

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
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.
Three recent stories about measles have implications that are far more consequential for the fate of humanity than Trump’s racist memes or his destabilizing antics on the world stage.
Not until President Donald Trump is long gone will Americans feel the full impact of his most destructive policies and his administration’s incompetence. Today’s topic: Measles.
“For children, the risks of measles are especially grave. Complications, which occur in 1 in 5 people who have the disease, can include pneumonia, blindness, permanent neurologic injury, and death. These outcomes are well-documented, particularly among young children and those with delayed access to medical care.” (Theresa Cheng, MD, JD, assistant clinical professor in the Department of Emergency Medicine at UCSF-Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and a lawyer.)
Measles is preventable, but community immunity requires a 92-94% vaccination rate. Since the introduction of the measles vaccine in 1963, the incidence of the disease has decreased by over 99%, thanks to the combination of immunity through prior exposure and vaccination rates above the required threshold.
Secretary of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is reversing that remarkable public health achievement.
Someone who does not get vaccinated puts others—mostly children who have no voice in the critical decision to protect or jeopardize their health—at serious risk of injury or death.
Three recent stories about measles have implications that are far more consequential for the fate of humanity than Trump’s racist memes or his destabilizing antics on the world stage.
Between 1991 and 2024, South Carolina had a total of only 8 measles cases—6 of which occurred within a single household in 2018.
In October 2025, the state reported the first three cases in the current outbreak.
As of February 17, South Carolina had 962 confirmed measles cases; 253 involve children under 5, 615 are ages 5 to 17, 85 are adults, and nine ages are unknown.
Since the outbreak, 20 individuals have been hospitalized with complications related to the disease.
Ninety-five percent of the infected individuals were not vaccinated.
The area of the state experiencing the greatest number of cases (95% of them) also led the state in the decline in vaccination rate: Spartanburg County’s rate dropped from 93.9% in 2021-2022 to 88.9% the current school year—well below the critical threshold required for community immunity.
Kennedy has gutted the Department of Health and Human Services. He has replaced scientific and medical experts with hacks who adhere here to his willful ignorance.
One of those appointees is the leader of the federal panel that recommends vaccines for Americans, Dr. Kirk Milhorn, chair of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. On January 22, Milhorn said that vaccines protecting children from polio and measles, and perhaps all diseases, should be optional.
“What we are doing is returning individual autonomy to the first order—not public health but individual autonomy to the first order.”
What he and his colleagues are actually doing is killing us. Kennedy has already dropped six vaccines from the childhood immunization schedule.
Only individual states, which have ultimate responsibility for vaccine schedules, have saved the country from the full destructive force of Kennedy’s anti-science, anti-vaxxer crusade. But his ascension as head of the nation’s federal public health policy has empowered his allies to target state childhood vaccination mandates.
The Medical Freedom Act Coalition includes the Children’s Health Defense—a nonprofit group that Kennedy co-founded. It is pushing legislation that would end state laws that codify vaccination schedules. Such legislation is pending in several states.
Asked about the effort, Kennedy said he was not involved, but added, “I believe in freedom of choice.”
As the impact of his attack on science intensifies, the overall public health costs will be staggering.
Earlier this month, Chris Anders, a Republican state lawmaker in West Virginia, introduced a bill that would eliminate his state’s school vaccination mandates, including the requirement that county health departments offer free shots to low-income children.
“If people decide not to be vaccinated, that is their choice,” he argued. “Just like if they decide not to wear a seatbelt or a motorcycle helmet or anything else. If they decide that, they suffer the consequences.”
Kennedy, Milhorn, Anders, and their like-minded anti-vaxxers march under the “freedom of choice” banner. It’s a red herring that omits a crucial element of the equation: Someone who does not get vaccinated puts others—mostly children who have no voice in the critical decision to protect or jeopardize their health—at serious risk of injury or death.
For a long time to come, everyone else’s kids will bear those consequences.
The measles vaccine is the small tip of an enormous public health iceberg. Kennedy and his anti-vaxxers in charge of public health have “sent a chill through the entire [vaccine] industry,” according to Dr. John Coller of Johns Hopkins University, a member of the executive committee of the Alliance for mRNA Medicines.
As Kennedy creates unwarranted fears about the safety and efficacy of lifesaving vaccines, some Americans will continue to believe him and vaccine sales will suffer. As he cuts research funding for new vaccine development, America will be unprepared for the next pandemic. As the impact of his attack on science intensifies, the overall public health costs will be staggering.
Future historians will scratch their heads in disbelief at what we are doing to ourselves and our children.
"Pretty much all federal scientists working on climate in the US have had to self-censor," said one scientist. "Thankfully much of the underlying science is still occurring, even if they cannot talk about it."
National Aeronautics and Space Administration Administrator Bill Nelson declared a year ago that "once again, the temperature record has been shattered—2024 was the hottest year since recordkeeping began in 1880," and NASA's statement noted climate change and its consequences, from sweltering heat to devastating wildfires. This week, under a president who has called the fossil fuel-driven crisis "the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world," there was no such language from the US agency.
NASA did release a statement about its latest findings on Wednesday. The agency said that, like other experts around the world, its scientists found that "Earth's global surface temperature in 2025 was slightly warmer than 2023—but within the margin of error the two years are effectively tied," and "the hottest year on record remains 2024."
Specifically, 2025 saw average temperatures 2.14°F or 1.19°C above the 1951-80 average, the statement said, also detailing NASA's data sources. However, in line with what President Donald Trump's second administration has done across the federal government, the release does not mention human-caused climate change.
Here's the data:
[image or embed]
— Michael E. Mann (@michaelemann.bsky.social) January 14, 2026 at 8:22 PM
The omission quickly caught the attention of journalists and scientists, including Agence France-Presse's Issam Ahmed, who began a Wednesday report on the topic with, "Don't say the c-word" and spoke with various experts:
"The US government is now, like Russia and Saudi Arabia, a petrostate under Trump and Republican rule, and the actions of all of its agencies and departments can be understood in terms of the agenda of the polluters that are running the show," University of Pennsylvania climatologist Michael Mann told AFP. "It is therefore entirely unsurprising that NASA administrators are attempting to bury findings of its own agency that conflict with its climate denial agenda."
Zeke Hausfather, a research scientist at Berkeley Earth, added, "I'm just happy they were allowed to put out a press release."
"Pretty much all federal scientists working on climate in the US have had to self-censor and leave out reference to human influences on climate change, unfortunately," he told AFP. "Thankfully much of the underlying science is still occurring, even if they cannot talk about it."
Mike Scott of Carbon Copy Communications, told Euronews Green on Thursday that NASA's new statement is "consistent" with the administration's other "anti-climate actions."
In September, the US Department of Energy—led by climate liar and former fracking CEO Chris Wright—added "climate change" to its "list of words to avoid" at the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Other banned terms include carbon/CO2 "footprint," clean, decarbonization, "dirty" energy, emissions, energy transition, green, sustainability/sustainable, and tax breaks/tax credits/subsidies.
Last month, the Trump administration removed all references to human-caused climate change from Environmental Protection Agency webpages, as well as data showing global warming over recent decades and the resulting risks. Daniel Swain, a climate scientist at the University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources, called it "one of the more dramatic scrubbings we've seen so far in the climate space."
And we have a NASA press release at least! www.nasa.gov/news-release...
[image or embed]
— Alexandra Witze (@alexwitze.bsky.social) January 14, 2026 at 9:28 AM
Since returning to office nearly a year ago with support from Big Oil's money, Trump has also declared a "national energy emergency" to help deliver on his campaign pledge to "drill, baby, drill," rolled back various climate policies implemented under his Democratic predecessor, ditched the Paris climate agreement again along with dozens of other international treaties and organizations, refused to attend an annual United Nations summit, and more.
"This increasingly authoritarian regime has operated with impunity to tear up climate and clean energy policies, lie about the scientific realities of climate change and the facts on renewable energy, and ram through measures to boost fossil fuels and the profits of polluters," Rachel Cleetus, policy director with the Climate and Energy program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, wrote Thursday.
"They have attacked the federal scientific enterprise built up over decades through taxpayer investments, fired or forced out agency experts, and cut funding for critical science. And a compliant Congress has enabled this destructive agenda, including by rubber-stamping some of the president's illegal actions and by failing to exercise its constitutional powers to check his tyrannical power grabs," she continued.
"This year has also brought extraordinary efforts to expose and fight back against the worst excesses of this unhinged administration," she noted, pointing to lawsuits, organizing, and wins in states. "And as we face down another tough year under the anti-science, authoritarian Trump administration, we're fired up to keep up the fight for science and for our democracy. We hope you'll join us—because despite it all, that future is ours to build."
The finance industry is relying on climate models that understate the speed of climate change and likely economic impact. New report warns that climate-driven inflation, financial shocks, and insurance withdrawals could happen sooner than anticipated. 🧪greenfuturessolutions.com/news/parasol...
[image or embed]
— Scientists for Global Responsibility (@responsiblesci.bsky.social) January 14, 2026 at 4:38 AM
Like Cleetus, Scott of Carbon Copy Communications expects Trump and his allies to continue waging its war on science.
"It's not clear what climate institutions are left for Trump to try and dismantle, but there is little doubt that if he finds them, he will go after them," he warned. "The climate denial is really worrying and out of line with almost every other country in the world, including most of the world's largest oil producers. Failing to acknowledge the impacts of climate change will leave the US less able to deal with those impacts—which will continue to happen whatever Trump thinks."
"The US stance is bad for science, it's bad for the US economy and its citizens, and it's bad for the climate," Scott added. "It's also unsustainable. Climate change will not stop because the US administration doesn't believe in it. The American response to climate-related disasters will be worse if it doesn't understand why extreme weather events and other climate impacts are happening."
"This is self-sabotage by a wildly ignorant and malicious administration cutting off their nose to spite their face," said one hurricane researcher.
One US House Democrat pledged Tuesday night that Colorado officials will fight the Trump administration's latest attack on science "with every legal tool that we have" after top White House budget adviser Russell Vought announced a decision to break up a crucial climate research center in Boulder.
Rep. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.) called the decision to dismantle the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) "a deeply dangerous" action.
"NCAR is one of the most renowned scientific facilities in the WORLD—where scientists perform cutting-edge research every day," said Neguse. "We will fight this reckless directive."
Vought, the director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) said the National Science Foundation (NSF), which contracts the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (UCAR) to run NCAR, "will be breaking up" the center and has begun a "comprehensive review," with "vital activities such as weather research" being moved to another entity.
He added that NCAR is "one of the largest sources of climate alarmism in the country.”
But scientists pointed to the center's 65-year history of making major advances in climate research and developing systems that scientists use regularly.
NCAR developed GPS dropsondes, which are dropped from the center's aircraft into the eye of hurricanes to gather crucial data and improve forecasts, as well as severe weather warnings and analyses of the economic impacts that weather can bring, Daniel Swain, a climate scientist at the University of California, told USA Today, which first reported on the plan to dismantle the facility.
Neguse also called the decision to shutter NCAR "blatantly retaliatory." The breakup of the center was announced days after President Donald Trump announced his plan to pardon Tina Peters, despite uncertainty over his authority to do so. The former county clerk was convicted in Colorado court on felony charges of allowing someone to access secure voting system data—part of an effort to prove the baseless conspiracy theory pushed by Trump that the 2020 election had been stolen from him.
Trump attacked Colorado's Democratic governor, Jared Polis, over the Peters case last week, calling him "incompetent" and "pathetic."
Also on Tuesday, the administration announced it was canceling $109 million in environmental transportation grants for Colorado that were aimed at boosting investment in electric vehicles, rail improvements, and other research.
Writer Benjamin Kunkel said the dismantling of NCAR is evidently "what happens to a state whose leading officials do accept climate science... and don't accept that Trump won the 2020 election."
Polis said Tuesday that his government had not received any communication from the White House about the NCAR review and dismantling, but "if true, public safety is at risk and science is being attacked."
"Climate change is real, but the work of NCAR goes far beyond climate science," he said. "NCAR delivers data around severe weather events like fires and floods that help our country save lives and property, and prevent devastation for families.”
The White House Tuesday said it objected to UCAR's "woke direction," including its efforts to "make the sciences more welcoming, inclusive, and justice-centered" via the Rising Voices Center for Indigenous and Earth Sciences and wind turbine research that aims to "better understand and predict the impact of weather conditions and changing climate on offshore wind production.”
The administration also said the review of NCAR will eliminate "green new scam research activities"—green energy research completed by many of the center's 830 employees.
Climate scientist Katherine Hayhoe warned that the dismantling of NCAR was an attack on "quite literally our global mothership."
"NCAR supports the scientists who fly into hurricanes, the meteorologists who develop new radar technology, the physicists who envision and code new weather models, and yes—the largest community climate model in the world," said Hayhoe. "Dismantling NCAR is like taking a sledgehammer to the keystone holding up our scientific understanding of the planet."
Hurricane specialist Michael Lowry said the center is "crucial to cutting-edge meteorology and improvements in weather forecasting."
"It's far, far bigger than a 'climate' research lab," he said. "This is self-sabotage by a wildly ignorant and malicious administration cutting off their nose to spite their face."
The president this year has also pushed massive cuts to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, where major climate and weather research takes place. The cuts have come as 2024 has been named the hottest year on record and scientists have warned that planetary heating has contributed to recent weather disasters.
“Any plans to dismantle NSF NCAR," UCAR president Antonio Busalacchi told the Washington Post, "would set back our nation’s ability to predict, prepare for, and respond to severe weather and other natural disasters."