June, 25 2009, 03:12pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Stacey Hamburg, Sierra Club, (928) 774-6514
Taylor McKinnon, Center for Biological Diversity, (928) 310-6713
Roger Clark, Grand Canyon Trust, (928) 774-7488
One Year Later: Uranium Threat to Grand Canyon Still Dire Despite Emergency Action by Congress
GRAND CANYON, Ariz.
A resolution to temporarily protect Grand Canyon National Park by
withdrawing 1 million acres from uranium exploration, passed by
Congress one year ago, has been ignored by the Bureau of Land
Management, leading to an increased risk of contaminating drinking
water consumed by millions of people.
Rep. Raul
Grijalva, D-Ariz., chairman of the House Subcommittee on National
Parks, Forests, and Public Lands, today announced that the House
Committee on Natural Resources passed the emergency resolution because
spikes in the price of uranium had led to thousands of new uranium
mining claims, dozens of exploratory drilling projects, and movement to
open several uranium mines on public lands immediately north and south
of Grand Canyon National Park.
But despite the
resolution, the Bureau of Land Management under the Bush and Obama
administrations has continued to authorize new uranium-mining
exploration, which drove the Sierra Club, Grand Canyon Trust, and the
Center for Biological Diversity to file a lawsuit against the secretary
of the interior in September 2008. The lawsuit challenges the continued
authorization of uranium exploration near Grand Canyon National Park in
defiance of Congress's emergency resolution. The Federal Land Policy
and Management Act also gives Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar the
authority to temporarily protect the same lands from exploration and
claims; however, he has failed to act.
"The Grand
Canyon is one of the world's greatest natural wonders and a crown jewel
of our national park system," said Stacey Hamburg of the Sierra Club.
"Radioactive pollution from uranium mining is a threat to Grand Canyon
National Park visitors and wildlife, nearby Native American
communities, and southwestern cities that get their water from the
Colorado River. We need immediate action to protect these important
resources from proposed mining activities."
Concerns
about surface and groundwater contamination of Grand Canyon National
Park and the Colorado River have been expressed by former Arizona
Governor Janet Napolitano, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern
California, the Southern Nevada Water Authority, the Arizona Game and
Fish Department, the Navajo, Hopi, Havasupai, Hualapai, and Kaibab
Paiute tribes, Coconino County officials, and independent geologists.
"The
federal government's inaction risks the industrialization of public
lands adjacent to Grand Canyon National Park and the permanent,
irretrievable contamination of precious western water upon which people
and wildlife depend," said Taylor McKinnon of the Center for Biological
Diversity. "That inaction occurs on behalf of foreign mining
corporations over the objections of local and regional communities."
State
permitting has begun to open three existing mines in the area withdrawn
by the resolution. All three mines are owned by Denison Mines, a
Canadian firm, and are not subject to the congressional resolution. On
June 15, Denison Mines announced that it had entered into an agreement
to deliver 20 percent of its annual uranium production to KEPCO, a
Korean firm. KEPCO has also appointed Joo-Ok Chang, vice president of
KEPCO, to become a director of Denison. Federal environmental approvals
for all three mines were completed in the 1980s; despite the fact that
they are more than 20 years old, the Bureau of Land Management has
indicated that it does not intend to conduct any new environmental
studies or seek new public comments.
The Canyon
Mine near Red Butte is a sacred area for the Havasupai tribe and
immediately south of the main entrance to the Grand Canyon National
Park. Both the Havasupai and conservationists opposed the mine during
the original permitting process, completed in 1986, because it lies in
the upper watershed of Havasu Creek, which runs through the Havasupai
village, provides drinking water for the tribe, and is a scenic and
popular destination for visitors from around the world.
Congressional
emergency withdrawals for other public lands have been enacted four
times prior to this, most recently in 1981 and 1983 by the late Arizona
Congressman Mo Udall and the House Interior and Insular Affairs
Committee to halt destructive mineral and energy-leasing programs
pursued by Interior Secretary James Watt.
In January 2009, Representative Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., reintroduced H.R.644, the Grand Canyon Watersheds Protection Act of 2009,
legislation that bans exploration and the establishment of new mining
claims on approximately 1 million acres of public lands (national
forests and Bureau of Land Management lands) bordering Grand Canyon
National Park.
###
April 23, 2007 Bureau of Land Management uranium exploration authorizations
April 27, 2009 Bureau of Land Management uranium exploration authorizations
Map of newly authorized uranium exploration in violation of emergency withdrawal
Map of all uranium exploration authorized since and in violation of emergency withdrawal
Conservationists' lawsuit against Kempthorne
Map of previous uranium exploration authorized in violation of emergency withdrawal
Map of uranium claims, seeps, and springs in withdrawal area
Letter by former Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano
Letter by Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
Coconino County Grand Canyon uranium resolution
Testimony of Dr. Larry Stevens
Testimony of Dr. Abe Springer
Testimony of Robert Arnberger, former Grand Canyon National Park superintendent
Testimony of Roger Clark
Testimony of Chris Shuey
Supplement to Chris Shuey Testimony
Letter dated July 15 from Department of Interior
Letter dated July 16 by Congressman Rahall
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) 623-5252LATEST NEWS
Trump Condemned for 'Genocidal' Threat to Destroy Iran
"Trump's threat to blow Iran's largest cities and the country itself 'to smithereens' is an outrageous threat that should be widely condemned," said the National Iranian American Council.
Sep 25, 2024
Former U.S. President Donald Trump's threat on Wednesday to blow Iran "to smithereens" if he returns to power was condemned by a leading Iranian American advocacy group as "genocidal."
Trump—the 2024 Republican nominee—addressed a campaign rally in North Carolina on Wednesday after he was reportedly briefed about alleged Iranian assassination threats against him.
"If I were the president, I would inform the threatening country—in this case, Iran—that if you do anything to harm this person, we are going to blow your largest cities and the country itself to smithereens," he said to raucous applause. "We're gonna blow it to smithereens, you can't do that. And there would be no more threats."
Responding to the former president's remarks, the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) said in a statement that "Trump's threat to blow Iran's largest cities and the country itself 'to smithereens' is an outrageous threat that should be widely condemned as psychotic and genocidal."
"Just like his threat to target 52 of Iran's most cherished cultural sites, Trump appears disturbingly willing to kill millions of Iranians who have no say over the actions of their authoritarian government," NIAC continued. "These remarks should be disqualifying for a man vying to once again be commander in chief and have sole authority over launching nuclear weapons with the power to make good on his horrifying threat."
"Likewise, we unequivocally condemn any Iranian threats that may be targeted at Trump or former officials," the group added. "Political violence must be rejected and prevented in all forms. Assassinations are a path to war and human suffering, as was demonstrated by the strike on [Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Maj. Gen.] Qasem Soleimani that engendered these threats, and risk further embroiling the region in violence."
Trump ordered the January 2020 airstrike that killed Soleimani in Iraq. He also unilaterally withdrew from the so-called Iran nuclear deal and ramped up sanctions on Tehran, exacerbating Iran's economic woes.
While Trump is known for his boastful and sometimes empty claims, as president he also followed through on his 2016 campaign promise to "bomb the shit out of" Islamic State fighters and "take out their families," resulting in thousands of civilian casualties in countries including Iraq and Syria.
Although Trump often presents himself as the peace candidate, critics have warned voters not to be fooled.
"He's a liar. C'mon, you know he doesn't tell the truth at all," Congresswoman Barbara Lee (D-Calif.)—the only member of either legislative chamber who voted against authorizing the so-called War on Terror in 2001—said in a recent interview with The Nation.
"Just look at his record, who he cozies up to in terms of dictators," Lee added. "He wants more investment in the military budget. What his strategy is, is to create a more dangerous world."
Keep ReadingShow Less
CBO: GOP Social Security Plan Would Cut Benefits by Thousands, Not Extend Solvency
"Their goal is to destroy our Social Security system," one advocate for seniors said of Republican politicians.
Sep 25, 2024
Social Security defenders have long argued that former Republican U.S. President Donald Trump's return to the Oval Office could spell disaster for seniors, and a nonpartisan government analysis released Wednesday bolsters their warnings.
U.S. House Budget Committee Ranking Member Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.) asked the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to analyze the impact of raising the full retirement age (FRA) for Social Security from 67 to 69, as various Republican groups have proposed.
"This report shows that raising the retirement age to 69 would slash benefits by an average of $3,500 a year," Social Security Works executive director Alex Lawson told Common Dreams. "For seniors and people with disabilities, that means not being able to buy groceries, pay a heating bill, or buy birthday presents for their grandkids."
"This cruel benefit cut would hit those who claim benefits early—largely people who work on their feet, not those who work in offices—the hardest," Lawson noted. "Even worse, it is only one of the benefit cuts that Republicans are backing. Their goal is to destroy our Social Security system."
As CBO Director Phillip L. Swagel wrote to Boyle:
All people affected by such an increase in the FRA would receive a smaller amount of Social Security benefits over their lifetime. Workers who chose to delay claiming their retirement benefits by the same number of months as the increase in the FRA would receive the same monthly benefit for a shorter period. Those workers who claimed retirement benefits at the same age as they would have claimed them under current law would receive a smaller benefit for the same number of years.
In a statement responding to the report, Boyle's office highlighted that "for workers currently in their 30s and 40s who are subject to the full retirement age increase, the average annual benefit cut would be 13%, or around $3,500 a year."
As the congressman's office pointed out, the CBO also found that "though increasing the retirement age would reduce spending, it would not create enough savings to change the expected exhaustion date of the Social Security Trust Fund, which is projected to be unable to pay full benefits by the end of fiscal year 2034."
Boyle and Senate Budget Committee Chair Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) have introduced the Medicare and Social Security Fair Share Act, which would extend the solvency of both programs by requiring Americans with higher incomes to pay more than they do now.
"Social Security is a sacred promise that after a lifetime of hard work, Americans have earned the right to retire with dignity," Boyle said Wednesday. "This independent, nonpartisan report shows just how devastating Republican plans to rip away hard-earned Social Security benefits would be for American workers."
"Instead of saving Social Security by making the ultrarich pay their fair share, the GOP is hellbent on gutting benefits for the middle class," he warned, specifically calling out the congressional Republican Study Committee and the Heritage Foundation, which is behind Project 2025. "Democrats will never stop fighting to keep the promise of Social Security and defend Americans' retirement security from Republican attacks."
The CBO report comes less than six weeks away from the U.S. general election. Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris is facing Trump in the race for the White House.
Before President Joe Biden left the contest and passed the torch to Harris, the National Committee to Preserve Social Security & Medicare, National United Committee to Protect Pensions, and Social Security Works Political Action Committee were backing him over Trump. All three groups have endorsed Harris.
"As president, Biden has been an unwavering protector of Social Security and Medicare," Social Security Works president Nancy Altman wrote in a July opinion piece for Common Dreams. "Harris will be as fierce a defender, and she will do more. She will expand Social Security and Medicare and ensure that all benefits will continue to be paid in full and on time for the foreseeable future by requiring billionaires to pay their fair share."
"In stark contrast, Donald Trump and his Republican allies in Congress are a serious threat to our earned benefits and to our families," she stressed, also warning of the GOP's positions on medication prices and tax breaks for the rich. "A vote for Democrats is a vote to expand benefits, lower prescription drug prices, and require those billionaires to start paying their fair share."
Keep ReadingShow Less
After Latest US Execution, Progressives Say 'Abolish the Death Penalty'
"The use of the death penalty in the United States is one of the ugliest stains on our broken criminal justice system," said Congresswoman Barbara Lee.
Sep 25, 2024
Amid a wave of executions in Republican-led states—including Tuesday's lethal injection of Marcellus Williams in Missouri—progressive U.S. lawmakers and groups renewed calls to "abolish the death penalty."
Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Congresswomen Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), and Cori Bush (D-Mo.) were among those who took to social media to demand an end to capital punishment following Williams' execution.
"The use of the death penalty in the United States is one of the ugliest stains on our broken criminal justice system," said Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.). "It is disproportionately imposed against poor people and people of color. We must abolish it once and for all."
Williams, 55, was killed by the state of Missouri via lethal injection—a method known for botched executions—despite serious doubts about his guilt. The office that prosecuted him sought to have his murder conviction overturned and members of the victim's family pleaded for clemency.
"Sometimes injustice is so glaring that it leaves us struggling to comprehend how such events could happen in the first place," Bush said in a statement released after Williams' execution.
The congresswoman continued:
The deadly decision to execute Williams came despite urgent pleas from Missourians and people all across the country... who called for clemency. Gov. Mike Parson didn't just ignore these pleas and end Williams' life, he demonstrated how the death penalty is wielded without regard for innocence, compassion, equity, or humanity. He showed us how the standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt" can be applied selectively, depending on who stands accused and who stands in power.
"The state of Missouri and our nation's legal system failed Marcellus Williams, and as long as we uphold the death penalty, we continue to perpetuate this depravity—where an innocent person can be killed in the name of justice," Bush stressed. "We have a moral imperative to abolish this racist and inhumane practice, and to work towards building a just legal system that values humanity and compassion over criminalization and violence."
"Rest in power, Marcellus Williams," she added.
Williams wasn't the only one executed on Tuesday. Travis Mullis—a 38-year-old autistic man who murdered his infant son—was killed by lethal injection in Texas after waiving his right to appeal.
Last week, South Carolina executed Freddie Owens by lethal injection after Republican state Attorney General Alan Wilson brushed off a key prosecution witness' bombshell claim that the convicted man did not commit the murder for which his life was taken.
Although the number of U.S. executions has been steadily decreasing from 85 in 2000 to 24 last year, there is currently a surge in state killings, with five more people set to be put to death in three states by October 17.
On Thursday, Alabama is scheduled to kill Alan Eugene Miller using nitrogen gas, despite the inmate suffering severe mental illness. Miller was meant to be put to death in 2022; however, prison staff could not find a vein in which to inject the lethal cocktail and his execution was postponed.
That same day, Emmanuel Antonio Littlejohn is set to be executed by lethal injection in Oklahoma, even after the state's Pardon and Parole Board voted to recommend clemency.
According to a 2014 study, over 4% of people on U.S. death rows did not commit the crime for which they were condemned. The Death Penalty Information Center found that since 1973, at least 200 people who were wrongly convicted and sentenced to death in the U.S. have been exonerated.
"The only way to eliminate the possibility of executing an innocent person is to do away with the death penalty altogether," the advocacy group Human Rights First said Wednesday.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular