

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Jeff Miller, (510) 499-9185
The Center for Biological
Diversity and two dozen other conservation and health groups today filed
emergency petitions with eight Midwestern and southern states, seeking to
end unsustainable commercial harvest of freshwater turtles. The coalition
submitted administrative petitions to state wildlife and health agencies in
Arkansas , Iowa,
Kentucky, Louisiana,
Missouri, Ohio,
South Carolina, and Tennessee, asking for a ban on
commercial harvest of freshwater turtles in all public and private waters.
The commercial-harvest regulations are needed to prevent further depletions
of native turtle populations and to protect public health. Freshwater
turtles collected in these states and sold domestically as food or exported
to international food markets are often contaminated with mercury, PCBs,
and pesticides.
"Unregulated
wildlife dealers are mining southern and midwestern streams for turtles for
the export trade, in a frenzy reminiscent of the gold rush," said
Jeff Miller, conservation advocate with the Center for Biological
Diversity. "Commercial collectors could harvest every non-protected
turtle that exists in the wild under the inadequate regulations that
currently exist in these states. Turtles are an important part of aquatic
ecosystems, and this unsustainable trade needs to be stopped."
Wildlife
exporters and dealers are commercially harvesting massive and unsustainable
numbers of wild freshwater turtles from southern and midwestern states that
continue to allow unlimited and unregulated take of turtles. The few turtle
surveys that have been conducted in southern and midwestern states show
depletions and extinction of freshwater turtles in many streams.
Herpetologists have reported drastic reductions in numbers and even the
disappearance of many southern map turtle species.
Harvests
and exports of wild turtles caught in the United States have skyrocketed.
Almost 200,000 wild turtles are trapped each year in Arkansas; one
collector alone takes more than 300 snapping turtles each year in Kentucky
for the pet trade; a single collector took 220 adult snapping turtles from
a single river in Louisiana in one year; another pet dealer buys 8,000 to
10,000 pounds per year of live wild adult snappers from trappers in
Louisiana; and a collector in Tennessee took more than 4,000 pounds of
common snapping turtles from a single reservoir in 2007. Commercial turtle
buyers in Oklahoma
reported purchasing almost 750,000 wild-caught turtles from 1994 to 1999.
More than a quarter million wild-caught adult turtles captured in Texas were exported from Dallas
Fort Worth Airport
alone to Asia for human consumption from
2002 to 2005.
The
coalition has now submitted regulatory petitions to every remaining
state in the United States that has unrestricted commercial harvest or
inadequate harvest regulations for freshwater turtles. In 2008 the
Center and allied groups petitioned Florida, Oklahoma, Georgia, and
Texas to ban commercial harvest of all native freshwater turtles in
those states. The petitions trigger a public rulemaking process in each
state. Texas has since prohibited commercial harvest from public
waters, but continues to allow unlimited harvest of some native turtle
species from streams and lakes on private lands. Oklahoma enacted a
three-year moratorium on commercial harvest of turtles from public
waters while studying the status of its wild turtle populations, the
effects of commercial harvest, and the potential contamination of
turtles sold as food. Florida imposed a temporary, 20 turtle-a-day
limit for commercial fishermen while it reviews harvest regulations.
The Georgia legislature is currently considering a bill on restrictions
to turtle harvest, based on recommendations by the Georgia Department
of Natural Resources.
The South Carolina state legislature is currently
considering a turtle harvest bill in the House, but it would allow
collectors to harvest up to 10 turtles at a time, with a maximum of 20
turtles per year - which would create an avenue for
illegal export of turtles from South
Carolina. A bill that would prohibit the sale,
barter, or trade of turtles is currently being considered by a subcommittee
in the Iowa
legislature.
The
petitioning groups are the Center for Biological Diversity, Center for
North American Herpetology, Center for Reptile and Amphibian Conservation
and Management, Center for Food Safety, Audubon Society of Central Arkansas
(AR), St. John's Riverkeeper (FL), Satilla Riverkeeper (GA), Altamaha
Riverkeeper (GA), Tallgrass Prairie Audubon Society (IA), Sierra Club,
Iowa Chapter (IA), Arkansas River Coalition (KS), Kentucky Heartwood
(KY), Gulf Restoration Network (LA), Ozark Rivers Chapter of the National
Audubon Society (MO), Miami Valley Audubon Society (OH), Western Cuyahoga
Audubon Society (OH), Oklahoma Chapter Sierra Club (OK), Charleston Chapter
Audubon Society (SC), Congaree Riverkeeper (SC), Tennessee Chapter Sierra
Club (TN), Tennessee Herpetological Society (TN), Tennessee Scenic Rivers
Association (TN), Save The Cumberland (TN), Lone Star Chapter Sierra Club
(TX), and Pineywoods Group Sierra Club (TX).
Most
wild turtles harvested in the United States
are exported to supply food markets in Asia, primarily China, where turtle consumption
rates have soared and as a result, most native freshwater turtles have been
driven to extinction in the wild. Importers are now turning to the United States
to meet demand. Turtles are sold to Asian seafood markets in the United States
as well. Many of these turtles are harvested from streams under state and
federal fish advisories and bans that caution against and prohibit human
consumption, due to aquatic contaminants that are carcinogenic or harmful
to humans such as DDT, PCBs, pesticides, mercury and other heavy metals.
Turtles live longer and bioaccumulate considerably greater amounts of
aquatic contaminants than fish, particularly snapping and softshell turtles
that burrow in contaminated sediments.
"Hundreds
of thousands of wild-caught turtles are sold locally as food or exported to
international food markets from these states each year, many contaminated
with dangerous levels of mercury, PCBs, and pesticides," said Miller.
"This food trade is completely unregulated, so the potential health
implications are staggering."
Because
freshwater turtles are long lived (some may reach 150 years of age), breed
late in life, and have low reproductive and survival rates, they are highly
vulnerable to overharvest. Removing even a few adults from a stream can
have a population effect lasting for decades, since each adult turtle
removed eliminates the reproductive potential over a breeding life that may
exceed 50 years. Stable turtle populations are dependent on sufficient long
lived breeding adults to offset natural mortality and human impacts.
Commercial collecting of wild turtles intensifies the effects of water
pollution, road mortality, incidental take from fishery devices, and
habitat loss, which are already contributing to turtle declines. Scientists
warn that freshwater turtles can not sustain any significant level of
harvest from the wild without leading to population crashes.
Adult
turtles, particularly map turtles and snapping turtles, are also harvested
from the wild to breed hatchlings in captivity for the international pet
trade. Turtle dealers solicit huge numbers of wild turtles from American
sources on the internet. A single dealer can employ a virtual army of hundreds
of interstate turtle collectors to conduct unlimited turtle harvest in
states where commercial harvest is still legal.
Arkansas, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana,
Missouri, Ohio,
South Carolina, and Tennessee continue to allow unlimited
commercial take of all sizes and ages of most species of native turtles,
using unlimited quantities of lethal hoopnets and box traps in public and
private waters. Although some of these states protect rarer turtle species,
many state and federally protected freshwater turtles are incidentally
harvested and sold since turtle traps do not distinguish the species
captured, and collectors often misidentify protected species captured in
traps that appear similar to non-protected turtles. Hoopnets and box traps
are lethal devices that also capture, maim, kill, and drown protected
turtle species, non-target fish, mammals, and migratory birds, and in some
areas, endangered species such as the federally threatened American
alligator.
State
wildlife agencies in Mississippi, North Carolina, and Alabama have prohibited commercial take
of wild freshwater turtles. North
Carolina closed all commercial harvest of aquatic
turtles after compiling one years worth of harvest data which showed the
removal of 28,000 wild caught turtles. Wildlife biologists from states with
bans have advised neighboring states to also ban harvest, since wildlife
traffickers illegally collect turtles in states where they are protected
and claim they were collected in states where harvest is still legal. Most
states do not survey to determine densities of turtle populations nor
require commercial collectors to report the quantity and species of turtles
harvested from the wild. Tennessee
is one of the only states that has conducted bioaccumulation analyses of
toxins in freshwater turtles, with disturbing results.
The
petitions and background information on the commercial harvest of
freshwater turtles can be found on the Center for Biological Diversity Web
site at:
www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/southern_and_midwestern_freshwater_turtles/index.html.
The
Center for Biological Diversity is a nonprofit
conservation organization with 200,000 members and online activists
dedicated to the protection of endangered species and wild places.
State Turtle Harvest Information
Arkansas
Arkansas law allows turtle collectors to
deploy an unlimited number of box traps and hoopnets to harvest freshwater
turtles. Of the 16 species of turtles that occur in Arkansas, 11 aquatic species are
commercially harvested. Box turtles (genus Terrapene),
alligator snapping turtles (Macrochelys
temminckii), and chicken turtles (Deirochelys reticularia) are prohibited from harvest or
restricted possession in Arkansas.
The dominant commercial species in Arkansas
are the red-eared slider (Trachemys
scripta), which comprised 80% of total harvest, spiny softshell
(Apalone spinifera), and
common snapping turtle (Chelydra
serpentina). Map turtles are harvested in Arkansas for the pet trade. Mandatory
reporting of turtle harvests in Arkansas
by collectors only began in 2004. From 2004-2006, 589,382 aquatic turtles
were reported harvested by commercial collectors in Arkansas, an average of 196,460 turtles
per year. Turtles are harvested primarily from the Mississippi Delta
ecoregion. Commercial dealers are attempting to open additional waters in Arkansas to the use
of hoop nets, seeking to exploit previously unharvested populations as
demand goes up due to other state's turtle harvest restrictions. The
Arkansas Game and Fish Commission does not monitor health or population
trends of wild turtle populations.
Florida
In
September 2008, Florida
imposed a temporary, 20 turtle-a-day limit for commercial fishermen while
it reviews harvest regulations. The interim rules continue to allow turtle
harvest using hoopnets and inexplicably allow the possession of several
imperiled Florida turtle species such as alligator snapping turtle (Macrochelys temminkcii), Escambia map
turtle (Graptemys escambia)
and Barbour's map turtle (Graptemys
barbouri). Herpetologists report drastic population depletions
and even extirpations of most southern map turtle species, in Florida, especially
in the panhandle. The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission is
undertaking a year-long study of freshwater turtles. Florida already prohibits harvest of
river cooters, soft-shell turtles and their eggs during the early summer,
which is nesting season. Florida
in the past has not monitored the health or population trends of wild
turtle populations, kept track of numbers of turtles harvested each year,
or required commercial harvesters to report their take. The U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service reports 3,000 pounds of freshwater turtles are exported
from Miami
per week, and one Broward seafood firm purchases about 15,000 pounds of
native softshells weekly. Florida Governor Charlie Crist has publicly supported
a complete ban on wild turtle harvest.
Georgia
The Georgia
legislature is currently considering a bill on restrictions to turtle
harvest, based on recommendations by the Georgia Department of Natural
Resources. Harvest is currently unregulated for 13 out of 14 native
freshwater turtle species in Georgia. Except for the Chattahoochee River
between Georgia and Alabama, the Georgia
Department of Natural Resources allows unlimited commercial harvest of
freshwater turtles using an unlimited quantity of hoopnets. Georgia
does not require collectors to report the quantity, species, harvest locale
or destination of captured turtles. Georgia protects the Bog turtle
(Glyptemys muhlenbergii ) as
Endangered and the Barbour's map turtle (Graptemys barbouri) and alligator snapping turtle (Macrochelys temminckii) as Threatened.
Numerous herpetologists have reported drastic population depletions and
even extirpation of most southern map turtle species from Georgia.
Iowa
Iowa allows commercial turtle collectors
to legally take an unlimited number of common snapping turtles, softshell
turtles and painted turtles with a commercial turtle license using an
unlimited number of hoopnets and boxtraps. Nonresident dealers can only
take these three species from the Missouri,
Mississippi and Bog Sioux
Rivers. Iowa law prohibits
the harvest of rare turtle species including alligator snapping turtles (Macrochelys temmickii), chicken
turtles (Deirochelys reticularia)
and Blanding's turtles (Emydoidea
blandingii). However, these species overlap in range with
non-protected turtles in Iowa
and are caught in baited traps set by commercial collectors. Trappers often
can not distinguish alligator snappers from common snappers and coin both
species simply as "snappers" or "loggerheads." To
the untrained eye chicken turtles are strikingly similar in appearance to
red eared sliders and river cooters. Collectors who can distinguish these
species and who realize their high value for the international pet trade
may purposely harvest and portray them as common snappers and red eared
sliders and sell these to dealers in states where their commerce is legal.
The largest known Midwest state dealer of common snapping turtles has
operated in Iowa
for more than thirty years. Iowa does not
track the amount of turtles harvested from Iowa waters and the Iowa Department of
Natural Resources does not monitor health or population trends of wild
turtle populations. A bill that would prohibit the sale, barter, or trade
of turtles is currently being considered by a subcommittee in the Iowa legislature.
Kentucky
Kentucky law allows turtle collectors to
deploy an unlimited number of box traps and hoopnets to harvest common
snapping and softshell turtles. Kentucky
does not have data on freshwater turtle harvest levels. A commercial turtle
operation is known to occur on Reelfoot
Lake in western Kentucky;
and a single collector of more than thirty years captures common snapping
turtles from private stock ponds in intensive agricultural areas in western
Kentucky,
and can capture over 330 turtles in one year. Kentucky law prohibits the harvest of
rare turtle species including alligator snapping turtles (Macrochelys temmickii) and chicken
turtles (Deirochelys reticularia).
However, these species overlap in range with non-protected turtles in Kentucky and are
caught in baited traps set by commercial collectors. Trappers often can not
distinguish alligator snappers from common snappers and coin both species
simply as "loggerheads." To the untrained eye chicken turtles
are strikingly similar in appearance to red eared sliders and river
cooters. Collectors who can distinguish these species and who realize their
high value for the international pet trade may purposely harvest and
portray them as common snappers and red eared sliders and sell these to
dealers in states where their commerce is legal. Kentucky Fish and Game
Department does not monitor health or population trends of wild turtle
populations.
Louisiana
Louisiana law allows unlimited commercial
harvest of 24 native freshwater turtle species and allows turtle collectors
to deploy an unlimited number of box traps and hoopnets to harvest
freshwater turtles. Louisiana
prohibits harvest of two federally protected map turtle species (Graptemys oculifera and G. flavimaculata). However, illegal
harvest of these two endangered map turtles occurs to meet the demands of a
black market turtle trade.
Until 2004, Louisiana
was the last state that allowed unlimited commercial harvest of alligator
snapping turtles. Harvest of wild adult alligator snappers in Louisiana
intensified in the mid 1990s through 2004 to facilitate trophy adult males
for the zoo and aquarium exhibit industry and to breed hatchlings for the
international pet trade. For example, in 2000 an estimated 220 adult snappers
were taken from the Ouachita River by a single collector to breed and sell
hatchlings to buyers abroad; and another pet dealer from Missouri
estimated buying 8,000-10,000 pounds per year live weight of adult snappers
from trappers in Louisiana.
Due to harvest pressures, Louisiana
prohibited unlimited commercial harvest of alligator snapping turtles in
2004, but allows "recreational take" of one alligator snapping
turtle per day.
Although
Louisiana
is the heart of the turtle industry and conservation groups and
herpetologists have long recommended banning all turtle harvest, collectors
are not required to report the quantity of turtles captured, species,
harvest locale, or destination of captured turtles. Louisiana Department of
Wildlife and Fisheries statewide population surveys from 1996 to 2001 show
severely depleted populations and extirpations of alligator snapping
turtles from areas that once supported substantial populations, consistent
with surveys by herpetologists in 1994, 1988, and 2002. The depletions of
alligator snapping turtles are bioindicators of population levels and
diversity of other commercially sought turtle species (common snapper,
softshell, red ear, cooter and map turtles) in the surveyed areas. Louisiana trappers also report population depletions
and because of this Louisiana turtle
dealers are soliciting commercial numbers of turtles as far away as South Carolina.
Missouri
Missouri law allows turtle collectors to
deploy an unlimited number of box traps and hoopnets to harvest freshwater
turtles. Collectors may harvest an unlimited number of common snapping
turtles and spiny and smooth softshell turtles in three major watersheds:
the Missouri River, Mississippi River, and St. Francis
River. However, collectors are not required to report the
date, species or quantity of turtles captured or stream and county where
harvest occurred. Missouri
law prohibits the harvest of rare turtle species including alligator
snapping turtles (Macrochelys temmickii),
and chicken turtles (Deirochelys
reticularia). However, these species overlap in range with
non-protected turtles in Missouri
and are caught in baited traps set by commercial collectors. Trappers often
can not distinguish alligator snappers from common snappers and coin both
species simply as "loggerheads." To the untrained eye chicken
turtles are strikingly similar in appearance to red eared sliders and river
cooters. Collectors who can distinguish these species and who realize their
high value for the international pet trade may purposely harvest and
portray them as common snappers and red eared sliders and sell these to
dealers in states where their commerce is legal. Alligator snapping turtle
population surveys from the boot heel of Missouri show depleted and extirpated
population, which may indicate relatively low densities of other turtle
species. Studies funded by the Missouri Department of Conservation describe
grave concern for depleted turtle populations resulting from incidental
mortality from commercial fishing nets that are commonly deployed in Missouri.
Ohio
Ohio
law allows turtle collectors to deploy an unlimited number of box traps and
hoopnets to harvest freshwater turtles, and allows unlimited commercial
harvest of common snapping turtles (Chelydraserpentina),
smooth softshell turtles (Apalone
spinifera) and spiny softshell turtles (Apalone mutica). Ohio does not require collectors to
report the number or species of turtles taken from the wild. Ohio prohibits the
harvest of rare turtle species including wood turtles (Clemmys insculpta), chicken turtles (Deirochelys reticularia), spotted
turtles (Clemmys guttata) and
Blanding's turtles (Emydoidea
blandingii). However, these species overlap in range with
snapping turtles and softshell turtles are caught in baited traps set by
commercial collectors. Trappers often do not distinguish common snappers
from chicken, spotted or Blanding's turtles and coin all species
simply as "snappers" or "stripernecks." To the
untrained eye chicken turtles are strikingly similar in appearance to red
eared sliders and river cooters. Collectors who can distinguish these
species and who realize their high value for the international pet trade
may purposely harvest and portray them as common snappers and sell these to
dealers in states where their commerce is legal. The Ohio Department of
Natural Resources does not monitor health or population trends of wild
turtle populations.
Oklahoma
In
May 2008 the Oklahoma Wildlife Conservation Commission enacted a three-year
moratorium on commercial harvest of turtles from all public waters, but
allowed continued harvest in private waters. During the moratorium, the
Department of Wildlife Conservation will study the status of Oklahoma's
wild turtle populations, the effects of commercial harvest, and the potential
contamination of turtles sold as food with heavy metals and pesticides. The
Commission also requested Department of Wildlife Conservation staff to
further explore the potential need to close all waters, including private
waters, to harvest. Recent surveys by Oklahoma
State University
show depletions and extinction of freshwater turtles in many Oklahoma streams.
Commercial turtle buyers in Oklahoma
reported purchasing almost 750,000 wild-caught turtles from 1994 to 1999.
The Commission resolution noted that 92 commercial turtle harvesters
reported trapping 63,814 wild turtles in Oklahoma in 2007.
South
Carolina
South Carolina law allows turtle collectors to
deploy an unlimited number of box traps and hoopnets to harvest freshwater turtles,
and allows unlimited harvest of common snapping turtles (Chelydra serpentina) from streams
draining into the Atlantic Ocean. South Carolina does
not require collectors to report the quantity of turtles harvested. South Carolina
prohibits the harvest of rare turtle species including chicken turtles (Deirochelys reticularia), spotted
turtles (Clemmys guttata) and
federally protected bog turtles (Glyptemys
muhlenbergii). However, the chicken and spotted turtles overlap
in range with snapping turtles in South Carolina
and streams draining into the Atlantic and
are caught in baited traps set by commercial collectors. Trappers often do
not distinguish common snappers from chicken and spotted turtles and coin
both species simply as "snappers" or "stripernecks."
To the untrained eye chicken turtles are strikingly similar in appearance
to red eared sliders and river cooters. Collectors who can distinguish
these species and who realize their high value for the international pet
trade may purposely harvest and portray them as common snappers and red
eared sliders and sell these to dealers in states where their commerce is
legal. The South Carolina Department of Natural Resources does not monitor
health or population trends of wild turtle populations. The South Carolina state legislature is currently
considering a turtle harvest bill in the House, but it would allow
collectors to harvest up to 10 turtles at a time, with a maximum of 20
turtles per year - which would create an avenue for
illegal export of turtles from South
Carolina.
Tennessee
In
the mid 1990s the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency prohibited commercial
harvest of most turtle species throughout the majority of the state, after
law enforcement reported encountering resident and nonresident turtle collectors
in Tennessee who worked for large scale
turtle export turtle dealers in Louisiana
and Arkansas.
However unlimited harvest is still allowed for eleven turtle species from
three Tennessee counties along the
Mississippi River surrounding Reelfoot
Lake in northwest Tennessee. In Lake, Obion, and Dyer counties snapping turtles, map
turtles, soft-shell turtles, river cooters, western painted turtles,
red-eared sliders, common mud turtles, and common musk turtles may continue
to be taken commercially in unlimited quantities. Collectors may also
harvest an unlimited number of common snapping turtles over 12 inches from
any water that is open to commercial harvest. Tennessee law allows turtle collectors
to deploy an unlimited number of box traps and hoopnets to harvest
freshwater turtles. Commercial harvesters must report their monthly
harvest. Tennessee
prohibits the harvest of rare turtle species including alligator snapping
turtles (Macrochelys temmickii)
and chicken turtles (Deirochelys
reticularia). However, these species overlap in range with
non-protected turtles in Tennessee
and are caught in baited traps set by commercial collectors. Trappers often
can not distinguish alligator snappers from common snappers and coin both
species simply as "loggerheads." To the untrained eye chicken
turtles are strikingly similar in appearance to red eared sliders and river
cooters. Collectors who can distinguish these species and who realize their
high value for the international pet trade may purposely harvest and portray
them as common snappers and red eared sliders and sell these to dealers in
states where their commerce is legal.
Tennessee is one of the only states in the
nation that has conducted bioaccumulation analyses of snapping turtles
muscle tissue, fat tissue and eggs. Sample results from the 1990s showed
high levels of pesticides, PCBs, heavy metals and mercury in snapping
turtles beyond permissible FDA guideline thresholds that were safe for
consumption. This study was published in 1997, yet it remains legal in Tennessee to
commercially harvest snapping turtles from known contaminated areas to be
sold as food. Since 2007, fear of harvest moratoriums in neighboring states
where commercial harvest is legal may have intensified harvest pressure in Tennessee,
especially in streams that are not known to have been trapped. For example,
in 2007 TWRA law enforcement engaged a nonresident collector with more than
4,000 pounds of common snapping turtle harvested from Old Hickory Reservoir
in Davidson County. The turtles were to be sold
to an exporter in an undisclosed state.
Texas
In
2007 the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission voted to end
commercial harvest of turtles in public waters in Texas, but continued to allow unlimited
harvest of some native turtle species from streams and lakes on private
lands. A petition was submitted in 2008 to the Texas Department of Health
to ban all commercial turtle harvest in Texas, including on private lands, due
to significant public-health risk from consumption of contaminated turtles.
Over a quarter million wild-caught adult turtles captured in Texas were exported from Dallas
Fort Worth Airport
to Asia for human consumption from 2002 to
2005. A major Texas turtle dealer employs
an interstate network of 450 collectors that harvest turtles from Texas and other
southern states where unlimited harvest is allowed or harvest is
inadequately regulated.
At the Center for Biological Diversity, we believe that the welfare of human beings is deeply linked to nature — to the existence in our world of a vast diversity of wild animals and plants. Because diversity has intrinsic value, and because its loss impoverishes society, we work to secure a future for all species, great and small, hovering on the brink of extinction. We do so through science, law and creative media, with a focus on protecting the lands, waters and climate that species need to survive.
(520) 623-5252"No Mr. Musk, we should be worried about the pain that AI could cause humanity, not the other way around."
US Sen. Bernie Sanders responded Tuesday to Elon Musk's apparent concern for artificial intelligence's potential feelings by arguing for a human-centered approach to the rapidly advancing technology.
Musk, the CEO of Tesla and SpaceX who also runs the AI company xAI, recently endorsed rival Anthropic's recent decision to ban employees from "sustained and needless abusive or cruel behavior" toward the company's Claude chatbot models.
Last week, Musk responded to a discussion on X about Anthropic's updated usage policy, calling the company's decision “the right move.”
“Cruelty to something that believes it is experiencing pain is not OK," he added.
Sanders (I-Vt.), meanwhile, has repeatedly warned that AI's effects on workers, families, and society deserve far more attention than the priorities of the billionaires developing it.
" Elon Musk, who wants to build millions of robots per year to replace workers, is now worried about the 'pain' humans may cause AI," Sanders wrote on X. "No, Mr. Musk, we should be worried about the pain that AI could cause humanity, not the other way around. HUMANS FIRST."
Anthropic's policy, which is scheduled to take effect November 12, does not prohibit ordinary expressions of frustration, disagreement with a chatbot, or dark creative writing.
There is no established evidence that today's chatbots experience pain or possess feelings in the human sense.
Critics of Anthropic's policy have warned that treating AI systems like they possess human emotions could mislead users or make them more susceptible to manipulation. Scott Stevenson, CEO of legal AI company Spellbook, called the policy “a dangerous precedent,” while journalist Michael Shellenberger accused the company of “anthropomorphizing machines,” Cybernews reported Sunday.
Sanders has cited Musk's own prediction that AI and robots could “replace all jobs,” questioning how ordinary people would earn a living if machines displaced workers on a massive scale. The senator has also raised concerns about the social consequences of AI companions, especially for children and teenagers.
Last week, Sanders renewed his call for a congressional ban on the development of advanced artificial intelligence, citing Big Tech oligarchs' secret preparations for a "catastrophic AI event."
Sanders and Congressman Greg Casar (D-Texas) last month introduced legislation to pause advanced AI development and ban the creation or deployment of artificial superintelligence, which experts believe poses a grave threat to humanity.
"They’re racing to build a technology they can’t control and that threatens humanity," the senator wrote last week.
"After years of using socialism to frighten voters away from Democrats, political interests with apparent Republican connections are trying a remarkable reversal: selling voters on a socialist," said one news site.
A mysterious right-wing political action committee has spent nearly $400,000 promoting a socialist running for the US Senate in Ohio, raising questions about an apparent effort to siphon progressive votes from Democratic candidate Sherrod Brown in a key midterm contest, according to reports published Monday.
The Columbus Dispatch and Cleveland.com are among the media outlets reporting that the newly formed Enough Promises Ohio PAC has financed mailers urging voters to support Greg Levy, an independent candidate affiliated with the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL), whose working-class platform includes implementing a $30 hourly minimum wage, ending the "US war machine" and "war on Black America," and working to "save the planet from capitalism."
The mailers were not produced by Levy's campaign. Federal campaign finance filings trace the spending to a printing vendor with connections to President Donald Trump's political network. Seven Farms shares a business address with Whistlestop Strategies, a direct mail operation associated with Big Dog Strategies, a Republican consulting firm that has worked with Republican candidates and has ties to MAGA Inc., Trump's principal super political action committee (PAC).
"After years of using socialism to frighten voters away from Democrats, political interests with apparent Republican connections are trying a remarkable reversal: selling voters on a socialist," Cleveland.com reported, noting what some are calling a "cynical attempt to turn growing interest in socialism into a weapon against Sherrod Brown."
The connections raise questions about whether the spending is part of a Republican strategy to divide Democratic-leaning voters. Enough Promises Ohio has not disclosed its contributors, leaving the source of the money unclear. The PAC and the involved companies have yet to explain the spending.
"The Greg Levy for Senate campaign team has recently discovered, through messages circulating on social media, that mailers falsely impersonating our campaign are being sent out to voters across Ohio," Levy said on X. "The Greg Levy for Senate campaign has no ties to the entities circulating the mailer, and we condemn this attempted deception of voters."
"There is a well-established record of both Republican and Democratic Party operatives using their financial resources to try and trick voters," he continued. "This is a highly undemocratic practice and does a disservice to voters in Ohio and throughout the country."
"Our campaign is historically rooted in Black and working-class communities throughout our state, and our message of fighting for working people against the biggest banks and corporations is resonating with voters all over Ohio," Levy said. "We reject and condemn the dirty tricks and racist impersonation of our campaign by entities working on behalf of those same capitalist institutions."
"This racist caricaturing of our candidate, a form of digital blackface, is a cheap, cowardly attack that is meant to demean the communities we represent and scare voters away from policies that put the needs of working families ahead of corporate profits," he added. "The Greg Levy for Senate campaign is considering taking legal action against the operatives behind this crude impersonation."
The murky mailers come as Brown, a former US senator seeking to reclaim his seat, faces Republican Sen. Jon Husted in a closely watched race that could help determine control of the Senate. Numerous recent polls indicate a low- to mid-single-digit lead for Brown.
Progressives who eschew Brown in favor of Levy cite the latter's pro-working-class economic agenda, Brown's support for Israel's genocidal assault on Gaza, and general frustration with the two major parties.
In an opinion piece published Tuesday by Common Dreams, Ohio Peace Council Chair Werner Lange argued that Levy's candidacy risks being a "spoiler," particularly among younger and pro-Palestinian voters dissatisfied with Brown's record and his acceptance of campaign contributions from pro-Israel interests—including the American Israel Public Affairs Committee—which have given more than $1.2 million to the former senator since 1990, according to the campaign finance tracker OpenSecrets.
"The danger is that Levy may do to the 2026 Senate race in Ohio what Ralph Nader did to the 2000 Presidential race in Florida—snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory for progressive forces," Lange wrote, repeating the controversial, and, according to some experts, false claim that the consumer advocate's Green Party run tipped the highly contentious contest in favor of Republican nominee George W. Bush.
That does not mean that Levy can't divert enough votes from Brown to deliver a win for Husted and, possibly, control of the narrowly divided Senate to Republicans.
The right-wing funding in support of Levy underscores how outside groups can spend enormous sums to influence voters while keeping their own donors hidden, at least until disclosure deadlines require them to reveal more, largely as a result of US Supreme Court rulings, chiefly 2010's Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.
Recently, Democrats including former US Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, Michigan US Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed, and comedian/commentator Jon Stewart have called for a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United and get big money out of politics.
Last year, Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) led the introduction of the We the People Amendment, which rejects corporate personhood and would enshrine that "the rights protected and extended by the Constitution are the rights of natural persons only."
"Instead of helping countries withstand another major shock," Oxfam's executive director said, the IMF "is forcing them to cut back on the very spending that can help protect people and recover."
The US-Israeli war with Iran has exacerbated economic hardship across the world. It's especially bad for the developing nations currently being forced to implement austerity programs by the International Monetary Fund.
Under IMF loan programs, countries struggling with debt are required to reduce government budget deficits by introducing spending cuts and tax increases that tend to hurt their poorest citizens. They often include cuts to public services and welfare programs, caps on government workers' salaries, and the elimination of subsidies that keep basic needs affordable.
According to a report out Monday from Oxfam—amid the IMF's annual meeting in Bangkok this week—24 of the 28 nations currently receiving IMF loans have been forced to implement austerity measures. Some of them, like Sierra Leone and Guinea-Bissau, are among the poorest nations in the world.
Even before the war—which has caused oil prices to soar and driven inflation worldwide—people in many of these countries were struggling to meet their basic needs and facing severe economic pressure: 51% were food insecure, and 57% lacked access to clean cooking fuel.
Emergency government programs have been able to backstop the worst effects for up to 130 million of the world's poorest people, according to a report published before the meeting by the United Nations Development Program.
But as those countries run out of resources, many are being forced to pivot, and the stiff requirements imposed by the IMF may exacerbate the hardship.
In Ecuador and Guinea-Bissau, the IMF is requiring governments to cut spending, raise taxes, or both to the equivalent of roughly 4% of the nations' annual gross domestic product (GDP).
The terms are even harsher for Sierra Leone, where the government is required to cut spending or raise costs equivalent to more than five times its annual healthcare budget.
A loan approved last week for Bolivia requires the government to slash as much as 8.5% of its GDP from the deficit—about twice its annual healthcare spending. The country has already been forced to eliminate a diesel subsidy that drove high prices down for consumers and businesses.
The IMF has acknowledged that these cuts are likely to make the strain worse for many low-income countries already suffering from the war, but said they had "no choice" but to cut spending or restructure their debts.
Oxfam International executive director Amitabh Behar noted that during previous crises like the Covid-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine, the IMF has enacted tools to ease the burden on nations in debt by providing emergency loans and access to foreign currency without requiring additional borrowing.
"But this time, the fund is taking a very different path," he said. "Instead of helping countries withstand another major shock, it is doubling down on austerity—forcing them to cut back on the very spending that can help protect people and recover—and leaving them even more vulnerable to the next crisis."
"If the administration wants to investigate anyone, maybe they should look at themselves first."
Progressive US Rep. Pramila Jayapal this week not only joined a growing chorus outraged by President Donald Trump's "rogue" Department of Homeland Security agents raiding Congresswoman Ilhan Omar's home, the Washington Democrat took it a step further.
After putting out a nearly three-minute video decrying Trump's repeated attacks on her Democratic colleague from Minnesota, Jayapal reminded social media users of the president's "border czar," Tom Homan, allegedly accepting a bribe in the form of a paper bag stuffed with $50,000 in cash.
As part of a probe launched under the Biden administration, Homan was the target of a Federal Bureau of Investigation sting operation. In September 2024, he was recorded taking the bag of cash from undercover FBI agents posing as businessmen interested in securing government contracts if Trump returned to the White House.
"If the administration wants to investigate anyone, maybe they should look at themselves first. Anyone remember this?" Jayapal wrote alongside a photo of media coverage that notes Trump's Department of Justice (DOJ) closed the probe into Homan last year.
Before former US Attorney General Pam Bondi was fired by Trump this past April, she insisted last year that "the investigation into Mr. Homan was subjected to a full review by the FBI, agents, and DOJ prosecutors," who "found no credible evidence of any wrongdoing."
However, congressional Democrats as well as the groups Democracy Defenders Fund and Democracy Forward have fought for access to records, including the recording of Homan and the undercover agents.
Homan is far from the only member of Trump's second administration to face credible allegations of corruption. In fact, according to polling results released Tuesday, 59% of Americans believe the president himself has done illegal or unethical things to cash in on his return to power.
Jayapal also isn't the only critic of the Omar raid to point a finger at Trump's border czar this week. Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) similarly wrote on social media that "Tom Homan, the man leading Trump’s authoritarian 'investigation' of Rep. Ilhan Omar right before the midterm, was caught by the FBI accepting a bribe of $50,000 in cash in a paper bag."
"But Trump's Justice Department simply dropped the case and covered it up," Beyer stressed. "The most corrupt presidential administration in history."
"For 23 years, since its inception, DHS has been utilized by the government to target and persecute those they consider the public enemy," Ramirez said.
In response to the agency's rampant abuses during President Donald Trump's second term, many elected Democrats have warmed to the idea of abolishing US Immigration and Customs Enforcement. But one progressive lawmaker is pushing to go a step further: abolishing the entire Department of Homeland Security.
Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) introduced legislation on Tuesday that would repeal all “duplicative and overreaching terrorism laws,” including getting rid of DHS, which was created in 2003 following the September 11 terrorist attacks.
The bill, titled the Reimagining Safety Act, would not only eliminate ICE and Customs and Border Protection (CBP). It seeks to eliminate immigration detention altogether and begin the process of replacing it with a civil court-based immigration system run through the US Department of Justice (DOJ).
In a dramatic departure from current immigration procedures, all deportations would need to be approved by Congress before they could proceed.
The bill comes just one day after agents with the DHS Investigations unit raided the home of Ramirez's colleague, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), as part of a federal criminal investigation related to her citizenship documents.
The investigation---which follows years of attacks by President Donald Trump and other Republicans against Omar's Somali background and Muslim faith, and comes just weeks before an election---has been described by critics as intimidation against a political opponent.
"For almost a decade, Trump and Republicans have lied about Congresswoman Omar to silence her dissent," Ramirez said on Monday. "My sister [Ilhan] has not backed down, so now they are using DHS and the federal government to target and persecute her."
"We must strip them of their weapons," she said. "We must dismantle DHS."
Under Ramirez's legislation, a new agency called the Department of Community Safety would assume DHS's duties. This would include running the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), which handles the federal response to natural disasters and other emergencies.
The new agency would use DHS's massive pot of federal funding for programs that aim to stop gun violence and other crime; provide support to asylum seekers at the border; redirect federal resources toward community needs like healthcare, housing, education, and emergency preparedness; and support community-based safety programs that do not adopt the militarized law enforcement of DHS.
Other functions of DHS would be scattered across different agencies: Immigration enforcement would belong to the DOJ, the Department of Transportation would take over the Transportation Security Administration and Coast Guard, and the Treasury Department would conduct customs enforcement.
Some of the expansive powers introduced during the War on Terror would also be rolled back: Those without criminal convictions or warrants would no longer be able to be put on "no-fly" lists, which civil liberties advocates have long criticized for stripping people of their right to travel on arbitrary, often racist, grounds.
The legislation would also eliminate the authority of the secretary of state to declare "foreign terrorist" organizations, a power that has been wielded to criminalize protest.
Ramirez told The Intercept that the need to abolish the agency was also underscored by an ICE agent's shooting of 28-year-old Oscar Belgal in the neck last week in New York. Belgal was shot through the window of his car while his 5-year-old child was in the back seat. In the past year, ICE agents have shot at least 25 people, and six of those shootings have been fatal.
Since Trump's return to office in January 2025, at least 58 people have died in immigration custody, according to the ACLU—a dramatic spike from previous administrations.

The rising death toll comes as the Trump administration and Republican Congress have dramatically expanded DHS and its budget to create a massive network of new detention camps, where immigrants (and some US citizens)—most of whom have not been convicted of crimes—have been disappeared, often arbitrarily, denied access to legal representation, and subjected to severe physical mistreatment.
Some noncitizens have been targeted explicitly over their political speech, including the hundreds of students who suddenly found their legal status stripped over their participation in pro-Palestine protests, many of whom were summarily arrested and faced with the threat of deportation.
Ramirez told The Intercept all of these were examples of how DHS is "not rogue," but working as designed.
"For 23 years, since its inception, DHS has been utilized by the government to target and persecute those they consider the public enemy," she said, "whether it is Muslim Americans, Haitians escaping violence, Latinos yearning for a better life, or dissenting voices demanding an end to the genocide in Palestine and the kidnapping of our neighbors.”

During the second Trump administration, public opinion has dramatically shifted against ICE, to the point where a plurality of voters, 48%, said they wanted the agency abolished in a July YouGov poll. In a February poll by the Public Religion Institute, 60% said they opposed increasing ICE's budget, compared with just 36% who favored it.
“In the past, the type of policy we are fighting for would have been written off as outlandish, too ‘extreme,’ or simply put, impossible," said Viviana Baraja, a Chicago-based immigrants' rights advocate who has helped to launch Ramirez's proposal.
"I have seen this administration make the most impossible nightmares possible," Baraja said. "And in the most distorted way, it has strengthened my resolve that if the worst can be possible, we can also dare to dream and to believe that the best can be possible too."
"If we don’t see the massive gains in productivity promised by the AI enthusiasts, then we will almost certainly see a collapse in the stock market," said one economist.
The International Monetary Fund warned Tuesday that the global economy faces serious risks from Big Tech firms taking on massive debt to fund the buildout of artificial intelligence data centers worldwide.
The IMF's latest Global Financial Stability Report outlines a number of risks to economic growth in the coming years, including a reliance on AI industry spending that it warns could lead to a new financial crisis.
The report points to the methods the world's largest data center operators, known as hyperscalers, are using to fund new construction as particularly troubling.
"Hyperscalers have strong earnings from their core businesses," the report states. "Yet, free cash flows are rapidly declining as hyperscalers try to sustain large AI investment needs, leaving debt financing increasingly necessary."
The analysis also details the role played by so-called circular financing agreements, in which one company agrees to fund another company's AI project in exchange for the firm receiving the money buying the investing firm's products.
These arrangements could create dangerous interdependence within the industry that could spark a financial contagion if one of the firms goes belly up, according to the report.
"While investors... are generally financially sound, distress at key investee firms could present significant 'wrong-way risk' to the AI ecosystem," the report states. "Equity and debt investments in the firms depreciate in value precisely when future revenue streams tied to them are impaired."
Investment expert Bret Jensen, in an analysis published by Seeking Alpha on Tuesday, examined projected capital expenditures from the five biggest hyperscalers—Oracle, Microsoft, Facebook parent company Meta, Amazon, and Google parent company Alphabet—and highlighted how they have increasingly moved financing off their corporate balance sheets.
"Over the past 12-18 months, there has been a huge increase in debt and equity issuance," Jensen explained. "The five hyperscalers now have a combined over $1.3 trillion of debt on their balance sheets and roughly $3 trillion in off-balance-sheet allocations."
Because of this, Jensen continued, "debt markets are starting to groan" by "signaling a substantial chance of default over the next half-decade on the debt of Oracle."
Jensen also pointed out that half of this infrastructure was being built for the benefit of frontier AI labs OpenAI and Anthropic, which he described as "unprofitable" and "bleeding cash."
Dean Baker, co-founder of the Center for Economic and Policy Research argued in an analysis published on Friday that AI is completely propping up the US economy at the moment, as investors are holding out hope that it delivers an unprecedented boom in productivity.
The problem, Baker pointed out, is there is little sign that AI is going to deliver anywhere near the increased productivity needed to make these historic investments pay off.
"If we believe the hype, we are about to see an incredible surge in productivity that will make us ridiculously wealthy," Baker explained. "To date, there is no evidence to support this view. Productivity growth has been at best on its trend pace the last couple of years."
"If we don’t see the massive gains in productivity promised by the AI enthusiasts," Baker added, "then we will almost certainly see a collapse in the stock market, with a serious recession almost guaranteed."
"We need Medicare for All," one critic said. "No private insurance necessary."
Corporate-backed Democrats evidently see the writing on the wall.
The latest polling from Axios-Ipsos American Health Index, released Wednesday, found that a purality of Americans support replacing the for-profit health insurance industry with a government-run Medicare for All plan, and that 62% of Democrats back the idea. Supporters of a single-payer healthcare program like those that have long existed in the United States' peer countries swept primary races across the US this year. And one of the top potential 2028 Democratic presidential candidates, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), is a vehement supporter of the idea.
But instead of simply joining efforts to extend the popular Medicare program to everyone in the US, Majority Democrats—a group of Democratic lawmakers aimed at "reshaping and growing" the party, with billionaire hedge fund manager Stephen Mandel as its top funder—is intent on recycling an old proposal, with a new name.
The group introduced "Medicare for Americans" in a six-minute video posted on social media Tuesday—one that essentially described a "public option"—or a government-run healthcare program that would "compete" with health insurers instead of dismantling the $5.3 trillion-per-year for-profit system.
The video describes a plan similar to one unveiled in 2020 by former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, then a presidential candidate, who called his proposal "Medicare for All Who Want It."
"If we want to earn voters' trust back," says the narration, "we need a real solution... A revolutionary plan that will make a real difference in how we handle healthcare in this country."
The plan would "offer every American who is sick and tired of private insurance a plan through Medicare," the narrator continues. "People who want to keep the private insurance they have should be able to."
Sick of our broken healthcare system?Medicare is one of the most popular programs in American history. Why not give people the choice to enroll—and force insurance companies to compete?That’s Medicare for Americans. https://t.co/HQ8aIPPBRy
— Majority Democrats (@MajorityDems) October 11, 2026
The video goes on to say that proponents of Medicare for All, like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Ocasio-Cortez, want to "blow up the whole system and tax the hell out of everyday Americans," while Republicans want to keep a "dysfunctional status quo."
It warns that Medicare for All "comes with a $40 trillion price tag," naming the estimated cost over a decade. But it neglects to mention that the annual cost of the current healthcare system—$5.3 trillion in 2024—is about $1 trillion higher than the annual cost of Medicare for All that was projected by researchers at Yale School of Public Health in an August study. Americans are also spending more on healthcare following the Republican Party's Medicaid cuts and refusal to extend subsidies under the Affordable Care Act.
"In one Axios-Ipsos survey, two-thirds of Americans, including half of Republicans, believe the federal government should be willing to increase public healthcare spending to lower consumer costs. But it’s misleading to suggest Medicare for All would cost more than our current system," noted The Lever, calling Medicare for Americans "the billionaire option."
Lis Smith, a Democratic political operative who has worked for Buttigieg and disgraced former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, praised the proposal as a "transformative, once-in-a-generation healthcare reform" that is "within reach... if Democrats are smart."
But one progressive streamer wrote that Majority Democrats "want to pretend like they support progressive healthcare policy but are just protecting private insurance."
"We need Medicare for All," she said. "No private insurance necessary."
The editorial board of The Philadelphia Inquirer wrote that President Donald Trump is engaging in "rank bribery" ahead of the midterms.
US President Donald Trump's pledge to send every American adult $5,000, delivery of small healthcare rebates to millions of people, and announcement of a deal to secure Russian diesel amount to "a last-ditch attempt to buy off voters and dodge a richly deserved reckoning," the editorial board of The Philadelphia Inquirer argued Tuesday as the midterm elections approach.
The editorial accuses Trump–whose illegal war against Iran has sent gas prices soaring and whose signature legislative achievement has stripped healthcare and food aid from millions of Americans—of engaging in "rank bribery" as a "last crass resort" ahead of the midterm elections as his approval rating plummets and threatens to drag Republican candidates down with it.
"His deeply unpopular Middle East war is metastasizing, contributing to persistently high prices and a historically low public opinion of his presidency," the editorial reads. "Republican schemes to rig the vote by gerrymandering and other means appear insufficient to withstand a Democratic wave, forcing them to abandon formerly favorable territory such as Georgia and North Carolina and fight for ruby-red turf in Kansas and South Carolina."
"And polls have shown voters are divided over Trump’s crude promises of cash, which most don’t believe," the editorial adds. "When it comes to winning over voters, it seems promises of payoffs are no substitute for a record of success."
Trump's flurry of pledges and rebate announcements come amid widespread discontent over high energy prices and surging health insurance premiums—which the president's $90 Medicare rebates and $500 Affordable Care Act checks will do very little to offset for most Americans. People who receive the healthcare checks will also get an accompanying letter in which Trump touts his record—without mentioning his unprecedented cuts to Medicaid or the millions of people who have lost coverage during his second term.
"There is no better reflection of the purely transactional nature of Donald Trump’s politics than his love for buying Americans’ affections with cold hard cash," New York magazine's Ed Kilgore wrote last week. "The reality is that he’s commandeering (with no apparent legal authority) money designed for other public purposes and sending it out as individual checks. The ACA money is legally supposed to go to Obamacare enrollment and outreach efforts... while the Medicare dollars have typically gone to provider reimbursement-rate adjustments. Neither source was supposed to finance a preelection slush fund for politicians."
Reuters estimated that the Trump administration is sending a combined $2.35 billion in direct payments to millions of Americans ahead of next month's elections.
That total doesn't include Trump's promised $5,000 checks, which would cost an estimated $1.2 trillion. The president is explicitly dangling the checks as an enticement to vote Republican. During a Monday rally in Ohio, Trump said that "if Republicans win the House of Representatives and the Senate, I am going to give all adult citizens in the United States $5,000 each."
"Only Republicans can do that," Trump declared.
Tim Burga, president of the Ohio AFL-CIO, told The Washington Post that Trump is clearly attempting to distract from the nation's worsening affordability crisis and trying to "buy votes."
"It reeks of desperation," said Burga.
"Costs are hitting Main Street from every direction at once and Washington doesn't seem to care about the needs of small business owners," said the head of a national coalition.
Arizona-based Gabe Hagen said Tuesday that "to keep my business afloat, I invested my 401(k) savings and leveraged my home equity as collateral for additional capital, putting my family's financial security on the line to sustain my business and employees."
"I raised my prices, but sales have just flattened out because customers are ordering less," explained Hagen, who founded the Tempe coffee roasting company Brick Road Community Corporation. He's among over 1,000 US small business owners polled by the national coalition Small Business for America's Future from mid-August to early October.
Among those surveyed, 77% have seen customers spend less, delay purchases, or trade down recently, with 46% saying that shoppers are spending "significantly less." Meanwhile, owners like Hagen are increasingly enduring more financial stress, with many cutting their own pay or pulling money from personal savings to keep their companies operating.
The survey exposes how "a combination of factors is crushing small business," the coalition said in a statement announcing its resulting report—which highlights soaring costs for everything from fuel to healthcare, and was released just weeks away from the US midterm elections that will determine control of Congress for the latter half of Trump's second term.
"Costs are hitting Main Street from every direction at once and Washington doesn't seem to care about the needs of small business owners," said Walt Rowen, the coalition's co-chair and president of Susquehanna Glass Co., a family-owned glass manufacturer in Columbia, Pennsylvania that's been around for over a century.
Rowen—whose company is located in a key swing state—noted that "my business is a good example of what is happening. We've been navigating erratic tariff policies that have disrupted our supply chains, and now my heating oil costs $4,000 to $6,000 a month."
"We've lived through the Depression, wars, and recessions," he said. "Heating my factory in this current economy is some of the hardest math I've ever had to do, and I'm expecting the bill to jump 30% to 40% this winter. This survey shows us that I am far from alone. Small business owners everywhere are comparing this economy to some of the worst moments we've had this century."
The survey shows that 83% of small business owners are concerned about their company's financial health over the next year, including 44% who are very concerned. Three-quarters called this one of the hardest economies of their careers, with over half drawing comparisons to the Covid-19 pandemic, and nearly a third pointing to the Great Recession.
A similar share (78%) accused decision-makers in Washington, DC of putting large corporations first, and 72% said running their business is harder than it was a year ago—with 85% citing inflation and rising prices as the source of strain. Majorities saw increases for utilities (72%); fuel (68%); transportation, shipping, or supplies (64%); business services (64%); healthcare and health insurance (54%); and employee wages and benefits (53%).
Those soaring costs have had consequences. Two-thirds of surveyed owners said they canceled, delayed, or scaled back investments in equipment, facilities, or technology. Over half did the same for hiring and expansion to new markets. Nearly two-thirds skipped or reduced their own pay, and 52% said their personal debt has increased in the past year.
Rising costs can be clearly connected to decisions by Trump and congressional Republicans—many of whom are up for reelection next month, as the GOP tries to hang on to its slim majorities in both chambers.
The president returned to power early last year having campaigned on a mass detention and deportation agenda, despite arguments from economists and elected Democrats that his approach was not only inhumane but economically risky. A clear majority of surveyed owners (61%) said that immigration enforcement has hurt the small business economy.
Trump and Republican lawmakers also enacted a 2025 budget package that cut federal healthcare spending and did not extend Affordable Care Act enhanced premium tax credits. Among surveyed business owners who buy their own insurance coverage through an ACA marketplace, 90% saw their premiums rise after the subsidies expired. Nearly three-quarters also said they fear rising health insurance costs will make it harder to hire and keep needed employees.
The administration's shifting tariff policy and refund process have caused further stress: 59% of owners said trade-related cost increases have made it harder to run their business, and only 3% have filed refund claims since the US Supreme Court's February ruling against many of Trump's tariffs.
Trump's illegal war on Iran continues to drive up fuel prices. The construction of artificial intelligence data centers—which the president has encouraged—is also increasing energy costs. Nearly three-quarters of those surveyed are worried about the impact of electricity demand from new AI facilities. Around the same share is concerned about the consequences of the new armed conflict in the Middle East, which the GOP-controlled Congress never authorized, but has refused to end.
In a social media post about all the findings, Small Business for America's Future urged, "Lawmakers, make your next decision with Main Street in mind."
“Healthcare is one of the significant ways that people experience economic pressure every day,” said Ipsos' president.
Yet another poll, this one released on Tuesday, shows significant support for Medicare for All as Americans grapple with rising healthcare costs and the Trump administration and congressional Republicans target federal programs upon which tens of millions of people rely.
A plurality—43%—of respondents to the latest Axios-Ipsos American Health Index said they support replacing private health insurance with a government-run Medicare for All system, compared with 24% who oppose the idea. Another 32% were unsure, leaving supporters outnumbering opponents by nearly two to one. Two-thirds of respondents also backed increased federal spending to reduce healthcare costs.
Respondents' views on Medicare for All are divided along party lines, with a majority of Democrats (62%) and a plurality of independents (47%) supporting the proposal, while a majority of Republicans (52%) oppose it.
Again: Supporting Medicare for All is not Radical — opposing it is. We can’t afford NOT to do it. #MedicareForAllNOW www.axios.com/2026/10/13/a...
[image or embed]
— The Tennessee Holler (@thetnholler.bsky.social) October 13, 2026 at 5:24 AM
The most commonly cited reason people said they oppose Medicare for All is fear that the quality of care would be inferior to that offered by private health insurance (38%), followed by concern that the program would be too expensive for taxpayers (22%), and that the federal government should not be involved in providing healthcare (21%). Supporters were not asked why they favor Medicare for All.
The survey also revealed deepening distrust of political leaders on healthcare issues. Just 20% of respondents said that they trusted President Donald Trump for health-related information, down from 31% in March 2025, while only 25% trusted Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. The poll also found that 49% would be less likely to support a candidate who received money from pharmaceutical company political action committees.
"Healthcare is one of the significant ways that people experience economic pressure every day," Mallory Newall, Ipsos senior vice president for US public affairs, told Axios. She noted that while many Americans still "have questions" about Medicare for All, the current level of support for the proposal is "noteworthy—and it is not solely driven by members of the Democratic Party."
Newall said that even if candidates "don't call it Medicare for All," expanding federal healthcare programs so that they cover more people "is a message that can connect with voters" as they prepare to cast their ballots in next month's midterm elections.
The stakes extend beyond Medicare for All. Republicans' sweeping 2025 budget law enacted the biggest cuts to Medicaid in the program's six-decade history, while enhanced Affordable Care Act premium tax credits expired at the beginning of 2026, threatening higher costs for millions of enrollees.
Progressives have cited these and other developments to argue that the private insurance system leaves working-class families vulnerable to corporate profiteers and political attacks.
A separate survey released last week by the health policy research organization KFF found that 66% of Americans favor Medicare for All, the highest level of support since the organization began tracking the issue a decade ago. While 84% of Democrats and 72% of Independents polled backed Medicare for All, 66% of Republican respondents opposed the proposal.
According to a study published in August by researchers at Yale University, shifting to a Medicare for All-type system would save more than 114,000 lives and around $1 trillion annually in the US. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) has cited the study while promoting his Medicare for All Act.
"Do not tell me we cannot afford Medicare for All," he said at the time of the study's publication. "What we cannot afford is a broken healthcare system based on greed."