Bill expanding radioactive waste investigations unanimously sent to Missouri governor
A sign warns of radioactive material at the West Lake Landfill. Thousands of tons of nuclear waste from the Manhattan Project were dumped there in the 1970s (Theo Welling/Riverfront Times).
A bill expanding the state's ability to find radioactive contamination in the St. Louis region that dates to World War II development of the atomic bomb is on its way to the governor after unanimously clearing the Missouri House Monday.
The measure, which passed unanimously out of the Senate last week, would authorize the Department of Natural Resources to seek a search warrant to conduct investigations on otherwise off-limits government land. The bill also removes a $150,000 annual cap on how much the state can spend on an investigation and changes the rules governing the fund so that unspent money is not moved to another fund.
Money transferred to the fund could not be used for clean-up of any contamination found in the investigation. The waste was spread by federal contractors and should be cleaned up by federal authorities, state Sen. Nick Schroer, a Defiance Republican, said during last week's debate.
'Let's give them the data. Let's see where that goes,' Schroer said. 'And if they're not willing to clean the mess up, I think we're going to have a lot of lawsuits on our hands. But I think we're gonna be back in this building, talking about it and if they're not going to do it, we need to step up and protect our people.'
Records reveal 75 years of government downplaying, ignoring risks of St. Louis radioactive waste
St. Louis has struggled for decades with remnant radioactive waste from the World War II-era effort to build the world's first atomic bomb.
While the presence of radioactive contamination in suburban St. Louis was known for years, an investigation by The Independent, MuckRock and The Associated Press revealed in 2023 that the federal government and companies handling the waste were aware of the threat to the public long before informing residents.
Uranium was refined in downtown St. Louis for use in the development of the bomb. After the war, it was trucked to St. Louis County, often falling off of trucks along the way. It was dumped at the airport, susceptible to the wind and rain, and contaminated the adjacent Coldwater Creek.
As suburban neighborhoods sprung up along Coldwater Creek, generations of children and families were exposed to the radioactive waste, elevating residents' risk of certain cancers.
The waste was sold and moved to a site in Hazelwood, also along Coldwater Creek, so that a company could extract valuable metals. Eventually, the remnant radioactive material was dumped in the West Lake Landfill where it remains today.
'This has been a long time coming,' state Rep. Raychel Proudie, a Ferguson Democrat, said of the radioactive waste investigative fund legislation passed Monday.
Coldwater Creek is being cleaned up by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers while the Environmental Protection Agency is overseeing the cleanup of the West Lake Landfill.
The EPA announced earlier this year that it expanded the area of the West Lake Landfill that requires remediation by 40 acres after discovering contamination was more widespread than the agency previously thought. The cost of the project is now nearly $400 million, up from $229 million.
State Rep. Doug Clemens, a Democrat from St. Ann, said Monday that his community is ravaged by rare cancers that he attributes to the radioactive contamination left behind by development of the atomic bomb.
'We played our part in World War II,' he said. 'This weapons project left waste behind. That waste is incredibly harmful.'
The Independent's Rudi Keller contributed to this story.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
BlackRock calls antitrust claims "unprecedented, unsound and unsupported"
(Reuters) -An attorney for BlackRock called antitrust claims by Republican-led states "unprecedented, unsound and unsupported" on Monday and said they had failed to show how the firms' involvement with industry climate groups interfered with market competition. Gibson Dunn attorney Gregg Costa spoke as BlackRock and co-defendants Vanguard and State Street seek to dismiss the claims in the closely watched antitrust case brought by Texas and 12 other states.
The Hill
20 minutes ago
- The Hill
Democrats are drawing closer to the crypto industry despite Trump divisions
WASHINGTON (AP) — As President Donald Trump builds a crypto empire — including hosting a private dinner with top investors at his golf club — Democrats have united in condemning what they call blatant corruption from the White House. But the Democratic Party's own relationship with the emerging crypto industry is far less cut and dried. Work in the Republican-led Senate to legitimize cryptocurrency by adding guardrails has drawn backing from some Democrats, underscoring growing support for the industry in the party. But divisions have opened over the bill, with many demanding it prevent the Republican president and his family from directly profiting from cryptocurrency. 'I'm all on board with the idea of regulating crypto,' said Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn. 'But at this moment, when cryptocurrency is being so clearly used by Donald Trump to facilitate his corruption, I don't think you can close your eyes to that when you're legislating.' The legislation is moving ahead more rapidly than Congress usually acts when an industry is new. But the big money and campaign donations flowing from cryptocurrency firms have made them a new powerhouse on the political scene, one that's increasingly gaining allies and capturing the attention of lawmakers. A look at what to know about the industry's clout and the political fight over what's known as the GENIUS Act: To understand the growing clout of the crypto industry, look no further than the 2024 election. Fairshake, a crypto super political action committee, and its affiliated PACs spent more than $130 million in congressional races. Fairshake spent roughly $40 million supporting Republican Bernie Moreno in Ohio in an effort to defeat Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown. Brown, who lost to Moreno by more than 3 percentage points, was seen as a chief critic of the industry as the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. 'DC received a clear message that being anti-crypto is a good way to end your career, as it doesn't represent the will of the voters,' Brian Armstrong, the CEO of Coinbase, wrote in a social media post the day after the 2024 election. Coinbase — the largest crypto exchange in the U.S. and biggest contributor to Fairshake — does not view support for its industry as partisan, according to Kara Calvert, the company's vice president of U.S. policy. The industry also spent heavily to support Democrats Ruben Gallego and Elissa Slotkin in their races for open Senate seats in battleground states. Fairshake spent $10 million in support of Slotkin during her successful Senate run against Republican Mike Rodgers, and Slotkin, who won the Michigan race by fewer than 20,000 votes, spoke in favor of crypto on the campaign trail. Slotkin declined to be interviewed. Similar dynamics are setting up ahead of 2026 in contested House and Senate races. Fairshake said in January that it already had $116 million in cash on hand aimed at the 2026 midterm elections. 'We're not slowing down, and everything remains on the table,' Josh Vlasto, a spokesperson for Fairshake, told The Associated Press. Hours before a May 19 vote to move forward on cryptocurrency legislation in the Senate, an advocacy group tied to Coinbase sent an email to the offices of U.S. senators warning that the vote would count toward their crypto-friendliness scores. 'What the spending does is put crypto on the map. It lets members know that this is not a phase, this is real industry, with real dollars, that is developing its hold in Washington,' said Calvert. A significant number of Democrats, 16, joined Republicans in advancing the crypto legislation. The GENIUS Act would create a new regulatory structure for stablecoins, a type of cryptocurrency typically pegged to the U.S. dollar. It is viewed as a step toward consumer protections and greater legitimacy for the industry. The sticking point for many Democrats is that while the bill prohibits members of Congress and their families from profiting off stablecoins, it excludes the president from those restrictions. Trump, once a skeptic of the industry, has vowed in his second term to make the U.S. the global capital of crypto. Meanwhile, he and his family have moved aggressively into nearly every corner of the industry: mining operations, billion-dollar bitcoin purchases, a newly minted stablecoin and a Trump-branded meme coin. Days after Trump's interests in the industry became public in early May, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York urged the Democratic caucus to unite and vote against the package to have a stronger hand in negotiations, according to a person familiar with the matter who insisted on anonymity to discuss private discussions. On May 8, a bloc of Senate Democrats who had previously backed the GENIUS Act reversed course — ultimately voting to block the bill from advancing. Negotiations between Senate Democrats and Republicans followed. The White House was also involved, and in contact with senators' offices on both sides of the aisle, according to a senior official granted anonymity to discuss private conversations. The new version of the bill is now expected to pass the 100-member Senate this month. Amendments are still possible. Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore. has filed an amendment — cosponsored by Schumer — that would bar the president and his family from profiting off stablecoins, though it's unlikely to pass. 'There is room for improvements as there often is with a lot of legislation. But with this in particular, we've got issues with the president,' said Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly of Arizona 'Having said that, this was negotiated with Democrats and Republicans. We got to a place. We voted on it. I expect this is the version we're going to pass.' Still, the legislation is stirring unease. Schumer, asked if he's urging members to vote against the bill, noted that he has opposed the legislation and said 'there's division in our caucus on that issue.' 'There's a gaping hole in this bill that everybody sees,' Murphy said. 'After it's passed, it will be illegal for me to issue a cryptocurrency, but it's legal for the president of the United States.' 'If this bill passes, we kind of go from a dirt road to a paved road,' he said. If the Senate approves the stablecoin legislation, the bill will still need to clear the House before reaching the president's desk. Crypto advocates say the next priority is pushing Congress for market structure legislation, a far more sweeping effort than simply regulating stablecoins. 'Stablecoin is one step of the path. Then you need market structure. We're hopeful that the Senate works together to pass something quickly,' Calvert said. Some Democrats view the legislation as a chance to impose basic guardrails on a rapidly growing industry that's particularly popular among men and younger voters, two groups that drifted from the party in 2024. ___ Associated Press writers Alan Suderman, Lisa Mascaro, Matt Brown and Mary Clare Jalonick contributed to this report.
New York Post
26 minutes ago
- New York Post
GOP lawmakers push to jack up proposed tax on money migrants send home after threat by Mexico
GOP lawmakers are pushing to jack up a proposed new tax on money migrants earn in the US and send back home to family — after being threatened by Mexico's president. Nestled in the proposed One Big Beautiful Bill Act making its way through the Senate is a 3.5% tax on 'remittances' from noncitizens in the US, or money transferred back to relatives and family in the migrants' home country. Over the weekend, footage of Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum blasting the planned tax during a speech last month went viral. 'If necessary, we'll mobilize. We don't want taxes on remittances from our fellow countrymen. From the US to Mexico,' Sheinbaum warned in the clip. It is not entirely clear what she meant by 'mobilize.' 4 Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum is griping about the impact a new US tax on money Mexico's migrants send home would have on her country. Carlos Santiago/Eyepix Group / Shutterstock 4 GOP Sen. Eric Schmitt of Missouri proposed now imposing a tax on of 15% instead of 3.5% because of Sheinbaum's comments. Getty Images But her salvo was enough to prompt several Republican lawmakers to promptly call on the Senate to jack up the proposed tax on remittances. 'The House's Big Beautiful Bill addressed the urgent need for a remittance tax. But we can go further. I'm introducing legislation to quadruple the proposed remittance tax — from 3.5% to 15%,' Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.) seethed on X. 'America is not the world's piggy bank. And we don't take kindly to threats.' The tax on remittance is estimated to haul in about $26 billion over the next decade, according to an estimate from the Joint Committee on Taxation. Remittances are generally a huge revenue stream for developing countries. Mexico is the second largest receiver of remittances in the world behind India thanks to cash flows from the US, according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies. 4 Rep. Chip Roy, a Republican from Texas, backed the idea of raising the tax on remittances in response to the Mexican leader's threat. Getty Images Some estimates indicate that Mexico received about $64.7 billion in remittances last year, although transfers to Mexico have begun to wane in recent months amid President Trump's crackdown on illegal immigration. 'New reason to amend the Senate bill to tax remittances at a lot higher rate…' Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) wrote on X in response to the clip of Sheinbaum. 4 Mexico has been grappling with economic fallout from President Trump's tariffs. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) added, 'Raise the remittances!!' Mexico is the largest US trading partner, according to recent data from the US Census Bureau. Earlier this year, Trump slapped 25% tariffs on imports from both Mexico and Canada that are not subject to the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement. Trump claimed the new tariffs were necessary to leverage Canada and Mexico to crack down on the flow of fentanyl and illegal immigration into the US. The president has since fired off a flurry of tariffs on other countries as well.
