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
ryan zinke
Top Official's Disclosure Failure Underscores 'Naked Corruption' of Trump Interior Department
"Congress must say enough is enough and immediately open an investigation into just how deep the rot at Burgum’s Interior goes," said one critic.
Jan 06, 2026
Ethics experts this week raised red flags over a senior US Interior Department official's failure to disclose her family's financial interest in the nation's largest lithium mine, which opponents say was illegally approved by the Trump administration.
In 2018, Frank Falen, husband and former law partner of current Associate Deputy Interior Secretary Karen Budd-Falen—the third-highest ranking Department of Interior (DOI) official—sold the water rights from a family ranch in Humboldt County, Nevada to a subsidiary of Lithium Americas for $3.5 million.
The subsidiary, Lithium Nevada, wanted to build a highly controversial $2.2 billion open-pit lithium mine—Thacker Pass—that required both massive amounts of water and approval from the DOI. Falen's water rights sale also hinged upon DOI approving the mine.
At the time, Budd-Falen worked as the DOI's deputy solicitor for wildlife. In 2019, she sat down for a lunch meeting with Lithium Americas executives in the DOI cafeteria.
“They just happened to mention to me they were going to DC, and I was like, ‘Well, my wife is back there,’” Falen said of the Lithium Americas executives in a New York Times interview. “It was my fault because I just said, ‘Yeah, you should stop by and say hi to my wife.’"
The US Bureau of Land Management (BLM), part of DOI, approved the mine during the final days of Trump's first administration via an expedited process to circumvent lengthy environmental review. Indigenous and conservation groups, working together in the Protect Thacker Pass coalition, subsequently sued over what they argued was the mine's illegal approval.
A Lithium Americas spokesperson told the Times: "We haven’t worked directly with Karen Budd-Falen related to Lithium Americas, nor have we ever met with her in a formal capacity regarding our project.”
However, ethics experts question the financial ties between Falen and Thacker Pass and why Budd-Falen did not publicly disclose her husband's $3.5 million water deal.
“Did she have any oversight of the environmental review process regarding Thacker Pass?" Kyle Roerink, executive director of the Great Basin Water Network, a Nevada conservation group, said during an interview last week with High Country News. “If she didn’t recuse herself, it would fly in the face of the impartial decision-making that Americans expect from government officials.”
Doug Burgum’s third-in-command Karen Budd-Falen made millions after the Trump administration fast-tracked what’s now the nation’s biggest lithium mine. Illegal, conflict of interest, corruption, or whatever you want to call it, there’s a rot in our Interior Department. https://nyti.ms/3LfBVWM
[image or embed]
— Save Our Parks (@saveourparks.us) January 5, 2026 at 1:00 PM
Robert Weissman, co-president of the watchdog group Public Citizen, told the Times: "It’s not clear that Karen Budd-Falen knew she had a conflict, but it’s clear she should have known, and that the public should have known. It’s also clear that she should not have met with Lithium Nevada."
Green groups and Indigenous peoples—including the the Reno-Sparks Indian Colony, Burns Paiute Tribe, and Summit Lake Paiute Tribe—fiercely oppose the mine. Opponents argue the project lacks consent, had a rushed environmental review, and that the mine would threaten wildlife and water and desecrate sacred Indigenous sites.
Thacker Pass, whose name means "rotten moon" to all three tribes, is also the site of an 1865 massacre of dozens and perhaps scores of Northern Paiute men, women, and children by US Cavalry troops. The tribes want it listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
In September, the Trump administration and Lithium Americas reached a deal under which the government will take a 5% equity stake in both the company and the Thacker Pass mine in return for Department of Energy loan money as demand for lithium—a key component of electric vehicle batteries, cellphones, and laptops—is surging worldwide.
The apparent conflict of interest involving Budd-Falen continues a history of corruption at Trump's DOI in both the president's first and current terms. First-term Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke's tenure was plagued by ethics violations and abuse of office. Federal investigators found that Zinke lied to them about his involvement in private land deals while in office, had improper relationships with developers, and improperly used taxpayer funds to pay for chartered aircraft and helicopter flights.
Zinke resigned in 2019. His eventual successor, David Bernhardt, was called a "walking conflict of interest" and "as corrupt as it gets" due to his prior work as a fossil fuel lobbyist.
Budd-Falen could also benefit from the Trump administration's invasion of Venezuela. According to reporting from Public Domain's Jimmy Tobias and Chris D'Angelo, Budd-Falen or her husband hold tens of thousands of dollars worth of stock in fossil fuel companies including ExxonMobil and pipeline firm Enterprise Products Partners.
Responding to Budd-Falen's failure to disclose her family's interest in the Thacker Pass mine, Save Our Parks spokesperson Jayson O’Neill said Monday:
This raises substantial questions about the lack of transparency, clear conflicts of interest, and potential illegal self-dealing at the Interior Department under [Interior Secretary] Doug Burgum. It wasn’t enough for Burgum’s top lieutenant, Karen Budd-Falen, to hold tens of thousands of dollars in Big Oil stocks while advancing their interests at Interior. Now we find out that she worked behind the scenes with Lithium Americas’ representatives and lobbyists, which received fast-track approval, making her and her husband millions.
"This naked corruption and self-dealing is par for the course at Doug Burgum’s Interior Department, which is more focused on self-serving and special interests than the American people and our outdoor heritage," O'Neill added. "Congress must say enough is enough and immediately open an investigation into just how deep the rot at Burgum’s Interior goes.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Is Congress Too Dysfunctional to Fund the National Parks?
The stark difference between the House and Senate versions of a funding measure have some observers speculating that the upcoming impasse may be unresolvable, leading to yet another full or partial government shutdown.
Aug 10, 2023
On a partisan 33-27 vote, the House Appropriations Committee has passed a spending bill that will cause the National Park Service to shed more than 1,000 staff positions as it copes with the return of record-breaking crowds.
If it stands, this 12.5% cut in operating funds would reverse Biden administration efforts to stem the overall decline in Park Service staffing. Between 2010 and 2020, the agency shrank by nearly 30%, losing around 6,000 net employees.
During this period, the ranks of permanent law enforcement rangers also fell substantially while those of seasonal law enforcement rangers deployed during peak seasons have dropped even more. Meanwhile, all these new visitors are getting into more trouble, like trying to take selfies with bison—and getting lost. In just the past six years, there has been explosive growth in park search and rescue operations, with such incidents more than tripling.
In past decades, America’s best idea was one of the few domestic programs enjoying bipartisan support.
However, the House’s impending actions are not based on any workload analyses or targeted to safeguard visitor services. In fact, some riders tacked onto the bill make the effects of overcrowding worse, such as forbidding Glacier National Park from continuing its car reservation system to reduce traffic jams in one of the many popular parks being loved to death.
This Glacier rider is the work of former Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke, who has returned to the House of Representatives after a close election to again represent Montana. Arguably, Zinke should have learned something about Park Service problems and come prepared to offer solutions—but no such luck.
Adding further insult to this impending injury are a posse of other nasty riders stapled into this funding measure, such as stripping any remaining endangered species protections from lower-48 grizzlies and gray wolves, as well as park-specific nuggets, such as
- Impeding any bans on lead ammunition or fishing tackle on federal lands;
- Reinstating mineral leases near the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness; and
- Green-lighting oil and gas development within Florida’s Big Cypress National Preserve.
Meanwhile, the Senate version of this 2024 fiscal year spending bill does not contain big cuts or any of these nasty riders. The stark difference between the House and Senate versions of this funding measure have some observers (including me) speculating that the upcoming impasse may be unresolvable, leading to yet another full or partial government shutdown when the current fiscal year funding runs out at the end of the federal fiscal year next month.
Recently, Fitch Ratings cut the U.S. debt by one notch, from AAA to AA+, partly in response to the brinksmanship in how the federal government handled the debt crisis. This appears to be a recognition by the markets of the growing governance concerns with the current Congress. It apparently has reached the point where we can no longer even manage parks.
In past decades, America’s best idea was one of the few domestic programs enjoying bipartisan support. Ironically, this former font of consensus may have morphed into the source for a new paralyzing partisan divide.
Keep ReadingShow Less
171 Republicans and 150 Democrats Vote Down Effort to Withdraw Troops From Syria
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Speaker Kevin McCarthy were among the no votes on the resolution led by Rep. Matt Gaetz and backed by progressives.
Mar 09, 2023
More than 170 House Republicans and 150 Democrats teamed up Wednesday to defeat a resolution aimed at withdrawing all remaining U.S. troops from Syria, a proposal led by right-wing Rep. Matt Gaetz and supported by members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
The measure, just the latest House push to bring the nation's yearslong military presence in Syria to an end, failed by a vote of 103 to 321, with Democratic House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York and Republican Speaker Kevin McCarthy of California among the no votes.
The resolution would have required the president to remove 900-plus U.S. troops from Syria within 180 days of passage, barring congressional action to authorize their continued presence.
Opponents of the resolution who support prolonging the occupation echoed the Pentagon claim that U.S. forces are needed in Syria to prevent a resurgence of ISIS and to ensure "stability" in the region.
"Either we fight 'em in Syria, or we'll fight 'em here," said Republican Rep. Ryan Zinke of Montana.
While lamenting the proposal's defeat, peace advocates noted that it garnered more Republican support than any previous war powers resolution, with 47 GOP yes votes. Fifty-six House Democrats—including Reps. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Ro Khanna of California, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, and Cori Bush of Missouri—voted for the resolution.
“There is a new generation of thinking on two central issues," Khanna told The Intercept following Wednesday's vote. "A concern about wars and entanglements over the last 20 years that have not made us safer, and a concern over the offshoring of our domestic production over bad trade deals that have left the working class and middle class poorer."
"I believe that this new generation of political leaders can help fix those two mistakes that the country has made, and that there is an emerging consensus that we should not have our troops fighting overseas without congressional authorization," Khanna added. "If the president wants to make the case for a certain presence that is required for America to protect the Kurds, then he should come to Congress and work with us to make that case."
As The Intercept's Ryan Grim and Daniel Boguslaw noted, "the legal rationale for U.S. occupation" of Syria is "dubious at best."
Opponents of the Syria war powers resolution, including Zinke, pointed to the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF)—a law that U.S. presidents have cited to give legal cover for airstrikes and ground operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia, and elsewhere.
"With ISIS suppressed," Grim and Boguslaw wrote, the Biden administration "has suggested the purpose of the occupation is to act as a bulwark against Iran."
Pointing to U.S. officials' claim that the presence of American troops prevents Iranian forces from establishing a "land bridge" to shuttle weapons to allies in Lebanon, Grim and Boguslaw observed that Iran "already has a direct 'land bridge' through eastern Syria to Lebanon; the U.S. occupation merely adds some time to the Iranian truckers' journey."
Critics of the U.S. troop presence in Syria have stressed that Congress did not specifically authorize a military operation to confront "Iran-backed militias" in Syria.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular