the same force: militarized, transnational government-corporate alliances. Their fight is not solely for their own physical and cultural survival—it is a battle for justice and freedom for all people and the planet.
The climate crisis is inseparable from the forces of militarism, colonialism, and capitalism. Climate change is also contributing to a related crisis—the rise of fascism and the demonization of immigrants.
As global temperatures climb, environmental disasters and unpredictability increase, contributing to economic destabilization and a general sense of uncertainty and fear. This creates an ideal breeding ground for fascist ideologies that promise greater security (for some) through the exercise of state control, brute strength, and the scapegoating of the vulnerable—all while siphoning money and power to corporations. Climate change also drives the displacement of people, as extreme heat, flooding, drought, and other environmental disasters force entire regions into unlivable conditions. In 2022 alone, over 43 million people were displaced by climate-related events, from hurricanes and floods to shifts in agricultural viability. This number is set to grow, creating an ever-growing wave of climate refugees.
Indigenous and Palestinian struggles confront the same systems that aim to strengthen corporate and elite interests at the expense of everyday people and vulnerable populations, further deepening global inequality.
Rather than addressing the root causes of climate change, developing plans for adaptation that serve the public good, or offering refuge to those forced to migrate, many governments worldwide are responding with authoritarian measures. Fascist leaders paint climate refugees as threats, blaming migrants and marginalized communities for crises they did not create. In the U.S., we see this in the criminalization of immigration, mass deportation, the expansion of border walls, and the deployment of surveillance technologies—many of which were first developed in Israel and tested on Palestinians. These policies only worsen human suffering while deflecting attention from the real culprits: fossil fuel corporations, militarism, and capitalist greed.
These rising authoritarian impulses are deeply linked to the fight against Line 5 and resistance to Israel’s expansion. Indigenous and Palestinian struggles confront the same systems that aim to strengthen corporate and elite interests at the expense of everyday people and vulnerable populations, further deepening global inequality.
The November 2024 election and turn toward fascism in the U.S. have underscored the urgency of grassroots resistance. Corporate and right-wing forces are aligning in unprecedented ways, fueled by economic inequality, xenophobia, fear, and disinformation. Authoritarian regimes in the U.S. and abroad, including Israel, are poised to further expand corporate power, fossil fuel extraction, militarism, and state oppression in frightening ways. This convergence poses an escalating threat to human communities and the natural world.
The fight against Line 5, led by the Bad River Band, and the global solidarity movement for Palestine both stand at the forefront of grassroots resistance to these converging forces. Broadening our lens, we can see such resistance taking place all over the world: in the anti-pipeline struggles in East Africa, the efforts of Indigenous communities in the Amazon to protect their land and way of life, and the bravery of anti-mining activists in El Salvador, to name just a few examples. These movements remind us that these battles in specific places are part of a broader struggle against interconnected systems of oppression—something that has long been recognized by local communities and Indigenous-led organizations worldwide.
Our organizing must be both intersectional and international. We must connect struggles that have too often been treated in isolation. The same forces that drive the expansion of Line 5 and the attacks on Palestinian life are at work in militarized occupations and conflicts abroad, the construction of border walls and the criminalization of migrants, and the climate crisis itself. By challenging these forces at home, and acting in solidarity with those abroad, we strike at the roots of a global system of exploitation and oppression.
Climate justice movements in the U.S. must recognize not only the moral imperative but the strategic necessity of centering struggles for immigrant rights, Indigenous and Palestinian sovereignty, and struggles against militarism and fascism. We must forge alliances with diverse movements from Wisconsin to East Africa to the Philippines, recognizing that we succeed or fail together. Despite these dangerous and difficult times, a different world is possible when we unite and act as one.
To ignore the fact that global warming amplified this flood is to invite the next storm—wetter, hotter, and deadlier.
More than 120 deaths have been reported, and at least 161 people remain missing after catastrophic floods tore through Central Texas on July 4. The death toll is expected to rise. As communities reel from the tragedy, the question remains: Will anything change?
Over the last 12 months, hundreds of Americans have died in disasters made deadlier and more likely by climate change. Yet, the U.S. government and many state and local leaders continue to deny and otherwise downplay the climate emergency. How many lives will be lost before our leaders confront reality?
The floods in Hill Country, Texas are only the most recent in a devastating string of climate disasters across the U.S. in the last year alone.
In September 2024, Hurricane Helene killed more than 200 people in North Carolina and drenched the Southeast with 20 trillion gallons of rain—50% more than would have fallen without climate change, according to experts.
This January, wildfires swept across Los Angeles, killing 30 people in what were some of the most destructive fires in the city’s history. Fueled by extreme heat, record winds, and historic drought—conditions exacerbated by climate change, the fires were a reminder of the human causes and consequences of global warming and the disasters it fuels. The smoke may lift, but the consequences will linger, reshaping lives and landscapes for years to come.
Every moment we stay silent about climate change, we sink deeper into a fossil-fueled future defined by disaster.
In March, a deadly tornado outbreak tore through much of the Midwest and South, killing 42 people. It was the largest tornado outbreak ever recorded for the month of March, again, made more likely by a warming climate.
Just two months later, in mid-May, a severe tornado outbreak struck the Midwestern and Southeastern United States, spawning 60 tornadoes and claiming 27 more lives.
Tornadoes emerge from powerful thunderstorms, and climate change is making these storms more frequent and more intense. As the atmosphere warms and holds more moisture, the conditions that fuel tornadoes—like those seen in March and May—are arriving earlier, occurring more often, and leaving behind more destruction.
Despite the relentless and deadly reminders of climate change, the U.S. administration remains in denial. Just last week, they replaced hundreds of scientists and experts working on the federal government’s flagship climate impacts report with known climate skeptics.
Just a month before the floods, NASA released new research showing a sharp rise in the intensity, frequency, duration, and severity of extreme weather events—including floods—over the past five years. The Texas floods are another example of the devastating extreme weather events fueled by rising temperatures and human-caused climate change.
The fatal Texas flooding began with torrential downpours that overwhelmed the Guadalupe River and its tributaries. In a matter of hours, more than 10 inches of rain fell, causing the river to rise nearly 29 feet in less than an hour. This kind of extreme rainfall has become far more likely in our warming world.
As Andrew Dessler, a climate scientist at Texas A&M University, put it, “Climate change is like steroids for the weather—it injects an extra dose of intensity into existing weather patterns.” Global temperatures have already risen 1.5°C, on average. Warmer air holds more water vapor, enabling bigger downpours and more intense rainfall. At least 1.8 trillion gallons of rain fell over the impacted area.
Arsum Pathak, director of Adaptation and Coastal Resilience at the National Wildlife Federation, explained it simply: “The atmosphere is like a giant sponge. As the air gets warmer, which is what’s been happening because of climate change, the sponge can hold a lot more water. And then when there’s a storm, the same sponge can squeeze out way more water than it used to.”
In Texas, warmer temperatures mean storms like this one are now up to 7% wetter than during similar storms in the past. The region has experienced a 21% increase in total precipitation on the heaviest rainfall days since the 1950s. These are no longer theoretical risks; they are lived realities.
Many politicians and officials have been quick to blame the severity of the flooding on the federal administration’s weakened civil service and cuts to disaster response agencies. It is true that hollowing out of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has left communities less prepared and protected. But we cannot lose sight of the bigger picture.
Don’t let the preparedness debate distract us from the real question: Why do we need this level of preparation in the first place?
Climate change.
In all the chatter about preparing for extreme weather, “climate change” has barely been uttered by federal, state, or local officials from either political party. Indeed, like challenges to preparedness, efforts to raise climate change as a contributing factor have been met with tired accusations of “politicizing a tragedy.” But as Nobel laureate Paul Krugman rightly argues:
Now is exactly the time to put officials on the spot… if we don’t make an issue of how this happened… nothing will be learned and nothing will change.
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott dismissed the idea of blame, calling it a word for “losers” before pivoting to football metaphors. But unless climate change becomes part of the game plan, Texans—and all Americans—will continue to lose.
To ignore the fact that global warming amplified this flood is to invite the next storm—wetter, hotter, and deadlier. Every moment we stay silent about climate change, we sink deeper into a fossil-fueled future defined by disaster.
The science is undeniable. Greenhouse gases are at their highest concentration in at least 800,000 years, and fossil fuels are their primary driver. 2024 was the warmest year on record, with the global average near-surface temperature 1.55°C above the preindustrial average. The last decade was the warmest ever documented.
The deadly floods in Texas will cause an estimated $18 billion to $22 billion in damage and economic loss. But it won’t be the fossil fuel companies footing the bill. It will be ordinary Texans‚ families already grieving lost loved ones and livelihoods.
As the waters recede, many flood victims will discover they won’t be insured for the damage. Standard homeowners’ insurance doesn’t cover flooding. Separate flood insurance, often prohibitively expensive, isn’t always required, and only a fraction of Texans carry it.
Across the 21 counties included in Gov. Abbott’s disaster declaration, only 10% of homeowners carry federal flood insurance. In Kerr County, the worst-hit area where 95 people died, just 2% of homeowners hold federal flood insurance. In neighboring Kendall County, it is less than 5%.
The tragic loss of life in Texas was undoubtedly fueled by climate change—and climate change is driven by the fossil fuel industry.
Homeowners can purchase a separate flood insurance policy from a private insurance provider, but it is expensive, and the coverage is limited. It’s not yet clear how many Texas flood victims held separate private flood insurance as an add-on to their homeowners policy.
The residents facing the greatest climate-related vulnerabilities, including those living in RVs, mobile homes, or informal housing, face even greater risks. Several RV and mobile home parks in Central Texas were swept away by floodwaters, highlighting how those with the fewest resources are often forced to live in the most dangerous places.
And yet, the insurance industry—an industry that invests billions in fossil fuel companies and underwrites fossil fuel projects—continues to fuel the climate crisis while shielding itself from its financial impacts. Insurers raise premiums, limit coverage, or leave disaster-prone areas altogether, but they remain heavily invested in the fossil fuel economy that’s driving these disasters.
The tragic loss of life in Texas was undoubtedly fueled by climate change—and climate change is driven by the fossil fuel industry. The fossil fuel industry must be held accountable for its contribution to the floods in Texas—and other fossil-fueled climate catastrophes.
Insurance companies must also be called to account. They cannot claim to be managing climate risk while actively financing and underwriting the industries that create it. State insurance regulators should require insurers to divest from fossil fuel companies and stop insuring fossil fuel projects. And responses to the climate-driven insurance crisis should prioritize the needs of residents on the front line of fossil-fueled climate disasters, not insurers’ bottom line.
Extreme weather events will continue to escalate until we confront their root cause. State and local leaders hold the keys to both prevention and recovery. It’s time for them to face reality and protect the people they serve.