It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
A new era of anti-intellectualism — and what all senior Trump officials have in common
REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem gestures, as President Donald Trump delivers a speech, during the Laken Riley Act signing event, at the White House, in Washington, U.S., January 29, 2025.
The many controversial people appointed to the Trump administration, from Elon Muskto Robert F. Kennedy Jr., have at least one thing in common: They dislike and distrust experts.
While anti-intellectualism and populism are nothing new in American life, there has hardly been an administration as seemingly committed to these worldviews.
Take President Donald Trump’s decision to nominate Kennedy, a well-known vaccine skeptic, to lead the Department of Health and Human Services. Kennedy, whose Senate confirmation hearing is Jan. 29, 2025, epitomizes the new American political ethos of populismand anti-intellectualism, or the idea that people hold negative feelings toward not just scientific research but those who produce it.
For instance, Trump denigrated scientific experts on the campaign trail and in his first term in office. He called climate science a “hoax” and public health officials in his administration “idiots.”
Trump and Kennedy have cast doubt on vaccine safety and the medical scientific establishment. As far back as the Republican primary debates in 2016, Trump falsely asserted that childhood vaccines cause autism, in defiance of scientific consensus on the issue.
Kennedy’s long-term vaccine skepticism has also been well documented, though he himself denies it. More recently, he has been presenting himself as “pro-vaccine safety,” as one Republican senator put it, on the eve of Kennedy’s confirmation hearing.
A researcher works in the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases, part of the National Institutes of Health.
If confirmed, Kennedy has vowed to turn this anti-intellectual rhetoric into action. He wants to replace over 600 employees in the National Institutes of Health with his own hires. He has also suggested cutting entire departments.
During one interview, Kennedy said, “In some categories, there are entire departments, like the nutrition department at the FDA, that are – that have to go.” Populism across political spectrum
In lockstep with this anti-intellectual movement is a version of populism that people like RFK Jr. and Trump both espouse.
Populism is a worldview that pits average citizens against “the elites.” Who the elites are varies depending on the context, but in the contemporary political climate in the U.S., establishment politicians, scientists and organizations like pharmaceutical companies or the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are frequently portrayed as such.
For instance, right-wing populists often portray government health agencies as colluding with multinational pharmaceutical companies to impose excessive regulations, mandate medical interventions and restrict personal freedoms.
Left-wing populists expose how Big Pharma manipulates the health care system, using their immense wealth and political influence to put profits over people, deliberately keeping lifesaving medications overpriced and out of reach – all of which has been said by politicians like Bernie Sanders.
The goal of a populist is to portray these elites as the enemy of the people and to root out the perceived “corruption” of the elites.
This worldview doesn’t just appeal to the far right. Historically in the United States, populism has been more of a force on the political left. To this day, it is present on the left through Sanders and similar politicians who rail against wealth inequality and the interests of the “millionaire class.”
In short, the Trump administration’s populist and anti-intellectual worldview does not map cleanly onto the liberal-conservative ideological divide in the U.S. That is why Kennedy, a lifelong Democrat and nephew of a Democratic president, might become a Cabinet member for a Republican president.
The cross-ideological appeal of populism and anti-intellectualism also partly explains why praise for Trump’s selection of Kennedy to head the Department of Health and Human Services came from all corners of society. Republican senators Ron Johnson and Josh Hawley lauded the move, as did basketball star Rudy Gobert and Colorado’s Democratic governor, Jared Polis.
Why, then, is disdain for scientific experts appealing to so many Americans?
Much of the public supports this worldview because of perceived ineffectiveness and moral wrongs made by the elites. Factors such as the opioid crisis encouraged by predatory pharmaceutical companies, public confusion and dissatisfaction with changing health guidance in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the frequently prohibitive cost of health care and medicine have given some Americans reason to question their trust in science and medicine.
Populists have embraced popular and science-backed policies that align with an anti-elite stance. Kennedy, for example, supports decreasing the amount of ultra-processed foods in public school lunches and reducing toxic chemicals in the food supply and natural environment. These stances are backed by scientific evidence about how to improve public health. At the same time, they point to the harmful actions of a perceived corrupt elite – the profit-driven food industry.
It is, of course, reasonable to want to hold accountable both public officials for their policy decisions and scientists and pharmaceutical companies who engage in unethical behavior. Scientists should by no means be immune from scrutiny.
Examining, for example, what public health experts got wrong during the COVID-19 pandemic would be tremendously helpful from the standpoint of preparing for future public health crises, but also from the standpoint of rebuilding public trust in science, experts and institutions.
However, the Trump administration does not appear to be interested in pursuing good faith assessments. And Trump’s victory means he gets to implement his vision and appoint people he wants to carry it out. But words have consequences, and we have seen the impact of anti-vaccine rhetoric during the COVID-19 pandemic, where “red” counties and states had significantly lower vaccine intent and uptake compared with the “blue” counterparts.
Therefore, despite sounding appealing, Kennedy’s signature slogan, “Make America Healthy Again,” could – in discouraging policies and behaviors that have been proven effective against diseases and their crippling or deadly outcomes – bring about a true public health crisis.
In summertime, cows wait under a canopy to be milked at Mark McAfee’s farm in Fresno, California. From his Cessna 210 Centurion propeller plane, the 63-year-old can view grazing lands of the dairy company he runs that produces products such as unpasteurized milk and cheese for almost 2,000 stores.
Federal regulators say it’s risky business. Samples of raw milk can contain bird flu virus and other pathogens linked to kidney disease, miscarriages, and death.
McAfee, founder and CEO of the Raw Farm, who also leads the Raw Milk Institute, says he plans to soon be in a position to change that message.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the anti-vaccine activist President Donald Trump has tapped to run the Department of Health and Human Services, recruited McAfee to apply for a job as the FDA’s raw milk standards and policy adviser, McAfee said. McAfee has already written draft proposals for possible federal certification of raw dairy farms, he said.
Virologists are alarmed. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends against unpasteurized dairy that hasn’t been heated to kill pathogens such as bird flu. Interstate raw milk sales for human consumption are banned by the FDA. A Trump administration that weakens the ban or extols raw milk, the scientists say, could lead to more foodborne illness. It could also, they say, raise the risk of the highly pathogenic H5N1 bird flu virus evolving to spread more efficiently, including between people, possibly fueling a pandemic.
“If the FDA says raw milk is now legal and the CDC comes through and says it advises drinking raw milk, that’s a recipe for mass infection,” said Angela Rasmussen, a virologist and co-editor-in-chief of the medical journal Vaccine and an adjunct professor at Stony Brook University in New York.
The raw milk controversy reflects the broader tensions President Donald Trump will confront when pursuing his second-administration agenda of rolling back regulations and injecting more consumer choice into health care.
Many policies Kennedy has said he wants to revisit — from the fluoridation of tap water to nutrition guidance to childhood vaccine requirements — are backed by scientific research and were established to protect public health. Some physician groups and Democrats are gearing up to fight initiatives they say would put people at risk. Raw milk has gained a following among anti-regulatory conservatives who are part of a burgeoning health freedom movement.
“The health freedom movement was adopted by the tea party, and conspiracy websites gave it momentum,” said Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, who has studied the history of the anti-vaccine movement.
Once-fringe ideas are edging into the mainstream. Vaccine hesitancy is growing.
Arkansas, Utah, and Kentucky are weighing legislation that would relax or end requirements for fluoride in public water. And 30 states now allow for the sale of raw milk in some form within their borders.
While only an estimated 3% of the U.S. population consumes raw milk or cheese, efforts to try to restrict its sales have riled Republicans and provided grist for conservative podcasts.
Many conservatives denounced last year’s execution of a search warrant when Pennsylvania agriculture officials and state troopers arrived at an organic farm tucked off a two-lane road on Jan. 4, 2024. State inspectors were investigating cases of two children sickened by E. coli bacteria and sales of raw dairy from the operation owned by Amish farmer Amos Miller, according to a complaint filed by the state’s agricultural department.
Bundled in flannel shirts and winter jackets, the inspectors put orange stickers on products detaining them from sale, and they left toting product samples in large blue-and-white coolers, online videos show. The 2024 complaint against Miller alleged that he and his wife sold dairy products in violation of state law.
The farm was well known to regulators. They say in the complaint that a Florida consumer died after being sickened in 2014 with listeria bacteria found in raw dairy from Miller’s farm. The FDA said a raw milk sample from the farm indicates it was the “likely source” of the infection, based on the complaint.
Neither Miller’s farm nor his lawyer returned calls seeking comment.
The Millers’ attorney filed a preliminary objection that said “shutting down Defendants would cause inequitable harm, exceed the authority of the agency, constitute an excessive fine as well as disparate, discriminatory punishment, and contravene every essential Constitutional protection and powers reserved to the people of Pennsylvania.”
Regulators in Pennsylvania said in a press release they must protect the public, and especially children, from harm. “We cannot ignore the illnesses and further potential harm posed by distribution of these unregulated products,” the Pennsylvania agricultural department and attorney general said in a joint statement.
Unpasteurized dairy products are responsible for almost all the estimated 761 illnesses and 22 hospitalizations in the U.S. that occur annually because of dairy-related illness, according to a study published in the June 2017 issue of Emerging Infectious Diseases.
But conservatives say raiding an Amish farm is government overreach. They’re “harassing him and trying to make an example of him. Our government is really out of control,” Pennsylvania Republican Sen. Doug Mastriano said in a video he posted to Facebook.
Videos show protesters at a February 2024 hearing on Miller’s case included Amish men dressed in black with straw hats and locals waving homemade signs with slogans such as “FDA Go Away.” A court in March issued a preliminary injunction that barred Miller from marketing and selling raw dairy products within the commonwealth pending appeal, but the order did not preclude sales of raw milk to customers out of state. The case is ongoing.
With Kennedy, the raw milk debate is poised to go national. Kennedy wrote on X in October that the “FDA’s war on public health is about to end.” In the post, he pointed to the agency’s “aggressive suppression” of raw milk, as one example.
McAfee is ready. He wants to see a national raw milk ordinance, similar to one that exists for pasteurized milk, that would set minimal national standards. Farmers could attain certification through training, continuing education, and on-site pathogen testing, with one standard for farms that sell to consumers and another for retail sales.
The Trump administration didn’t return emails seeking comment.
McAfee has detailed the system he developed to ensure his raw dairy products are safe. He confirmed the process for KFF Health News: cows with yellow-tagged ears graze on grass pastures and are cleansed in washing pens before milking. The raw dairy is held back from consumer sale until it’s been tested and found clear of pathogens.
His raw dairy products, such as cheese and milk, are sold by a variety of stores, including health, organic, and natural grocery chains, according to the company website, as well as raw dairy pet products, which are not for human consumption.
He said he doesn’t believe the raw milk he sells could contain or transmit viable bird flu virus. He also said he doesn’t believe regulators’ warnings about raw milk and the virus.
“The pharmaceutical industry is trying to create a new pandemic from bird flu to get their stock back up,” said McAfee, who says he counts Kennedy as a customer. His view is not shared by leading virologists.
In December, the state of California secured a voluntary recall of all his company’s raw milk and cream products due to possible bird flu contamination.
Five indoor cats in the same household died or were euthanized in December after drinking raw milk from McAfee’s farm, and tests on four of the animals found they were infected with bird flu, according to the Los Angeles County Department of Health.
In an unrelated case, Joseph Journell, 56, said three of his four indoor cats drank McAfee’s raw milk. Two fell sick and died, he said. His third cat, a large tabby rescue named Big Boy, temporarily lost the use of his hind legs and had to use a specialized wheelchair device, he said. Urine samples from Big Boy were positive for bird flu, according to a copy of the results from Cornell University and the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
McAfee dismissed connections between the cats’ illnesses and his products, saying any potential bird flu virus would no longer be viable by the time his raw milk gets to stores. He also said he believes that any sick cats got bird flu from recalled pet food.
“Raw milk is good for you, just not if it has bird flu in it,” he said. “I do believe in its healing powers.”
KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.
This article first appeared on KFF Health News and is republished here under a Creative Commons license
.
Trump action stalls studies of deadly bird flu as outbreak escalates across the U.S.
The Trump administration has intervened in the release of important studies on the bird flu, as an outbreak escalates across the United States.
One of the studies would reveal whether veterinarians who treat cattle have been unknowingly infected by the bird flu virus. Another report documents cases in which people carrying the virus might have infected their pet cats.
The studies were slated to appear in the official journal of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. The distinguished journal has been published without interruption since 1952.
Its scientific reports have been swept up in an “immediate pause” on communications by federal health agencies ordered by Dorothy Fink, the acting secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services. Fink’s memo covers “any document intended for publication,” she wrote, “until it has been reviewed and approved by a presidential appointee.” It was sent on President Donald Trump’s first full day in office.
That’s concerning, former CDC officials said, because a firewall has long existed between the agency’s scientific reports and political appointees.
“MMWR is the voice of science,” said Tom Frieden, a former CDC director and the CEO of the nonprofit organization Resolve to Save Lives.
“This idea that science cannot continue until there’s a political lens over it is unprecedented,” said Anne Schuchat, a former principal deputy director at the CDC. “I hope it’s going to be very short-lived, but if it’s not short-lived, it’s censorship.”
White House officials meddled with scientific studies on covid-19 during the first Trump administration, according to interviews and emails collected in a 2022 report from congressional investigators. Still, the MMWR came out as scheduled.
“What’s happening now is quite different than what we experienced in covid, because there wasn’t a stop in the MMWR and other scientific manuscripts,” Schuchat said.
Neither the White House nor HHS officials responded to requests for comment. CDC spokesperson Melissa Dibble said, “This is a short pause to allow the new team to set up a process for review and prioritization.”
News of the interruption hit suddenly last week, just as Fred Gingrich, executive director of the American Association of Bovine Practitioners, a group for veterinarians specializing in cattle medicine, was preparing to hold a webinar with members. He planned to disclose the results of a study he helped lead, slated for publication in the MMWR later that week. Back in September, about 150 members had answered questions and donated blood for the study. Researchers at the CDC analyzed the samples for antibodies against the bird flu virus, to learn whether the veterinarians had been unknowingly infected earlier last year.
Although it would be too late to treat prior cases, the study promised to help scientists understand how the virus spreads from cows to people, what symptoms it causes, and how to prevent infection. “Our members were very excited to hear the results,” Gingrich said.
Like farmworkers, livestock veterinarians are at risk of bird flu infections. The study results could help protect them. And having fewer infections would lessen the chance of the H5N1 bird flu virus evolving within a person to spread efficiently between people — the gateway to a bird flu pandemic.
At least 67 people have tested positive for the bird flu in the U.S., with the majority getting the virus from cows or poultry. But studies and reporting suggest many cases have gone undetected, because testing has been patchy.
Just before the webinar, Gingrich said, the CDC informed him that because of an HHS order, the agency was unable to publish the report last week or communicate its findings. “We had to cancel,” he said.
Another bird flu study slated to be published in the MMWR last week concerns the possibility that people working in Michigan’s dairy industry infected their pet cats. These cases were partly revealed last year in emails obtained by KFF Health News. In one email from July 22, an epidemiologist pushed to publish the group’s investigation to “inform others about the potential for indirect transmission to companion animals.”
Jennifer Morse, medical director at the Mid-Michigan District Health Department and a scientist on the pending study, said she got a note from a colleague last week saying that “there are delays in our publication — outside of our control.”
A person close to the CDC, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of concerns about reprisal, expected the MMWR to be on hold at least until Feb. 6. The journal typically posts on Thursdays, and the HHS memo says the pause will last through Feb. 1.
“It’s startling,” Frieden said. He added that it would become dangerous if the reports aren’t restored. “It would be the equivalent of finding out that your local fire department has been told not to sound any fire alarms,” he said.
In addition to publishing studies, the MMWR keeps the country updated on outbreaks, poisonings, and maternal mortality, and provides surveillance data on cancer, heart disease, HIV, and other maladies. Delaying or manipulating the reports could harm Americans by stunting the ability of the U.S. government to detect and curb health threats, Frieden said.
The freeze is also a reminder of how the first Trump administration interfered with the CDC’s reports on covid, revealed in emails detailed in 2022 by congressional investigators with the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis. That investigation found that political appointees at HHS altered or delayed the release of five reports and attempted to control several others in 2020.
In one instance, Paul Alexander, then a scientific adviser to HHS, criticized a July 2020 report on a coronavirus outbreak at a Georgia summer camp in an email to MMWR editors, which was disclosed in the congressional investigation. “It just sends the wrong message as written and actually reads as if to send a message of NOT to re-open,” he wrote. Although the report’s data remained the same, the CDC removed remarks on the implications of the findings for schools.
Later that year, Alexander sent an email to then-HHS spokesperson Michael Caputo citing this and another example of his sway over the reports: “Small victory but a victory nonetheless and yippee!!!”
Schuchat, who was at the CDC at the time, said she had never experienced such attempts to spin or influence the agency’s scientific reports in more than three decades with the agency. She hopes it won’t happen again. “The MMWR cannot become a political instrument,” she said.
Gingrich remains hopeful that the veterinary study will come out soon. “We’re an apolitical organization,” he said. “Maintaining open lines of communication and continuing research with our federal partners is critical as we fight this outbreak.”KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.
Subscribe to KFF Health News' free Morning Briefing.
This article first appeared on KFF Health News and is republished here under a Creative Commons license
Chemtrail conspiracy theorists sway Republicans to support ban on geoengineering
Screenshot via ACTV/azleg.gov Jodi Brackett speaks to the House Regulatory Oversight Committee on Jan. 28, 2025, alongside pictures of contrails she believes are evidence of “chemtrails” in Arizona. Jerod Macdonald-Evoy, Arizona MirrorJanuary 29, 2025
Conspiracy theorists came out in force Tuesday afternoon to support a Republican bill that aims to ban “geoengineering,” citing the long debunked “chemtrails” conspiracy theory as evidence that nefarious actors are already turning Arizona’s skies into a laboratory and treating its unsuspecting residents as guinea pigs.
“This started when I noticed lines in the sky that did not look normal,” Jodi Brackett told the House Regulatory Oversight Committee.
As Brackett stood at the podium in the legislative hearing room, a man held a collage of photos of contrails taken in Arizona. Brackett said she brought the issue to freshman GOP legislator Lisa Fink’s attention.
Claims that Arizona has seen an increase in contrails left behind by airliners was a major theme among many of the speakers who came to support the bill.
“Whether you know it or not, your body is part of their laboratory,” Crystal Hansen told the committee claiming that the vapor trails left behind by airliners are “not condensation,” citing a website that has posted altered videos and photos as “evidence” of the conspiracy.
The geography of the Phoenix metropolitan area, where many of those who spoke in favor of Fink’s House Bill 2056 said they reside, plays a role in those long-hanging contrails that many see as “proof” of a larger conspiracy. The region sits basically in a bowl surrounded by mountains, with an inversion above that bowl that traps the air below it. That results in high ozone and other pollutant levels — as well as contrails that linger in the air longer than they do in most other places.
“We, the people, are extremely concerned with all the trails in our skies,” Melissa Price said to the committee, adding that she wants lawmakers to send the bill to the ballot for voters to decide on.
But Price did concede that “even with all the weather modification” she claimed was happening, the state is “not seeing any rain” and remains facing the effects of a historic drought.
Fink’s bill would ban geoengineering in Arizona. In simple terms, geoengineering is the practice of intentionally attempting to modify the atmosphere. In recent years, it has been explored as a possible way to combat the increasingly extreme effects of climate change.
The field is largely theoretical with only small projects taking place, some of which have faced backlash from local communities. Geoengineering has recently become the focus of groups that have previously pushed unfounded conspiracy theories about vaccines.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration currently monitors the planet’s atmosphere for signs of geoengineering programs by other nations or by small venture capitalist backed groups.
The emerging field has caused fierce debate among scientists, some of whom see it as a way to combat mankind’s impact on the planet, while others see it as another way to create climate chaos.
Many refer to the practice as climate intervention, and some scientists have been studying it as a means of combating climate change. These efforts have included studying things like solar radiation modification, a process that aims to decrease surface temperatures by reflecting sunlight away from the planet.
Last year, Tennessee lawmakers passed a law that banned geoengineering, with lawmakers during debate alluding to the debunked “chemtrails” conspiracy theory. Online conspiracy theorists have long pointed to the condensation left behind by airliners as being part of a larger conspiracy to modify the weather or poison the populace, though no evidence of such programs exist and the contrails planes sometimes leave behind are little more than water vapor that has frozen into ice crystals.
Other speakers also saw the bill as a way to combat other bogus geoengineering conspiracy theories that have long had a place in the fringes of conspiracy culture.
Leslie Forster told the committee that the bill would help protect Arizonans from the High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program, also known as HAARP, which studies the planet’s upper atmosphere. The research project has been accused of causing a litany of weather-related events, despite its inability to impact the weather.
Speakers also confused sulfur iodide with sodium iodide, a chemical commonly used in cloud seeding. Cloud seeding eventually became a focus of the committee, as Fareed Bailey, a lobbyist representing the Salt River Project, said the utility was concerned about the bill’s ban on it.
Fink’s HB2056 bill would ban a litany of geoengineering practices, including cloud seeding, deploying aerosol particles in the stratosphere, releasing chaff into the atmosphere, solar radiation modification or any other attempts to modify the weather. Her legislation is similar to several others filed in other states this year.
Bailey said SRP has been studying cloud seeding as a possible way to help with the state’s water woes, but all research has been theoretical in computer models. SRP has not flown any aircraft to conduct cloud seeding tests, Bailey said.
“We do not want to close the door to this promising technology,” he said, adding that silver iodide, the main chemical used in cloud seeding, has been found to be largely non-toxic. Bailey’s claim was met with boos and jeers from many in the audience.
The bill initially was written to bar any government agency, research project, university, “public or private organization” or “military force” from engaging in geoengineering, with violators facing a $500,000 fine and a felony, with up to three years of prison; the the director of the Department of Water Resources would have been tasked with investigating any claim of geoengineering.
But the GOP-led committee amended the proposal to remove those penalties and the responsibility of the head of the water agency, instead allow citizens to bring any geoengineering claims to court, where they’d be awarded injunctive relief if they proved their case. The amendment also adds a ban on universities funding any research into solar radiation modification.
One attendee felt the amendment lacked “teeth” and suggested that the punishment for geoengineering be treason — which is punishable by death — eliciting cheers from the attendees.
Others asked members of the committee to “get on Instagram” to see the evidence of geoengineering that is allegedly happening out of Sky Harbor International Airport. Many cited increased issues with asthma as proof of the geoengineering plot.
With the increase in population and heat, the Phoenix metro area has seen a marked increase in the number of high pollution days, which leads to more adverse reactions to those with asthma and other breathing complications.
Some in attendance also appeared to believe in other conspiracy theories, sporting t-shirts supporting election reforms based on election fraud falsities and sharing with the committee their belief that a large number of children are being sex trafficked, a core component of the QAnon conspiracy theory. Local election conspiracy theorist Gail Golec also came out to support the bill Tuesday afternoon.
The formal GOP platform makes no mention of climate change, greenhouse gases, the environment, pollution, clean air or clean water. It makes a brief mention of conservation in a section on restoring “American Beauty.” And although there is broad scientific consensus that human activity is causing climate change, and that its effects are becoming more extreme, Arizona Republicans largely reject that it is happening at all.
Last year, state Senate Republicans backed a bill to bar state government and universities from spending money to reduce greenhouse gases or research climate change, deeming them both “Marxist” ideas that are “anti-God.”
Democratic committee members voiced concern that they did not hear from any experts, such as physicians or scientists. When the minority lawmakers said they didn’t see evidence of what the bill’s proponents were saying, many in attendance booed, leading Republican Committee Chair Joseph Chaplik to threaten bringing in security if outbursts continued.
Rep. Rachel Keshel, R-Tucson, who is married to conspiracy theorist Seth Keshel, said she has seen “adequate research” that the alleged chemicals involved in the fictional geoengineering leads to increased Azlhiemers.
And Chaplik said his inability to see individual airplanes flying more than 20,000 feet above Phoenix that are leaving contrails in the sky was concerning enough to support changing Arizona law to ban geoengineering.
“You’re seeing these in the sky at nighttime or early morning, you’re really not seeing the planes fully flying around the air,” he said, adding that he has been talking with Fink about the issue for “a few months.”
The bill passed out of the committee along party lines, with Republicans voting in favor and Democrats opposing. The bill heads next to the full House of Representatives for consideration. Arizona Mirror is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arizona Mirror maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jim Small for questions: info@azmirror.com
Republican AGs pressure Costco to drop 'unlawful' diversity policies — citing Trump
DEI policies are often aimed at removing bias and promoting fairness in areas like employment and education.
A group of Republican attorneys general — including Kentucky’s Russell Coleman — is pressuring Costco “to end all unlawful discrimination imposed” by the retailer’s diversity, equity and inclusion policies.
The 19 attorneys general sent a letter to Costco CEO Ron Vachris this week citing Republican President Donald Trump’s executive order that encouraged “all agencies to enforce our longstanding civil-rights laws and to combat illegal private-sector DEI preferences, mandates, policies, programs, and activities.”
Writing that Costco “should treat every person equally and based on their merit, rather than based on divisive and discriminatory DEI practices,” the attorneys general asked Vachris to either repeal Costco’s DEI policies or explain why the company is keeping them in place within 30 days.
Costco shareholders recently rejected a proposal from a conservative think tank to examine risks posed by its DEI policies. Nearly 98% of shareholders voted against the measure. Costco’s board had recommended rejection of the proposal.
At the Jan. 24 shareholders meeting, Costco board chair Tony E Curtis said the company’s commitment to inclusion “does not and has never included quotas or systematic preferences, nor does it mean compromising merit. The demands of our business and our steadfast commitment to serve our members mean that we cannot afford to do anything but hire and promote the most qualified individuals.”
Costco has not publicly responded to the letter. A spokesperson for the company did not immediately respond to a request for comment Wednesday.
Kentucky AG Coleman said in a statement, “Costco has a motto to ‘Do the right thing,’ but their DEI business practices are all wrong. By pushing a DEI agenda, Costco is out-of-step with the Kentuckians who just want affordable prices.”
Costco has four stores in Kentucky, according to its website.
Nationwide, some companies are rethinking their commitment to DEI, while others are standing by their diversity practices. Brands like Walmart and Meta have rolled back DEI policies while tech giants Microsoft and Apple reaffirmed their policies within the last week. Last year, Kentucky-based whiskey maker Brown-Forman suspended its DEI policies. DEI policies are often aimed at removing bias and promoting fairness in areas like employment and education.
Former Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron crusaded with other Republican attorneys general to curb DEI in the private sector, including issuing a letter to Fortune 100 CEOs calling on them to use “race-neutral principles in your employment and contracting practices” following the U.S. Supreme Court’s reversal of affirmative action in higher education.
After losing a race for Kentucky governor in 2023, Cameron became CEO of the 1792 Exchange, a group that aims to “steer public companies back to neutral on divisive, ideological issues.”
Kentucky Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear in an appearance at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, recently defended private sector decisions to maintain DEI policies. If companies think encouraging a diverse workforce helps them, Beshear said, “the state that you’re working with should support you.” Read the letter below FINAL Costco Letter (1)
Kentucky Lantern is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Kentucky Lantern maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jamie Lucke for questions: info@kentuckylantern.com.
Lawmakers challenge OK superintendent's Bible initiatives after test scores tank
OKLAHOMA CITY — As national testing again ranks Oklahoma in the bottom 10 for academic results, lawmakers on Wednesday debated whether the state is headed in the right direction or is pursuing policies that distract from better outcomes.
The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) released 2024 reading and math results from every state Wednesday. The NAEP tests showed Oklahoma was among the lowest-performing states in the country, had no significant progress since 2022 and still has not reached pre-pandemic performance.
The same day as the NAEP release, lawmakers at the state Capitol heard a budget presentation from the head of Oklahoma’s public education system, Superintendent Ryan Walters, who said his administration is making a difference for schools and students by funding teacher recruitment efforts, literacy programs and high-dosage tutoring.
But, House Democrats said Walters has spent too much time focusing on divisive rhetoric rather than school needs.
“We saw some rosy pronouncements. We saw a lot of hand waving about educational performance improvements,” Rep. Andy Fugate, D-Oklahoma City, said after the budget hearing. “The sad reality is year-over-year scores did not improve, and we saw that confirmed in the release this week of the NAEP scores.”
A spokesperson for Walters did not return a request for comment on Oklahoma’s NAEP results. Walters didn’t discuss it either during his budget hearing even when a Republican lawmaker asked how Oklahoma compares to other states in education.
“We are still not where we need to be in math, reading and ACT (scores),” Walters said during the hearing in the House chamber. “I believe what we’ve got to continue to do is continue to aggressively help the schools in the bottom 5% (of the state).”
Improving scores from the lowest-performing students corresponded with an overall upward swing in national test results through the mid-1990s and early 2000s, officials from the National Center for Education Statistics said in a NAEP town hall Wednesday. The 2024 results, though, show the gap is widening between the top and bottom performers.
Walters also touted a new rule that would penalize a school district if more than half of its students score below a basic performance level in reading and math. His administration proposed the rule, and Gov. Kevin Stitt signed it into law last year.
“We’ve got to continue to move forward with reforms that are focused on student outcomes,” Walters told lawmakers.
He asked for an extra $1 million to support a new program mentoring early career teachers and another $4 million to meet demand for teacher maternity leave.
Rep. Jacob Rosecrants, D-Norman, noted multiple versions of the Bible are available for free online, and Rep. Michelle McCane, D-Tulsa, questioned whether $3 million could be better spent on literacy or early childhood programs.
Rep. Denise Crosswhite Hader, R-Piedmont, asked why the state couldn’t seek out donated Bibles rather than buying them with taxpayer funds. Rep. Cynthia Roe, R-Lindsay, said she worried whether inviting the Bible into classrooms might open a door to the Quran, Wicca, atheists and “other religions outside of Christianity.”
Walters said the Bible should be physically present in classrooms, along with the U.S. Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, to help contextualize American history.
“Walters accusing immigrants of being the one to overburden our system is exactly the opposite of the truth,” Rep. Arturo Alonso-Sandoval, D-Oklahoma City, said. “It is him that’s overburdening our schools by bringing these political issues into the classroom.”
Some of Walters’ fellow Republicans, though, praised the state superintendent’s work on improving academic results. The head of the House subcommittee on education funding, Rep. Chad Caldwell, R-Enid, thanked Walters during Wednesday’s budget hearing for his work “to move our state forward.”
The subcommittee’s vice chair, Rep. Toni Hasenbeck, R-Elgin, even joined Walters’ news release Wednesday to compliment his budget request.
“We appreciate Superintendent Walters’ dedication to our students and proven programs like high-dosage tutoring,” Hasenbeck said in her statement. “He has proven that he is willing to go to bat, time and time again, for Oklahoma’s teachers, parents, students and school safety.”
Oklahoma ranks toward the bottom in reading, math scores
Underscoring the day’s proceedings is yet another bottom-10 ranking for Oklahoma education. NAEP assessments, also known as the Nation’s Report Card, found Oklahoma showed no significant improvement since the previous round of national testing in 2022.
NAEP has been testing fourth and eighth graders across the country since 1992.
In NAEP’s 2024 results, Oklahoma ranked 47th in fourth-grade reading and 48th in eighth-grade reading. Oklahoma fourth graders ranked 44th and its eighth graders 45th for math proficiency.
Christy Hovanetz, a senior policy fellow at the Foundation for Excellence in Education, speaks at a panel about school accountability during the foundation’s national summit at the Omni Hotel in Oklahoma City on Nov. 14. (Photo by Nuria Martinez-Keel/Oklahoma Voice)
The state’s reading scores indicate students are about a full grade level behind where fourth and eighth graders were before the COVID-19 pandemic, said Christy Hovanetz, a school accountability expert at the education-focused think tank ExcelinEd.
Oklahoma’s decision this year to reduce its own expectations for student performance on state-administered tests won’t help, she said. The state quietly lowered the bar in 2024 for students to reach a proficient score on its yearly exams for reading and math.
States that shot up the NAEP rankings in recent years, like Mississippi, have done so by maintaining high expectations for students and schools, Hovanetz said.
She said Oklahoma also must ensure it has a qualified teacher workforce that is trained in the science of reading. That’s an issue Walters has put money behind to improve.
“I just don’t want to see us saying this is all we should be expecting of our kids, knowing that 10 years ago we were getting a lot more from them,” Hovanetz said. “We know what works. We know how to do it. It’s just not easy, but it’s time to start implementing some of those tougher reforms again.”
Reporter Emma Murphy contributed to this report.
Oklahoma Voice is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Oklahoma Voice maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Janelle Stecklein for questions: info@oklahomavoice.com.
Yes, Trump can rename the Gulf of Mexico — here's how Photo by Adolfo Félix on Unsplash
Among the blizzard of executive orders issued by Donald Trump on his first day back in the Oval Office was one titled Restoring Names that Honor American Greatness. It unilaterally renamed “the area formerly known as the Gulf of Mexico” as the “Gulf of America”.
The order was justified by this maritime space having long been an “integral asset” to the United States, with its “bountiful geology” yielding around 14% of US crude oil production, “vibrant American fisheries”, and it being “a favourite destination of American tourism”.
The gulf was also characterised as “an indelible part of America” that would continue to play “a pivotal role in shaping America’s future and the global economy”.
But while it’s undoubtedly important to the US, this part of the Atlantic Ocean washes against other countries, too. So, can the president really rename it? Sure! At least as far as the US is concerned, anyway.
Naming rights
The relevant federal body is the Board on Geographic Names (BGN), established in 1890 with the mission to maintain uniform geographic name usage.
Specifically, Trump’s executive order instructs the secretary of the interior to take “all appropriate actions” to change the name to the Gulf of America, ensure all federal references reflect the renaming, and update the Geographic Names Information System.
The BGN has usually been reluctant to change generally accepted geographic names. However, the executive order clearly signals that the composition of the board may change in order to ensure the proposed renaming happens.
But whatever the US decides to call the gulf, it doesn’t mean other countries will pay any heed. Indeed, Mexico’s President Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo promptly suggested the US might itself be renamed Mexican America.
She was referring to a 17th-century map showing that name for much of the area that now makes up the US, and asserted Mexico and the rest of the world would continue to use the name Gulf of Mexico.
But the study is explicit that these limits “have no political significance whatsoever” and are “solely for the convenience” of hydrographic offices preparing information for mariners.
It has not been published since 1953 – precisely because of a dispute over the geographic name of the body of water between Japan and Korea. Japan prefers to call it the Sea of Japan (as most know it) but South Korea has long campaigned for it to be named the East Sea or East Sea/Sea of Japan.
A revised edition of the IHO volume was submitted to member states in 2002 but dealt with the issue by omitting coverage of the East Sea/Sea of Japan. It remains a working document only.
The issue is taken so seriously by South Korea that an ambassador-level position was created to deal with it, and a Society for the East Sea was established 30 years ago.
That this deadlock has prevented a new edition of an IHO publication for more than 70 years shows not only the difficulty of changing generally well-recognised geographic names, but also the importance countries place on these matters. Dangerous ground
Place names – known as toponyms – are sensitive because they show that any country changing a name has the right to do so, which implies sovereignty and possession. Names therefore carry historical and emotional significance and are readily politicised.
This is particularly true where past conflicts with unresolved legacies and current geopolitical rivalries are in play. For example, the Sea of Japan/East Sea dispute goes back to Japan’s 1905 annexation of Korea and subsequent 40-year colonial rule.
Similarly, the disputed sovereignty of the Falkland Islands/Las Malvinas, over which Britain and Argentina went to war in 1982, remains a perennial source of diplomatic dispute.
But the South China Sea case is hard to beat. All or parts of this body of water are simultaneously referred to as the South Sea (Nan Hai) by China, the West Philippines Sea by the Philippines, the North Natuna Sea by Indonesia, and (another) East Sea (Biển Đông) by Vietnam.
To further complicate things in that same area, what in English are generally known as the Spratly Islands are known in Chinese as the Nánshā Qúndǎo, the Kepulauan Spratly in Malay, and in Vietnamese as the Trường Sa.
All the individual islands, rocks and cays in this highly disputed zone also carry names, individually or collectively, in multiple languages. Even the names of entirely and permanently submerged features have proved controversial. Early British Admiralty cartographers were arguably most accurate in naming the area simply “Dangerous Ground”.
Political gulfs
Globally, there have been moves to replace colonial references with original indigenous names, something very familiar to Australians and New Zealanders.
In the same executive order renaming the Gulf of Mexico, Trump also changed the name of the highest peak in North America (in Alaska) from Denali back to Mount McKinley (named after the 25th president, William McKinley, in 1917).
This simultaneously attacked the legacy of former president Barack Obama, who renamed the peak Denali in 2015, and spoke to Trump’s war on perceived “woke” politics.
That said, the change was tempered by the fact the national park area surrounding the mountain will retain the name Denali National Park and Preserve.
Ultimately, Trump can rebadge the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America, but only from a strictly US perspective. It is unlikely to matter much to the rest of the world, save for those wishing to curry favour with the new administration.
Most of the world will likely continue to refer to the Gulf of Mexico. And the Gulf of America may yet be consigned to history in four years’ time. Clive Schofield, Professor, Australian National Centre for Ocean Resources and Security (ANCORS), University of Wollongong
Earlier this week, President Donald Trump's administration offered millions of federal workers seven months of pay in advance if they quit their jobs. Days later, a mid-air collision between a regional jet and a military helicopter killed dozens outside the Washington D.C. National Airport. One senator thinks the two events may be related.
Politico reported Thursday evening that the deadly Wednesday night crash above the Potomac River that killed 60 American Airlines passengers and four crew members along with three U.S. Army pilots in a Black Hawk helicopter has lawmakers and aviation officials demanding answers. During a Thursday press conference, officials with the National Transportation Safety Board promised to fully investigate the crash to determine what caused the fatal error, though they cautioned it could take a year or more before their investigation is complete.
The New York Times reported earlier Thursday that the air traffic controller who was on duty at the time of the crash was performing duties normally done by two controllers, and that staffing levels were "not normal" on Wednesday night. And Politico reported that airports across the country have had a critical shortage of air traffic controllers for years, mostly due to a lack of funding appropriated by Congress for hiring and training new airport control tower workers. According to the Times, many air traffic controllers work six days a week for as much as 10 hours per day.
But Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) — an Iraq War veteran who used to pilot a Black Hawk helicopter — suggested that morale among federal employees being lower than usual due to the Trump administration's recent buyout offer letter could have also been a contributing factor. She also blasted Trump for his assertion that diversity, equity and inclusion-based hiring practices under former Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden were to blame.
"Obviously, you’re relying on air traffic control," Duckworth said. She noted that both Federal Aviation Administration officials and air traffic controllers were among those who received emails from the Office of Personnel Management asking them to consider leaving their jobs.
"[Letters were sent to] some air traffic controllers that are responsible for airspace in the Northeast region,” she continued, “Basically trying to scare them into quitting at a time when we have a shortage of air traffic controllers. So I don’t think the Trump administration is in a strong position right now to start blaming others.”
“This should’ve never happened, and we wanna understand what happened,” said Senate Commerce Committee member Ted Budd (R-N.C.)
New Trump memo claims DEI, Obama and Biden 'decisions' linked to fatal aviation disaster
U.S. President Donald Trump signs executive orders in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, U.S., January 30, 2025. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz
President Donald Trump continued his attacks on his Democratic predecessors and diversity programs late Thursday afternoon, signing a presidential memo that linked “decisions” made by Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden’s administrations, and DEI initiatives, to Wednesday’s mid-air collision between an Army helicopter and a regional commercial airplane. The President’s memo offers no practical evidence they played a role. Sixty-seven people are believed to have died, and no one is believed to have survived.
Trump’s memo orders “a systematic assessment of any deterioration in hiring standards and aviation safety standards and protocols during the Biden Administration.”
Axios reports that the “order shows Trump is doubling down on his claim, without evidence, that DEI policies were a factor in the crash. His memo explicitly mentions ‘diversity equity and inclusion,’ and reflects how anti-DEI efforts are a centerpiece of his second administration’s policy.”
Critics, including U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT), say the incident took place on Trump’s watch, after he allowed the head of the FAA to reportedly resign under pressure, and gutted a critical aviation safety group Trump also just fired the head of the TSA, and placed a hiring freeze on nearly all government positions.
One Federal Aviation Administration traffic controller was assigned to both helicopters and planes when the deadly collision occurred, the FAA stated in a report.
“The report, reviewed by The New York Times, said that one controller was communicating with both helicopters and planes. Those jobs are typically assigned to two people, not one,” The Times reported. “Staffing at the air traffic control tower at Ronald Reagan National Airport was ‘not normal for the time of day and volume of traffic,’ according to an internal preliminary Federal Aviation Administration safety report about the collision that was reviewed by The New York Times.”
Staffing at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport “has been understaffed for years,” and “nearly a third below targeted staff levels,” The Times reports, citing “years of employee turnover and tight budgets.”
Calling the deadly collision a “shocking event” Trump’s memo says it “follows problematic and likely illegal decisions during the Obama and Biden Administrations that minimized merit and competence in the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).”
A CNN fact check found that a congressional law from 1973 “aimed to increase federal hiring of qualified people with disabilities.”
“The Obama Administration implemented a biographical questionnaire at the FAA to shift the hiring focus away from objective aptitude,” Trump’s memo alleges. He claimed “the Biden Administration egregiously rejected merit-based hiring, requiring all executive departments and agencies to implement dangerous ‘diversity equity and inclusion’ tactics, and specifically recruiting individuals with ‘severe intellectual’ disabilities in the FAA.”
The memo claims, “During my first term, my Administration raised standards to achieve the highest standards of safety and excellence,” but a CNN fact check reveals that “Trump’s FAA used the same language about hiring people with disabilities [that] he’s now blasting.”
“During his Thursday press conference,” CNN reported, “President Donald Trump repeatedly suggested there was a link between the tragedy and diversity hiring policies at the Federal Aviation Administration.”
“It’s most important to note that Trump provided no evidence whatsoever that there was any such connection. But it’s also worth noting that some of Trump’s specific assertions about the FAA’s push to hire people with disabilities were either inaccurate or missing critical context about what happened during Trump’s own first presidency.”
Political strategist Donna Brazile noted, “Without an investigation or the recovery of all of the souls that have fallen, Trump inflicts partisan damage without proof or evidence.”
'Sickening': Senator says Trump’s DEI 'blame game' means he’s 'afraid to answer questions'
U.S. President Donald Trump signs executive orders in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, U.S., January 30, 2025. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz
Less than 24 hours after a mid-air collision at the Washington D.C. National Airport killed as many as 67 people, President Donald Trump argued that tragedy was the result of is predecessors' hiring practices. One Democratic U.S. senator called his argument "sickening."
From the White House briefing room, Trump asserted without evidence that diversity, equity and inclusion policies, or DEI, under former Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden were the main contributor to the crash. During a Thursday interview on MSNBC, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) told host Chris Jansing that Trump's comments were "sickening" and "turned [his] stomach." He also suggested that Trump may be hoping to distract the media from one of his actions that could have contributed to the crash.
"Imagine you're a you're a family member and you're grieving the loss of a family member. And you have the president of the United States telling you that your loved one was killed because of DEI, when he has zero evidence — and I mean zero, I mean less than zero — to suggest that that's true," Kaine said. "It's been reported today that President Trump scrapped an aviation safety board that was advising the [Department of Homeland Security] on January 22nd, maybe he wanted to change the subject and not have to answer questions about why he did that."
As Kaine mentioned, Trump fired every member of the Aviation Security Advisory Committee on January 22, along with the heads of the Transportation Security Administration and the U.S. Coast Guard. In the memo announcing the firings, the Trump White House wrote that the firings of advisory committee members were part of his "commitment to eliminating the misuse of resources and ensuring that D.H.S. activities prioritize our national security."
According to the New Republic, the Aviation Security Advisory Committee was established more than 30 years ago after the PanAm Flight 103 bombing over Lockerbie, Scotland. The outlet reported that virtually all of the committee's recommendations had been incorporated into federal aviation safety standards, and that the committee had been out of commission for more than a week at the time of the crash.
"There was not an there was not a [Federal Aviation Administration] administrator named, okay. He's named somebody today. Great. But his decision to instead of comfort grieving families, start to play a blame game is really sickening," he continued. "And maybe there's something that he doesn't want to have the public pay attention to."
'Heinous personality': Internet unleashes on 'psychopath' Trump after he jokes about crash
U.S. President Donald Trump speaks while signing executive orders during a brief event in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, U.S., January 30, 2025. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz
Before all the bodies of the 67 people killed in a mid-air collision Wednesday night have even been recovered, President Donald Trump made a quip about the tragedy. One comment Trump recently made from the Oval Office resulted in anger and outrage on social media.
On Thursday evening, while taking questions from reporters from the Resolute Desk, Trump demurred from answering questions about whether he would meet with victims' families. But in one exchange, he suggested to a reporter that he didn't plan to visit the site of the crash, which happened above the Potomac River, because he didn't want to "go swimming."
"I have a plan to visit — not the site, because, you tell me, what's the site? The water? You want me to go swimming?" Trump said. "I don't have a plan to do that, but I will be meeting with some people that were very badly hurt — with their family member, obviously."
Pennsylvania Capital-Star correspondent Nick Field theorized that because the fatal plane crash took up the bulk of TV news coverage on Thursday, Trump was "p—d" and "had to rectify that by putting his heinous personality on display and stealing attention." Writer and comedian Akilah Hughes wrote on Bluesky: "Wow. What a piece of s—."
"Absolutely no empathy at all," TV actor and writer Jean-Marcos González posted to X.
Attorney Chase Madar lamented that Americans were "in for another four years of this s—." Author and artist Oisín McGann responded to the video of Trump's comments by writing: "Okay, so he's a psychopath." And actor Nazarin Nour tweeted that she "hate[s] this f—ing idiot."
"People’s loved ones died in that water, children included, and he makes a joke," Nour wrote.
'67 people are dead': Aviation reporter rips Trump’s 'inconsiderate' and 'frankly unhinged' presser
After an air collision between a U.S. Army Blackhawk helicopter and an American Airlines passenger jet occurred outside Washington, DC, some MAGA Republicans — including President Donald Trump and Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tennessee) — were quick to blame DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) programs for the tragedy.
Ogles blamed DEI during a conversation with Fox Business' Maria Bartiromo, and Trump attacked DEI during a press conference on Thursday.
But aviation expert Pete Muntean called out Trump's comments as ridiculous during a conversation on CNN.
When CNN's Pamela Brown asked him if DEI policies at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) were "to blame" for the collision, Muntean replied, with frustration, "I put my head in my hands, Pam. when the president said that. This is something that has been pushed by the far right for a few months now: that die policies are to blame and a degradation in safety in aviation in the United States. But frankly, the president is getting out ahead of his skis here."
Muntean continued, "What he has said is not only unprofessional, unpresidential, inconsiderate of the status of this investigation, but frankly, it is just unhinged that he could even say, with any sort of certainty, that diversity, equity and inclusion policies had any part to play in this accident."
Muntean grew even angrier when he described the likely death toll in the collision. Officials believe that neither the 64 passengers on the American Airlines flight nor the three people on the Blackhawk helicopter survived.
Muntean told Brown, "Sixty-seven people are dead. I hate to get so upset here, but this is something that investigators will really need to pick apart piece by piece. And that is going to take some really significant time. We're not even 24 hours after this crash. We're barely even 12 hours after this crash. And he is saying, with a lot of certainty, that the blame is on DEI and the blame is, in some ways, on air traffic control and air traffic controller hiring."
The aviation expert continued, "I have to feel for the air traffic controllers in the tower at Reagan National Airport, who had to essentially sit there helplessly and make the call to first responders to say, 'We have a serious aircraft crash.'"
Trump's Firing of Labor Officials Shows He 'Could Not Care Less About Rights of Workers'
"Trump and Republicans are hell-bent on launching an all-out assault on working people and their rights—they're just hoping we don't notice," said Democratic Sen. Patty Murray.
Union members picket outside of the Netflix/Warner Bros. Discovery offices on October 31, 2023 in New York City. (Photo: Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)
U.S. President Donald Trump's firing of officials on the National Labor Relations Board and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission earlier this week marks another clear indication that he "could not care less about the rights of workers," a top Democratic senator remarked late Tuesday as the implications of the president's moves set in.
"I am extremely alarmed by the unprecedented firings of EEOC commissioners and NLRB members without cause—these are yet more lawless actions by a president who thinks he is above the law," Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) said of Trump's termination of EEOC commissioner Jocelyn Samuels, former EEOC chair Charlotte Burrows, NLRB member Gwynne Wilcox, and NLRB general counsel Jennifer Abruzzo—decisions that are expected to spark legal fights.
"These brazen firings undermine not only the will of Congress but these agencies' critical work fighting on behalf of workers across the country," Murray added. "Trump and Republicans are hell-bent on launching an all-out assault on working people and their rights—they're just hoping we don't notice."
Trump's firing of Wilcox and Abruzzo—champions of workers' rights—halted the NLRB's ability to issue decisions, as the board is now without a quorum.
"The board reviews rulings by in-house judges in cases brought by the general counsel," Reutersnoted. "Until it does, those orders cannot be enforced."
News of the firings—which could have sweeping implications for the future of the NLRB and organizing rights—came on the same day the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) released fresh data showing that the share of workers who were union members in 2024 fell to a new low of 9.9% even as public support for unions climbed to 70%, close to a record high.
The Economic Policy Institutenoted that "although the latest BLS data show a decline in the unionization rate, many workers continued to make organizing gains within auto manufacturing, hospitality, public education, and healthcare."
AFL-CIO president Liz Shuler warned in a statement Tuesday that Trump's firing of Wilcox—who, under federal law, cannot be fired on political grounds—"is illegal and will have immediate consequences for working people."
"By leaving only two board members in their posts, the president has effectively shut down the National Labor Relations Board's operations, leaving the workers it defends on their own in the face of union-busting and retaliation," said Shuler. "Alongside the firing of NLRB General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo, these moves will make it easier for bosses to violate the law and trample on workers' legal rights on the job and fundamental freedom to organize."
"Member Wilcox has already indicated she will challenge her firing," Shuler added, "and we fully expect she will succeed in the courts and be restored to her position so she can continue to be a critical pro-worker voice on the NLRB
