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.
Last May, the United Steelworkers union noted that the newly merged DowDupont was paying its CEO 249 times more than the company's median worker. (Photo: Shutterstock)
This January, President Trump claimed credit for new figures from the American Cancer Society showing "the sharpest one-year drop in cancer death rate ever recorded" between 2016 and 2017.
The society politely pointed out that the Trump administration had nothing to do with this encouraging decline. The new numbers, chief Gary Reedy explained, "reflect prevention, early detection, and treatment advances that occurred in prior years."
Media outlets rushed to relate this latest Trump Twitter flap. But this story doesn't deserve to end there. Something is shaking on the cancer front that needs our full attention.
Average Americans pay a deadly price for the excessive corporate pay packages that incentivize profit-making by any means necessary.
The Trump administration, investigative journalist Sharon Lerner detailed a few days later, "is executing an old tobacco industry scheme to dismantle the federal government's ability to protect the public from cancer."
The Trump White House has packed the Environmental Protection Agency's top echelons with free-market fundamentalists who've set about "freeing" chemical companies from regulations designed to limit the presence of cancer-causing chemicals in our nation's air, water, and soil.
These appointees, Lerner's reporting documents, are working hand in glove with chemical manufacturers, which have spent $1.4 billion on lobbying over the past dozen years.
Those lobbying dollars paid off. Chemical companies now have their pals running the regulatory show--and more Americans, as a result, will find themselves fighting cancer.
Americans like Angela Ramirez, a mother in Illinois who traces her personal cancer to a carcinogen known as ethylene oxide. Two years ago, EPA scientists tagged ethylene oxide a clear and present danger and, writes Lerner, proposed a new safety threshold "30 times more sensitive than previous estimates."
Dow Chemical -- a huge ethylene oxide producer -- pushed back. Now, the Trump EPA's political appointees are abandoning the standards their own scientists are seeking.
This is "only one of the changes made under the Trump administration," notes Lerner, "that promise to weaken protections for Americans' health, many of which were intended specifically to stave off cancers."
Any hands-off approach to fighting carcinogens, Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) notes, will particularly devastate the poor communities that already face "disproportionately high rates of air and water pollution."
"If you really want to see what doing nothing truly looks like, come to my district," adds Tlaib. "Rows and rows and rows of homes have these little white crosses in front of them, representing cancer, survivors of cancer."
Meanwhile, chemical executives are raking it in.
In 2017, the industry's two biggest companies, Dow and Dupont, merged in a deal that nearly tripled the compensation of CEO Andrew Liveris to $65.7 million. In 2018, Stephen Angel -- CEO of Linde PLC, the nation's fourth-largest chemical company -- pulled down $66.1 million.
The enrichment of these executives -- at the same time their companies are battling attempts to regulate their toxic products -- represents a far greater scandal than any vain and empty boasting out of the White House. Yet the deregulatory collusion between the chemical industry and the Trump administration continues to go largely unnoticed.
Also largely unnoticed: a counter trend, the emerging efforts to limit the mammoth CEO pay rewards that give top executives -- in the chemical industry and beyond -- an ongoing incentive to play fast and loose with America's health.
One of those efforts just took a significant stride forward in California, where state senators moved a step closer to hiking the tax rate on corporations that pay their CEOs over 50 times what they pay their most typical workers.
Last May, the United Steelworkers union noted that the newly merged DowDupont was paying its CEO 249 times more than the company's median worker.
Average Americans pay a deadly price for the excessive corporate pay packages that incentivize profit-making by any means necessary. If the California legislation becomes law, America's corporations may finally begin paying a price for continuing that excess.
Trump and Musk are on an unconstitutional rampage, aiming for virtually every corner of the federal government. These two right-wing billionaires are targeting nurses, scientists, teachers, daycare providers, judges, veterans, air traffic controllers, and nuclear safety inspectors. No one is safe. The food stamps program, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are next. It’s an unprecedented disaster and a five-alarm fire, but there will be a reckoning. The people did not vote for this. The American people do not want this dystopian hellscape that hides behind claims of “efficiency.” Still, in reality, it is all a giveaway to corporate interests and the libertarian dreams of far-right oligarchs like Musk. Common Dreams is playing a vital role by reporting day and night on this orgy of corruption and greed, as well as what everyday people can do to organize and fight back. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover issues the corporate media never will, but we can only continue with our readers’ support. |
This January, President Trump claimed credit for new figures from the American Cancer Society showing "the sharpest one-year drop in cancer death rate ever recorded" between 2016 and 2017.
The society politely pointed out that the Trump administration had nothing to do with this encouraging decline. The new numbers, chief Gary Reedy explained, "reflect prevention, early detection, and treatment advances that occurred in prior years."
Media outlets rushed to relate this latest Trump Twitter flap. But this story doesn't deserve to end there. Something is shaking on the cancer front that needs our full attention.
Average Americans pay a deadly price for the excessive corporate pay packages that incentivize profit-making by any means necessary.
The Trump administration, investigative journalist Sharon Lerner detailed a few days later, "is executing an old tobacco industry scheme to dismantle the federal government's ability to protect the public from cancer."
The Trump White House has packed the Environmental Protection Agency's top echelons with free-market fundamentalists who've set about "freeing" chemical companies from regulations designed to limit the presence of cancer-causing chemicals in our nation's air, water, and soil.
These appointees, Lerner's reporting documents, are working hand in glove with chemical manufacturers, which have spent $1.4 billion on lobbying over the past dozen years.
Those lobbying dollars paid off. Chemical companies now have their pals running the regulatory show--and more Americans, as a result, will find themselves fighting cancer.
Americans like Angela Ramirez, a mother in Illinois who traces her personal cancer to a carcinogen known as ethylene oxide. Two years ago, EPA scientists tagged ethylene oxide a clear and present danger and, writes Lerner, proposed a new safety threshold "30 times more sensitive than previous estimates."
Dow Chemical -- a huge ethylene oxide producer -- pushed back. Now, the Trump EPA's political appointees are abandoning the standards their own scientists are seeking.
This is "only one of the changes made under the Trump administration," notes Lerner, "that promise to weaken protections for Americans' health, many of which were intended specifically to stave off cancers."
Any hands-off approach to fighting carcinogens, Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) notes, will particularly devastate the poor communities that already face "disproportionately high rates of air and water pollution."
"If you really want to see what doing nothing truly looks like, come to my district," adds Tlaib. "Rows and rows and rows of homes have these little white crosses in front of them, representing cancer, survivors of cancer."
Meanwhile, chemical executives are raking it in.
In 2017, the industry's two biggest companies, Dow and Dupont, merged in a deal that nearly tripled the compensation of CEO Andrew Liveris to $65.7 million. In 2018, Stephen Angel -- CEO of Linde PLC, the nation's fourth-largest chemical company -- pulled down $66.1 million.
The enrichment of these executives -- at the same time their companies are battling attempts to regulate their toxic products -- represents a far greater scandal than any vain and empty boasting out of the White House. Yet the deregulatory collusion between the chemical industry and the Trump administration continues to go largely unnoticed.
Also largely unnoticed: a counter trend, the emerging efforts to limit the mammoth CEO pay rewards that give top executives -- in the chemical industry and beyond -- an ongoing incentive to play fast and loose with America's health.
One of those efforts just took a significant stride forward in California, where state senators moved a step closer to hiking the tax rate on corporations that pay their CEOs over 50 times what they pay their most typical workers.
Last May, the United Steelworkers union noted that the newly merged DowDupont was paying its CEO 249 times more than the company's median worker.
Average Americans pay a deadly price for the excessive corporate pay packages that incentivize profit-making by any means necessary. If the California legislation becomes law, America's corporations may finally begin paying a price for continuing that excess.
This January, President Trump claimed credit for new figures from the American Cancer Society showing "the sharpest one-year drop in cancer death rate ever recorded" between 2016 and 2017.
The society politely pointed out that the Trump administration had nothing to do with this encouraging decline. The new numbers, chief Gary Reedy explained, "reflect prevention, early detection, and treatment advances that occurred in prior years."
Media outlets rushed to relate this latest Trump Twitter flap. But this story doesn't deserve to end there. Something is shaking on the cancer front that needs our full attention.
Average Americans pay a deadly price for the excessive corporate pay packages that incentivize profit-making by any means necessary.
The Trump administration, investigative journalist Sharon Lerner detailed a few days later, "is executing an old tobacco industry scheme to dismantle the federal government's ability to protect the public from cancer."
The Trump White House has packed the Environmental Protection Agency's top echelons with free-market fundamentalists who've set about "freeing" chemical companies from regulations designed to limit the presence of cancer-causing chemicals in our nation's air, water, and soil.
These appointees, Lerner's reporting documents, are working hand in glove with chemical manufacturers, which have spent $1.4 billion on lobbying over the past dozen years.
Those lobbying dollars paid off. Chemical companies now have their pals running the regulatory show--and more Americans, as a result, will find themselves fighting cancer.
Americans like Angela Ramirez, a mother in Illinois who traces her personal cancer to a carcinogen known as ethylene oxide. Two years ago, EPA scientists tagged ethylene oxide a clear and present danger and, writes Lerner, proposed a new safety threshold "30 times more sensitive than previous estimates."
Dow Chemical -- a huge ethylene oxide producer -- pushed back. Now, the Trump EPA's political appointees are abandoning the standards their own scientists are seeking.
This is "only one of the changes made under the Trump administration," notes Lerner, "that promise to weaken protections for Americans' health, many of which were intended specifically to stave off cancers."
Any hands-off approach to fighting carcinogens, Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) notes, will particularly devastate the poor communities that already face "disproportionately high rates of air and water pollution."
"If you really want to see what doing nothing truly looks like, come to my district," adds Tlaib. "Rows and rows and rows of homes have these little white crosses in front of them, representing cancer, survivors of cancer."
Meanwhile, chemical executives are raking it in.
In 2017, the industry's two biggest companies, Dow and Dupont, merged in a deal that nearly tripled the compensation of CEO Andrew Liveris to $65.7 million. In 2018, Stephen Angel -- CEO of Linde PLC, the nation's fourth-largest chemical company -- pulled down $66.1 million.
The enrichment of these executives -- at the same time their companies are battling attempts to regulate their toxic products -- represents a far greater scandal than any vain and empty boasting out of the White House. Yet the deregulatory collusion between the chemical industry and the Trump administration continues to go largely unnoticed.
Also largely unnoticed: a counter trend, the emerging efforts to limit the mammoth CEO pay rewards that give top executives -- in the chemical industry and beyond -- an ongoing incentive to play fast and loose with America's health.
One of those efforts just took a significant stride forward in California, where state senators moved a step closer to hiking the tax rate on corporations that pay their CEOs over 50 times what they pay their most typical workers.
Last May, the United Steelworkers union noted that the newly merged DowDupont was paying its CEO 249 times more than the company's median worker.
Average Americans pay a deadly price for the excessive corporate pay packages that incentivize profit-making by any means necessary. If the California legislation becomes law, America's corporations may finally begin paying a price for continuing that excess.
Sen. Bernie Sanders said that a Maryland resident whom the Trump administration wrongly deported "must not be allowed to rot in an El Salvadorian jail based on lies and defiance of our Constitution."
U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders warned late Monday that President Donald Trump's open refusal to comply with court orders requiring him to bring home a Maryland resident his administration wrongly deported represents "just another step forward" in his "move toward authoritarianism."
"Just a few weeks ago, the Trump administration admitted that the deportation of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a father of three who has been in the country more than decade, was an 'administrative error,'" Sanders (I-Vt.) said in a statement following the U.S. president's chummy meeting with far-right Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele at the White House.
"The U.S. Supreme Court—in a 9-0 decision backed by every Trump-appointed justice—ruled that the administration must bring Abrego Garcia back to the United States," Sanders continued. "Now, in open defiance of the Supreme Court and without any evidence, the White House claims that Abrego Garcia is a 'terrorist,' who was 'sent to the right place.' This is a blatant LIE."
During Monday's meeting, Bukele showed a willingness to help Trump evade domestic court mandates, echoing the U.S. administration's false narrative that Abrego Garcia is a "terrorist" and declining to release him from a notorious El Salvador mega-prison—insisting, like his American counterpart, that he lacks the power to do so.
The Trump administration proceeded to quote Bukele's claim that he cannot "smuggle a terrorist into the United States" in a court filing.
Silky Shah, executive director of Detention Watch Network, said the Trump-Bukele meeting "should alarm everyone."
"Trump is taking monumental yet calculated steps to expand the scope of who can be subjected to arrest, incarceration, and deportation, and normalize the abduction and removal of people to another country without due process," said Shah. "The Trump and Bukele partnership to outsource incarceration to El Salvador is setting a dangerous precedent of total disdain for basic human rights—not only for migrants, but for everyone in the United States, including residents and citizens, and especially Black and brown people who are disproportionately targeted by the U.S.'s unjust criminal legal system."
During Bukele's visit to the White House, livestream audio captured Trump telling El Salvador's president that "he needs to build about five more places" and that "homegrown" U.S. prisoners "are next."
Trump to Bukele: "Home-growns are next. The home-growns. You gotta build about five more places. It's not big enough." pic.twitter.com/o20thGNK9e
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) April 14, 2025
Working Families Party national director Maurice Mitchell said Monday that Trump's remarks were "some of the most chilling words uttered in the Oval Office."
"He's pulling straight from the authoritarian playbook—and isn't hiding it," said Mitchell. "We condemn his comments in the strongest possible terms and demand the immediate release of wrongly imprisoned Maryland resident Kilmar Abrego Garcia."
"Trump is dismantling critical environmental safeguards, putting lives at risk, and leaving working people to suffer the devastating consequences," said one campaigner.
A coalition of green groups on Monday promoted plans for nationwide "All Out on Earth Day" rallies "to confront rising authoritarianism and defend our environment, democracy, and future" against the Trump administration's gutting of government agencies and programs tasked with environmental protection and combating the climate emergency.
Organizers of the protests—which are set to take place from April 18-30—are coalescing opposition to President Donald Trump's attacks on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other agencies, which include efforts to rescind or severely curtail regulations aimed at protecting the public from pollution, oil spills, and other environmental and climate harms.
"This Earth Day, we fight for everything: for our communities, our democracy, and the future our children deserve."
The Green New Deal Network, one of the event's organizers, decried Trump's "massive rollbacks" to the EPA and noted that funds "for critical programs have been frozen and federal workers have been unjustly fired" as Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, takes a wrecking ball to government agencies.
"This Earth Day, we fight for everything: for our communities, our democracy, and the future our children deserve," Green New Deal Network national director Kaniela Ing said in a statement.
"Trump, Musk, and their billionaire allies are waging an all-out assault on the agencies that keep our air clean, our water safe, and our families healthy," Ing continued. "They're gutting the programs and projects we fought hard to win—programs that bring down energy costs and create good-paying jobs in towns across America, especially in red states."
"So, we need to make sure the pressure continues and our protests aren't just a flash in the pan," Ing added. "When we stand together—workers, environmentalists, everyday folks—we can not only stop them, but we can build the world we deserve."
All Out on Earth Day participants include Sunrise Movement, Climate Power, Third Act, Popular Democracy, Climate Defenders, the Democratic National Committee Council on Environment and Climate, Unitarian Universalists, NAACP, Dayenu, Evergreen, United to End Polluter Handouts Coalition, Climate Hawks Vote, and the Center of Biological Diversity (CBD).
Last month, CBD sued five Cabinet-level agencies in a bid to ensure that DOGE teams tasked with finding ways to cut costs—including via workforce reductions—fully comply with federal transparency law. This, after DOGE advised the termination of thousands of probationary staffers at the EPA, Department of the Interior, and other agencies.
Although a federal judge last month ordered the Trump administration to reinstate thousands of government workers fired from half a dozen agencies based on the "lie" that their performance warranted termination, the right-wing U.S. Supreme Court subsequently sided with the White House, finding that plaintiffs in the case lacked the legal standing to sue.
Bill McKibben, co-founder of 350.org and founder of the elder-led Third Act, harkened back to the historic first Earth Day in 1970.
"Fifty-five years ago, a massive turnout on the first Earth Day forced a corrupt Republican administration to pass the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act, and create the EPA," he said on Monday, referring to the presidency of Richard Nixon. "Let's do it again!"
Aru Shiney-Ajay, executive director of the youth-led Sunrise Movement, highlighted the need for action now, noting that Trump "is giving oil and gas billionaires the green light to wreck our planet and put millions of lives at risk, all so they can pad their bottom line."
"Just three months into the Trump presidency, the damage has already been catastrophic," she added. "Trump is dismantling critical environmental safeguards, putting lives at risk, and leaving working people to suffer the devastating consequences. "This Earth Day, we stand united in defiance of their greed and fight for a future that prioritizes people and the planet over profits."
"No one person should have the power to impose taxes that have such vast global economic consequences," said a Liberty Justice Center lawyer, stressing that the Constitution empowers Congress to set tax rates.
Though U.S. President Donald Trump temporarily paused some of his "Liberation Day" tariffs for negotiations, a nonprofit firm and legal scholar still sued him and other officials on Monday on behalf of five import-reliant small businesses, asking the U.S. Court of International Trade to "declare the president's unprecedented power grab illegal."
Ilya Somin, a Cato Institute chair and George Mason University law professor, announced earlier this month on a legal blog hosted by the outlet Reason that he and the Liberty Justice Center—which has a record of representing libertarian positions in court battles—were "looking for appropriate plaintiffs to bring this type of case."
Monday's complaint was filed on behalf of FishUSA, Genova Pipe, MicroKits, Terry Precision Cycling, and VOS Selections. It argues that "the statute the president invokes—the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA)—does not authorize the president to unilaterally issue across-the-board worldwide tariffs."
"And the president's justification does not meet the standards set forth in the IEEPA," the complaint continues. "His claimed emergency is a figment of his own imagination: trade deficits, which have persisted for decades without causing economic harm, are not an emergency. Nor do these trade deficits constitute an 'unusual and extraordinary threat.' The president's attempt to use IEEPA to impose sweeping tariffs also runs afoul of the major questions doctrine."
"It's devastating. The government shouldn't be able to make sweeping economic decisions like this without any checks or accountability."
Somin said in a Monday statement that "if starting the biggest trade war since the Great Depression based on a law that doesn't even mention tariffs is not an unconstitutional usurpation of legislative power, I don't know what is."
Jeffrey Schwab, senior counsel at the Liberty Justice Center, stressed that "no one person should have the power to impose taxes that have such vast global economic consequences... The Constitution gives the power to set tax rates—including tariffs—to Congress, not the president."
Just hours after Trump's taxes on imports took effect last week, he paused what he is misleadingly calling "reciprocal" tariffs—except for those on China, which now faces a minimum rate of 145%. However, his 10% baseline rate is in effect. As experts fret over a possible recession, the business leaders involved in the new legal challenge shared how they are already struggling because of the evolving policy.
"Instead of focusing on growing our business, creating more jobs in our region, and developing new products that our customers want, we are spending countless hours trying to navigate the tariff chaos that the president is causing for us and all our vendors," said FishUSA president and co-founder Dan Pastore. "It takes years working with factories to design and build our products, and we cannot just shift that business to the U.S. without starting the whole process over again."
Andrew Reese, president of Genova Pipe in Salt Lake City, Utah, explained that "we operate seven manufacturing facilities across the United States and are committed to producing high-quality products in America. With limited domestic sources, we rely on imports to meet our production needs. The newly imposed tariffs are increasing our raw material costs and hindering our ability to compete in the export market."
David Levi of MicroKits in Charlottesville, Virginia, similarly said that "we build as much as we can in the U.S. We're proud of that, but these surprise tariffs are crushing us. It's devastating. The government shouldn't be able to make sweeping economic decisions like this without any checks or accountability."
Critics of Trump's tariff policy have blasted not only how sweeping his levies have been but also the chaotic speed. Terry Precision Cycling president Nik Holm noted that "even before this year's increases, we were already paying tariffs of up to 39.5%. With the additional 145% now imposed, we can't survive long enough to shift course."
"Twenty years ago, we made all our apparel in the U.S. but gradually moved production overseas to sustain our business," the Vermonter detailed. "Bringing manufacturing back would require a long-term strategy supported by consistent government policies, investment in factories with skilled sewers, and access to raw materials that are not subject to high tariffs. Many of our products rely on raw materials that are simply not produced in the U.S."
Victor Owen Schwartz, whose New York-based VOS Selections specializes in imported alcohol, said that "as a heavily regulated business, we cannot turn on a dime... We are required to post our prices with the State Liquor Authority a full month in advance, so we're locked into pricing decisions that don't account for these sudden, unpredictable tariffs. This is devastating to our ability to operate and support the farmers and producers we work with around the world."
Trump is also facing a suit filed earlier this month in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida. That case involves Emily Ley, whose company Simplified makes home management products, including planners, and relies on imports from China.
As The New York Times reported last week:
Her lawyers are from the New Civil Liberties Alliance, a libertarian-leaning nonprofit that counts among its financial backers Donors Trust, a group with ties to Leonard A. Leo, who is a co-chairman of the Federalist Society.
The Federalist Society is an influential legal group that advised Mr. Trump through the confirmation of justices he appointed to form the current conservative supermajority on the Supreme Court, though some in Mr. Trump's circle came to believe that its leaders were out of step with the president's political movement.
Another donor to New Civil Liberties Alliance is Charles Koch, the billionaire industrialist and Republican megadonor.
Additionally, as The Hill pointed out Monday, "four members of the Blackfeet Nation previously sued over Trump's Canada tariffs, including the Canadian aspects of his April 2 announcement."
Along with arguments over the legality of the duties, Trump's tariff announcement and pause sparked concerns about potential stock market manipulation and insider trading, triggering calls for investigation, including from members of Congress.