The EPA gives up on climate change
Welcome to The Logoff: President Donald Trump's Environmental Protection Agency said today that it plans to reverse its own legal justification for regulating emissions, potentially a major blow to efforts to combat climate change.
Why does the EPA want to do this? EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin has described the change, which follows a January executive order by Trump to reexamine the policy, as 'the largest deregulatory action in the history of America'; more generally, it's consistent with the Trump administration's focus on promoting fossil fuels.
What is the agency actually proposing? In 2009, the EPA reached what is known as the 'endangerment finding' — a determination that greenhouse gases are dangerous to human health because of their role in climate change, on which the agency's efforts to regulate greenhouse gas emissions rests. Now, the EPA proposes rolling back that finding.
What will the impact be? If the EPA proposal takes effect, it would spell the end of nearly all US climate regulations, including those governing emissions by vehicles, factories, power plants, and more. That change would come even as the US is beginning to face more severe effects of climate change and as the world struggles to fend off warming caused by greenhouse gas emissions.
The Logoff
The email you need to stay informed about Trump — without letting the news take over your life. Email (required)
Sign Up
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Notice . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Is this a done deal? No. The EPA announced its proposal on Tuesday, but before it can reverse the finding, the plan will go through a review process, including a public comment period. It's also all but certain to be challenged in court by environmental groups.
And with that, it's time to log off…
Katie Ledecky won her sixth world title in the 1,500-meter freestyle at the swimming world championships in Singapore on Tuesday, and as usual, her competition wasn't even in frame when she finished the race. As the Athletic points out, her split en route to the full 1,500 distance Tuesday would have been good for the 13th-fastest 800 meters ever swum, and with that win, she hasn't lost a 1,500-meter race since she was 13 (she's now 28).
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
9 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump sends letters to pharma CEOs demanding they reduce drug prices in 60 days
President Trump escalated efforts to reduce drug prices in the US on Thursday, releasing letters sent to 17 pharmaceutical company CEOs on Truth Social. The letters, addressed to Eli Lilly (LLY), Pfizer (PFE), AstraZeneca (AZN), and others, include a 60-day deadline to implement Trump's most-favored nations clause — to reduce prices of drugs at the rates of the lowest that it sells to any developed nation — for Medicare and Medicaid enrollees. All three company stocks were trading down between 1% and 3.5% after the letters were posted. AstraZeneca declined to comment to Yahoo Finance, and requests for comment from other pharma companies were not immediately returned. "I am calling on [company] and every manufacturer doing business in our great country to take the following actions within the next 60 days," Trump wrote. "Domestic MFN pricing will require you, and all manufacturers, to negotiate harder with foreign freeloading nations," he added. Trump said that Health and Human Services (HHS) Sec. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and CMS Administrator Mehmet Oz will be involved in the process and "stand ready to implement these terms." He ended the letters with a deadline of September 29 this year. The letters add to pressure from the White House, even as many of these CEOs have had comfortable relationships with the president. Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla, who has known Trump since his first term due to the pandemic, is also the chair of the industry's largest lobbying group, PhRMA. In both roles, he has been able to communicate directly with Trump and indicated he has done so on tariffs and other topics. He isn't alone. Eli Lilly CEO David Ricks has also been seen in Washington, D.C., and has said he has spoken to the administration. AstraZeneca CEO Pascal Soriot has taken steps to turn the UK-based company's image into a more American one, with rumors of making the company's main listing in New York rather than London. In addition, Soriot said this week that he has sent his own proposal for reduced drug prices to the White House, with a response pending. In a statement Thursday, the White House acknowledged it had met with the companies but that "industry proposals have fallen short." The CEOs have been largely focused on cultivating a relationship with the White House and the Trump administration in hopes of avoiding tariffs on drug imports. They have collectively committed to more than $200 billion in manufacturing investments through the end of the decade and have expressed interest in helping to produce lower-cost drugs onshore, rather than lower-cost production overseas. A majority of branded drug prices in the US are higher, while generics cost less and make up a majority of the drugs consumed by Americans. "It is estimated that 91% of all prescriptions in the United States are filled as generic drugs, with more than 32,000 generic drugs approved by the FDA to date," a 2022 report from the FDA said. In a press briefing from the White House, spokesperson Karoline Leavitt read the letter to Eli Lilly aloud. She added, "According to recent data, the prices that Americans have been paying for branded drugs are more than three times the price other similarly developed nations pay. The president is determined to solve this problem." Trump has tried since his first term to pass a most-favored-nations clause for drug pricing, which would force companies to match pricing in other countries. He signed an executive order on May 12 to provide pathways for the administration to implement the clause. In a statement from the White House Thursday, Trump said, "In case after case, our citizens pay massively higher prices than other nations pay for the same exact pill, from the same factory, effectively subsidizing socialism [abroad] with skyrocketing prices at home." Anjalee Khemlani is the senior health reporter at Yahoo Finance, covering all things pharma, insurance, provider services, digital health, PBMs, and health policy and politics. That includes GLP-1s, of course. Follow Anjalee as AnjKhem on social media platforms X, LinkedIn, and Bluesky @AnjKhem. Click here for in-depth analysis of the latest health industry news and events impacting stock prices Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
The Hill
11 minutes ago
- The Hill
Biden, Harris step back into the spotlight
U.S. officials met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday about delivering aid to Gaza, as public pressure grows on Israel to address the humanitarian and hunger crisis. President Trump 's envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, and U.S. ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee had a 'very productive' meeting with Netanyahu in Israel, according to White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt. Witkoff and Huckabee will travel into Gaza on Friday to 'inspect the current distribution sites' and to 'come up with a plan to deliver more food,' Leavitt said. They'll also 'meet with local Gazans to hear first hand about this dire situation on the ground.' Witkoff and Huckabee will brief Trump after the visit to approve a food distribution plan. Peace talks have stalled and Israel is facing a growing public pressure campaign to ensure food and aid is getting into Gaza. Trump said this week the U.S. would work to set up 'food centers' in Gaza to address the 'real starvation' that is taking place. Netanyahu says there is no hunger crisis, but both he and Trump have blamed Hamas for disrupting aid distribution in the region. Netanyahu is nearing a political inflection point as some Republicans from the MAGA wing of the party speak out against U.S. support for Israel. 'Are innocent Israeli lives more valuable than innocent Palestinian and Christian lives? And why should America continue funding this?' Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) posted on X. 'The secular government of nuclear armed Israel has proven that they are beyond capable of dealing with their enemies and are capable of and are in the process of systematically cleansing them from the land.' On Wednesday, a record number of Senate Democrats — more than half the caucus — voted in favor of two resolutions to block U.S. military sales to Israel. The resolutions ultimately failed but it was another warning shot at Netanyahu that his once-firm support in the U.S. is crumbling. Sen. Jon Ossoff (Ga.), who is among the most vulnerable Democrats up for reelection in 2026, voted in favor of the resolutions. 'I do not believe the United States Senate should acquiesce without objection to the extreme mass deprivation of civilians in Gaza, including the intolerable starvation of children, that have resulted from the policies of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government,' Ossoff said. 'Despite my opposition to Prime Minister Netanyahu's conduct of the war in Gaza, I believe the United States must continue to support the Israeli people…Hamas, a despicable terrorist organization, started this horrific round of conflict with the brutal massacre of October 7th, 2023. Their abhorrent tactics, their refusal to release hostages, and their refusal to lay down their arms continue to deepen and prolong civilian suffering in Gaza.' • Trump is ramping up his attacks against GOP senators, who he believes aren't doing enough to stand up for him. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) said he had a 'good chat' with Trump after the president unloaded on him for supporting a bill that would prohibit lawmakers, future presidents and vice presidents from trading stocks. Hawley, who sponsored the bill, was the only Republican to join all Democrats in passing it out of committee. The Hill's Sarah Fortinsky writes: 'Hawley's bill was originally called the Preventing Elected Leaders from Owning Securities and Investments (PELOSI) Act — a nod to the criticism former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has faced amid scrutiny over her husband's stock trading. The Missouri Republican changed the name in exchange for Democrats' support.' Pelosi signaled her support for the legislation, while pushing back on claims she's ever traded on insider information. 'If legislation is advanced to help restore trust in government and ensure that those in power are held to the highest ethical standards, then I am proud to support it — no matter what they decide to name it,' she said in a statement. The dust-up between Trump and Hawley comes a day after Trump targeted Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) for honoring a longstanding agreement with Democrats over an obscure procedural rule. Trump's attacks on Grassley, 91, irked GOP senators. The Hill's Alexander Bolton reports: 'Republican senators were appalled by President Trump's rough treatment of 91-year-old Sen. Chuck Grassley (Iowa), the Senate's most senior Republican, on social media and are pushing back on Trump's attempts to squeeze the senator into abolishing an arcane procedure known as the Senate blue slip.'
The Hill
11 minutes ago
- The Hill
Democrats accuse GOP of racism in proposed Texas map
House Democrats are hammering President Trump and GOP leaders for their effort to redraw the congressional map in Texas, accusing the Republicans of 'rigging' the system to keep a grip on power — and purposefully disenfranchising millions of minority voters in the process. 'The truth of the matter is: Somebody has to have the courage to say that it's racism,' Rep. Al Green (D-Texas), a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, told reporters in Austin on Thursday morning. 'Unfortunately, we have grown to the point in this country where you can use racism against people of color, but people of color can't respond and say, 'That's racism.'' The outcry comes in response to a proposed congressional map unveiled on Wednesday by Texas Republicans at Trump's urging. The new lines, if approved, are designed to flip at least five Democratic seats to the GOP, making it much harder for Democrats to seize control of the lower chamber in next year's midterm elections. The Trump administration, in pushing Texas GOP leaders to redraw the lines, argued the change is needed because the current map gives favor to Black and Latino voters in ways that are illegal. In a letter to Gov. Greg Abbott and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, Harmeet Dhillon, assistant attorney general of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, urged state Republicans 'to rectify these race-based considerations.' The Democratic critics dismissed that argument as projection, saying the current lines — drawn by Texas state Republicans just four years ago — already give disproportionate voice to white voters, and the newly proposed districts would only exacerbate that lopsided power dynamic. 'Black and brown communities will suffer the most. They're getting torn up across the state,' said Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-Texas). 'In the last few decades, the overwhelming majority of growth in the state of Texas has come from Latino and African American communities. And yet the number of seats that have been drawn to serve those communities has stayed flat or shrunk. 'And so there is racism to this.' The proposed Texas map targets Democrats in the state's largest cities — Houston, Dallas and Austin — as well as those on the U.S.-Mexico border. Two of those border-district Democrats — Reps. Henry Cuellar and Vicente Gonzalez — represent regions won by Trump last year. The Democratic critics of the plan are quick to note that Republicans already control 25 of Texas's 38 seats in the U.S. House — an advantage aided by the lines drawn by Republicans in 2021. They say GOP leaders have to 'cheat' to stay in power because the Republicans' policy agenda — including the sharp Medicaid cuts Trump signed into law earlier this month — are unpopular with voters. 'Politicians who don't want to face the consequences of their votes and their choices can't just change the rules of the game in the middle of it,' Rep. Lizzie Fletcher (D-Texas) said. 'Texas already has the most racially gerrymandered congressional map in the country, and it's important to know that of Texas's 38 congressional districts — in a state with a majority-minority population, where the population of the state is more than 60 percent minority — only 13 districts allow voters of color to regularly and consistently elect their candidate of choice. And this new map cuts that number down to just eight.' In years past, the Democratic critics could have leaned on the minority protections provided by the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA), which had required certain states to get federal pre-approval before changing election rules. The law had applied on a blanket basis to nine states, including Texas, with documented histories of racial discrimination. That landmark law was weakened in 2013, when conservatives on the Supreme Court struck down the decades-old formula dictating which regions are subject to the additional layer of scrutiny. Twelve years later, Republicans are seeking new ways to eliminate the remaining VRA protections. Despite the challenges, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said he's hopeful the courts will strike down Texas's proposed map on the grounds that it discriminates against minority voters. 'The current map violates the law,' he said in Austin on Thursday, 'and this congressional map will double and triple down on the extreme racial gerrymandering that is silencing the voices of millions of Texans.'
