Riverton says ‘no' to fluoride in resolution
The Riverton City Council passed a unanimous resolution Wednesday urging fluoride be removed from its drinking water in a nod to legislation pending at the Capitol that would require its banishment from all public drinking water supplies in the state.
'I am pleased Riverton City is the first to support HB81, Fluoride Amendments, and I encourage all Utah state representatives and senators to vote in favor of passage. The Riverton City Council unanimously passed a resolution in support of the legislation prohibiting the addition of fluoride in public water systems,' said Riverton Mayor Trent Staggs.
'I believe it reflects the sentiments of Riverton residents and the concerns over continuing to add fluoride. Upon passage by the state legislature, I have instructed Riverton City Public Works Department to immediately suspend fluoridating culinary water in city owned water systems.'
The resolution is a nod to HB81, or Fluoride Amendments, by Rep. Stephanie Gricius, R-Eagle Mountain, passed the House Natural Resources, Agriculture and Environment Committee on a 10-3 vote last week, with the majority of those in attendance testifying in favor of individual choice rather than mass 'medication' of drinking water.
The bill would prohibit the introduction of the chemical in public drinking water systems by the end of May and upends current systems that practice fluoridation of their water, including Box Elder, Salt Lake and Davis counties.
Stagg is joined by the two large water districts tasked with infusing drinking water with fluoride for Davis and Weber counties after voter-approved initiatives.
Scott Paxman, general manager of the Weber Basin Water Conservancy District, said it cost the district millions of dollars to install the necessary equipment to infuse fluoride into its multicounty system that also serves Weber and Summit counties.
Over protests by dentists and fluoride supporters about its benefits to oral health, the move for Utah to eliminate it from public drinking water supplies is gaining traction.
'Regardless of fluoride's purported health benefits, Utahns and their families should be able to choose for themselves whether and how to apply it. Riverton residents, living under Salt Lake County's fluoridation ordinances, have been denied that freedom to decide for themselves for nearly a quarter century. It's time to change that!' Stagg said, adding: 'Let's empower Utahns with independence to make their own individual health risk assessments pertaining to fluoride.'
The bill stems from a federal district court ruling in September which said that .7 milligrams per liter of fluoride introduced into drinking water systems causes unreasonable risk. The ruling directed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to issue guidance.
The California-based judge said, 'The 'optimal' water fluoridation level in the United States of 0.7 milligrams per liter is nearly double that safe level of 0.4 milligram per liter for pregnant women and their offspring. In all, there is substantial and scientifically credible evidence establishing that fluoride poses a risk to human health.'
Fluoride, while a naturally occurring substance comes from hydroflurosilicic acid that as a concentrate in its undiluted form is classified as a hazardous, poisonous material that, while it contains fluoride, also contains arsenic, lead, copper, manganese, iron and aluminum. It is a byproduct from phosphate mining operations.
In 2019, a Sandy overfeed of fluoride that sickened dozens.
An independent investigation found failure at all government levels for the accidental overfeed that was not publicly acknowledged for days. In some instances, residents were told there was a problem with their water heater that was causing the ill health effects.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
29 minutes ago
- Fox News
ASRA NOMANI: The familiar hidden hand behind today's #NoKings protests
Yesterday, as protesters readied to descend on city squares across America for a mass demonstration branded #NoKings, California Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis took to MSNBC, praising the movement as a righteous stand for democracy. "People are very determined to get out there and be seen. This is the United States. We do not want a king," she said. What she didn't say: The California Democratic Party is itself organizing today's protests — from Orange County to Oakland — with the full institutional weight of the Democratic machine, and the Democratic National Committee is playing a critical role behind the scenes in protests across the country from California to Florida. Already, I established in analysis for the Pearl Project, a nonprofit journalism initiative, that the protests are organized by 197 organizations aligned with the Democratic Party. This network harnesses a machine of about $2.1 billion in total annual revenues toward this cause. That effort alone represents a partisan political enterprise that I call the protest industrial complex. Now, in a new analysis of 148 protest listings uploaded on a Democratic Party organizing platform, I have established that at least 70 Democratic National Committee affiliates are also organizing protests in at least 19 states and the District of Columbia. This is a clear indicator of the partisanship of these protests as an orchestrated, calculated expression of the opposition party, not a spontaneous grassroots outpouring. Despite the rhetoric of populist uprising, it's clear: #NoKings is the Democratic Party staging political theater in the streets of America. As editor-in-chief of the Pearl Project, I have spent the last week building this database of the protest organizers and the findings expose the true architecture of today's "day of defiance." From Mobilize links and protest pages to organizing toolkits, we traced the digital and physical infrastructure behind the June 14 demonstrations. I've added a tab with the Democratic Party events in a public spreadsheet that I invite readers to study. Here's what I found about the hand of the Democratic Party: It's important to recognize: the Democrat Party isn't just supporting these protests — they're leading them, often under the radar. Here's just a glimpse of the geographic footprint of Democratic National Committee club and committee activity. It's dense, but I share it so you can know we have the receipts: What does this list tell us? This is a party infrastructure, not a protest movement. Let's be honest: this isn't about stopping a "king." It's about protecting a political party. Across the country, Democratic Party chapters have flooded local organizing channels with official flyers, water bottles branded with county logos, talking points and coordinated slogans. In Santa Monica, Calif., the local Democratic Club is marching along the boardwalk. In Flagstaff, Ariz., the Coconino County Democratic Party is rallying on the steps of city hall. In Naples, Florida, the Collier County Democratic Executive Committee is mobilizing volunteers with signage pre-approved by national political action committees. In Seminole County, Fla., the advertising is about political canvassing with these details for volunteers: "Signs will be provided to place next to the cooler that say 'Free Water from SemDems.' Consider bringing trash bags to tie to the handle of the cooler to collect used bottles. Email deb4elections@ if you can bring a cooler with water. Passing out SemDems cards. Stand at protest area entry points and make sure people receive a SemDem card so they can connect with us. Passing Out Protest Signs. Hand out signs for people to wave if they didn't bring one. Help people make a sign using SemDems supplies. In this role, you will be too busy to participate in the protest at the street." In total, we tracked scores of unique combinations of state and club, proving that multiple organizations — including groups like Swing Left and Indivisible — are operating across several states with the Democratic Party, deploying scripts, signs, and staff. Here is what you won't hear on most of the media's coverage: These are not the spontaneous actions of private citizens. They are events sanctioned by the Democratic Party dressed up in the language of moral resistance. These are not the spontaneous actions of private citizens. They are events sanctioned by the Democratic Party dressed up in the language of moral resistance. These protests amount to a new chapter of political puppetry. One longtime Democratic volunteer, granted anonymity, described to us the internal pressure they felt to participate: "It feels less like a movement and more like a performance. We are told which graphics to share, what signs to print and even how to answer reporters. It is like the whole protest is a campaign rollout — but in protest clothes." This comment is telling. The Democratic Party is not showing up to these protests as supporters. They are stage managers. The very people warning us against authoritarianism are deploying authoritarian tactics to choreograph outrage. It's political cynicism at its finest—activism from above, not below. Why does this matter? In 2002, my friend and colleague Daniel Pearl was murdered by extremists in Pakistan. The ideology that led to his death — sectarianism, division, moral absolutism — has haunted me ever since. That same dogma is now playing out in American streets, cloaked in slogans like "No Kings" and "Save Democracy." In my 2023 book, Woke Army, I warned of an unholy alliance between far-left radicals and ideological opportunists that undermines institutions from within. Today's protests manifest this alliance and they are the logical next step: not organic resistance, but manufactured dissent designed to influence the next election cycles. This isn't about Donald Trump's flaws or strengths. It's about the weaponization of protest by those already in power. Today's protest is not a revolution. It's a message that refuses the 2024 election results. The message is this: the Democratic Party is willing to use every tool available — PACs, nonprofits, public unions and even street protests — to control the narrative heading into the next elections. Voters should be wary of any party that cries "democracy" while scripting the applause, supplying the signs and managing the stage. Today, as you watch video clips of marchers chanting and waving signs, ask yourself: who paid for the microphone? Who printed the signs? And who benefits when the crowd disperses? The answer is clear with Trump's birthday party for the Army: it's an expression of the ruling Republican administration. That's the kind of transparency we need to have about the street protests. The protests aren't grassroots. They are the political puppeteering of the Democratic Party.
Yahoo
44 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Senate Republicans block California's 2035 electric vehicle plan
WASHINGTON − The Senate opted to block California's landmark plan to end the sale of gasoline-only cars by 2035, in a near-party-line vote May 22. Republicans employed a controversial procedural tactic to skirt the chamber's filibuster, which typically creates a 60-vote threshold to pass legislation. One Democrat, Sen. Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, voted in favor of the move, against her party. The 51-44 vote repealed a waiver issued under former President Joe Biden's administration, which allowed California to set their own clean air standards, higher than those of the federal government. The move will likely escalate political tensions between the Trump administration and California Gov. Gavin Newsom. Democrats in Congress denounced the federal government overruling an individual state's decision, along with Republicans rule-skirting legislative approach. "California has a right to protect its own people. From dirty air and dirty water," Sen. Adam Schiff, D-California, said in a post May 21, in anticipation of the vote. "It is a precedent they will come to regret," he added. "That's the thing about a slippery slope. You can be the one who starts down the slope but you don't get to be the one who decides where the ride stops." Meanwhile, Republicans criticized the Golden State for the damage they said such a regulation would have on the American auto industry − making the matter a nationwide concern. "The Biden administration and Congressional Democrats tried to block the will of the American people." Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, R-West Virginia, said in a statement, "but Congress has now spoken and soundly rejected this rule." This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Senate blocks California's EV plan in controversial move
Yahoo
44 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Will Trump invoke the Insurrection Act? 'We'll see,' he says
President Donald Trump mulled invoking the Insurrection Act, which would give him more leeway to use the military for domestic purposes, as he deploys troops to Los Angeles in response to protests prompted by ICE raids in the region. "If there's an insurrection, I would certainly invoke it,' Trump said June 10 during an event in the White House. 'We'll see. But I can tell you, last night was terrible. The night before that was terrible." Trump deployed the California National Guard to Los Angeles over the objection of Gov. Gavin Newsom, sparking a lawsuit from the state. Marines were also sent to help the guard after protests erupted over his immigration enforcement efforts. The troops are limited to protecting federal property and law enforcement officers. The Insurrection Act would give Trump authority to use them more broadly. More: 'High-stakes game': Trump-Newsom clash pits two political heavyweights Trump said there were parts of Los Angeles on June 9 where "you could have called it an insurrection. It was terrible." Newsom described Trump's actions as "the acts of a dictator" and accused the president of 'inciting and provoking violence,' 'creating mass chaos,' and 'militarizing cities.' Legal experts say invoking the Insurrection Act is an extreme step. It has been done 30 times in U.S. history. "The invocation of it would be viewed as a pretty dramatic act," said Duke Law Professor H. Jefferson Powell. Powell said the law is "dangerously broad." The last time the Insurrection Act was invoked was in May 1992, by President George H.W. Bush at the request of California's governor, to quell rioting in Los Angeles after four White police officers were acquitted for beating Black motorist Rodney King. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Trump mulls Insurrection Act as he sends troops to LA
