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.
By repealing the Endangerment Finding, Administrator Lee Zeldin is disabling the central moral and legal framework designed to keep us safe and healthy.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s decision last month to repeal the Endangerment Finding is like tossing out the 10 Commandments.
That might sound hyperbolic. But sadly, it isn’t. After months of relentless anti-environmental regulatory efforts at the EPA, Administrator Lee Zeldin is now tearing out the foundation of our country’s climate regulatory framework. Known as the “Endangerment Finding,” this 2009 document is the scientific basis for regulating greenhouse gas emissions. By abrogating that finding, Zeldin and the EPA are essentially stripping away our government’s ability to regulate the emissions that are heating our planet. It is not only a profoundly misguided decision, it is one aimed at destroying the legal framework our country has developed to drive a coherent climate policy.
Interestingly, back when he was a congressman, Administrator Zeldin supported some climate regulations. At Dayenu, the leading Jewish climate organization that I direct, we had actually hoped that the first Jewish head of the EPA might honor the most basic of Jewish values—like pikuach nefesh (saving a life)—and pursue environmental policies that support a more livable future in the face of a fast accelerating climate crisis.
Instead, Administrator Zeldin has embarked on an almost unconceivable path. Since taking office earlier this year, he’s overseen the wholesale dismantling of the environmental policy framework designed to keep Americans safe. Scores of regulations have been repealed, imploding the basic legal and regulatory structure of American environmental policy. The coup de grace, though, has been his decision last month to abandon the Endangerment Finding.
The Endangerment Finding translates the lived reality of the climate threat—namely, that greenhouse gas emissions pose a threat to our health and well-being—into a legal framework that has enabled us to begin mounting a substantive response.
Like the 10 Commandments, the Endangerment Finding is not only a legal framework, it is also a codification of basic truths. The commandment not to murder (lo tirzah), for example reflects a truth: that it is wrong to wantonly kill another human being. The commandment institutionalizes a basic moral precept. The same goes for the Endangerment Finding. By now, it should be blindingly obvious to us all that the threat to our climate is here and real. Whether or not we choose to accept that truth, we are all being impacted by climate change. From wildfire smoke in New York, to ravaging hurricanes in Florida, to the wildfires in Los Angeles, to floods in Texas, to summers that are each hotter than the last. We now know, at the most intrinsic level, that our world is not the same as it was five years ago. Or 50. The climate is changing, and we as humans are responsible.
The Endangerment Finding translates the lived reality of the climate threat—namely, that greenhouse gas emissions pose a threat to our health and well-being—into a legal framework that has enabled us to begin mounting a substantive response. True, climate regulations have oftentimes not gone far enough. The first Trump administration did terrific damage to crucial pieces of environmental policy passed under the Obama administration. But what is happening under Administrator Zeldin takes our nation to an infinitely more reckless place.
Administrator Zeldin claimed that the Endangerment Finding was “the holy grail of climate change religion.” This not only makes a mockery of religion, it distorts the objective science and obvious moral framework at hand. As people of faith, we are concerned with the fundamental principles and values of our society. Administrator Zeldin is weaponizing the very concept of religion to suggest that those of us confronting the climate crisis are fearmongers, that the lived realities of millions of Americans harmed by climate change can simply be ignored. But his language is a smokescreen. We know what the truth is here. The EPA is essentially taking the 10 Commandments out of the Bible—they are disabling the central moral and legal framework designed to keep us safe and healthy.
Administrator Zeldin is knowingly courting disaster. As an administrator, as an American, and as a Jew, he must do better. It is not too late to reverse course.
"The days of shackling America's oil, gas, and coal companies are over," said spokesperson Melinda McFossilShill.
A renaming ceremony for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was held at its Washington, D.C. headquarters on Thursday to give the EPA a name that reflects its priorities under Administrator Lee Zeldin and Republican President Donald Trump.
On the heels of Zeldin's visit to New England that spotlighted a push for the Constitution gas pipeline, a small group gathered outside the EPA building on Thursday to reintroduce it as the Environmental Pollution Agency and unveil its new logo.
"The days of shackling America's oil, gas, and coal companies are over," said Environmental Pollution Agency spokesperson Melinda McFossilShill. "The Trump administration stands for freedom, and that includes the freedom to pollute."
McFossilShill is not a real representative of the agency, but rather a critic of what it's become. Thursday's "Make Pollution Great Again!" event was a protest, led by groups including Shut Down D.C. and the local arm of Extinction Rebellion.
In addition to McFossilShill, protesters took on the personas of fossil fuel executives and backers, including Joe Gasfracker, vice president for corporate capture of government (a false name and position) at the (real) American Petroleum Institute.
"I want to extend my deepest gratitude to Administrator Zeldin and President Trump for finally ending the charade of so-called 'environmental protection' and making government work for our patriotic fossil fuel corporations again," he said.
"There are hundreds of people dying in floods, thousands dying in hurricanes, and millions being sickened by particulate matter pollution, wildfire smoke, and extreme heat, but we must balance that against the billions of dollars in profit that our members make," Gasfracker continued. "Billions are more than millions, so obviously our profits must take precedence."
Another protester—dubbed Pete Pollution, executive director of Energy Villains for Increased Leakage (EVIL)—declared that "the American Dream has always been about the freedom to pour toxic chemicals into every community."
"If we don't pollute America's environment, who will?" added Pollution. Other participants held signs that called for making rivers burn, causing more asthma, and destroying human health.
Protesters renamed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency the Environmental Pollution Agency at its Washington, D.C. headquarters on August 7, 2025. (Photo: Extinction Rebellion D.C.)
During Trump's second term, the EPA has faced intense criticism for a range of actions. Over the past month, the agency has put 144 employees on leave after they signed a letter criticizing the administration's "harmful" policies, eliminated its scientific research arm in the "ultimate Friday night purge," proposed reregistering a pesticide twice banned by federal courts, and moved to cancel $7 billion in solar grants for low- and middle-income households.
Perhaps most notably, the agency also unveiled a rule to rescind the 2009 "endangerment finding" that has enabled federal regulations aimed at the fossil fuel-driven climate emergency over the past 15 years.
Further, Trump last month signed a series of proclamations to provide what he called "regulatory relief" to over 100 coal, chemical manufacturing, iron ore processing, and sterile medical equipment facilities, with the White House claiming that rules imposed on them under former Democratic President Joe Biden's EPA were "burdensome."
At the time, John Walke, clean air director for the environmental group Natural Resources Defense Council, accused Trump of signing a "literal free pass for polluters," and warned that "if your family lives downwind of these plants, this is going to mean more toxic chemicals in the air you breathe."
Elected Democrats—who have minorities in both chambers of Congress—have joined climate, environmental, and public health advocates in calling out Trump and Zeldin for various moves.
Jay Inslee: Trump and Zeldin have turned EPA into ‘Environmental Pollution Agency’ by revoking essential climate rule www.msnbc.com/ali-velshi/w...
[image or embed]
— Ali Velshi (@velshi.com) August 4, 2025 at 11:51 AM
On Thursday, U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Environment and Public Works Committee Ranking Member Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) led a letter to Zeldin about his proposal to gut power plant pollution standards.
"Climate change and toxic air pollution are serious issues," dozens of Senate Democrats wrote to the EPA administrator. "We represent millions of constituents who risk poisoning from mercury and air toxics and who are facing the rising costs of the climate crisis."
"Congress established the Clean Air Act to protect our constituents from these dangers. We urge EPA to follow its directive," they added, urging Zeldin to withdraw two proposals on fossil fuel plant emissions.
In a Thursday statement, Schumer said that "the Trump administration is saying to hell with five decades worth of protection against deadly pollution and neurotoxins that has saved thousands of lives, made communities safer, and our economy stronger. Why? To appease Big Oil and fossil fuel billionaires."
"The Trump administration's obsession with gutting clean air protections and allowing more poison into the air is reckless, dangerous, and a clear reminder: Republicans care about their donors, not you," he charged. "The EPA needs to stop ignoring the science and the facts and immediately reverse course and put the health and safety of Americans first."
Donald Trump is using his bully pulpit to foist fossil fuels on the U.S. and on the world, but his efforts may backfire.
When I was a cub reporter at the New Yorker in the early 1980s, New York City was actually a somewhat seedy and dangerous (if fascinating) place (sort of fitting the image currently assigned it by MAGA ideologues who have ignored its almost complete makeover into a remarkably safe enclave). In those days, anyone wandering the Times Square neighborhood where I worked could count on seeing a three-card monte game on every block, with fast-talking card sharps hustling the tourists. It wasn’t very sophisticated, but it must have worked because they were out there every day.
The grift playing out this week in the federal government around climate is no more complicated, but it too relies on speed and distraction. On the first day of his term, U.S. President Donald Trump set up the con by asking the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to evaluate its 2009 finding that greenhouse gas emissions were dangerous. Yesterday, EPA czar and former failed gubernatorial candidate Lee Zeldin dutifully made his long-awaited announcement: Nothing to fear from carbon dioxide, methane, and the other warming gases.
“Today is the greatest day of deregulation our nation has seen,” EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said when he first announced the idea. “We are driving a dagger straight into the heart of the climate change religion to drive down cost of living for American families, unleash American energy, bring auto jobs back to the U.S., and more.”
Trump didn’t really need to do this in order to stop working on the climate crisis—he’s done that already. The point here is to try and make that decision permanent, so that some future administration can’t work on climate either, without going through the long and bureaucratic process of once again finding that the most dangerous thing on the Earth is in fact dangerous.
The problem with this simple one-two punch from Trump and Zeldin is that someone will challenge it in court as soon as it becomes official. “If EPA finalizes this illegal and cynical approach, we will see them in court,” said Christy Goldufss of the Natural Resources Defense Council. And they’ll have an argument, since—well, floods, fires, smoke, storms. I mean, if carbon dioxide was dangerous in 2009, that’s a hell of a lot more obvious 16 years later. The Supreme Court upheld the idea that CO2 was dangerous in 2007—here’s how Justice John Paul Stevens began that opinion:
A well-documented rise in global temperatures has coincided with a significant increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Respected scientists believe the two trends are related. For when carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere, it acts like the ceiling of a greenhouse, trapping solar energy and retarding the escape of reflected heat. It is therefore a species—the most important species—of a “greenhouse gas.”
But that was a different, and non-corrupted, Supreme Court. John Roberts wrote the dissent, and he’s doubtless eager to do with climate change what he’s already done with abortion. But that would be easier if they had some “well-respected experts” to say that there’s not any trouble—stage three of this grift. It’s true that there aren’t any well-respected experts that believe that, but the White House has hired several aged contrarians who have maintained for decades that global warming is not a problem, even as the temperature (and the damage) soared. And yesterday they released a new report that reads more or less like a Wall Street Journal op-ed. In it they cherry pick data, turn to old and long-debunked studies, and in general set up a group of strawmen so absurd that one almost has to grin in admiration. Actual climate scientists were lining up to say their papers had been misquoted, but all you needed was a modicum of knowledge to see how stupid the whole enterprise was. Just as an example, our contrarians hit the old talking point that CO2 is plant food—indeed, “below 180 ppm [parts per million], the growth rates of many C3 species are reduced 40-60% relative to 350 ppm (Gerhart and Ward 2010) and growth has stopped altogether under experimental conditions of 60-140 ppm CO2.” Great point except that there is no one calling for, and no way, to get CO2 levels anywhere near that low. I led a large-scale effort to remind people that anything above 350 ppm is too high, and that was so successful that we’re now at 420 ppm and climbing. Too little carbon dioxide is a problem for the planet in the way that too little arrogance is a problem for the president
And yet, when it finally reaches the court, they will doubtless cite this entirely cynical and bad-faith document to buttress the case that the EPA should be allowed to stop paying attention to carbon dioxide. As I said, it’s a pretty easy to follow swindle, but they count on the fact that most people won’t. Butter won’t melt in their mouths—as Energy Secretary (and former fracking executive) Chris Wright said in his foreword to the new report:
I chose the [authors] for their rigor, honesty, and willingness to elevate the debate. I exerted no control over their conclusions. What you’ll read are their words, drawn from the best available data and scientific assessments. I’ve reviewed the report carefully, and I believe it faithfully represents the state of climate science today.
Every word of that is nonsense, but it doesn’t matter—because it’s an official document on the right letterhead it will do the trick. This is precisely what science looks like when it’s perverted away from the search for truth. It’s disgusting.
Still, there’s another grift also underway this week, and this one that may work the other way and do the world some good. The president announced his new trade deal with the European Union, which calls for 15% tariffs—but it’s sweetened by the European promise to buy $750 billion worth of American natural gas in the next three years. Trump has essentially been using the tariff process as a shakedown, a way to repay his Big Oil cronies for their hundreds of millions in support: it’s pretty much exactly like a mob protection racket, where you buy from the guy you’re told to or you get a rock through the window. The White House quickly put out a list of thank yous, including one from the American Petroleum Institute: “We welcome POTUS’ announcement of a U.S.-E.U. trade framework that will help solidify America’s role as Europe’s leading source of affordable, reliable and secure energy.”
And yet, as Reuters first noted and then many others also calculated, the numbers are clearly nonsense. First, the E.U. actually doesn’t buy any energy itself, and it can’t tell its member states what to purchase; in fact, even those member states usually rely on private companies to buy stuff. Second, it’s physically impossible to imagine the U.S. selling Europe $250 billion worth of natural gas a year. As Tim McDonnell wrote at Semafor:
Total U.S. energy exports to the world were worth $318 billion last year, of which about $74.4 billion went to the E.U., according to Rystad Energy. So to meet the target, the E.U. would need to more than triple its purchases of U.S. fossil fuels—and the U.S. would need to stop selling them to almost anyone else.
“These numbers make no sense,” said Anne-Sophie Corbeau, a researcher specializing in European gas markets at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy.
The biggest reason it won’t happen, though, is that Europe is quickly switching to renewable energy. As Bill Farren-Price, head of gas research at the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies, explained to the Financial Times:
“European gas demand is soft, and energy prices are falling. In any case, it is private companies not states that contract for energy imports,” he said. “Like it or not, in Europe the windmills are winning.”
Trump will doubtless coerce some countries into buying more liquefied natural gas (LNG) in the short run, and that will do damage. Global Venture announced Tuesday that they’d found the financing for the massive Calcasieu Pass 2 (CP2) export terminal, which has been opposed by both climate scientists and environmental justice activists. As Louisiana’s Roishetta Ozane said Tuesday:
The CP2 LNG facility is an assault on everything I hold dear. It’s a direct threat to the health and safety of my community and an assault on the livelihoods of our fishermen and shrimpers.
I’ve seen my kids struggle with asthma, eczema, headaches, and other illnesses that result from the pollution petrochemical and LNG plants dump into my community. I won’t stop opposing this project in every way I can, because my children—and everyone’s children—deserve to breathe clean air, drink clean water, and live in a healthy environment. I refuse to let Venture Global turn my community into a sacrifice zone for the sake of its profits.
But my guess is that such facilities won’t be pumping for as many decades as their investors imagine. Europe pivoted hard to renewables because Russian President Vladimir Putin proved an unstable supplier of natural gas; Trump’s America is hardly more reliable, since the president has made it clear he’ll tear up any agreement on a whim. Any rational nation will be making the obvious calculation: “I may not have gas of my own, but I’ve got wind and sun and they’re cheap. I’d rather rely on the wind than the windbag.”
Trump’s a conman, but he’s also a mark.