The Epstein Report:
Showing posts with label good government. Show all posts
Showing posts with label good government. Show all posts
Oct 30, 2026
Aug 10, 2026
Jun 12, 2026
Recollecting
"The emperor awakes, and having dreamt of being a butterfly, wonders if he is now a butterfly dreaming he is the emperor."
According to history and folklore, Lao Tzu compiled the Tao Te Ching for rulers and emperors to guide them toward enlightened, natural, and effortless leadership (Wu-wei).
The Role of the Emperor & The Sage
In traditional Chinese philosophy, the "Emperor" is the ultimate representative of worldly power, while the awakened sage represents ultimate spiritual mastery and harmony.
Have you been wondering why MAGA is focused on "anti-woke"? Stop wondering
Guiding the Ruler:
The Tao Te Ching is often framed as advice for an emperor. It teaches that an awakened ruler does not govern through force, tyranny, or strict laws, but rather through stillness, compassion, and humility, allowing the empire to find natural balance.
The Concept of Awakening:
For Lao Tzu, to awaken (or to reach enlightenment) is to transcend human desires, shed the ego, and align completely with the "Tao" (the unnamable source and natural order of the universe).
Awakening the World:
Lao Tzu famously tied the awakening of a single ruler to the harmony of the entire kingdom, famously stating: "If you want to awaken all of humanity, then awaken all of yourself."
This philosophy applies to modern individuals as well as historical emperors.
True Power is Inner Mastery:
To lead, influence, or change the world, one must first master their own mind and eliminate their own inner negativity.
Leadership by Example:
An enlightened leader rules so effortlessly and unobtrusively that the people accomplish their goals and say, "We did it ourselves," highlighting the beauty of invisible, empowering leadership.
Jun 2, 2026
Take It, Abe
by Barack Obama
There isn’t any dream beyond our reach, any obstacle that can stand in our way, when we recognize that our individual liberty is served, not negated, by pursuit of the common good
Most Americans know Abraham Lincoln as a marble giant, the Great Emancipator, the president who saved the Union. But it is perhaps more instructive, and more honest, to see him as he was in the decade before he rose to the White House: a Springfield lawyer who’d served just a single term in Congress.
Possibly in his law office, his feet on a cluttered desk, his sons playing around him, his clothes a bit too small to fit his uncommon frame, he put some thoughts on paper — for what purpose we do not know. “The legitimate object of government,” he wrote, “is to do for the people what needs to be done, but which they can not, by individual effort, do at all, or do so well, by themselves.”
It’s impossible to know for sure, but I suspect Lincoln’s conviction did not come from a belief that government always had the answer, or a failure to understand our individual rights and responsibilities.
Born in a log cabin of pioneer stock, Lincoln cleared a path through the woods as a boy, lost his mother and a sister to the rigors of frontier life, and taught himself everything he knew. He understood, perhaps better than anyone, what it means to pull yourself up by your bootstraps, and how personal liberty and self-reliance are at the heart of the American experience.
But Lincoln also understood something else. He recognized that while each of us must do our part, work as hard as we can, and be as responsible as we can — in the end, there are certain things we cannot do on our own. There are certain things we can only do together. There are certain things only a union can do.
Only a union could harness the courage of our pioneers to settle the American west, which is why he passed a Homestead Act giving a tract of land to anyone seeking a stake in our growing economy — though at great cost to Native peoples.
Only a union could foster the ingenuity of our farmers, which is why he set up land-grant colleges that taught them how to make the most of their land while giving their children an education that let them dream the American dream.
Only a union could speed our expansion and connect our coasts with a transcontinental railroad, and so, even in the midst of civil war, he built one.
Only a union could spur innovation and ignite America’s imagination on a national scale, which is why he established a national academy of sciences, believing we must, as he put it, add “the fuel of interest to the fire of genius in the discovery…of new and useful things.”
And only a union could serve the hopes of every citizen — to knock down the barriers to opportunity and give each and every person the chance to pursue the American dream.
In hindsight, this notion may seem uncontroversial. Yet Lincoln knew, better than anyone, that our union was not, and is not, inevitable. He’d witnessed how, at crucial moments, our improbable experiment in self-government nearly flickered out — and he was determined to keep the flame of liberty alive.
When the outbreak of war halted construction of the new Capitol dome, Lincoln ordered that work resume. Critics accused him of diverting resources and manpower from the war effort. But Lincoln recognized that the dome was more than a construction project. “If people see the Capitol going on,” he replied, “it is a sign that we intend the Union shall go on.”
Lincoln’s efforts went well beyond the symbolic. Throughout the fiery trial of civil war, he felt compelled to make compromises — some of them distasteful — to preserve the fragile Union. Intent on keeping the border states from seceding, Lincoln rebuffed demands from some in his party for immediate nationwide emancipation and revoked a premature emancipation order issued by one of his generals in Missouri. When Lincoln ultimately issued his own Emancipation Proclamation, he conspicuously exempted the border states. “I hope to have God on my side,” he reportedly said, “but I must have Kentucky.”
Nor was Lincoln above infringing on civil liberties when he deemed it necessary, declaring martial law, suspending habeas corpus, and arresting suspected secessionists in states like Maryland and Missouri. This was the price, as he saw it, of holding together an unwieldy coalition that could defeat the Confederacy.
Over the course of the war, Lincoln’s understanding of the Union deepened and expanded. What began as a constitutional battle to preserve the nation as a legal entity became, in his mind, a moral struggle over what kind of country America would be.
That evolution came into focus at Gettysburg. When Lincoln arrived there in November 1863, the rolling fields still bore the scars of one of the bloodiest battles ever fought on American soil. Workers had labored for ten days to clear the dead. Lincoln himself was exhausted and ill — “a ghastly color,” one of his cabinet secretaries observed. Edward Everett, one of the most celebrated orators in America, delivered a two-hour address. Then Lincoln rose and spoke for barely two minutes.
In just 272 short words, Lincoln transformed the meaning of the war and the Union itself.
No longer were the states mere parties to a contract, as he described them in his First Inaugural. The United States was now a nation “conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.” The sacrifices at Gettysburg had given the Union a moral purpose beyond itself, an “unfinished work” testing whether government of the people, by the people, for the people could survive at all.
Once Lincoln came to see the Union this way, triumph on the battlefield was not enough. If the nation was to endure, it would have to emerge from war true to the ideals for which so many had fought and died. By the time Lincoln delivered his Second Inaugural Address near the war’s end, he would call on Americans to move forward without malice, realizing that a lasting union required not only victory, but restraint; not only strength, but a sense of shared obligation to one another.
Lincoln understood what George Washington understood when he led farmers, craftsmen, and shopkeepers to rise up against an empire. What Franklin D. Roosevelt understood when he lifted us out of the Great Depression, built an arsenal of democracy, and created the largest middle-class in history with the GI Bill. What Dwight D. Eisenhower understood when he created an interstate highway system that knit together cities and towns across the country. What John F. Kennedy understood when he sent us to the moon.
All these presidents recognized that America is — and always has been — more than a band of thirteen colonies, more than a bunch of Yankees and Confederates, more than a collection of red states and blue states. We are the United States of America and there isn’t any dream beyond our reach, any obstacle that can stand in our way, when we recognize that our individual liberty is served, not negated, by pursuit of the common good.
More than anything, that’s what Abraham Lincoln taught us. That union is not simply a matter of law or accident of geography, but a moral commitment we make to our fellow citizens and to our shared future. That democracies endure not only because of constitutions or armies, but because free people choose, again and again, to bind their fates together. That only by maintaining a sense of shared sacrifice and responsibility — for ourselves and one another — can we do the work that must be done in this country. And that it is precisely when the climb is steepest that we relearn how to take the mountaintop, as one nation and one people.
That’s the very definition of what it means to be American. And together, that’s how we will do what Lincoln called on us to do, and “nobly save…the last best hope of earth.”
There isn’t any dream beyond our reach, any obstacle that can stand in our way, when we recognize that our individual liberty is served, not negated, by pursuit of the common good
Most Americans know Abraham Lincoln as a marble giant, the Great Emancipator, the president who saved the Union. But it is perhaps more instructive, and more honest, to see him as he was in the decade before he rose to the White House: a Springfield lawyer who’d served just a single term in Congress.
Possibly in his law office, his feet on a cluttered desk, his sons playing around him, his clothes a bit too small to fit his uncommon frame, he put some thoughts on paper — for what purpose we do not know. “The legitimate object of government,” he wrote, “is to do for the people what needs to be done, but which they can not, by individual effort, do at all, or do so well, by themselves.”
It’s impossible to know for sure, but I suspect Lincoln’s conviction did not come from a belief that government always had the answer, or a failure to understand our individual rights and responsibilities.
Born in a log cabin of pioneer stock, Lincoln cleared a path through the woods as a boy, lost his mother and a sister to the rigors of frontier life, and taught himself everything he knew. He understood, perhaps better than anyone, what it means to pull yourself up by your bootstraps, and how personal liberty and self-reliance are at the heart of the American experience.
But Lincoln also understood something else. He recognized that while each of us must do our part, work as hard as we can, and be as responsible as we can — in the end, there are certain things we cannot do on our own. There are certain things we can only do together. There are certain things only a union can do.
Only a union could harness the courage of our pioneers to settle the American west, which is why he passed a Homestead Act giving a tract of land to anyone seeking a stake in our growing economy — though at great cost to Native peoples.
Only a union could foster the ingenuity of our farmers, which is why he set up land-grant colleges that taught them how to make the most of their land while giving their children an education that let them dream the American dream.
Only a union could speed our expansion and connect our coasts with a transcontinental railroad, and so, even in the midst of civil war, he built one.
Only a union could spur innovation and ignite America’s imagination on a national scale, which is why he established a national academy of sciences, believing we must, as he put it, add “the fuel of interest to the fire of genius in the discovery…of new and useful things.”
And only a union could serve the hopes of every citizen — to knock down the barriers to opportunity and give each and every person the chance to pursue the American dream.
In hindsight, this notion may seem uncontroversial. Yet Lincoln knew, better than anyone, that our union was not, and is not, inevitable. He’d witnessed how, at crucial moments, our improbable experiment in self-government nearly flickered out — and he was determined to keep the flame of liberty alive.
When the outbreak of war halted construction of the new Capitol dome, Lincoln ordered that work resume. Critics accused him of diverting resources and manpower from the war effort. But Lincoln recognized that the dome was more than a construction project. “If people see the Capitol going on,” he replied, “it is a sign that we intend the Union shall go on.”
Lincoln’s efforts went well beyond the symbolic. Throughout the fiery trial of civil war, he felt compelled to make compromises — some of them distasteful — to preserve the fragile Union. Intent on keeping the border states from seceding, Lincoln rebuffed demands from some in his party for immediate nationwide emancipation and revoked a premature emancipation order issued by one of his generals in Missouri. When Lincoln ultimately issued his own Emancipation Proclamation, he conspicuously exempted the border states. “I hope to have God on my side,” he reportedly said, “but I must have Kentucky.”
Nor was Lincoln above infringing on civil liberties when he deemed it necessary, declaring martial law, suspending habeas corpus, and arresting suspected secessionists in states like Maryland and Missouri. This was the price, as he saw it, of holding together an unwieldy coalition that could defeat the Confederacy.
Over the course of the war, Lincoln’s understanding of the Union deepened and expanded. What began as a constitutional battle to preserve the nation as a legal entity became, in his mind, a moral struggle over what kind of country America would be.
That evolution came into focus at Gettysburg. When Lincoln arrived there in November 1863, the rolling fields still bore the scars of one of the bloodiest battles ever fought on American soil. Workers had labored for ten days to clear the dead. Lincoln himself was exhausted and ill — “a ghastly color,” one of his cabinet secretaries observed. Edward Everett, one of the most celebrated orators in America, delivered a two-hour address. Then Lincoln rose and spoke for barely two minutes.
In just 272 short words, Lincoln transformed the meaning of the war and the Union itself.
No longer were the states mere parties to a contract, as he described them in his First Inaugural. The United States was now a nation “conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.” The sacrifices at Gettysburg had given the Union a moral purpose beyond itself, an “unfinished work” testing whether government of the people, by the people, for the people could survive at all.
Once Lincoln came to see the Union this way, triumph on the battlefield was not enough. If the nation was to endure, it would have to emerge from war true to the ideals for which so many had fought and died. By the time Lincoln delivered his Second Inaugural Address near the war’s end, he would call on Americans to move forward without malice, realizing that a lasting union required not only victory, but restraint; not only strength, but a sense of shared obligation to one another.
Lincoln understood what George Washington understood when he led farmers, craftsmen, and shopkeepers to rise up against an empire. What Franklin D. Roosevelt understood when he lifted us out of the Great Depression, built an arsenal of democracy, and created the largest middle-class in history with the GI Bill. What Dwight D. Eisenhower understood when he created an interstate highway system that knit together cities and towns across the country. What John F. Kennedy understood when he sent us to the moon.
All these presidents recognized that America is — and always has been — more than a band of thirteen colonies, more than a bunch of Yankees and Confederates, more than a collection of red states and blue states. We are the United States of America and there isn’t any dream beyond our reach, any obstacle that can stand in our way, when we recognize that our individual liberty is served, not negated, by pursuit of the common good.
More than anything, that’s what Abraham Lincoln taught us. That union is not simply a matter of law or accident of geography, but a moral commitment we make to our fellow citizens and to our shared future. That democracies endure not only because of constitutions or armies, but because free people choose, again and again, to bind their fates together. That only by maintaining a sense of shared sacrifice and responsibility — for ourselves and one another — can we do the work that must be done in this country. And that it is precisely when the climb is steepest that we relearn how to take the mountaintop, as one nation and one people.
That’s the very definition of what it means to be American. And together, that’s how we will do what Lincoln called on us to do, and “nobly save…the last best hope of earth.”
Mar 30, 2026
Mar 16, 2026
Mar 3, 2026
Jul 18, 2025
Overheard
Jay Powell took this joint from 9% inflation down to just over 2% in 5 years, without triggering a generation-killing recession.
That's like doing a double-twisting, fourple backflip on one ice skate and sticking a perfect landing.
Trump is a total fucking idiot for even thinking about trying to remove that guy.
And BTW:
May 27, 2025
Katie Phang
She makes a point worth serious consideration: Judges are having a hard time getting Trump's goons to comply, and there's a lot of hand-wringing about the obvious probability of a crisis that ensues if the courts ordered the US Marshals into the fray. So maybe the thing to do is get after the lawyers.
Feb 27, 2025
#AltGov
Government employees fight the Trump administration’s chaos by organizing and publishing information on Bluesky
After seeing Elon Musk’s X post on Saturday afternoon about an email that would soon land in the inboxes of 2.3 million federal employees asking them to list five things they did the week before, a clandestine network of employees and contractors at dozens of federal agencies began talking on an encrypted app about how to respond.
Employees on a four-day, 10-hours-a-day schedule wouldn’t even see the email until Tuesday – past the deadline for responding – some noted. There was also a bit of snark: “bonus points to anyone who responds that they spent their government subsidy on hookers and blow,” one worker said.
Within hours, the network had agreed on a recommended response: break up the oath federal employees take when hired into five bullet points and send them back in an email:
“1. I supported and defended the constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”
“2. I bore true faith and allegiance to the same,” and so on.
It was only the latest effort by a growing and increasingly busy group banding together to “expose harmful policies, defend public institutions and equip citizens with tools to push back against authoritarianism”, according to Lynn Stahl, a contractor with Veterans Affairs and a member of the network. Increasingly, the group is also trying to help its members and others face the thousands of layoffs that have been imposed across the federal government.
Calling itself #AltGov, the network has developed a visible, public-facing presence in recent weeks through Bluesky accounts, most of which bear the names or initials of federal agencies, aimed at getting information out to the public – and correcting disinformation – about the chaos being unleashed by the Trump administration.
With 40 accounts to date, their collective megaphone is getting louder, as most of the accounts have tens of thousands of followers, with “Alt CDC (they/them)” being the largest, at nearly 95,000 followers.
The network has also formed a group and a series of sub-groups on Wire, the encrypted messaging app, to share information and develop strategies – as played out on Saturday.
The #AltGov hashtag has roots in the first Trump administration, perhaps most famously through the “ALT National Park Service” account on what was then Twitter, according to Amanda Sturgill, journalism professor at Elon University, whose book We Are #AltGov: Social Media Resistance from the Inside documents the earlier phenomenon. (That account, with its 774,000 followers, has since moved to Bluesky. Its online presence is parallel to and separate from the #AltGov network.)
The original #AltGov Twitter accounts were dedicated to “sharing information about what was happening inside government – which usually doesn’t get covered as much, because it usually works”, Sturgill said. Examples included the first Trump administration’s deletion of data and separation of families through immigration policies, she said.
The people behind those accounts also banded together to “provide services the government wasn’t providing” – like helping coordinate hurricane relief and distributing masks during the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic. Those efforts were often coordinated in Twitter group chats.
It was “a movement, more than an organization”, Sturgill said – and the same could be said of the current version, which moved its social media presence from X (formerly Twitter) to Bluesky “because of the Elon mess”, said Stahl, referring to Musk’s 2022 purchase of the app. “It’s not safe to organize [on X] anymore,” she added.
The current iteration has not been reported on to date, but the numbers of the Bluesky #AltGov accounts have doubled in recent weeks without media attention, Stahl said. The group internally vets all members “to make sure people work where they say”.
A thread from the Bluesky #AltGov account for the Fish and Wildlife Service compiles five funny responses including “Counted all the fish and ensured they were gendered properly”
“#AltGov dates from the first Trump administration, but it’s even more needed now,” said an employee at Fema, the disaster response agency, who requested anonymity to avoid being targeted at work. She recently launched an #AltGov Fema account on Bluesky. With nearly 13,000 followers, the account says it’s dedicated to “helping people before, during, and after (this democratic) disaster”.
“Every federal employee takes an oath,” said the Fema employee. “When I did it, I teared up.” She said one reason she decided to join #AltGov was because “information [from the federal government] is so compromised right now. Everything is going on behind closed doors.”
As an example, she mentioned the moment nearly two weeks ago when Trump and Musk brought attention to her agency, claiming that Fema was spending $59m on housing immigrants in New York hotels. The administration fired four Fema employees. So she turned to Bluesky and posted on the #AltGov Fema account:
“The official story the federal government was telling was a lie!” the #AltGov member told the Guardian. “Of course they didn’t throw CBP under the bus – because to them, those are the people who lock up immigrants.”
Stahl, the federal contractor, said that #AltGov members are also increasingly turning their attention to what she called “action plans” for everyday citizens, such as calling members of Congress and attending town halls. “The idea is to get regular people aware of what’s happening … [and] maybe even inspire some people to run for office,” she said.
And as Musk’s “department of government efficiency” (Doge) swings its “chainsaw” through federal payrolls and piles up layoffs, #AltGov members also are using encrypted chats to figure out how federal employees can help one another. “[A]re we thinking of gathering resources for terminated folks?” one #AltGov member recently asked on Wire. “We are gonna need food bank info and benefits and anything the [federal] unions don’t cover.” Others weighed in on building a website to cover such information.
Sturgill said the first go-round of #AltGov was “interesting … [because] it kind of stood up a different way of governing by putting it in direct contact with people – a ‘government with the people’. Whether this [version] can take it further depends on how much of the government is left.”
“2. I bore true faith and allegiance to the same,” and so on.
It was only the latest effort by a growing and increasingly busy group banding together to “expose harmful policies, defend public institutions and equip citizens with tools to push back against authoritarianism”, according to Lynn Stahl, a contractor with Veterans Affairs and a member of the network. Increasingly, the group is also trying to help its members and others face the thousands of layoffs that have been imposed across the federal government.
Calling itself #AltGov, the network has developed a visible, public-facing presence in recent weeks through Bluesky accounts, most of which bear the names or initials of federal agencies, aimed at getting information out to the public – and correcting disinformation – about the chaos being unleashed by the Trump administration.
With 40 accounts to date, their collective megaphone is getting louder, as most of the accounts have tens of thousands of followers, with “Alt CDC (they/them)” being the largest, at nearly 95,000 followers.
The network has also formed a group and a series of sub-groups on Wire, the encrypted messaging app, to share information and develop strategies – as played out on Saturday.
The #AltGov hashtag has roots in the first Trump administration, perhaps most famously through the “ALT National Park Service” account on what was then Twitter, according to Amanda Sturgill, journalism professor at Elon University, whose book We Are #AltGov: Social Media Resistance from the Inside documents the earlier phenomenon. (That account, with its 774,000 followers, has since moved to Bluesky. Its online presence is parallel to and separate from the #AltGov network.)
The original #AltGov Twitter accounts were dedicated to “sharing information about what was happening inside government – which usually doesn’t get covered as much, because it usually works”, Sturgill said. Examples included the first Trump administration’s deletion of data and separation of families through immigration policies, she said.
The people behind those accounts also banded together to “provide services the government wasn’t providing” – like helping coordinate hurricane relief and distributing masks during the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic. Those efforts were often coordinated in Twitter group chats.
It was “a movement, more than an organization”, Sturgill said – and the same could be said of the current version, which moved its social media presence from X (formerly Twitter) to Bluesky “because of the Elon mess”, said Stahl, referring to Musk’s 2022 purchase of the app. “It’s not safe to organize [on X] anymore,” she added.
The current iteration has not been reported on to date, but the numbers of the Bluesky #AltGov accounts have doubled in recent weeks without media attention, Stahl said. The group internally vets all members “to make sure people work where they say”.
A thread from the Bluesky #AltGov account for the Fish and Wildlife Service compiles five funny responses including “Counted all the fish and ensured they were gendered properly”
“#AltGov dates from the first Trump administration, but it’s even more needed now,” said an employee at Fema, the disaster response agency, who requested anonymity to avoid being targeted at work. She recently launched an #AltGov Fema account on Bluesky. With nearly 13,000 followers, the account says it’s dedicated to “helping people before, during, and after (this democratic) disaster”.
“Every federal employee takes an oath,” said the Fema employee. “When I did it, I teared up.” She said one reason she decided to join #AltGov was because “information [from the federal government] is so compromised right now. Everything is going on behind closed doors.”
As an example, she mentioned the moment nearly two weeks ago when Trump and Musk brought attention to her agency, claiming that Fema was spending $59m on housing immigrants in New York hotels. The administration fired four Fema employees. So she turned to Bluesky and posted on the #AltGov Fema account:
Fiction: FEMA paid $59 million last week for illegal immigrants to stay luxury hotel rooms in NYCFact: FEMA administered funds allocated by Congress via the Shelter and Services Program (for Customs and Border Protection) which reimburses jurisdictions for immigration-related expenses. FEMA just sends the payments.
“The official story the federal government was telling was a lie!” the #AltGov member told the Guardian. “Of course they didn’t throw CBP under the bus – because to them, those are the people who lock up immigrants.”
Stahl, the federal contractor, said that #AltGov members are also increasingly turning their attention to what she called “action plans” for everyday citizens, such as calling members of Congress and attending town halls. “The idea is to get regular people aware of what’s happening … [and] maybe even inspire some people to run for office,” she said.
And as Musk’s “department of government efficiency” (Doge) swings its “chainsaw” through federal payrolls and piles up layoffs, #AltGov members also are using encrypted chats to figure out how federal employees can help one another. “[A]re we thinking of gathering resources for terminated folks?” one #AltGov member recently asked on Wire. “We are gonna need food bank info and benefits and anything the [federal] unions don’t cover.” Others weighed in on building a website to cover such information.
Sturgill said the first go-round of #AltGov was “interesting … [because] it kind of stood up a different way of governing by putting it in direct contact with people – a ‘government with the people’. Whether this [version] can take it further depends on how much of the government is left.”
Feb 19, 2025
Hopefully, A Rising Star
@repstansbury Why is the GOP shielding Elon Musk from Oversight!? Maybe…because while we’re sitting here he’s dismantling agencies, threatening national security, stealing our data, and breaking the law. Dems are not clutching our pearls. Dems are fighting back. And we won't stop!
♬ original sound - Rep. Melanie Stansbury
Jan 23, 2025
Jan 7, 2025
Today's LAMF
LEOPARDS ATE MY FACE
As Trump's gang of thieves moves to further gut the system of safety regulations, it's going to get harder to keep track of the dangers, and to know who's at fault when the inevitable bad things start to happen.
We grew accustomed to assuming the FDA is on the job and looking out for us - even though they've been badly impacted already, owing to the GOP's decades-long assault on government's obligation to promote the general welfare of we the people.
Joseph Journell thought he was doing the wholesome thing when he fed raw, unpasteurized milk to his cats. Journell also drank the raw milk, thinking it provided benefits that pasteurized milk did not have.
After two of his pets died in late 2024 and a third became seriously ill he realized the raw milk from Raw Farm LLC was dangerous.
Journell’s cats Alexander and Tuxedo died horrible deaths involving convulsions and blindness and a third cat, Big Boy, was hospitalized for eight days in critical condition. A fourth cat that did not drink the raw milk remained healthy. Journell himself was feeling sick just before his cats became ill and now believes it was the raw milk.
He said he is not sure when, or if, he will go back to drinking raw milk, which usually costs between $15 and $17 per gallon.
“I think there should be better testing and regulation to make sure it is safe,” Journell said.
Journell, who lives in San Bernardino, CA, paid for testing that showed Big Boy was infected with bird flu. The testing was done at USDA’s National Veterinary Services Laboratories and the Animal Health Diagnostic Center at Cornell University. The testing, medical bills and other expenses for Big Boy were about $14,000.
Big Boy’s recovery is ongoing. He is partially blind and had to use a wheeled device because he could not walk on his back legs for several weeks. His vision is still impaired but he is walking and eating normally.
Journell is now trying to recover costs from Mark McAfee, the owner of Raw Farm LLC, which is the dairy that produced the raw milk that made Journell and his cats sick.
McAfee has denied all liability, telling Journell that his cats must have gotten bird flu from eating a sick bird. This is impossible as Journell’s cats were all strictly indoor pets.
McAfee also told Journell that his raw milk is safe and said that his own cats at Raw Farm’s dairy drink raw milk and are healthy.
McAfee told Jounell that the Raw Farm LLC milk is entirely safe, saying that the H5N1 bird flu virus can not survive in cold milk for extended periods.
I asked an official with the state health department and she told me that isn’t true, Journell said.
McAfee had to recall his raw milk in November and December of 2024 because it tested positive for the bird flu. California health officials shut down the dairy until McAfee could prove that his milk was not contaminated.
“I feel like he (McAfee) just lied to me to protect his own company,” Journell said.
State and federal officials have been warning the public for months that unpasteurized, raw milk can be contaminated with the bird flu virus, which can infect those who consume it.
“I would tell other pet owners that if their cats begin having any symptoms out of the ordinary that they should seek medical attention fast. If I had done that sooner my other cats might still be alive,” Journell said.
Since Dec. 1, at least 11 cats in California that consumed raw milk and raw pet food have died. There have also been cases of cats in Texas and Oregon dying. In December, 20 animals at a big cat sanctuary in Washington State died as a result of infection with the virus.
Journell is represented by the Marler Clark law firm, headed by food safety attorney Bill Marler. The law firm contacted McAfee on Jan. 1 asking that he immediately reimburse Journell for his expenses.
“This incident represents yet another outbreak linked to Raw Farm and highlights ongoing concerns regarding the safety of your raw milk products,” according to a letter sent by Ilana Korchia of the law firm.
Nov 22, 2024
Today's Belle
So Trump loses one in the Senate, and I worry that people will think the guardrails have held, so we can all relax and slip back into our default apathetic haze.
But standing up and torpedoing one nomination does not a rebellion make.
For one thing, Trump turned around and nominated Pam Bondi for USAG. You may remember that Bondi (Florida AG at the time) declined to charge Trump with anything over his "Trump University" flimflam, and it was learned not too much afterward that she had taken a $25,000 "donation" from the Trump Foundation.
So the improvement here is that we've gone from "Dude-What-The-Actual-Fuck?" to "Wow-Really?"
The Senate gets up on its hind legs for a change and strikes the heroic pose, but there's a real possibility that "winning" this one could turn out to be cover for a less egregious-looking capitulation later.
BTW, Matt Gaetz could be right back in the House in January. It's pretty murky, but I keep hearing that having resigned from the 118th Congress, he could be sworn in to the 119th because he won re-election for it.
So, I think we may be in store for a whole new fucked up side show as Gaetz tries to sue his way back into his seat.
Nov 21, 2024
Told Ya
No tax on overtime pay!!!!!
A Trump Judge Just Nixed Overtime Pay for Millions—and Media Yawned
Remember the right-wing frenzy over “Rich Men North of Richmond”? Well, this ruling exposes Trump-MAGA hypocrisy on the working class—and reveals a big media failure.
You probably missed it, because it created barely a ripple in the media, but last Friday, a federal judge appointed by Donald Trump struck down one of President Biden’s most pro-worker policies: his effort to ensure that far more Americans benefit from overtime pay. Around four million salaried workers with lower incomes are the losers in this decision, yet it generated startlingly few news stories and no outraged missives from leading columnists.
Watching this all unfold brings to mind a now-forgotten controversy. Remember when Oliver Anthony, the little-known folk singer, went viral in 2023 with his song lamenting the plight of working people imposed by the “Rich Men North of Richmond”? Donald Trump and Republicans claimed the bearded, red-haired Southerner as one of their own, a veritable bard of MAGA country who’d crafted the ultimate right-wing populist ballad of protest aimed directly at supercilious elites.
“This is the anthem of the forgotten Americans,” gushed Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene. Media commentary endlessly analyzed the song as a cry of anguish straight from the blue-collar heartland, one that elite liberals should take to heart as a sign of how badly they’d failed regular Americans.
Here’s another “forgotten” detail about Anthony’s song for you to contemplate: It was about overtime pay.
“I’ve been sellin’ my soul, workin’ all day, overtime hours for bullshit pay,” Anthony croons, adding that this has led him to “drown my troubles away.” He laments that “young men are puttin’ themselves six feet in the ground,” seemingly describing oft-diagnosed social crises like self-medication, the spiritual alienation of modern work, and “deaths of despair.” All this was apparently a reference to Anthony’s own stint in a North Carolina factory, and he blames it on the “Rich Men North of Richmond”—politicians and their corporate overlords rigging the system against people like him.
This type of rigging is exactly what Biden’s overtime policy would combat. His administrative rule, proposed last year, would raise the income threshold for many workers to qualify for extra pay for hours beyond the 40-hour week under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Right now, that threshold is only around $35,000 per year. The rule would raise it to around $58,000.
Around four million additional people would qualify for overtime protections under this change. These are people who make more than $35,000 but less than $58,000 per year, but don’t currently qualify for overtime; to oversimplify, bosses have reclassified many of these workers as managers, exempting them from federal overtime protections.
The Biden rule would make them eligible: According to Labor Department spokesman Jesse Lawder, this group includes hundreds of thousands of people who do many types of manufacturing work as well as those holding low-to-medium-level positions in everything from retail and fast-food franchises to construction. Many are overworked and underpaid due to the same elite rigging of our economy perpetrated by the “Rich Men North of Richmond.”
Guess who managed to block this rule that would have provided those people with relief? MAGA Republicans allied with business interests, that’s who.
The lawsuit that succeeded combined two suits—one launched by Trumpy Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, the other by a consortium of business groups. While the business coalition appears broad, it includes big players. We’re talking about the National Federation of Independent Business, which gave over $500,000 to GOP candidates (and a pittance to Democrats) last cycle; the International Franchise Association, whose board includes executives from fast-food behemoths like McDonald’s; and the National Retail Federation, whose board boasts representatives from giants like Walmart and Target. Like the “Rich Men North of Richmond,” these are well-heeled special interests who employ high-priced lawyers and lobbyists to influence politicians in D.C.
A big question now looms: Will the Trump administration fight to make this Biden rule a reality? The Justice Department hasn’t said whether it will appeal the decision striking the rule down. It should, to compel Trump to either keep defending it or actively let it die.
It’s unlikely Trump will continue that fight. To be fair, Trump’s record on this is mixed. In 2016, when the eligibility threshold was around $23,000, President Barack Obama tried to raise it to around $47,000, but a court struck that down. As president, Trump did raise the threshold, but only to a meager $35,000 (the current level), which happened to be a level that business groups could accept. Biden would expand this to millions more workers, which is why business interests tried to thwart it—apparently succeeding.
During the “Rich Men North of Richmond” controversy, certain columnists pointed a finger at liberal elites, urging deep introspection about why they have lost touch with the anxieties of people like Oliver Anthony. Now that Trump has been reelected while winning more working-class voters, including Latinos, we’re mired in another such debate.
No one should deny the need for such introspection. It’s obviously not enough for Democrats and liberals to say, “Our policies are better for people like Oliver Anthony.” A reformed approach should include an agenda that’s substantially more economically populist; a clear-eyed look at why certain liberal policies alienate working-class voters; and a deep dive into why working people are skeptical that Democrats fight for their material interests these days.
But surely it’s a sign of another profound problem, one that deeply afflicts our discourse, that a genuine effort by Democrats to lift the fortunes of millions of people struggling with low overtime pay—one blocked by a Trump judge and business elites—garnered almost zero media attention. This, even as a working-class anthem partly about that very problem captivated the media for weeks.
That disconnect captures one of the cardinal facts about our times. While Trump has broken with pro–big business orthodoxy to some degree—on tariffs and trade, for example—broadly speaking, he will outsource much of his agenda to the GOP’s plutocratic wing. He is expected to deeply slash the safety net to pay for more tax cuts for the rich, and to roll back many Biden labor policies, ones that arguably constitute the most pro-worker agenda in decades, perhaps doing nothing on overtime as well.
The media obsesses over Oliver Anthony and treats MAGA’s fetishization of him as sincere—but for all of its dutiful coverage of our policy disputes, it can’t seem to convey the larger truth about which party’s policies are actually pro-worker, and which are not.
This deception runs deep in right-wing media too. Media Matters found that Fox News devoted hours of programming to hyping “Rich Men North of Richmond,” and the network also made it the topic of the first GOP presidential debate. At my request, Media Matters searched transcripts in the SnapStream video database for Fox coverage of the ruling striking down the overtime rule—and found zero such coverage.
Yes, Anthony’s song was about more than just overtime pay. It was about a broader set of social afflictions. That helps explain all the press attention to it. But after this extended media fixation, Trump and fellow populist JD Vance faced no media pressure at all during the campaign to say where they stood on Biden’s effort to expand overtime pay to millions, or whether they’ll continue it.
That’s absurd. It reflects its own form of elite dereliction—one that leaves people less informed about the larger forces shaping their lives, the very thing, we’re told, that makes so many people like Oliver Anthony feel powerless and adrift. This elite failure too deserves some serious introspection. Perhaps someone should write a song about it.
(because we're gonna make overtime disappear - by making overtime eligibility disappear)
Remember the right-wing frenzy over “Rich Men North of Richmond”? Well, this ruling exposes Trump-MAGA hypocrisy on the working class—and reveals a big media failure.
You probably missed it, because it created barely a ripple in the media, but last Friday, a federal judge appointed by Donald Trump struck down one of President Biden’s most pro-worker policies: his effort to ensure that far more Americans benefit from overtime pay. Around four million salaried workers with lower incomes are the losers in this decision, yet it generated startlingly few news stories and no outraged missives from leading columnists.
Watching this all unfold brings to mind a now-forgotten controversy. Remember when Oliver Anthony, the little-known folk singer, went viral in 2023 with his song lamenting the plight of working people imposed by the “Rich Men North of Richmond”? Donald Trump and Republicans claimed the bearded, red-haired Southerner as one of their own, a veritable bard of MAGA country who’d crafted the ultimate right-wing populist ballad of protest aimed directly at supercilious elites.
“This is the anthem of the forgotten Americans,” gushed Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene. Media commentary endlessly analyzed the song as a cry of anguish straight from the blue-collar heartland, one that elite liberals should take to heart as a sign of how badly they’d failed regular Americans.
Here’s another “forgotten” detail about Anthony’s song for you to contemplate: It was about overtime pay.
“I’ve been sellin’ my soul, workin’ all day, overtime hours for bullshit pay,” Anthony croons, adding that this has led him to “drown my troubles away.” He laments that “young men are puttin’ themselves six feet in the ground,” seemingly describing oft-diagnosed social crises like self-medication, the spiritual alienation of modern work, and “deaths of despair.” All this was apparently a reference to Anthony’s own stint in a North Carolina factory, and he blames it on the “Rich Men North of Richmond”—politicians and their corporate overlords rigging the system against people like him.
This type of rigging is exactly what Biden’s overtime policy would combat. His administrative rule, proposed last year, would raise the income threshold for many workers to qualify for extra pay for hours beyond the 40-hour week under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Right now, that threshold is only around $35,000 per year. The rule would raise it to around $58,000.
Around four million additional people would qualify for overtime protections under this change. These are people who make more than $35,000 but less than $58,000 per year, but don’t currently qualify for overtime; to oversimplify, bosses have reclassified many of these workers as managers, exempting them from federal overtime protections.
The Biden rule would make them eligible: According to Labor Department spokesman Jesse Lawder, this group includes hundreds of thousands of people who do many types of manufacturing work as well as those holding low-to-medium-level positions in everything from retail and fast-food franchises to construction. Many are overworked and underpaid due to the same elite rigging of our economy perpetrated by the “Rich Men North of Richmond.”
Guess who managed to block this rule that would have provided those people with relief? MAGA Republicans allied with business interests, that’s who.
The lawsuit that succeeded combined two suits—one launched by Trumpy Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, the other by a consortium of business groups. While the business coalition appears broad, it includes big players. We’re talking about the National Federation of Independent Business, which gave over $500,000 to GOP candidates (and a pittance to Democrats) last cycle; the International Franchise Association, whose board includes executives from fast-food behemoths like McDonald’s; and the National Retail Federation, whose board boasts representatives from giants like Walmart and Target. Like the “Rich Men North of Richmond,” these are well-heeled special interests who employ high-priced lawyers and lobbyists to influence politicians in D.C.
A big question now looms: Will the Trump administration fight to make this Biden rule a reality? The Justice Department hasn’t said whether it will appeal the decision striking the rule down. It should, to compel Trump to either keep defending it or actively let it die.
It’s unlikely Trump will continue that fight. To be fair, Trump’s record on this is mixed. In 2016, when the eligibility threshold was around $23,000, President Barack Obama tried to raise it to around $47,000, but a court struck that down. As president, Trump did raise the threshold, but only to a meager $35,000 (the current level), which happened to be a level that business groups could accept. Biden would expand this to millions more workers, which is why business interests tried to thwart it—apparently succeeding.
During the “Rich Men North of Richmond” controversy, certain columnists pointed a finger at liberal elites, urging deep introspection about why they have lost touch with the anxieties of people like Oliver Anthony. Now that Trump has been reelected while winning more working-class voters, including Latinos, we’re mired in another such debate.
No one should deny the need for such introspection. It’s obviously not enough for Democrats and liberals to say, “Our policies are better for people like Oliver Anthony.” A reformed approach should include an agenda that’s substantially more economically populist; a clear-eyed look at why certain liberal policies alienate working-class voters; and a deep dive into why working people are skeptical that Democrats fight for their material interests these days.
But surely it’s a sign of another profound problem, one that deeply afflicts our discourse, that a genuine effort by Democrats to lift the fortunes of millions of people struggling with low overtime pay—one blocked by a Trump judge and business elites—garnered almost zero media attention. This, even as a working-class anthem partly about that very problem captivated the media for weeks.
That disconnect captures one of the cardinal facts about our times. While Trump has broken with pro–big business orthodoxy to some degree—on tariffs and trade, for example—broadly speaking, he will outsource much of his agenda to the GOP’s plutocratic wing. He is expected to deeply slash the safety net to pay for more tax cuts for the rich, and to roll back many Biden labor policies, ones that arguably constitute the most pro-worker agenda in decades, perhaps doing nothing on overtime as well.
The media obsesses over Oliver Anthony and treats MAGA’s fetishization of him as sincere—but for all of its dutiful coverage of our policy disputes, it can’t seem to convey the larger truth about which party’s policies are actually pro-worker, and which are not.
This deception runs deep in right-wing media too. Media Matters found that Fox News devoted hours of programming to hyping “Rich Men North of Richmond,” and the network also made it the topic of the first GOP presidential debate. At my request, Media Matters searched transcripts in the SnapStream video database for Fox coverage of the ruling striking down the overtime rule—and found zero such coverage.
Yes, Anthony’s song was about more than just overtime pay. It was about a broader set of social afflictions. That helps explain all the press attention to it. But after this extended media fixation, Trump and fellow populist JD Vance faced no media pressure at all during the campaign to say where they stood on Biden’s effort to expand overtime pay to millions, or whether they’ll continue it.
That’s absurd. It reflects its own form of elite dereliction—one that leaves people less informed about the larger forces shaping their lives, the very thing, we’re told, that makes so many people like Oliver Anthony feel powerless and adrift. This elite failure too deserves some serious introspection. Perhaps someone should write a song about it.
Nov 15, 2024
Today's Belle
Blue state resistance builds against Trump
A week after the election, Democratic governors and attorneys general are sharpening plans to become the de facto blue state resistance to a second Trump term.
Why it matters:
Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker and Colorado Gov. Jared Polis announced Tuesday the creation of the Governors Safeguarding Democracy organization as a leading voice against President-elect Trump's policies — and to provide a playbook for other governors seeking to push back.
Driving the news:
Driving the news:
The effort will counter threats on state democratic institutions — including independent judiciary, executive agencies and electoral system — largely through legal action.
"What we are doing is pushing back against increasing threats of autocracy fortifying the institutions of democracy that our country and our states depend upon," Pritzker said.
The rollback of environmental regulations, immigration politics, attacks on reproductive rights and "any threats to our democracy that come from any president or from foreign powers" are foremost in mind, Polis added.
"What we are doing is pushing back against increasing threats of autocracy fortifying the institutions of democracy that our country and our states depend upon," Pritzker said.
The rollback of environmental regulations, immigration politics, attacks on reproductive rights and "any threats to our democracy that come from any president or from foreign powers" are foremost in mind, Polis added.
The big picture:
Democratic state officials across the nation are wary of another Trump presidency and pledged to play an adversarial role, just as they did in his first term.
- In California, Gov. Gavin Newsom called a special legislative session for Dec. 2 to "safeguard California values and fundamental rights" before Trump takes office.
- In Washington state, Attorney General Bob Ferguson's team has studied Trump's campaign promises and Project 2025 to prepare lawsuits to block federal actions.
- In Colorado, Polis promised to protect the "Free State of Colorado."
- In Arizona, Attorney General Kris Mayes said she "can't imagine a single Democratic attorney general in this country that won't be involved in fighting unconstitutional behavior."
- In Minnesota, Attorney General Keith Ellison said if Trump "violates the rights of people, we're gonna sue. It's simple as that."
The other side:
The Trump campaign has repeatedly suggested such moves would thwart the will of the American people who support his agenda.
Between the lines:
Between the lines:
The organization is modeled on the Reproductive Freedom Alliance, created by Newsom. Both claim to be nonpartisan but are led by Democratic governors.
Pritzker said he has contacted Republican governors about collaborating but declined to name them.
Pritzker said he has contacted Republican governors about collaborating but declined to name them.
The nonprofit Governors Action Alliance, led by former Newsom adviser Julia Spiegel, is spearheading the effort.
Sep 8, 2024
Today's Belle
The Biden plan for things like Rural Broadband, and Green Energy in 23 states is nearly as ambitious as FDR's REA back in the 30s.
So we've got it started, and it's a pretty good start, but it's just a start. Getting us fully transitioned away from dirty fuels, as soon as we can possibly do it, is the only thing that keeps us from the worst of the effects of Climate Change.
Based on the annual report from NOAA’s Global Monitoring Lab, global average atmospheric carbon dioxide was 419.3 parts per million (“ppm” for short) in 2023, setting a new record high. The increase between 2022 and 2023 was 2.8 ppm—the 12th year in a row where the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increased by more than 2 ppm. At Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii, where the modern carbon dioxide record began in 1958, the annual average carbon dioxide in 2023 was 421.08.
May 23, 2024
What's That Biden Guy Doing?
200 federal judges.
Now, if we can get SCOTUS to start acting like they're not on the wrong fucking side, we might just have it made.
Apr 10, 2024
Call It A Win
I'm guessing a twisted version of this could revive Nestle's attempts to privatize water utilities.
The Biden administration on Wednesday finalized strict limits on certain so-called “forever chemicals” in drinking water that will require utilities to reduce them to the lowest level they can be reliably measured. Officials say this will reduce exposure for 100 million people and help prevent thousands of illnesses, including cancers.
The rule is the first national drinking water limit on toxic PFAS, or perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, which are widespread and long lasting in the environment.
Health advocates praised the Environmental Protection Agency for not backing away from tough limits the agency proposed last year. But water utilities took issue with the rule, saying treatment systems are expensive to install and that customers will end up paying more for water.
Water providers are entering a new era with significant additional health standards that the EPA says will make tap water safer for millions of consumers — a Biden administration priority. The agency has also proposed forcing utilities to remove dangerous lead pipes.
Utility groups warn the rules will cost tens of billions of dollars each and fall hardest on small communities with fewer resources. Legal challenges are sure to follow.
EPA Administrator Michael Regan says the rule is the most important action the EPA has ever taken on PFAS.
“The result is a comprehensive and life-changing rule, one that will improve the health and vitality of so many communities across our country,” said Regan.
PFAS chemicals are hazardous because they don’t degrade in the environment and are linked to health issues such as low birth weight and liver disease, along with certain cancers. The EPA estimates the rule will cost about $1.5 billion to implement each year, but doing so will prevent nearly 10,000 deaths over decades and significantly reduce serious illnesses.
They’ve been used in everyday products including nonstick pans, firefighting foam and waterproof clothing. Although some of the most common types are phased out in the U.S., others remain. Water providers will now be forced to remove contamination put in the environment by other industries.
“It’s that accumulation that’s the problem,” said Scott Belcher, a North Carolina State University professor who researches PFAS toxicity. “Even tiny, tiny, tiny amounts each time you take a drink of water over your lifetime is going to keep adding up, leading to the health effects.”
PFAS is a broad family of chemical substances, and the new rule sets strict limits on two common types — called PFOA and PFOS — at 4 parts per trillion. Three other types that include GenEx Chemicals that are a major problem in North Carolina are limited to 10 parts per trillion. Water providers will have to test for these PFAS chemicals and tell the public when levels are too high. Combinations of some PFAS types will be limited, too.
Regan will announce the rule in Fayetteville, North Carolina, on Wednesday.
Environmental and health advocates praised the rule, but said PFAS manufacturers knew decades ago the substances were dangerous yet hid or downplayed the evidence. Limits should have come sooner, they argue.
“Reducing PFAS in our drinking water is the most cost effective way to reduce our exposure,” said Scott Faber, a food and water expert at Environmental Working Group. “It’s much more challenging to reduce other exposures such as PFAS in food or clothing or carpets.”
Over the last year, EPA has periodically released batches of utility test results for PFAS in drinking water. Roughly 16% of utilities found at least one of the two strictly limited PFAS chemicals at or above the new limits. These utilities serve tens of millions of people. The Biden administration, however, expects about 6-10% of water systems to exceed the new limits.
Water providers will generally have three years to do testing. If those test exceed the limits, they’ll have two more years to install treatment systems, according to EPA officials.
Some funds are available to help utilities. Manufacturer 3M recently agreed to pay more than $10 billion to drinking water providers to settle PFAS litigation. And the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law includes billions to combat the substance. But utilities say more will be needed.
For some communities, tests results were a surprise. Last June, a utility outside Philadelphia that serves nearly 9,000 people learned that one of its wells had a PFOA level of 235 parts per trillion, among the highest results in the country at the time.
“I mean, obviously, it was a shock,” said Joseph Hastings, director of the joint public works department for the Collegeville and Trappe boroughs, whose job includes solving problems presented by new regulations.
The well was quickly yanked offline, but Hastings still doesn’t know the contamination source. Several other wells were above the EPA’s new limits, but lower than those the state of Pennsylvania set earlier. Now, Hastings says installing treatment systems could be a multi-million dollar endeavor, a major expense for a small customer base.
The new regulation is “going to throw public confidence in drinking water into chaos,” said Mike McGill, president of WaterPIO, a water industry communications firm.
The American Water Works Association, an industry group, says it supports the development of PFAS limits in drinking water, but argues the EPA’s rule has big problems.
The agency underestimated its high cost, which can’t be justified for communities with low levels of PFAS, and it’ll raise customer water bills, the association said. Plus, there aren’t enough experts and workers — and supplies of filtration material are limited.
Work in some places has started. The company Veolia operates utilities serving about 2.3 million people across six eastern states and manages water systems for millions more. Veolia built PFAS treatment for small water systems that serve about 150,000 people. The company expects, however, that roughly 50 more sites will need treatment — and it’s working to scale up efforts to reduce PFAS in larger communities it serves.
Such efforts followed dramatic shifts in EPA’s health guidance for PFAS in recent years as more research into its health harms emerged. Less than a decade ago, EPA issued a health advisory that PFOA and PFOS levels combined shouldn’t exceed 70 parts per trillion. Now, the agency says no amount is safe.
Public alarm has increased, too. In Minnesota, for example, Amara’s Law aims to stop avoidable PFAS use. It’s been nearly a year since the law’s namesake, Amara Strande, died from a rare cancer her family blames on PFAS contamination by 3M near her high school in Oakdale, although a connection between PFAS and her cancer can’t be proven. Biden administration officials say communities shouldn’t suffer like Oakdale. 3M says it extends its deepest condolences to Amara’s friends and family.
Losing Amara pushed the family towards activism. They’ve testified multiple times in favor of PFAS restrictions.
“Four parts per trillion, we couldn’t ask for a better standard,” Amara’s sister Nora said. “It’s a very ambitious goal, but anything higher than that is endangering lives.”
Biden administration sets first-ever limits on ‘forever chemicals’ in drinking water
The Biden administration on Wednesday finalized strict limits on certain so-called “forever chemicals” in drinking water that will require utilities to reduce them to the lowest level they can be reliably measured. Officials say this will reduce exposure for 100 million people and help prevent thousands of illnesses, including cancers.
The rule is the first national drinking water limit on toxic PFAS, or perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, which are widespread and long lasting in the environment.
Health advocates praised the Environmental Protection Agency for not backing away from tough limits the agency proposed last year. But water utilities took issue with the rule, saying treatment systems are expensive to install and that customers will end up paying more for water.
Water providers are entering a new era with significant additional health standards that the EPA says will make tap water safer for millions of consumers — a Biden administration priority. The agency has also proposed forcing utilities to remove dangerous lead pipes.
Utility groups warn the rules will cost tens of billions of dollars each and fall hardest on small communities with fewer resources. Legal challenges are sure to follow.
EPA Administrator Michael Regan says the rule is the most important action the EPA has ever taken on PFAS.
“The result is a comprehensive and life-changing rule, one that will improve the health and vitality of so many communities across our country,” said Regan.
PFAS chemicals are hazardous because they don’t degrade in the environment and are linked to health issues such as low birth weight and liver disease, along with certain cancers. The EPA estimates the rule will cost about $1.5 billion to implement each year, but doing so will prevent nearly 10,000 deaths over decades and significantly reduce serious illnesses.
They’ve been used in everyday products including nonstick pans, firefighting foam and waterproof clothing. Although some of the most common types are phased out in the U.S., others remain. Water providers will now be forced to remove contamination put in the environment by other industries.
“It’s that accumulation that’s the problem,” said Scott Belcher, a North Carolina State University professor who researches PFAS toxicity. “Even tiny, tiny, tiny amounts each time you take a drink of water over your lifetime is going to keep adding up, leading to the health effects.”
PFAS is a broad family of chemical substances, and the new rule sets strict limits on two common types — called PFOA and PFOS — at 4 parts per trillion. Three other types that include GenEx Chemicals that are a major problem in North Carolina are limited to 10 parts per trillion. Water providers will have to test for these PFAS chemicals and tell the public when levels are too high. Combinations of some PFAS types will be limited, too.
Regan will announce the rule in Fayetteville, North Carolina, on Wednesday.
Environmental and health advocates praised the rule, but said PFAS manufacturers knew decades ago the substances were dangerous yet hid or downplayed the evidence. Limits should have come sooner, they argue.
“Reducing PFAS in our drinking water is the most cost effective way to reduce our exposure,” said Scott Faber, a food and water expert at Environmental Working Group. “It’s much more challenging to reduce other exposures such as PFAS in food or clothing or carpets.”
Over the last year, EPA has periodically released batches of utility test results for PFAS in drinking water. Roughly 16% of utilities found at least one of the two strictly limited PFAS chemicals at or above the new limits. These utilities serve tens of millions of people. The Biden administration, however, expects about 6-10% of water systems to exceed the new limits.
Water providers will generally have three years to do testing. If those test exceed the limits, they’ll have two more years to install treatment systems, according to EPA officials.
Some funds are available to help utilities. Manufacturer 3M recently agreed to pay more than $10 billion to drinking water providers to settle PFAS litigation. And the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law includes billions to combat the substance. But utilities say more will be needed.
For some communities, tests results were a surprise. Last June, a utility outside Philadelphia that serves nearly 9,000 people learned that one of its wells had a PFOA level of 235 parts per trillion, among the highest results in the country at the time.
“I mean, obviously, it was a shock,” said Joseph Hastings, director of the joint public works department for the Collegeville and Trappe boroughs, whose job includes solving problems presented by new regulations.
The well was quickly yanked offline, but Hastings still doesn’t know the contamination source. Several other wells were above the EPA’s new limits, but lower than those the state of Pennsylvania set earlier. Now, Hastings says installing treatment systems could be a multi-million dollar endeavor, a major expense for a small customer base.
The new regulation is “going to throw public confidence in drinking water into chaos,” said Mike McGill, president of WaterPIO, a water industry communications firm.
The American Water Works Association, an industry group, says it supports the development of PFAS limits in drinking water, but argues the EPA’s rule has big problems.
The agency underestimated its high cost, which can’t be justified for communities with low levels of PFAS, and it’ll raise customer water bills, the association said. Plus, there aren’t enough experts and workers — and supplies of filtration material are limited.
Work in some places has started. The company Veolia operates utilities serving about 2.3 million people across six eastern states and manages water systems for millions more. Veolia built PFAS treatment for small water systems that serve about 150,000 people. The company expects, however, that roughly 50 more sites will need treatment — and it’s working to scale up efforts to reduce PFAS in larger communities it serves.
Such efforts followed dramatic shifts in EPA’s health guidance for PFAS in recent years as more research into its health harms emerged. Less than a decade ago, EPA issued a health advisory that PFOA and PFOS levels combined shouldn’t exceed 70 parts per trillion. Now, the agency says no amount is safe.
Public alarm has increased, too. In Minnesota, for example, Amara’s Law aims to stop avoidable PFAS use. It’s been nearly a year since the law’s namesake, Amara Strande, died from a rare cancer her family blames on PFAS contamination by 3M near her high school in Oakdale, although a connection between PFAS and her cancer can’t be proven. Biden administration officials say communities shouldn’t suffer like Oakdale. 3M says it extends its deepest condolences to Amara’s friends and family.
Losing Amara pushed the family towards activism. They’ve testified multiple times in favor of PFAS restrictions.
“Four parts per trillion, we couldn’t ask for a better standard,” Amara’s sister Nora said. “It’s a very ambitious goal, but anything higher than that is endangering lives.”
And meanwhile:
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers vetoed a Republican bill Tuesday that would have created grants to fight pollution from “forever chemicals” and took the unusual step of calling the GOP-controlled budget committee into meeting to approve spending $125 million to deal with contamination.
Evers has only called a meeting of the Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee once before, a rarely used power afforded the governor under state law.
Evers and Republicans have not been able to agree on the best way to combat pollution from PFAS, chemicals that have polluted groundwater in communities across the state. Evers and Republicans have both said that fighting the chemicals is a priority, but they haven’t been able to come together on what to do about it.
Evers said it was “just wrong” that lawmakers have not approved spending the $125 million that was allocated to combat PFAS in the state budget passed last year.
“There is no reason Wisconsinites should have to wait any longer than they already have for these funds to be released,” Evers said in a statement. “This is about doing the right thing for our kids, our families, and our communities, and it should’ve been done a long time ago. This must get done.”
Republican Sen. Eric Wimberger, who cosponsored the bill, called the veto “shameful” and said he was holding the funding hostage.
“Every person in Wisconsin deserves to have clean, safe drinking water, and the Governor denied them that,” Wimberger said in a statement.
Evers said that addressing PFAS contamination remains a priority for him and the bill he vetoed “is not good enough.”
Evers has repeatedly called on the Legislature’s GOP-controlled budget committee to release the $125 million in funding. He called an April 16 meeting for them to consider it again, but Republicans have shown no indication they will act.
The bill Evers vetoed called for spending the money on grants for municipalities, private landowners and waste disposal facilities to test for PFAS in water treatment plants and wells. Landowners with property that became contaminated through no fault of their own also would have been eligible for grants.
And that's the twist. Republicans want to dole out the money to their buddies, and that accomplishes three basic GOP things:
- They get to slam Evers for vetoing a bill aimed at "helping the hard-working real people of Wisconsin"
- It creates another clusterfuck that makes government look corrupt and inept
- It works to reinforce the drive to replace "corrupt inept government" with "the efficiency of the free market system"
Wimberger, the bill’s sponsor, said Evers wants to create a “slush fund” for the DNR, rather than funnel the $125 million through the program spelled out in the bill.
Multiple environmental groups urged Evers to veto the legislation, saying the limits on DNR enforcement are a deal-breaker. The Wisconsin Towns Association, the League of Wisconsin Municipalities, and the Wisconsin Counties Association supported the bill.
Republican bill authors argued that the limits are necessary to protect landowners who aren’t responsible for PFAS pollution on their property from fines.
PFAS, short for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are man-made chemicals that don’t easily break down in nature. They are found in a wide range of products, including cookware and stain-resistant clothing, and previously were often used in aviation fire-suppression foam. The chemicals have been linked to health problems including low birth weight, cancer and liver disease, and have been shown to make vaccines less effective.
Municipalities across Wisconsin are struggling with PFAS contamination in groundwater, including Marinette, Madison, Wausau and the town of Campbell on French Island. The waters of Green Bay also are contaminated.
Apr 1, 2024
Today's Assignment
... learning about grand strategies, why they're vital to the success of any nation, and why empires fall when autocrats double down on bad decisions instead of building up institutions.
For me, there's nothing better than listening to smart people explain things to me.
Bookmark it, and come back later if you have to, but this shit is important.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)