December, 05 2017, 08:45am EDT
![Center for International Environmental Law](https://assets.rbl.ms/32012627/origin.jpg)
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Amanda Kistler, Communications Director, akistler@ciel.org, 202.742.5832
Plastics Industry Knew its Products Were Polluting Oceans by 1970s, Then Spent Decades Denying Responsibility and Fighting Regulation
A new report released today by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) examines the plastics industry's knowledge of the ocean plastics problem, answering
WASHINGTON
A new report released today by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) examines the plastics industry's knowledge of the ocean plastics problem, answering the question: When did industry become aware of the problems caused by their products, and what did they do about it? The report, Plastic Industry Awareness of the Ocean Plastics Problem, is the third in the ongoing Fueling Plastics series.
Plastics are pollutants of unique concern, as they do not break down quickly and accumulate in the environment as more is produced. Scientists first became aware of the problem of plastic pollution in the ocean in the 1950s, shortly after the introduction of oil-based plastics in consumer goods. The chemical and petroleum industries were aware of, or should have been aware of, the problems caused by their products by no later than the 1970s, according to the report.
"Unfortunately, the answer to both when the plastic industry knew their products would contribute to massive public harms and what they did with that information suggests they followed Big Oil's playbook on climate change: deny, confuse, and fight regulation and effective solutions," says Steven Feit, CIEL Attorney and lead author of Fueling Plastics.
The plastics industry has opposed sustainable solutions and fought local regulations of disposable plastic products for decades, even as evidence of the plastic crisis continues to mount. While the industry acknowledges the problem, plastics producers often take the position that they are only responsible for plastic waste in the form of resin pellets and that all other forms of plastic waste are beyond their control.
"The narrative that consumers bear primary responsibility for the plastics crisis is a public relations myth perpetuated by the petrochemical industry," continues Feit. "Consumer changes on their own won't solve the plastics crisis, as hundreds of billions of dollars from the petrochemical industry are being poured into new plastic production. We need a global, binding treaty that regulates plastic pollution throughout its lifecycle, from well head production to ocean waste."
Countries are currently gathered at the third session of the United Nations Environmental Assembly (UNEA) in Nairobi, Kenya, from December 4 through 6, with a focus on moving "Toward a Pollution-Free Planet." Under consideration is a resolution on marine litter and microplastics, which could establish a working group that aims to coordinate responses to the plastics crisis.
Since 1989, the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) has worked to strengthen and use international law and institutions to protect the environment, promote human health, and ensure a just and sustainable society.
LATEST NEWS
Oxfam Condemns Israel for Pushing Gazans Into a 'Death Trap'
"The areas Israel has defined as 'humanitarian' and 'safe' are, in reality, the polar opposite."
Jul 04, 2024
The global humanitarian group Oxfam condemned the Israeli military on Thursday for attempting to force hundreds of thousands of Gaza civilians out of the eastern part of Khan Younis and into overcrowded parts of the besieged territory with no guarantee of safety or humanitarian assistance.
"Pushing hundreds of thousands more people into what is essentially a death trap, devoid of any facilities, is barbaric and a breach of International Humanitarian Law," said Sally Abi Khalil, Oxfam's Middle East director. "Yet again, we are seeing vast numbers of people being forced to flee under Israeli military orders, with no heed for their safety or dignity."
"The areas Israel has defined as 'humanitarian' and 'safe' are, in reality, the polar opposite, leaving families with the horrific choice between staying in an active combat zone or moving somewhere that is already desperately overcrowded, dangerous, and unfit for human existence," Khalil added.
Oxfam said its staff members who are sheltering in the supposed safe zones to which Israel has directed Gazans reported "medieval conditions," with people "camping in the streets" amid "rapidly spreading disease."
"None of the declared safe routes in Gaza are actually safe," the group said. "Israel's military has also systematically attacked civilians and aid workers, including in those clearly marked 'safe zones' and 'evacuation routes.' Israel has repeatedly failed to comply with international law, which compels it to take all possible measures to ensure satisfactory conditions of shelter, hygiene, health, safety, and nutrition, and that family members are not separated."
Oxfam's statement came days after the U.S.-armed Israel Defense Forces (IDF) issued fresh evacuation orders for Khan Younis, a city to which many Gazans fled after Israeli forces began their full-scale assault on Rafah in May.
The IDF instructed people to move to al-Mawasi, a tiny coastal area that Israeli forces have previously attacked. The Financial Timesrecently described al-Mawasi as a "fetid, thirsty, and disease-filled refuge of tens of thousands of Palestinians."
Hours after issuing the orders, the IDF killed at least nine people—including three children and two women—in an airstrike on a home in Khan Younis.
The United Nations estimates that nine out of 10 people in Gaza have been internally displaced at least once since Israel began its latest assault on the enclave following a deadly Hamas-led attack in October. Some Gazans have been displaced as many as 10 times, according to the U.N.
The Washington Postreported Wednesday that while the European Hospital in Khan Younis is now "completely empty" following the IDF's evacuation order, "there are signs that many of the thousands who fled fearing the new Israeli incursion" in the city "are trickling back after being unable to find new shelter in the crowded parts of the Gaza Strip still accessible to them."
"For many in Khan Younis, this week's evacuation order was only the latest in a long string of forced displacements," the Post added. "Though the United Nations said up to a quarter-million Palestinians were affected by the order, some have already returned to Khan Younis, saying there is nowhere left in Gaza for them to go."
Oxfam's Khalil said Thursday that "the human cost of the military offensive in Gaza is unacceptable" and implored "all parties to push for an immediate and lasting cease-fire in order to end the bloodshed and suffering."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Judge Partially Blocks FTC Ban on Anti-Worker Noncompete Clauses
"We will keep fighting to free hardworking Americans from unlawful noncompetes," the agency said in response to the decision.
Jul 04, 2024
A Trump-appointed federal judge on Wednesday partially blocked a Federal Trade Commission rule banning most noncompete clauses, ubiquitous anti-worker agreements that prevent employees from moving to or starting their own competing businesses.
Judge Ada Brown of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas issued a preliminary ruling preventing the ban from taking effect against the handful of plaintiffs that sued the FTC over the rule mere hours after it was finalized in April. The plaintiffs include the tax service firm Ryan LLC and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the nation's largest corporate lobbying organization.
Researchers at the Revolving Door Project noted Wednesday that Ryan LLC was "represented by [former President Donald] Trump's Labor Secretary, Eugene Scalia, via BigLaw firm Gibson Dunn."
Watchdogs accused the U.S. Chamber, which celebrated Wednesday's decision, of "judge-shopping," a tactic the organization frequently uses to secure favorable legal outcomes. District courts in Texas fall under the purview of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, which is dominated by right-wing extremists.
In her Wednesday decision, Brown did not immediately grant the plaintiffs' request for a nationwide injunction against the ban on noncompetes. But the judge signaled she would likely block the rule in its entirety with her final decision in the case on August 30—just days before the ban's scheduled implementation date.
"The court concludes the commission has exceeded its statutory authority in promulgating the noncompete rule, and thus plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits," Brown wrote in her 33-page decision.
"The need for judicial reform in Congress has never been more clear as far-right 5th Circuit territory judges have effectively put up a giant neon sign, 'Corporations, Please Sue Here.'"
A spokesperson for the FTC said in response to the ruling that the agency stands by its "clear authority, supported by statute and precedent, to issue this rule."
"We will keep fighting to free hardworking Americans from unlawful noncompetes, which reduce innovation, inhibit economic growth, trap workers, and undermine Americans' economic liberty," the spokesperson added.
The FTC, led by antitrust trailblazer Lina Khan, estimates that roughly 30 million U.S. workers are bound by noncompete agreements that restrict their ability to switch jobs in pursuit of higher wages and better benefits. The commission believes its ban on noncompetes would result in up to $488 billion in wage increases for U.S. workers collectively over the next decade.
Progressive advocacy groups cast Wednesday's decision as the latest attack on workers—and gift to corporations—by a Trump-appointed judge.
"By halting the noncompetes ban, this court is standing in the way of real gains for workers again," said Emily Peterson-Cassin, director of corporate power at Demand Progress. "With the decision overturning Chevron earlier this week, it's a one-two punch against everyday people."
Tony Carrk, executive director of Accountable.US, said in a statement that "the industry-funded U.S. Chamber continues to cost everyday Americans a ton of money with its suing spree against the Biden administration crackdowns on corporate greed, junk fees, and anti-worker barriers."
"The U.S. Chamber's lawsuit holding up the administration's credit card late fee rule is already costing Americans $27 million a day —and now this latest lawsuit could slam the door shut for millions of American workers to begin pursuing better opportunities," said Carrk. "Noncompete clauses could force employees to endure low wages and poor working conditions as the rule drags through the courts. The big bank and Wall Street CEOs on the U.S. Chamber's board have gotten a huge return on their investment while American workers pay the price."
"The need for judicial reform in Congress has never been more clear as far-right 5th Circuit territory judges have effectively put up a giant neon sign, 'Corporations, Please Sue Here.'"
Keep ReadingShow Less
As Debate Fallout Continues, Biden Says Nobody 'Pushing Me Out'
The president's message comes as a second Democrat in Congress suggested that he should exit the race.
Jul 03, 2024
"I'm running," declared the subject line of a fundraising email that U.S. President Joe Biden sent on Wednesday as the Democrat's reelection campaign sought to combat the criticism that has mounted since his poor debate performance last week.
"I'm the Democratic Party's nominee. No one is pushing me out. I'm not leaving, I'm in this race to the end,
and WE are going to win this election," wrote Biden, who won't be the official nominee until the convention next month. "I've been knocked down and counted out my whole life. I'm sure the same is true for many of you."
After quoting his father—who supposedly used to say: "Champ, it's not how many times you get knocked down. It's how quickly you get up."—Biden expressed confidence that he and Vice President Kamala Harris will beat the presumptive Republican nominee, former President Donald Trump, in November, as they did in 2020.
However, recent polls and reporting suggest that Democratic voters and elected officials are less confident post-debate—particularly given the stakes, with Trump emboldened by a new U.S. Supreme Court ruling, pledging to be a dictator on "day one," and expected to pursue the far-right's Project 2025 policy agenda.
Since the debate, multiple political commentators have called for replacing Biden as the Democratic candidate. On Tuesday, U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Texas became the first Democrat in Congress to call on the president to withdraw from the race, saying that he "saved our democracy by delivering us from Trump in 2021. He must not deliver us to Trump in 2024."
In a Wednesday interview with The New York Times, Congressman Raúl Grijalva of Arizona became the second.
"If he's the candidate, I'm going to support him, but I think that this is an opportunity to look elsewhere," Grijalva said. "What he needs to do is shoulder the responsibility for keeping that seat—and part of that responsibility is to get out of this race."
As Reutersreported Tuesday:
There are 25 Democratic members of the House of Representatives preparing to call for Biden to step aside if he seems shaky in coming days, according to one House Democratic aide.
A second House Democratic aide said moderate House Democrats in competitive districts—often called "frontliners"—were getting hammered with questions in their districts this week.
Democratic Reps. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (Wash.) and Jared Golden (Maine)—Blue Dog Coalition co-chairs who, as the Timesnoted, are both "facing challenging reelection races in rural districts"—have not called on Biden to bow out of the contest but separately suggested this week that he is going to lose to Trump in November.
In addition to insisting that he is still running in the email to supporters, Biden on Wednesday "unexpectedly joined a Zoom call" with campaign and Democratic National Committee (DNC) staff, according toPolitico.
Citing two people on the call who were granted anonymity, the outlet detailed:
"Let me say this as clearly as I possibly can—as simply and straightforward as I can: I am running... no one's pushing me out. I'm not leaving. I'm in this race to the end and we're going to win," Biden said on the call.
Biden's forcefulness and resolve, especially compared to how he came across during last week's debate, was as reassuring to several attendees, who discussed the call afterward via text message, as what he said.
...Harris, whose profile has risen in recent days as Democrats focus on her with new seriousness as a possible replacement atop the ticket, was seated beside Biden on the video call.
"We will not back down," Harris said. "We will follow our president's lead. We will fight, and we will win."
Several names have been floated as possible replacements if the president does decide to end his campaign—including the Democratic governors of California, Illinois, Michigan, and Pennsylvania—but Reutersspoke with seven unnamed sources at the Biden campaign, DNC, and White House who all agreed that Harris is the top alternative.
While Harris' aides have so far publicly dismissed such a scenario, party donors and insiders—such as Democratic strategist Michael Trujillo and Donna Brazile, the former interim DNC chair—also told the news agency that should Biden decide against seeking a second term, it would make sense for the vice president to step in.
Democratic Congressman Jim Clyburn (S.C.), a key Biden ally, has reaffirmed his support for the president since the debate but also made clear that he would back Harris if Biden exited the race.
According to the Times, which also gave anonymity to its sources:
Mr. Biden's allies said that the president had privately acknowledged that his next few appearances heading into the July 4 holiday weekend must go well, particularly an interview scheduled for Friday with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News and campaign stops in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.
"He knows if he has two more events like that, we're in a different place" by the end of the weekend, said one of the allies, referring to Mr. Biden's halting and unfocused performance in the debate. That person, who talked to the president in the past 24 hours, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive situation.
White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre stressed during Wednesday's briefing that Biden isn't dropping out and rejected the Times reporting, saying, "That is absolutely false."
New national polling of likely voters from the Times and Siena College shows Trump beating Biden 49% to 43%, a three-point shift in the GOP's favor since before the debate. Polling published Wednesday by The Wall Street Journal similarly has Trump leading Biden 48% to 42%.
Survey results released Wednesday by CBS News feature a smaller margin but still favor the Republican: "Trump now has a three-point edge over President Biden across the battleground states collectively, and a two-point edge nationally."
Polling released Tuesday suggests Harris may do better against Trump. CNNfound that while Trump beats Biden 49% to 43%, the former president only leads Harris by two points, 47% to 45%.
The voters surveyed by Ipsos were split, with 40% supporting Trump and the same share backing Biden. In the Trump-Harris matchup, the split was 42% to 43% in the Republican's favor.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular