Trump waives clean-air rules for 202 facilities
JUST POSTED: Today at The NYT we are publishing a major investigation into how President Trump used his executive powers to expose millions of Americans to greater cancer risks. A six month-long investigation built on more than 10,000 pages of FOIA records. Read it www.nytimes.com/2026/10/24/c...
Eric Lipton NYT101Here is a video overview of the NYT investigation @maxinejoselow.bsky.social and I did that examines how President Trump moved first to grant pollution passes to chemical plants. Then former petrochemical lobbyists he appointed moved to make these waivers permanent www.nytimes.com/video/climat...
EyesOfTheWorld14Congratulations to the authors on some remarkable investigative journalism. Apparently, protecting 3.3 million Americans from cancer-causing pollution is an unreasonable burden on industry.
Dan Froomkin/Press Watch/Heads Up News8Terrific article. I would have liked to see two more elements: a nut graph bluntly explaining that this is an example of how, under Trump, greed and corruption are easily triumphing over the public good; and a section on “How do we fix this?”
Crabears5Thank you for sharing this article. Short term thinking fueled by profit making is the rule with these companies. Maybe it should be a requirement that those who want unrestricted ability to pollute live in these hot spot communities.
j-waller55.bsky.social4"The Trump administration did not ask companies to present an exhaustive case for why they deserved a waiver from these new requirements. It was as easy as sending an email to the E.P.A. and invoking the obscure exemption language in the act, a provision that no president had ever used."
Roxy3Fantastic reporting. These people are greedy and evil.
Mark Copelovitch42Amazing investigative journalism. Once again, I promise to take it seriously once there is any evidence at all that it has changed how Trump is covered in the political articles & front page headlines going forward: bsky.app/profile/mcop...
Soraya Nadia McDonald14Remember when I said this was the most pro-cancer administration in my lifetime, at *least*? Listen, if there's one thing I'm gonna be, it's *right* 👇🏽
Leonid Schneider3No problem. There's ivermectin, right?
Shockratees3It’s a good, important piece. But I’m never forgetting that NYT and other major media did a full court press against Biden, Kamala, and Democrats to shove this criminal Trump administration back into power over our nation and lives.
Dag.2This is another example of how electing a Biden and pushing back for a few years isn't enough if a wrecking ball can come back in 4 years. People exposed to toxins will not be "better" if these policies are reversed in January 2029. A return to normalcy is not feasable.
Aaron Sojourner2Make the rights of breathers of air dead letter bsky.app/profile/eric...
TeeJay 🦋2This is most likely not going to cause much reverberation but this is the kind of invaluable investigation journalism that makes a difference
Rajan Narang2It won't take decades to unwind Trump's malfeasance, but it will take an all-of-government sprint in 2029 - and some damage can never be reversed.
New research on how air pollution penetrates deep into the brain and could cause serious illness. As a reminder, Trump has dismantled, rolled back or paused major Clean Air Act rules.
LaPoodella4Well, didn’t we already prove that breathing lead dust affects the brain and isn’t that why lead paint is banned?
Climate News3Wait until we find out the reason most humans keep on using fossil fuels is because our brains have been damaged by the very fossil fuels the generation before us burnt and pumped directly into our brains.
Air pollution has always been linked to a lot of illness. As its diffuse its hard to pinpoint on a single source.
Gxro68832That’s everywhere these days, only 20% or so is cars surprisingly. The rest is dust from construction and energy generation and other transport. 10,000s die across Europe each year from pm2.5 particles
Dann2I'm no doctor, or scientist, but I have breathed enough city air in the past 66 years to know that "it ain't good for you."
Some Broad Thinking2This has me thinking again of the letter written to the C-suites of oil/gas companies that The aguardian got a hold of. The letter expressed fear over research linking (causation) pollution/chemical exposure to diseases. You kindly tried to find it in the archives. Wish I had kept a copy.
The Republican Party is giving us cancer. The New York Times doesn't say it that directly, but its investigation proves it.
Ethan Nichtern4"The New York Times Doesn't Say It Directly" is the headline for all of the 21st century.
Risto 🇫🇮2I wish people (maga, rightwingers) would understand, republicans are actively killing Americans. But because U.S. is so broken, it goes without notice and it can be brushed off like it's nothing. This is the reason why you need to be educated how you vote. It has real life consequences.
end times bacon1Don’t know how MAHA overlooks this.
MJ (left-wing transgender witch)🏳️⚧️🏳️🌈1If you’re sick and fighting for your life you can’t be out on the streets protesting.
BeanieCLE11“The Trump administration did not ask companies to present an exhaustive case for why they deserved a waiver from these new requirements. It was as easy as sending an email to the E.P.A. and invoking the obscure exemption language in the act, a provision that no president had ever used.”
