Senator to Pruitt: EPA meddling in health study ‘unconscionable’
By Annie Snider, Alex Guillen and Anthony Adragna May 16, 2018
Sen. Pat Leahy said efforts by the White House and political officials at EPA to block the chemicals assessment “unconscionable,” and he pointed to a community in his state that is grappling with contamination of that chemical. | Win McNamee/Getty Images
Senate Democrats tore into Scott Pruitt on Wednesday, blasting the Environmental Protection Agency’s meddling in a report on toxic chemicals as “unconscionable” and calling the EPA administrator’s multiple ethics controversies an embarrassment to the agency.
“You’re trailing a string of ethical lapses and controversies, they’re an embarrassment to the agency, an embarrassment to Republicans and Democrats alike,” Sen. Pat Leahy (D-Vt.) told Pruitt at a Senate hearing. “Forget about your own ego and your first class travel and your special phone booths and all these things that just make you a laughingstock and your agency a laughingstock.”
Pruitt has faced a wave of scandals over the past few months, with scrutiny focused on his first-class flights, extensive security detail, privacy phone booth, and below-market condo rental from an energy lobbyist. With news this week that EPA’s Inspector General would look into Pruitt’s use of multiple email accounts, he is now facing more than a dozen probes and investigations from Congress, the White House and his agency’s internal watchdog.
And earlier this week, POLITICO reported that EPA helped to bury a federal study that would have increased warnings about toxic chemicals found in hundreds of water supplies across the country. That report showed Pruitt’s senior aides intervened in the release of the Health and Human Services Department assessment into PFOA and PFOS after theWhite House warned of a “public relations nightmare.”
Leahy said efforts by the White House and political officials at EPA to block the chemicals assessment “unconscionable,” and he pointed to a community in his state that is grappling with contamination of that chemical.
“It’s incomprehensible to the people in Bennington and in Vermont why an agency that works for them — their tax dollars are paying for it — whose charge it is to protect their health, turns their back on them and tries to hide health dangers,” Leahy said in his opening statement.
Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) pressed Pruitt on his requests that his security detail use his vehicle’s lights and sirens to beat Washington traffic and get to a restaurant.
“I don’t recall that happening,” Pruitt answered. But Udall shot back by referencing an email from Pruitt’s former security chief, Pasquale “Nino” Perrotta, that said “Administrator Pruitt encourages the use” of those lights and sirens. Udall’s office has not released that email. POLITICO has reported that Perrotta goaded and encouraged such behavior on security matters.
Even the Sen. Lisa Murkowski, chairwoman of the Appropriations panel hosting Pruitt, said she saw “legitimate questions that need to be answered” about the ethics scandals plaguing Administrator Scott Pruitt.
“Unfortunately, I am concerned that many of the important policy efforts that you are engaged in are being overshadowed because of a series of issues related to you and your management of the agency,” Murkowski said at the opening the budget hearing.
Much like appearance last month in front of two House panels, Pruitt shifted the blame for many of the recent scandals, blaming “processes” at the agency not being followed for some of his ongoing spending and ethical issues, and he told Senate Appropriators he had taken steps to avoid similar issues going forward.
“There have been decisions over the last 16 or so months, that as I look back, I would not make those same decisions again,” Pruitt said.
But he stopped short of apologizing, and blamed critics of his deregulation agenda for the negative publicity.
“I want to rectify those going forward,” Pruitt continued. “I also want to highlight for you that some of the criticism is unfounded and I think exaggerated. And I think it feeds this division that we’ve seen around very important issues affecting the environment.”
Pruitt highlighted the decision to install a $43,000 phone booth in his office as one he’d taken steps to avoid going forward, pointing to a memo that gave three top staffers authority today to approve spending above $5,000 on his behalf.
Udall, who called on Pruitt to resign because of the recent controversies, said Pruitt was unfit to lead the agency because he didn’t believe in its mission to protect human health and the environment.
“It needs to be said that your tenure at the EPA is a betrayal of the American people,” he said, criticizing not just the ethics scandals, but also his regulatory rollbacks.
“This isn’t cooperative federalism, it’s flat-out abandonment,” he said.
Keyless Cars Have Killed More Than 2 Dozen People Since 2006: Report
Nina Golgowski, HuffPost May 14, 2018
A new report is highlighting the risks of keyless car ignitions after more than two dozen people died from carbon monoxide poisoning after mistakenly leaving a vehicle running in their garage.
Since 2006, at least 28 deaths and 45 injuries have been linked to keyless engines that do not automatically shut off after the driver exits the car, even if the driver leaves with the fob required to activate the engine, a review by The New York Times found.
In each case, the driver was found to have inadvertently left the car running in a garage. Many keyless vehicles do not need the fob nearby to remain running. The error caused the attached homes to fill up with the exhaust’s toxic carbon monoxide gas, which is odorless and colorless.
Doug Schaub, whose father, Fred Schaub, died in his Florida home after leaving his Toyota RAV4 running in his garage, summed it up as a simple mistake that can have grave consequences.
“After 75 years of driving, my father thought that when he took the key with him when he left the car, the car would be off,” he told The New York Times.
The exact number of deaths attributed to the keyless ignitions is not known, as official records have not been kept. The Times relied on news reports, lawsuits, police and fire records and incidents tracked by advocacy groups to complete its review.
After 75 years of driving, my father thought that when he took the key with him when he left the car, the car would be off. Doug Schaub, whose father died after leaving his keyless vehicle running in his garage
Almost half the fatalities and injuries reviewed by the Times involved Toyota models, including Lexus, a luxury vehicle division of Toyota.
Toyota, in a statement to HuffPost on Monday, argued that its products meet all safety standards.
“Toyota’s Smart Key System meets or exceeds all relevant federal safety standards while providing added convenience, improved theft prevention and personal security benefits,” a company spokesperson said in an email. “Toyota’s Smart Key System also provides multiple layers of visual and auditory warnings to alert occupants that the vehicle is running when the driver exits with the key fob.”
The NHTSA also argued that some car owners want their car to remain running when they walk away, such as when they leave a pet inside that needs heat or air conditioning.
“Since there’s no traditional key to operate, it can be easy to forget to put the car in park when you shut it off ― which can lead the car to roll away,” the video warns. “If the car is parked in an enclosed garage and you accidentally forget to turn off the engine, it can even result in carbon monoxide poisoning and death.”
Such deaths make up just a small fraction of fatal carbon monoxide poisonings annually in the U.S., according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which recorded 2,244 carbon monoxide fatalities from 2010 to 2015, with most of them in the winter months.
Enbridge: Damaged oil pipeline was dented less than 1 inch
The Associated Press, May 14, 2018
Lansing, Mich. (AP) — The company that operates twin oil pipelines in the Straits of Mackinac says one of the lines suspected of being struck by a tugboat anchor was dented more than three-fourths of an inch.
Enbridge Inc. official Peter Holran told the Michigan Pipeline Advisory Board in Lansing Monday about the April 1 damage to the pipelines running between Lake Michigan and Lake Huron.
Company spokesman Ryan Duffy says each pipeline is about 20 inches in diameter with walls nearly an inch thick — but the thickness of the walls did not decrease.
Holran says the other pipe suffered two dents of just under three-quarters of an inch and less than a half-inch.
The suspected anchor strike also caused about 600 gallons (2,270 liters) of mineral oil insulation fluid to leak from two electric cables.
Correction: A previous version of the story stated the thickness of the pipelines’ walls decreased from the dents, with the first dent being two-hundredths of an inch from rupturing. The dents did not decrease the wall thickness; they only pushed the walls in.
Michael Bloomberg Slams ‘Epidemic’ Of Political Lies As Danger To Democracy
Mary Papenfuss, HuffPost May 12, 2018
Billionaire and former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg lashed out Saturday at the “epidemic of dishonesty” in politics that he said poses “one of the most serious dangers” to American democracy.
“People are entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts,” he said.
Bloomberg didn’t single out President Donald Trump, though, he has called Trump’s candidacy a “con.” Bloomberg said Saturday that rampant dishonesty in politics is now “bigger than any one person … than any one party.”
He also held up presidents of the past — George Washington and Abraham Lincoln — as models of honesty.
“How did we go from a president who could not tell a lie to politicians who cannot tell the truth?” Bloomberg asked. “Today when we look at the city that bears Washington’s name, it’s hard not to wonder, ‘What the hell happened?’”
Bloomberg sharply criticized “enablers” who tolerate and defend lies.
Lies, he said, are only the start of a profound disturbance in U.S. politics.
“When elected officials speak as though they are above the truth, they will act as though they are above the law,” Bloomberg said. That invites “criminality” in the “form of corruption [and] abuse of power.”
“These abuses can erode the institutions that protect and preserve our rights and freedoms and open the door to tyranny and fascism,” he added.
Watch the rest of the speech is in the video above.
Bloomberg just last month committed $4.5 million to fund the United States’ annual commitment to the Paris climate agreement after Trump announced that the nation is withdrawing from the pact. He also last month criticized Environmental Protection Agency head Scott Pruitt for “abandoning” the environment “100 percent.”
Bloomberg – Opinion
Graduates: Here’s an Honor Code for Life
Amid a national epidemic of dishonesty, acting with integrity is more important than ever.
By Michael Bloomberg May 12, 2018
Follow his lead. Photographer: Raymond Boyd/Getty Images
The following is an adaptation of an address to Rice University’s class of 2018.
When I was deciding what I wanted to say today, I kept thinking about a Rice tradition that’s an incredibly important part of student life here: I’m talking about the honor code.
When you first arrived on campus, you attended a presentation on the honor code. And your very first quiz tested your knowledge of the code. And so today, I thought it would be fitting for you as graduates to end your time here the same way you began it: by hearing a few words about the meaning of honor.
Don’t worry: There won’t be a quiz. But there will be a test when you leave this campus — one that will last for the rest of your life. And that’s what I want to explain today — and it actually starts with the opposite of honor.
As a New Yorker, I was surprised to learn that an act of dishonor in my hometown almost blocked Rice from coming into existence. William Marsh Rice was murdered at his home in Manhattan by two schemers who tried to re-write his will.
They were caught. His money went where he wanted it to go. The university was built. And fittingly, an honor code was created that has been central to student life here from the beginning. Ever since you arrived here on campus, on nearly every test and paper you submitted, you signed a statement that began, “On my honor.”
But have you ever stopped to think about what that phrase really means?
The concept of honor has taken on different meanings through the ages: chivalry, chastity, courage, strength. And when divorced from morality, or attached to prejudice, honor has been used to justify murder, and repression, and deceit.
But the essence of honor has always been found in the word itself.
As those of you who majored in linguistics probably know, the words “honor” and “honest” are two sides of the same coin. In fact, the Latin word “honestus” can mean both “honest” and “honorable.” To be honorable, you must be honest. And that means speaking honestly, and acting honestly even when it requires you to admit wrongdoing, and suffer the consequences.
That commitment to honesty is, I believe, a patriotic responsibility. As young children, one of the first things we learn about American history is the story of George Washington and the fallen cherry tree.
“I cannot tell a lie,” young George tells his father. “I cut it down.”
That story is a legend, of course. But legends are passed down from generation to generation because they carry some larger truth. The cherry tree legend has endured because it’s not really about Washington. It’s about us, as a nation. It’s about what we want from our children — and what we value in our leaders: honesty.
We have always lionized our two greatest presidents — Washington and Lincoln — not only for their accomplishments, but also for their honesty. We see their integrity and morals as a reflection of our honor as a nation.
However, today when we look at the city that bears Washington’s name, it’s hard not to wonder: What the hell happened?
In 2016, the Oxford English Dictionary’s word of the year was “post-truth.” And last year brought us the phrase “alternative facts.” In essence, they both mean: Up can be down. Black can be white. True can be false. Feelings can be facts.
A New York senator known for working across the aisle, my old friend Pat Moynihan, once said: “People are entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts.” That wasn’t always a controversial statement.
Today, those in politics routinely dismiss inconvenient information, no matter how factual, as fake — and they routinely say things that are demonstrably false. When authoritarian regimes around the world did this, we scoffed at them. We thought: The American people would never stand for that.
For my generation, the plain truth about America — the freedom, opportunity and prosperity we enjoyed — was our most powerful advantage in the Cold War. The more communists had access to real news, the more they would demand freedom. We believed that, and we were right.
Today, though, many of those at the highest levels of power see the plain truth as a threat. They fear it, deny it, attack it — just as the communists once did. And so here we are, in the midst of an epidemic of dishonesty, and an endless barrage of lies.
The trend toward elected officials propagating alternate realities — or winking at those who do — is one of the most serious dangers facing democracies. Free societies depend on citizens who recognize that deceit in government isn’t something to shrug your shoulders at.
When elected officials speak as though they are above the truth, they will act as though they are above the law. And when we tolerate dishonesty, we will get criminality. Sometimes, it’s in the form of corruption. Sometimes, it’s abuse of power. And sometimes, it’s both. If left unchecked, these abuses can erode the institutions that preserve and protect our rights and freedoms and open the door to tyranny and fascism.
Now, you might say: There have always been dishonest politicians — in both parties. And that’s true. But there is now more tolerance for dishonesty in politics than I have seen in my lifetime. And I’ve been alive for one-third of the time the United States has existed. And as my generation can tell you: The only thing more dangerous than dishonest politicians with no respect for the law, is a chorus of enablers who defend their every lie.
Remember: The honor code here didn’t just require you to be honest. It required you to say something if you saw others acting dishonestly. That might be the most difficult part of an honor code, but it may also be the most important, because violations affect the whole community.
The same is true in our country. If we want elected officials to be honest, we have to hold them accountable when they are not or else suffer the consequences. Don’t get me wrong. Honest people can disagree. But productive debate requires an acceptance of basic reality.
For example: If 99 percent of scientists whose research has been peer-reviewed reach the same general conclusion about a theory, then we ought to accept it as the best available information — even if it’s not a 100 percent certainty.
Of course, it’s always good to be skeptical and ask questions. But we must be willing to place a certain amount of trust in the integrity of scientists.
If you aren’t willing to do that, don’t get on an airplane, don’t use a cell phone or microwave, don’t get treated in a hospital, and don’t even think about binge-watching Netflix.
The dishonesty in Washington isn’t just about science. We aren’t tackling so many of the biggest problems that affect your future — from the lack of good jobs in many communities, to the prevalence of gun violence, to the threats to the environment — because too many political leaders are being dishonest about facts and data, and too many people are letting them get away with it.
So how did we get here? How did we go from a president who could not tell a lie to politicians who cannot tell the truth? From a George Washington who embodied honesty to a Washington, D.C., defined by deceit?
It’s popular to blame social media for spreading false information. I, for one, am totally convinced that Selena Gomez and Justin Bieber are still dating.
But the problem isn’t just unreliable stories. It’s also the public’s willingness to believe anything that paints the other side in a bad light. That’s extreme partisanship, and it’s what’s fueling and excusing all this dishonesty.
Extreme partisanship is like an infectious disease. But instead of crippling the body, it cripples the mind. It blocks us from understanding the other side. It blinds us from seeing the strengths in their ideas and the weaknesses in our own.
And it leads us to defend or excuse lies and unethical actions when our own side commits them.
For example: In the 1990s, leading Democrats spent the decade defending the occupant of the Oval Office against charges of lying and personal immorality, and attempting to silence and discredit the women who spoke out. At the same time, leading Republicans spent that decade attacking the lack of ethics and honesty in the White House.
Today, the roles are exactly reversed — not because the parties have changed their beliefs — but because the party occupying the Oval Office has changed.
When someone’s judgment about an action depends on the party affiliation of the person who committed it, they’re being dishonest with themselves and with the public. And yet, those kinds of judgments have become so second nature that many people in both parties don’t even realize they are making them.
When people see the world as a battle between left and right, they become more loyal to their tribe than to our country. When power — not progress — becomes the object of the battle, truth and honesty become the first casualties.
You learned here at Rice that honesty leads to trust and trust leads to freedom (like the freedom to take tests outside the classroom). In democracy, it’s no different. If we aren’t honest with one another, we don’t trust one another. And if we don’t trust one another, we place limits on what we ourselves can do, and what we can do together as a country. It’s a formula for gridlock and national decline — but here’s the thing: It doesn’t have to be that way.
When I was in city government, I didn’t care which party proposed an idea. I never once asked someone his or her party affiliation during a job interview, or who they voted for. As a result, we had a dream team of Democrats, Republicans and independents.
That diversity made our debates sharper, our policies smarter, and our government better. Arguments were won and lost on facts and data — not parties and polls. That was why we had success. And it’s been great to see other mayors around the country taking that same kind of approach.
But at the national level, in Washington today, partisanship is everything, and I think the dishonesty it produces is one of the greatest challenges that your generation will have to confront.
Of course, partisanship is not a new problem. George Washington warned against it in his Farewell Address.
He referred to the “dangers of parties,” and called the passion that people have for them the, quote, “worst enemy” of democracy — a precursor to tyranny. Washington urged Americans to, quote, “discourage and restrain” partisanship. Sadly, in recent years, the opposite has happened. There is now unrestrained, rabid partisanship everywhere we look.
It’s not just on social media and cable news. It’s in the communities where we live, which are becoming more deeply red or more deeply blue. It’s in the groups and associations and churches we join, which increasingly attract like-minded people. It’s even in the people we marry.
Fifty years ago, most parents didn’t care whether their children married a member of another political party but they didn’t want them marrying outside their race or religion, or inside their gender.
Today, thankfully, polls show strong majority support for interracial, inter-religious, and same-sex marriage. That’s progress. But unfortunately, the percentage of parents who don’t want their children marrying outside of their political party has doubled.
The more people segregate themselves by party, the harder it becomes to understand the other side and the more extreme each party grows. Studies show that people become more extreme in their views when they are grouped together with like-minded people. That’s now happening in both parties. And as a result, it’s fair to say the country is more divided by party than it has been since the Civil War.
Bringing the country back together won’t be easy. But I believe it can be done — and if we are to continue as a true democracy, it must be done and it will be up to your generation to help lead it.
Graduates: You’re ready for this challenge. Because bringing the country back together starts with the first lesson you learned here: Honesty matters. And everyone must be held accountable for being honest.
So as you go out into the world, I urge you to do what honesty requires: Recognize that no one, nor either party, has a monopoly on good ideas. Judge events based on what happened, not who did it. Hold yourself and our leaders to the highest standards of ethics and morality. Respect the knowledge of scientists. Follow the data, wherever it leads.
Listen to people you disagree with — without trying to censor them or shout over them. And have the courage to say things that your own side does not want to hear.
I just came yesterday from visiting an old friend in Arizona, who has displayed that kind of courage throughout his life: Senator John McCain.
We often don’t see eye to eye on issues. But I have always admired his willingness to reach across the aisle, when others wouldn’t dare. He bucked party leaders, when his conscience demanded it. He defended the honor of his opponents, even if it cost him votes. And he owned up to his mistakes — just like that young kid with the cherry tree.
Imagine what our country would be like if more of our elected officials had the courage to serve with the honor that John has always shown.
Graduates: After today, you will no longer be bound by the Rice honor code. It will be up to you to decide how to live your life — and to follow your own honor code.
This university has given you a special opportunity to learn the true meaning of honor to base that code on, and now, I believe, you have a special obligation to carry it forward. The greatest threat to American democracy isn’t communism, jihadism, or any other external force or foreign power. It’s our own willingness to tolerate dishonesty in service of party, and in pursuit of power.
Let me leave you with one final thought: We can all recite the words of the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident…”
But remember that the Founding Fathers were able to bring those truths to life only because of the Declaration’s final words: “We mutually pledge to each other, our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.”
That pledge of honor — and that commitment to truth — is why we are here today. And in order to preserve those truths, and the rights they guarantee us, every generation must take that same pledge. Now it’s your turn.
Bloomberg delivers blistering critique of politicians (like Trump) who don’t accept science
“It’s called science — and we should demand that politicians have the honesty to respect it.”
Patrick Smith May 13, 2018
Michael Bloomberg speaks to a journalist during the One Planet Summit at the Seine Musicale on the Ile Sequin on December 12th in Boulogne-Billancourt, France. Photo by Chesnot/Getty Images
Former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg during a commencement speech at Rice University this weekend took a thinly-veiled swipe at “deceitful politicians” in Washington — and leaving little to the imagination about exactly who he was referring to.
In the wide-ranging speech on Saturday, the billionaire businessman lamented that “dishonesty in politics” is at unseen levels in American history. Bloomberg also touched on topics such as gun control and the economy.
But his harshest words were reserved for climate change deniers. Citing the almost unanimous consensus among scientists that human activity is contributing to Earth’s warming, Bloomberg says that citizens shouldn’t settle for politicians who reject science.
Global warming, he said “is not a Chinese hoax. It’s called science — and we should demand that politicians have the honesty to respect it.”
While scientists are in agreement the impact humans have had on climate change, many politicians stubbornly refuse to accept their findings. Bloomberg did not name any specific politician, but it was more than obvious to whom he was referring.
President Trump’s denial of human-caused warming is well known, and his actions as president have only cemented his position as denier-in-chief. From pulling the U.S. from the historic Paris climate deal to ripping up environmental regulations, U.S. policy on global warming has broken with scientific consensus.
As politicians have continued attempts to cast public doubt on climate science, the evidence that Earth is warming has continued to mount. The planet continues to break heat records, with the five hottest years all occurring since 2010. And scientists have warned that without steps to reduce carbon pollution from humans, this warming will continue.
The side-effects of this warming are already affecting many Americans. As global warming contributes to the melting of polar ice caps, the subsequent sea level rise threatens to pop the trillion dollar coastal property bubble in Miami, FL. And increasing dust storms in the U.S. Southwest have led to devastating health effects on residents.
Bloomberg warned the audience that the greatest threat to the U.S. is “our own willingness to tolerate dishonesty.” In the case of climate change, he couldn’t have chosen a better subject to illustrate just how real that threat is.
Trump and his merry band of climate change deniers are tearing up clean policies in favor of the coal industry. Here are the reasons why Trump’s big bet on coal is so stupid. Your thoughts?
Trump and his merry band of climate change deniers are tearing up clean policies in favor of the coal industry. Here are the reasons why Trump's big bet on coal is so stupid. Your thoughts?
Giant Hog Farms Are Fighting for the Right to Keep Polluting. The Trump Administration Is on Their Side.
“This industry in particular has incredible influence over all levels of government.”
Tom Philpott May 5, 2018
Triton Tree/iStock
If you enjoy bacon or ham, chances are you’ve eaten pork from North Carolina, where about 16 million hogs—10 percent of the US total—are raised each year. The great bulk of that production takes place in a handful of counties on the state’s coastal plain—places like Baden County, home to more than 750,000 hogs but only 35,000 humans. Recently, a federal jury awarded more than $50 million in damages to 10 plaintiffs who live near one of the factory-scale hog operations.
The hog facility in the case, which raises hogs under contract for Murphy Brown, a subsidiary of China-owned pork giant Smithfield, is called Kinlaw Farm. Here’s a Google Earth image of it:
Those white buildings in three clumps of four are hog barns. A typical barn holds around 1,000 hogs. The brownish splotches are open-air cesspools known as lagoons, which store manure from all those animals before it’s sprayed on surrounding fields. I’ve been near operations like this, and the stench is blinding—pungent gases like ammonia and hydrogen sulfide permeate the air. In addition to revulsion, these gases can trigger ill health effects in neighboring communities, including eye irritation, chronic lung disease, and olfactory neuron loss.
As Leah Douglas recently noted in a Mother Jones piece, all 10 of the plaintiffs in the case are black. This isn’t surprising, because in North Carolina, “people of color are 1.5 times more likely to live near a hog CAFO than white people.”
If you play around with Google Earth, you can find several residences within a half-mile of the site. That’s not unusual—a recent analysis of satellite data by the Environmental Working Group found that around 160,000 North Carolinians, representing more than 60,000 households, live within a half-mile of a hog confinement or a manure pit.
If the federal court’s Bladen County decision withstands Smithfield’s appeal, “it could motivate the company to change its ways,” says Danielle Diamond, executive director of the Socially Responsible Agriculture Project. But she doesn’t anticipate broader changes in the industry, because “other courts are not required to follow this decision.” (The decision could, however, influence the 25 additional cases pending in the same federal district court that awarded the $50 million.)
Real change, Diamond says, won’t come until governments force the industry to clean up its act through tighter regulation. But “this industry in particular has incredible influence over all levels of government,” she says. North Carolina’s state legislature is notoriously cozy with Big Pork; and as the money-in-politics tracker Open Secrets notes, the meat lobby wields tremendous power in Washington.
Indeed, chatting with reporters last Monday, USDA chief Sonny Perdue aired his view on the North Carolina case: The ag secretary called the decision “despicable,” adding, “I feel certain that kind of award has to be overturned.”
Tom Philpott is the food and ag correspondent for Mother Jones. He can be reached at tphilpott@motherjones.com
The anti-Obama: Trump’s drive to destroy his predecessor’s legacy
From the Iran deal to TPP to climate change, ‘the whole thing that animates and unites his policy views is antipathy towards Obama’
David Smith in Washington, The Guardian May 11, 2018
Donald Trump advertised his ambitions to dismantle Barack Obama’s achievements throughout the election campaign. Photograph: Pool New/Reuters
When Donald Trump pulled out of the deal to curb Iran’s nuclear ambitions, hardline conservatives celebrated, European leaders winced and Barack Obama made a rare, lengthy public statement.
Trump’s decision was “misguided” and “a serious mistake”, Obama said, as his signature foreign policy achievement was tossed away.
It was just the latest example of Trump’s all-out assault on the Obama legacy. From climate change to criminal justice to international relations, rarely has one occupant of the Oval Office appeared so obsessed with taking a chainsaw to the work of another.
Tommy Vietor, a former national security council spokesman under Obama, told the Guardian: “The whole thing that animates and unites his policy views is antipathy towards Obama. It’s fucking pathetic. He’s a vindictive person so there is an element of this that is about sticking it to Obama. He knows, probably better than anyone, how to find all the Republican erogenous zones because he spent years whipping people into a frenzy and telling lies about Obama.”
From the start, it has been hard to imagine two men more different than Obama, 56, a mixed-race intellectual married to one woman for a quarter of a century, and Trump, 71, a white, thrice married businessman and reality TV star who has boasted about grabbing women’s private parts. One reads books voraciously; the other, it is said, barely reads at all. There were few reasons for their paths to ever cross except, perhaps, on a golf course, their one common passion.
But then came the 2011 White House Correspondents’ Association dinner. Trump, pushing a racially charged conspiracy theory questioning whether the president was born in America, was among the tuxedo-wearing guests. Obama mocked his nascent political ambitions without mercy. “Obviously, we all know about your credentials and breadth of experience,” he said, recalling an episode of Celebrity Apprentice in which the men’s cooking team fell short and Trump fired actor Gary Busey.
“And these are the kind of decisions that would keep me up at night,” the president continued to roars of laughter. “Well handled, sir. Well handled. Say what you will about Mr. Trump, he certainly would bring some change to the White House. Let’s see what we’ve got up there.”
The room erupted as Obama pointed to a Photo-shopped image of the then fantastical idea of a Trump White House, with three extra storeys, a giant “TRUMP” sign, a hotel, casino and golf course, a giant crystal chandelier, four gold columns and two women in swimwear drinking cocktails in the north lawn fountain.
Four years later, Adam Gopnik of the New Yorker magazine would recall: “Trump’s humiliation was as absolute, and as visible, as any I have ever seen: his head set in place, like a man in a pillory, he barely moved or altered his expression as wave after wave of laughter struck him … he sat perfectly still, chin tight, in locked, unmovable rage.”
Future historians may well ask: was this the moment that Trump resolved to storm the White House and tear down the Obama legacy?
For sure, from the day he formally launched his election campaign in June 2015, branding Mexican immigrants as criminals and rapists, he cast himself as the anti-Obama in style and substance. His act enraptured rightwing media and the Republican base, who saw Trump as a vessel into which they could pour their hopes and frustrations. David Litt, a former speechwriter for Obama, said this week: “It’s not only Trump who says, ‘If Obama is for it, I’m against it.’ This was the guiding philosophy for eight years of the Obama administration. Trump is a catalyst of the movement but he’s also a product of it.”
President Barack Obama greets President-elect Donald Trump in the White House Oval Office on 10 November 2016. Photograph: Kevin Lamarque/Reuters
During his battle with Hillary Clinton, Trump duly promised to unravel Obama’s accomplishments. He described the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a proposed free trade deal with Asia, as “a rape of our country”. He said he is “not a great believer in manmade climate change” and vowed to cancel the Paris agreement. He called the Iran nuclear accord a “disaster” and “the worst deal ever negotiated” and warned that it could lead to a “nuclear holocaust”.
John Hudak, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution think-tank in Washington, said: “The president ideologically disagrees with much of what President Obama accomplished but it’s important to remember these were campaign promises. It’s not out of nowhere. It’s what his voters wanted. Very little of what the president is doing is shocking, considering his campaign rhetoric.”
Soon after the stunning election outcome, Obama hosted Trump at the White House for about an hour and a half. Trump seemed surprised and a little impressed by the welcome, Obama appeared to be walking on eggshells.
But extraordinarily, since inauguration day, the men have not spoken. Hudak described this as “odd”, noting a past example: the first person Obama called after the killing of Osama Bin Laden was George W Bush.
“But it’s important to remember President Trump doesn’t like to hear ideas that he does not believe. If he called President Obama and said, ‘Can you talk me through this Iran deal?’ he would hear things that wouldn’t fit with that mindset. He could call Bill Clinton or George Bush, but why waste their time?”
At the recent funeral of former first lady Barbara Bush, the Bushes, Clintons and Obamas were joined by the first lady, Melania Trump, but the current president was conspicuously absent.
In the meantime, Trump is working through his Obama checklist at a rapid clip. He made good on his promises to withdraw from the TPP, Paris and Iran agreements. He partially reversed what he called a “terrible and misguided deal” with Cuba, reinstating some travel and commercial restrictions. He ordered the Pentagon to reverse an Obama-era policy that allowed transgender people to serve in the military.
Trump has also struck a radically different tone from the 44th president, expressing admiration for strongmen, confounding America’s longstanding allies and apparently viewing international relations through the prism of personal chemistry. The steady hand of “no drama Obama” has been replaced by chaos, unpredictability and Twitter diplomacy.
Donald Trump’s ‘only guiding principle seems to be to undo what Obama did’, says one Democratic strategist. Photo: Win McNamee/Getty Images
Domestically, his tone on abortion rights, gun control and race relations represents another 180-degree turn. He announced plans to scrap Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (Daca), a program created under Obama to allow people brought to the US illegally as children the temporary right to live in America. He has rolled back hundreds of government regulations in areas such as immigration, net neutrality and clean air and water.
Some reversals have gained less public attention but could have more lasting consequences. Whereas the Obama administration directed federal prosecutors to be less aggressive in charging non-violent drug offenders, Trump’s attorney general, Jeff Sessions, has reverted to a hard-line stance, raising the prospect of a resurgence in mass incarceration just as the prison population had begun to dip.
Lanhee Chen, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution in Stanford, California, said: “It’s not unusual for a president to want to do things differently from his predecessor. I will say the scope and ambition of Trump’s effort to do that is breathtaking. Whether it’s breathtakingly good or breathtakingly bad depends on your point of view.”
But there have been setbacks in the anti-Obama crusade. Trump was unable to steer Republicans to agree on a replacement for the Affordable Care Act, the flagship of Obama’s domestic program, though critics argue they have since done their best to sabotage it through a sweeping tax reform and other measures.
Some believe the effort failed because Trump has little grasp of or interest in policy details. Bob Shrum, a Democratic strategist, said: “His only guiding principle seems to be to undo what Obama did. His driving motivation seems to be his animosity towards Obama. We know he has no deep convictions of his own so Obama became his negative reference point.”
Large Oil Spill Reported on Montana Reservation, Contaminating Pond
Lorraine Chow May 3, 2018
A well operated by Anadarko Minerals Inc. spilled a “substantial” amount of oil in the central region of the Fort Peck Reservation in northeast Montana, according to local media.
An estimated 600 barrels of oil and 90,000 barrels of brine (production water) leaked from the well, the Glasgow Courier reported, citing officials with the reservation’s Office of Environmental Protection and the Bureau of Land Management.
The spill was first discovered by a farmer doing a flyover in the area. The farmer immediately notified Valley County authorities about the incident.
According to a press release received by MTN News, the spill was reported to the reservation’s Office of Environmental Protection on April 27. The exact date that the leak occurred is not yet clear. The well was shut in late December.
Fort Peck Reservation, which lies north of the Missouri River, is home to members of the Sioux and Assiniboine nations. Members adamantly oppose the proposed Keystone XL (KXL) pipeline and its potential to endanger their water supply.
The press release states that the spill further reinforces tribal officials’ opposition to the KXL and pipeline development on or near the reservation.
Oil and brine from the leak has now traveled roughly 200 yards downhill to a stock pond used by tribal entities to water livestock. The extent of the pond’s contamination is not yet determined, the press release continued. According to initial assessments, about three to six inches of oil currently sit on top of the water.
Jestin Dupree, a Fort Peck Tribal council member, detailed in a Facebook post Wednesday: “In order to get this pond cleaned up there are certain levels of contamination that are allowable but we are looking at the possibility of draining the pond for a proper clean up and the Tribal Chairman felt the same way. In some places in this pond the water is about 13 feet deep.”
“THIS IS CONSIDERED A LARGE SPILL as there are 100,000 gallons of salt water, 27,000-30,000 gallons of oil which equates to 600 barrels of oil,” he added.
According to MTN News, Anadarko has developed a clean up plan with oversight from tribal officials, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Dupree noted on Facebook that by Friday the oil company will have a dollar amount for the cost of clean up.
Floyd Azure, chairman of the Fort Peck Tribes, was quoted by MTN News as saying that the incident is further indication of the detrimental effects oil production on the environment and is yet another threat to the reservation’s water quality.
After their initial report was published, the Glasgow Courier posted on their Facebook page: “Fort Peck Tribes have asked that people avoid the area of the oil spill so as not to impede clean up efforts.”
EcoWatch has contacted the reservation and will update with any new information.
Glasgow Courier: A “substantial” oil spill occurred approximately 5 miles west of the Frazer/Richland Road, Lustre Grain East Road Junction.
The spill was discovered last Thursday, according to the Fort Peck Disaster Emergency Service Coordinator. Clean-up is ongoing and the cause is being investigated.
Clean up and assessment are being handled by the Fort Peck Tribes and EPA. More information will be in May 9 Glasgow Courier.
The U.S. can tap into a huge source of renewable energy that few people are talking about: geothermal. This technology has already transformed Iceland.
The U.S. can tap into a huge source of renewable energy that few people are talking about: geothermal. This technology has already transformed Iceland. #WeCanSolveThis #YEARSproject
Sen. Pat Leahy said efforts by the White House and political officials at EPA to block the chemicals assessment “unconscionable,” and he pointed to a community in his state that is grappling with contamination of that chemical. | Win McNamee/Getty Images
Michael Bloomberg speaks to a journalist during the One Planet Summit at the Seine Musicale on the Ile Sequin on December 12th in Boulogne-Billancourt, France. Photo by Chesnot/Getty Images
Triton Tree/iStock
Those white buildings in three clumps of four are hog barns. A typical barn holds around 1,000 hogs. The brownish splotches are open-air cesspools known as lagoons, which store manure from all those animals before it’s sprayed on surrounding fields. I’ve been near operations like this, and the stench is blinding—pungent gases like ammonia and hydrogen sulfide permeate the air. In addition to revulsion, these gases can trigger 
Donald Trump advertised his ambitions to dismantle Barack Obama’s achievements throughout the election campaign. Photograph: Pool New/Reuters
President Barack Obama greets President-elect Donald Trump in the White House Oval Office on 10 November 2016. Photograph: Kevin Lamarque/Reuters
Donald Trump’s ‘only guiding principle seems to be to undo what Obama did’, says one Democratic strategist. Photo: Win McNamee/Getty Images
