SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
January, 23 2025, 10:10pm EDT
Contact:
Natasha Blakely, natasha.blakely@sierraclub.org
Sierra Club Statement on Confirmation Hearing for Brooke Rollins' Nomination as Secretary of Agriculture
Today, the U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry held hearings on the nomination of Brooke Rollins as Secretary of Agriculture. Rollins previously held roles as President Trump’s domestic policy chief during his first term and deputy general counsel for former Texas Gov. Rick Perry.
Rollins is one of the architects of President Trump’s tariff plan, has pushed heavily for mass deportation, and has publicly dismissed climate change concerns as hysteria.
In response, Athan Manuel, director of Sierra Club’s Lands Protection Program, released the following statement:
“Rather than installing someone with experience and background navigating agriculture and forestry issues, President Trump has chosen Brooke Rollins, whose background is in criminal law and has a history of defending fossil fuels in her policy roles. The U.S. Department of Agriculture is in need of strong leadership that can advocate for American farmers against large-scale corporate farm operations, support sustainable local agriculture to bolster food security in our communities, and preserve America’s federal forests as carbon sinks, which are one of the few proven ways to mitigate the impacts of fossil fuels and climate change.”
The Sierra Club is the most enduring and influential grassroots environmental organization in the United States. We amplify the power of our 3.8 million members and supporters to defend everyone's right to a healthy world.
(415) 977-5500LATEST NEWS
As Trump Nominees Back SNAP and Medicaid Work Requirements, Report Shows Harms
"They do not reliably increase employment, but they do kick people off essential benefits like food assistance and healthcare," said an expert at the Economic Policy Institute.
Jan 24, 2025
After nominees for U.S. President Donald Trump's Cabinet this week endorsed work requirements for social safety net programs, an economic think tank released a Friday report detailing the policy's drawbacks.
"Work requirements for safety net programs are a punitive solution that solves no real problem," said Economic Policy Institute (EPI) economist and report author Hilary Wething in a statement about her new publication.
"They do not reliably increase employment, but they do kick people off essential benefits like food assistance and healthcare," she stressed. "If policymakers are genuinely concerned about improving access to work, they should support policies like affordable child- and eldercare."
"The existing safety net is too stingy and tilts too hard toward making benefits difficult to access."
EPI's report explains that recently, congressional Republicans—who now have a majority in both chambers—"have embraced proposals to ratchet up work requirements as conditions for the receipt of some federal government benefits. These proposals are clearly trying to exploit a vague, but pervasive, sense that some recipients of public support are gaming the system to get benefits that they do not need, as they could be earning money in the labor market to support themselves instead."
"However, a careful assessment of the current state of public benefit programs demonstrates that almost none of the alleged benefits of ratcheting up work requirements are economically significant, but that the potential costs of doing this could be large and fall on the most economically vulnerable," the document states. "The most targeted programs for more stringent work requirements are the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, popularly referred to as food stamps) and Medicaid, the health insurance program for low-income people."
"EPI has surveyed the research literature on work requirements and how they interact with these two programs in particular, and we find that the existing safety net is too stingy and tilts too hard toward making benefits difficult to access," the report continues. "Tightening eligibility by increasing work requirements for these programs will make this problem even worse with no tangible benefit in the form of higher levels of employment among low-income adults."
Wething found that work requirements generally target nonelderly adults without documented disabilities who don't have official dependents living in their homes, formally called "able-bodied adults without dependents" (ABAWDs).
"While ABAWDs might not have documented disabilities that result in benefit receipt or have dependent children living at home full-time, they often experience health challenges and must take on some caregiving duties, each of which could provide a genuine barrier to finding steady work," the report says. "We find that 21% reported having a disability that affects their ability to find and sustain work, suggesting that adults with genuine health barriers are being swept up in overly stringent work requirements."
Additionally, "13.8% of ABAWDs live with an adult over the age of 65 in their household, suggesting that many are potential caregivers in some form and likely have caregiving responsibilities beyond what is captured on paper," the document notes. "Despite ABAWDs having health challenges and caregiving responsibilities that make participation in the labor market difficult, our current social safety net does very little to support these adults."
The publication highlights that "low-income adults generally face steep labor market challenges, making it difficult to meet work requirements," including that "low-wage work is precarious, making work time hard to maintain."
The report also emphasizes that "by making the process of applying for crucial safety net programs more burdensome, work requirements effectively function like a cut to programs," and "the consequences of losing access to SNAP and Medicaid for low-income adults are severe, often resulting in food and health insecurity."
Despite the abundance of research about the downsides of work requirements, Brooke Rollins, Trump's nominee to lead the U.S. Department of Agriculture—which administers SNAP—expressed support for the policy during a Thursday Senate confirmation hearing, echoing what Russell Vought, the president's pick to direct the Office of Management and Budget, said about Medicaid on Wednesday.
Rather than pushing work requirements, the EPI report argues, decision-makers could advocate for "policies that would measurably improve employment in low-income households," including "macroeconomic policy to maintain full employment."
The publication also promotes policies that increase scheduling predictability, provide better help with caregiving responsibilities, assist formerly incarcerated people with finding and maintaining jobs, reduce unnecessary education mandates for employment, and improve transportation options. It further calls for reducing existing work requirements.
"It is entirely possible that reducing eligibility barriers to safety net programs—barriers like work requirements—may well be more effective in promoting work than raising those barriers would be," the report states. "A majority of adults who gained coverage through Medicaid expansion in Ohio and Michigan found that having healthcare made it easier to find and maintain work."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'He's in on the Racket': Watchdog Slams Trump's Crypto Executive Order
The cryptocurrency token that U.S. President Donald Trump launched right before his inauguration, $TRUMP, is now worth billions.
Jan 24, 2025
Following a torrent of executive orders issued in his first few days back in the White House, U.S. President Donald Trump added another one to the list Thursday, this time aimed at promoting U.S. leadership in cryptocurrency—an industry he now holds a considerable stake in.
Co-president of the watchdog group Public Citizen, Robert Weissman, decried the move, writing in a statement Thursday that "Trump is pushing crypto because he's in on the racket."
This executive order "will help super-inflate what's already a dangerous speculative bubble in an artificial, unregulated asset that will, eventually, burst. The inevitable crash will badly injure millions of everyday Americans," Weissman wrote.
The executive order calls for the establishment of a working group on digital assets to explore the possibility of creating a "national digit asset stockpile"—something that crypto industry has pushed Trump's administration to create. That group would also "propose a federal regulatory framework governing the issuance and operation of digital assets." The order, however, didn't go as far as some in the crypto industry had hoped, remarkedThe New York Times.
Just prior to his inauguration, Trump launched a so-called meme coin—"$TRUMP"—which as of Thursday afternoon had a market cap of about $7 billion, according to The Wall Street Journal. The digital asset bitcoin also surged to new heights Monday, the day of Trump's inauguration, buoyed by expectations that the incoming administration will be friendly to the crypto industry.
Trump's decision to launch his crypto coin has been criticized on ethics grounds.
Jeff Hauser, the executive director of the Revolving Door Project, wrote in an MSNBC op-ed published Friday that having wealth linked to cryptocurrency will "obviously impact" how Trump's administration approaches regulation the market.
What's more, Hauser warned, "crypto markets are frequently believed to be subject to manipulation by 'whales,' i.e., large investors. Having a Trump asset so susceptible to manipulation is highly concerning. Consider whales who might manipulate the Trump coin's worth to buy influence with the president by intervening with purchases at strategic moments."
Keep ReadingShow Less
AOC: Democrats Must Be 'Brawlers for the Working Class' to Counter Trumpism
"One of the things that we need to do is to talk to people directly," said the congresswoman. "There need to be Democrats who walk the walk and talk the talk."
Jan 24, 2025
As Democratic lawmakers grappled with the reality of President Donald Trump's second term this week, U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Thursday urged the party to see the president's devotion to billionaires and corporations—after he campaigned as a champion for the forgotten working class—as an opportunity to make clear that Democrats, not Republicans, will fight for the interests of "everyday people."
First, the New York Democratic congresswoman said in an interview with Jon Stewart on his podcast, "The Weekly Show," the party must abandon its own allegiances to the billionaire class.
Trump, his close ties with tech billionaires like Tesla founder Elon Musk, his plans to extend the 2017 tax cuts that primarily benefited the wealthy, and his promises of deregulation to oil executives ahead of the election all highlight "ways that we can fight back," said Ocasio-Cortez.
"One of the things that we need to do is to talk to people directly," said the congresswoman. "There need to be Democrats who walk the walk and talk the talk. There is an insane amount of hypocrisy, and the hypocrisy is what gets exploited [by Republicans]."
Ocasio-Cortez pointed to the example of "insider trading" by lawmakers, with members of Congress who receive briefings on the defense industry, pharmaceuticals, and other businesses able to use information not available to the public to predict future stock prices. As Common Dreamsreported in December, dozens of members of Congress bought or sold up to $113 million worth of shares in Pentagon contractors last year, with three Democrats—Reps. Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.), Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), and Suzan Delbene (D-Wash.)—trading the most.
Pelosi, the former House speaker, is among the lawmakers who have vehemently defended stock trading by lawmakers, while Ocasio-Cortez has frequently spoken out against the practice.
"People think that everyday people are stupid," Ocasio-Cortez told Stewart on Thursday. "Do you really think that people don't see this shit? ...And then we're supposed to act like money only corrupts Republicans? Give me a fucking break."
Trump won the support of working class people across the country, increasing his support among voters who earn less than $100,000 per year despite the fact, as Ocasio-Cortez said, "that he has a Supreme Court that guts labor rights, that [Republicans] are overwhelmingly opposed to raising a minimum wage, that they are really gutting the civil rights around working people and organizing."
Wealthier voters shifted toward the Democratic Party in the election, supporting Democratic candidate former Vice President Kamala Harris.
To respond to Trump's victory, Ocasio-Cortez said, "we need to be a party of brawlers for the working class."
"We've been chasing this affluent group and making all of these little concessions and hoping that working people don't notice," she added.
The congresswoman—who campaigned for a top House Oversight Committee seat in recent weeks but lost to a more senior Democrat—has been a leading proponent of the Green New Deal, which would fight the climate emergency while creating millions of green energy jobs over a decade; the push to expand Medicare coverage to every American; and a supporter of tuition-free public college, which was offered to students across the U.S. until at least the 1970s.
Her interview with Stewart came as Semaforreported that Democratic leaders are "wrestling with how much resistance to mount to Trump's Cabinet."
"We're obviously in a bit of disarray," one Democratic senator told the outlet. "I don't think people are really completely sure about what lesson is to be learned in this election."
Jesse Brenneman, an editor for the podcast "Know Your Enemy," commented that "the fact Democrats don't know what to do tells you everything about their priorities."
In an email to supporters the day after Trump was inaugurated this week, Ocasio-Cortez stuck to the same message she shared with Stewart.
Pointing to the tech billionaires who attended the inauguration, with many elected officials "kicked to the curb," the congresswoman told supporters: "You're getting ripped off. All of us are going to be getting ripped off for the next four years, but what do we do about it?"
"The Trump trifecta has taken hold, and so have their billionaire right-wing donors," she said. "Our movement for real progress will have to push harder than ever these next four years."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular