If you’re a reporter interviewing a lawmaker supporting total abortion bans without exceptions, there’s a whole host of non-abortion follow up questions that should be asked. A few examples:
If you’re supporting forcing rape victims to give birth, do you support terminating rapists’ parental rights? Would you support giving a child rapist access to yet another child? Are you sponsoring legislation to that effect?
Would you support universal child care? If not, who is going to care for this baby whose mother can’t care for it because 1. She is too young to get a job and 2. Must attend elementary school?
How much funding did you vote should go toward CPS in their last budget?
How much additional funding do you believe WIC should receive to care for these additional babies? Did you vote for the Medicaid expansion?
The 5-4 decision by Alito finds wetlands are only protected if they are SO close to a bigger waterway and are SO wet that it is “difficult to determine where they ‘water’ ends and the ‘wetland’ begins.’”
If you recognize that wording, it's because it's a direct quote from Scalia's #WOTUS plurality in Rapanos.
You know about the oil industry causing climate change.
This is the untold story of how it has perpetuated lead air pollution, increasing the risk of lead exposure for the 5.2 million Americans living near general aviation airports.
Lead is a neurotoxin linked to lower IQ and learning problems. There is no safe level of lead, according to the CDC. The biggest source of lead in the air today? Emissions from small aircraft, like helicopters and two-to-ten seater airplanes.
Those emissions have real-world consequences. In East San Jose, Calif., toddlers living near a general aviation airport were found to have lead in their blood at levels comparable to kids' during the height of the Flint, Mich., drinking water crisis.
In case you're wondering, no, I'm not back on the water beat--that's still in Hannah's very capable hands. But let's do one last #WOTUS thread for the road...
Two years ago @KevinBogardus and I got back the most well-timed FOIA of our lives showing that EPA had reviewed federal data showing Trump #WOTUS would eliminate federal protections for 18 percent of streams and more than half of the nation’s wetlands.
The framing of #WOTUS in this @nytimes news alert is off. This is about what waters the Clean Water Act applies to. Yes, that results in changes to whether polluters need permits. But we're talking about polluting (or destroying) actual water bodies/wetlands.
@nytimes Also, no version of #WOTUS actually mentions pollutants. Yes, the implication is that pollution control will change, but that's not *technically* what the rule is about.