November, 11 2016, 03:00pm EDT
Bailed-Out Auto Industry Asks Trump's Lobbyist Transition Team to Ease Off Rules That Save Consumers Money
Statement of Tyson Slocum, Director, Public Citizen's Energy Program
Statement of Tyson Slocum, Director, Public Citizen's Energy Program
Note: In a letter sent Thursday, the Alliance of Automobile Manufactures asked the incoming Trump administration to roll back fuel efficiency standards. Legislation signed by Republican President George W. Bush in 2007 directed the U.S. Department of Transportation and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to improve fuel economy standards, and in 2012 those agencies directed automakers to increase fuel efficiency standards to 54.5 miles per gallon, because higher gas mileage standards save consumers billions in fuel costs, reduce air pollution and buffer the economy from the shock of eventually higher prices.
In 2009, in the aftermath of financial losses that stemmed from poor sales of inefficient fleets and higher oil prices, American taxpayers rescued the auto industry after it nearly went out of business. Now, this same industry sent a memo to Trump's lobbyist-staffed transition team asking for permission to ease off improved fuel economy standards.
Let's not forget that the reason the auto industry had to be bailed out was because automakers built a fleet of gas-guzzling sports utility vehicles that they could no longer sell. More fuel efficient cars would have saved them and taxpayers the trouble, but now it appears that the auto industry has learned nothing from its recent mistakes.
Federal regulators raised fuel efficiency standards because they save consumers money and are an important part of our effort to combat climate change. If the Trump administration grants the auto industry's request, American drivers will be paying more at the pump and paying more to deal with the expensive consequences of extreme weather, which are the inevitable result of burning fossil fuels. Americans didn't elect Trump or bail out the auto industry so they could rip us off.
Public Citizen is a nonprofit consumer advocacy organization that champions the public interest in the halls of power. We defend democracy, resist corporate power and work to ensure that government works for the people - not for big corporations. Founded in 1971, we now have 500,000 members and supporters throughout the country.
(202) 588-1000LATEST NEWS
Biden Admin Unveils New Rules Protecting Workers Who Get Abortion Care
"With these final rules, we have achieved a huge step forward for women's economic security, maternal health, and the economy as a whole," said one advocate.
Apr 16, 2024
Reproductive justice advocates on Monday applauded the Biden administration's "groundbreaking" new workplace protections for pregnant people, including requirements that most employers provide workers with time off for a range of pregnancy-related reasons—including, over the objections of right-wing lawmakers, abortion care.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued a final rule and guidance for employers, clarifying that under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), companies with 15 or more employees must accommodate a worker's needs if they request time off for "pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions" including prenatal doctor's appointments, childbirth recovery, postpartum depression, miscarriage, and abortion.
The guidance also details the wide array of accommodations pregnant workers can request under the law, including exemptions from heavy lifting and scheduling changes for people who suffer from pregnancy symptoms like nausea or morning sickness.
The PWFA was passed in December 2022 and went into effect several months later, but the EEOC's newly finalized regulations detail how the law must be enforced, including in states with abortion bans and restrictions.
The commission has spent the last four months sorting through tens of thousands of public comments on the proposed regulations, including those from reproductive rights groups which urged the EEOC to explicitly include protections for people who seek abortion care—and forced pregnancy proponents to objected to the provisions.
Under the final rules, employers are required to provide time off for workers who ask for it to obtain an abortion locally or who need to travel out of state for care. The regulations include strong restrictions against retaliating against workers for taking time off for any pregnancy-related reason.
"This rulemaking does not require abortions or affect the availability of abortion; it simply ensures that employees who choose to have (or not to have) an abortion are able to continue participating in the workforce, by seeking reasonable accommodations from covered employers, as needed and absent undue hardship," the regulation states.
In its comment submitted to the EEOC about its draft rule before the final regulations were announced, the ACLU thanked the agency for "recognizing that abortion has for decades been approved under the law as a 'related medical condition' to pregnancy that entitles workers to reasonable accommodations, including time off to obtain abortion care."
Employers will not be required to pay for workers' medical care or travel, and the time off can be paid or unpaid.
But advocates said the protections will make a particular impact on low-wage workers, many of whom are not eligible for the Family and Medical Leave Act, which only requires 12 weeks of unpaid time off for workplaces with 50 or more employees.
Before the PWFA was passed in 2022, 1 in 4 new mothers returned to work within two weeks of giving birth.
The national group Reproductive Freedom for All said the new rules will help ensure "that reproductive freedom is a reality for all pregnant workers."
The EEOC's effort to finalize the regulations has sparked anger among Republicans including Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), who called the inclusion of abortion in the rules "shocking and illegal."
But Dr. Verda Hicks, president of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), said the regulations are an "acknowledgment of people's complex needs during and after pregnancy."
"Families should have peace of mind that they won't face financial hardship due to pregnancy-related job loss, and workers who are pregnant should not have to fear compromising their own health and well-being to maintain their employment," said Hicks. "Pregnancy is physiologically demanding and many of the medical conditions related to pregnancy necessitate reasonable accommodations for people after their pregnancy has ended."
Dina Bakst, co-president of A Better Balance: The Work and Family Legal Center, said the new regulations "appropriately recognize the broad scope of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act and ensure millions of workers, especially women in low-wage and physically demanding jobs, can access the vital accommodations they need during pregnancy and after childbirth."
"Today with these final rules, we have achieved a huge step forward for women's economic security, maternal health, and the economy as a whole," said Bakst, who has lobbied for years for pregnancy workplace protections. "The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act is a life-changing protection for pregnant and postpartum workers nationwide, ensuring they aren't forced off the job or denied the accommodations they need for their health."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Call Your Senator Now': Privacy Advocates Ramp Up Effort to Stop Spying Expansion
"Make no mistake," said one expert, "the day will come when there is a president in the White House who will not hesitate to make full use of the Orwellian power this bill provides."
Apr 16, 2024
With the U.S. Senate poised to vote later this week on legislation to reauthorize a heavily abused warrantless surveillance authority, privacy advocates are ramping up pressure on lawmakers to remove a provision that would force a wide range of businesses and individuals to take part in government spying operations.
Dubbed the "Make Everyone a Spy" provision by one advocacy group, the language was tucked into a House-passed bill that would extend Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which allows U.S. agencies to spy on non-citizens located outside of the country without a warrant. Americans' communications have frequently been collected under the spying authority.
The provision that has sparked grave warnings from privacy advocates was spearheaded by the chair of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio), and the panel's ranking member, Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.).
While supporters of the provision, including the Biden White House, claim the proposed change to existing law is narrow, civil liberties defenders say it's anything but.
Currently, U.S. agencies can use Section 702 authority to collect the data of non-citizens abroad from electronic communications service providers such as Google, Verizon, and AT&T without a warrant.
The Turner-Himes amendment would significantly expand who could be ordered to cooperate with government surveillance efforts, broadening Section 702 language to encompass "any other service provider who has access to equipment that is being or may be used" to transmit or store electronic communications.
That change, privacy advocates say, would mean grocery stores, laundromats, gyms, barber shops, and other businesses would potentially be conscripted to serve as government spies.
"The Make Everyone a Spy provision is recklessly broad and a threat to democracy itself," Sean Vitka, policy director of Demand Progress, said in a statement Tuesday. "It is simply stunning that the administration and House Intelligence Committee do not have a single answer for how frighteningly broad this provision is."
"You can't create a surveillance state and just hope the government won't take advantage."
The New York Timesexplained Tuesday that after the FISA Court "approves the government's annual requests seeking to renew the program and setting rules for it, the administration sends directives to 'electronic communications service providers' that require them to participate."
In 2022, the Times noted, the FISA Court "sided with an unidentified company that had objected to being compelled to participate in the program because it believed one of its services did not fit the necessary criteria." Unnamed people familiar with the matter told the newspaper that "the judges found that a data center service does not fit the legal definition of an 'electronic communications service provider'"—prompting the bipartisan effort to expand the reach of Section 702.
"While the Department of Justice wants us to believe that this is simply about addressing data centers, that is no justification for exposing cleaning crews, security guards, and untold scores of other Americans to secret Section 702 directives, which are issued without any court review," Vitka said Tuesday. "Receiving one can be a life-changing event, and Jim Himes appears not to have any sense of that. The Senate must stop this provision from advancing."
Elizabeth Goitein, co-director of the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, wrote on social media Tuesday that "it's critical to stop this bill."
"The administration claims it has no intent to use this provision so broadly—and who knows, maybe it doesn't. But the plain language of the bill allows involuntary conscription of much of the private sector for [National Security Agency] surveillance purposes," Goitein wrote. "Make no mistake, the day will come when there is a president in the White House who will not hesitate to make full use of the Orwellian power this bill provides. You can't create a surveillance state and just hope the government won't take advantage."
URGENT: Please read thread below. We have just days to convince the Senate NOT to pass a “terrifying” law (@RonWyden) that will force U.S. businesses to serve as NSA spies. CALL YOUR SENATOR NOW using this call tool (click below or call 202-899-8938). 1/25 https://t.co/HAOHURZoJQ
— Elizabeth Goitein (@LizaGoitein) April 15, 2024
With Section 702 set to expire Friday, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in a floor speech Tuesday that he has placed the House-passed FISA legislation on the chamber's calendar and will soon "file cloture on the motion to proceed" to the bill, which is titled the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act (RISAA).
"We don't have much time to act," said Schumer. "Democrats and Republicans are going to have to work together to meet the April 19th deadline. If we don't cooperate, FISA will expire, so we must be ready to cooperate."
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), a member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and outspoken privacy advocate, has called RISAA's proposed expansion of government surveillance "terrifying" and warned it would "force any American who installs, maintains, or repairs anything that transmits or stores communications to spy on the government's behalf."
According to the Times, Wyden's office has in recent days been circulating "a warning that the provision could be used to conscript someone with access to a journalist's laptop to extract communications between that journalist and a hypothetical foreign source who was targeted for intelligence."
In a social media post on Tuesday, Wyden echoed campaigners in urging people to contact their senators.
"Congress wants to make it easier for the government to spy on you without a warrant," Wyden wrote. "Scared? Me too. Call your senator at (202) 224-3121 before April 19 and tell them to vote NO on expanding warrantless government surveillance under FISA."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Ed Scare' Deepens as 4,000+ Book Banned in First Half of School Year
"The bans we're seeing are broad, harsh, and pernicious—and they're undermining the education of millions of students across the country," said one lead author of a new PEN America report.
Apr 16, 2024
U.S. school districts banned more books during the first half of the current academic year than during the entire last scholastic year, a report published Tuesday revealed.
PEN America recorded 4,349 book bans across 52 school districts in 23 states during the fall 2023 semester, more than double the 1,841 titles that were prohibited during the spring term and more than the 3,362 volumes reported banned nationwide during the entire previous academic year.
"For anyone who cares about the bedrock of American values and the protection of free expression, this report should be a red alert," said Sabrina Baêta, manager of PEN America's Freedom to Read program and a co-lead author of the report, which comes as the free expression and human rights group is under fire from critics who say it's ignoring Palestinian writers during Israel's genocidal war on Gaza.
The report found that Florida again had the highest number of banned books, with 3,135 proscribed titles across 11 school districts. In Wisconsin, PEN America recorded 481 banned books in three districts—including 444 titles blacklisted in the Elkhorn Area School District following one parent's request. Iowa and Texas—with 142 and 141 forbidden titles, respectively—round out the report's top four book-banners.
According to PEN America:
While censors continue to use the concept of "obscenity" to justify widespread books bans, the report examines a wave of intense scrutiny over books that discuss women, sexual violence, and rape. This concerted focus comes amid an epidemic of sexual violence in the United States. The report also finds that books discussing race and racism, LGBTQ+ and especially transgender identities continue to be targeted at consistently high rates.
Book-banners continued to lean heavily upon "anti-obscenity" laws and exaggerated claims of "pornography in schools" in attempts to justify prohibiting books about sexual violence and LGBTQ+ issues. This has resulted in the disproportionate targeting of queer, nonbinary, and women authors. Similarly, the conservative fixation on purging critical race theory and "woke ideology" is undermining efforts to ensure school libraries are diverse and inclusive.
"Book bans are targeting narratives about race and sexual identities and sexual content writ large, and they show no sign of stopping," said Baêta. "The bans we're seeing are broad, harsh, and pernicious—and they're undermining the education of millions of students across the country."
But people are fighting back against what PEN America calls the "Ed Scare."
"Galvanized by the actions of the very students most impacted by book bans, a broad coalition of educators, librarians, parents, authors, and advocates are organizing in ways large and small to protect the freedom to read," the report notes.
PEN America Freedom to Read program director Kasey Meehan, another co-lead author of the report, said that "students are at the epicenter of the book-banning movement, and they're fearlessly spearheading the fight against this insidious encroachment into what they can read and learn across the country."
"By suppressing these stories, censors seek to delegitimize experiences that resonate deeply with young people," Meehan added. "Just as we've seen the power of America's youth in rallying around causes such as gun violence prevention, they're refusing to yield to the censorship of book bans threatening their peers and communities."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular