GOP Won't Install Jan. 6 Plaque Honoring Law Enforcement, Democrats Say
Congress approved this cast bronze plaque honoring members of law enforcement for their efforts to protect the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. But the plaque sits in a storage room in the Capitol as Democrats say Republican leaders won't install it because they are afraid it will anger President Donald Trump.
More than three years after its installation was approved by Congress, a plaque honoring law enforcement personnel for defending the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, is instead sitting in a Capitol basement utility room surrounded by tools and maintenance equipment.
The cast bronze memorial to the officers, which declares that 'their heroism will never be forgotten,' was required by law to be installed by March 2023 near the west front of the building. That was the scene of some of the most intense battles between police and supporters of President Donald Trump who attacked the Capitol in an attempt to overturn the election of Joe Biden as president.
The legislation authorizing the memorial was part of an omnibus spending package approved by Democrats and 39 Republicans in 2022 and signed into law by Biden. Leadership of the House changed in 2023 when Republicans took control and before the plaque was ready to be installed. The memorial has been in limbo ever since.
Last week, House and Senate Democrats used the backdrop of National Police Week to highlight their ongoing efforts to have the legislation implemented. They say the only thing keeping the plaque from public view is that House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) and Republican members have not yet instructed the Architect of the Capitol to install it.
At a House Appropriations subcommittee hearing last month, Architect of the Capitol Thomas E. Austin said that modifications on the House side of the Capitol are directed by the office of the speaker and that he had not received instructions to install the plaque.
Democrats blamed the delay on Republicans not wanting to anger Trump, who has pardoned those convicted or facing charges for taking part in the Jan. 6 attack.
'The reason why the law hasn't been complied with and a plaque hasn't been erected is because Republicans, directed by their puppet master Donald Trump, have been told try to erase January 6 as if it has never happened,' House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-New York) said in a news conference last week.
Johnson and several other Republican members of Congress did not reply to emails requesting comment on the assertions made by Democratic members. The White House press office also did not respond to a request for comment.
Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colorado), a former Army Ranger who served tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, was in the balcony of the House chamber on Jan. 6, 2021, as rioters pounded on its doors, determined to halt the certification of the presidential election. He called out Republicans in a January letter signed by 58 Democrats for not following the law requiring the plaque's installation.
In an interview this week, he said some Republican members have told him privately that they believe the officers who helped secure the Capitol that day should be honored, but they are worried about the consequences of saying so on the record.
'It comes down to a lack of courage and their interest in keeping their jobs above honoring police officers that put themselves in harm's way to save their lives,' Crow said.
The plaque, 43 inches wide by 32 inches tall, features an engraving of the Capitol and an inscription that reads: 'On behalf of a grateful Congress, this plaque honors the extraordinary individuals who bravely protected and defended this symbol of democracy on January 6, 2021. Their heroism will never be forgotten.'
It also lists the names of 21 local, state and federal law enforcement agencies including the U.S. Capitol Police, the D.C. police, the FBI, the National Guard, and the Virginia and Maryland state police.
A plaque of a similar size was installed in the Capitol in 1999 to honor two Capitol Police officers – Jacob Chestnut and John Gibson – who were killed in the line of duty July 24, 1998, when a man with a history of mental illness entered the building and began shooting.
Rep. Joseph Morelle (New York), the ranking Democrat on the House Administration Committee, whose responsibilities include the day-to-day operations of the House, posted a video on Instagram showing the Jan. 6 plaque leaning against a shelf in a utility room. In a statement, he called for the plaque to be installed 'as required by law. Sadly, my Republican colleagues continue to insult the officers who risked – and in some cases lost – their lives defending democracy. It's disgraceful this conversation is even necessary.'
Rep. Bryan Steil (R-Wisconsin), the chairman of the House Administration Committee, did not respond to a request for comment sent to the committee's communications director.
More than 140 officers were assaulted during the hours-long attack on the Capitol, including some who suffered severe injuries. Capitol Police officer Brian D. Sicknick suffered two strokes and died the day after confronting rioters at the Capitol. He was 42.
The decision to not install the memorial plaque angers his brother, Craig Sicknick.
'Mike Johnson of course refuses to hang it because he would have to admit that something bad happened on January 6, 2021, and the Republicans don't believe anything bad happened,' Sicknick said in an interview Monday. 'They believe the calendar skipped from January 5 to January 7.'
Trump pardoned nearly all of about 1,600 people charged in the riot, including at least 379 charged with assaulting police or media members. And he granted clemency to 14 members of the far-right Proud Boys and Oath Keepers groups, most of whom were convicted of seditious conspiracy.
The unions representing Capitol Police officers and D.C. police officers did not reply to a request for an interview. Capitol Police Chief J. Thomas Manger, who took charge of the force in July 2021 and is retiring this month, declined through a spokesperson to comment for this article.
This week, the Trump administration settled a wrongful-death lawsuit for nearly $5 million with the family of Ashli Babbitt, who was fatally shot by police when she tried to break into the Speaker's Lobby during the Jan. 6 attack. After hearing of the proposed settlement, Manger wrote a letter to department officers calling it 'extremely disappointing.'
'In 2021, the DOJ said that there was no evidence to show that law enforcement broke the law. After a thorough investigation it was determined to be a justified shooting,' Manger wrote. 'This settlement sends a chilling message to law enforcement officers across our nation – especially those who have a protective mission like ours.'
Rep. Glenn Ivey (D-Maryland), who counts Capitol Police and D.C. police officers among his constituents, said he believes Republicans do not want the plaque installed because they 'are embarrassed.'
'January 6 was a low moment for democracy, certainly in America but also around the world,' Ivey said. 'And it was the lowest possible moment for Donald Trump and the Republican Party.'
Ivey and other Democrats say they will continue their calls to have the plaque installed.
'We know the plaque was made, we know it is here in the Capitol and I have yet to see one good reason why the speaker hasn't put it up yet,' Sen. Patty Murray (D-Washington) said at a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing last week. 'I want you to know I'm going to keep pressing until we get that done.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Japan Times
2 hours ago
- Japan Times
U.S. museum says Trump administration did not compel impeachment display removal
The recent removal of a placard at the National Museum of American History that detailed President Donald Trump's two impeachments did not come after White House pressure, the museum's parent organization said Saturday. The placard was meant to be temporary and "did not meet the museum's standards in appearance, location, timeline and overall presentation," the Smithsonian Institution said in a statement on X. "It was not consistent with other sections in the exhibit and moreover blocked the view of the objects inside its case. For these reasons, we removed the placard. "We were not asked by any administration or other government official to remove content from the exhibit." The Smithsonian statement came after The Washington Post reported Thursday that the museum last month removed the placard describing Trump's impeachments and reverted to old signage that said "only three presidents have seriously faced removal" — Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton. The Post said the removal stemmed from a Smithsonian content review after the White House pressured the organization to remove a director of one of its art museums. Trump is the only American president to have been impeached twice — first in 2019 for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, then in 2021 for inciting an insurrection. He was acquitted by the Senate both times. Since starting his second term in January, the Republican has moved to control major cultural institutions while slashing arts and humanities funding. In March, Trump signed an executive order to "restore the Smithsonian Institution to its rightful place as a symbol of inspiration and American greatness" and "remove improper ideology." The order accused the institution of having "come under the influence of a divisive, race-centered ideology" and argued the shift has promoted narratives that portray American values as "inherently harmful and oppressive." The impeachment exhibit "will be updated in the coming weeks to reflect all impeachment proceedings in our nation's history," the Smithsonian said in its statement.
The Mainichi
7 hours ago
- The Mainichi
From Laos to Brazil, Trump's tariffs leave a lot of losers. But even the winners will pay a price
WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Donald Trump's tariff onslaught this week left a lot of losers -- from small, poor countries like Laos and Algeria to wealthy U.S. trading partners like Canada and Switzerland. They're now facing especially hefty taxes -- tariffs -- on the products they export to the United States starting Aug. 7. The closest thing to winners may be the countries that caved to Trump's demands -- and avoided even more pain. But it's unclear whether anyone will be able to claim victory in the long run -- even the United States, the intended beneficiary of Trump's protectionist policies. "In many respects, everybody's a loser here,'' said Barry Appleton, co-director of the Center for International Law at the New York Law School. Barely six months after he returned to the White House, Trump has demolished the old global economic order. Gone is one built on agreed-upon rules. In its place is a system in which Trump himself sets the rules, using America's enormous economic power to punish countries that won't agree to one-sided trade deals and extracting huge concessions from the ones that do. "The biggest winner is Trump," said Alan Wolff, a former U.S. trade official and deputy director-general at the World Trade Organization. "He bet that he could get other countries to the table on the basis of threats, and he succeeded -- dramatically.'' Everything goes back to what Trump calls "Liberation Day'' -- April 2 -- when the president announced "reciprocal'' taxes of up to 50% on imports from countries with which the United States ran trade deficits and 10% "baseline'' taxes on almost everyone else. He invoked a 1977 law to declare the trade deficit a national emergency that justified his sweeping import taxes. That allowed him to bypass Congress, which traditionally has had authority over taxes, including tariffs -- all of which is now being challenged in court. Winners will still pay higher tariffs than before Trump took office Trump retreated temporarily after his Liberation Day announcement triggered a rout in financial markets and suspended the reciprocal tariffs for 90 days to give countries a chance to negotiate. Eventually, some of them did, caving to Trump's demands to pay what four months ago would have seemed unthinkably high tariffs for the privilege of continuing to sell into the vast American market. The United Kingdom agreed to 10% tariffs on its exports to the United States -- up from 1.3% before Trump amped up his trade war with the world. The U.S. demanded concessions even though it had run a trade surplus, not a deficit, with the UK for 19 straight years. The European Union and Japan accepted U.S. tariffs of 15%. Those are much higher than the low single-digit rates they paid last year -- but lower than the tariffs he was threatening (30% on the EU and 25% on Japan). Also cutting deals with Trump and agreeing to hefty tariffs were Pakistan, South Korea, Vietnam, Indonesia and the Philippines. Even countries that saw their tariffs lowered from April without reaching a deal are still paying much higher tariffs than before Trump took office. Angola's tariff, for instance, dropped to 15% from 32% in April, but in 2022 it was less than 1.5%. And while Trump administration cut Taiwan's tariff to 20% from 32% in April, the pain will still be felt. "20% from the beginning has not been our goal, we hope that in further negotiations we will get a more beneficial and more reasonable tax rate," Taiwan's president Lai Ching-te told reporters in Taipei Friday. Trump also agreed to reduce the tariff on the tiny southern African kingdom of Lesotho to 15% from the 50% he'd announced in April, but the damage may already have been done there. Bashing Brazil, clobbering Canada, shellacking the Swiss Countries that didn't knuckle under -- and those that found other ways to incur Trump's wrath -- got hit harder. Even some poorer countries were not spared. Laos' annual economic output comes to $2,100 per person and Algeria's $5,600 -- versus America's $75,000. Nonetheless, Laos got rocked with a 40% tariff and Algeria with a 30% levy. Trump slammed Brazil with a 50% import tax largely because he didn't like the way it was treating former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, who is facing trial for trying to lose his electoral defeat in 2022. Never mind that the U.S. has exported more to Brazil than it's imported every year since 2007. Trump's decision to plaster a 35% tariff on longstanding U.S. ally Canada was partly designed to threaten Ottawa for saying it would recognize a Palestinian state. Trump is a staunch supporter of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Switzerland was clobbered with a 39% import tax -- even higher than the 31% Trump originally announced on April 2. "The Swiss probably wish that they had camped in Washington'' to make a deal, said Wolff, now senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. "They're clearly not at all happy.'' Fortunes may change if Trump's tariffs are upended in court. Five American businesses and 12 states are suing the president, arguing that his Liberation Day tariffs exceeded his authority under the 1977 law. In May, the U.S. Court of International Trade, a specialized court in New York, agreed and blocked the tariffs, although the government was allowed to continue collecting them while its appeal wend its way through the legal system, and may likely end up at the U.S. Supreme Court. In a hearing Thursday, the judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit sounded skeptical about Trump's justifications for the tariffs. "If (the tariffs) get struck down, then maybe Brazil's a winner and not a loser,'' Appleton said. Paying more for knapsacks and video games Trump portrays his tariffs as a tax on foreign countries. But they are actually paid by import companies in the U.S. who try to pass along the cost to their customers via higher prices. True, tariffs can hurt other countries by forcing their exporters to cut prices and sacrifice profits -- or risk losing market share in the United States. But economists at Goldman Sachs estimate that overseas exporters have absorbed just one-fifth of the rising costs from tariffs, while Americans and U.S. businesses have picked up the most of the tab. Walmart, Procter & Gamble, Ford, Best Buy, Adidas, Nike, Mattel and Stanley Black & Decker, have all hiked prices due to U.S. tariffs "This is a consumption tax, so it disproportionately affects those who have lower incomes,'' Appleton said. "Sneakers, knapsacks ... your appliances are going to go up. Your TV and electronics are going to go up. Your video game devices, consoles are going to up because none of those are made in America.'' Trump's trade war has pushed the average U.S. tariff from 2.5% at the start of 2025 to 18.3% now, the highest since 1934, according to the Budget Lab at Yale University. And that will impose a $2,400 cost on the average household, the lab estimates. "The U.S. consumer's a big loser," Wolff said.
Japan Times
7 hours ago
- Japan Times
How Trump is gaslighting the climate — with Japan's help
Nestled among the bold characters of headlines about freshly signed U.S. trade deals are equally bold numbers: $550 billion, $250 billion, $100 billion. These are some of the eye-watering figures that countries have promised to invest in or buy from the United States' energy sector — primarily its fossil fuel industry — as part of the agreements. Whether such large amounts of money will actually be pumped into the U.S. economy is yet to be seen, but in the meantime, U.S. President Donald Trump is living up to his promise to 'drill, baby, drill' by aggressively promoting America's energy resources, especially natural gas. Increasing the United States' oil and gas production means it can rely on these as cheap energy sources domestically while also selling them abroad to reduce its trade deficit with other countries — so the MAGA argument goes. Major environmental concerns about boosting this industry aside — particularly given the country's status as the top emitter of methane from oil and gas production — the economic case is also far from clear. Increased American gas exports, most of which are traded abroad via ship as liquefied natural gas (LNG), could push up domestic energy prices at a time when households are already feeling the pain of high living costs. Plus, as the world gears up for an unprecedented increase in LNG export capacity, many believe that global supply will outstrip demand, which is falling in major markets such as Japan and Europe and may not grow as much as the industry hopes in emerging economies such as China and India. With its LNG export capacity set to triple, accounting for one-third of the global total by 2030, the U.S. needs buyers. This is where Trump's leverage tactics come in handy as Washington pushes America's trading partners — including Japan — to buy more U.S. gas in exchange for more lenient tariffs. The question of Asia's gas needs also hangs over what U.S. President Donald Trump hopes will become the crown jewel of American energy dominance: Alaska LNG. | Reuters In February, Trump said Japan would start importing 'record numbers' of American LNG. While the president's hyperboles should be taken with a comparably large grain of salt, Japanese companies have indeed been buying more of the fuel this year, on top of already sizable contracts and investments. Japanese banks are the top three financiers of LNG export projects in the U.S. Jera, Japan's largest power generator and one of the biggest LNG importers globally, has increased the U.S. share of its gas mix from 10% to nearly 30%. On July 22, as the ink on the U.S.-Japan trade deal was still drying, Trump said Japan had agreed to form a joint venture to develop an LNG project in Alaska, without specifying which project. The details of any potential venture remain unclear. But the reality for those living at the heart of the American LNG buildout, in the coastal communities of Texas and Louisiana that look out on to the Gulf of Mexico, is one of diminishing returns. Having already suffered the brunt of decades of oil, gas and petrochemical development — including a boom in LNG export facilities in the wake of the 2016 U.S. shale gas revolution that transformed the country from a net gas importer into the world's No. 1 exporter — their health, livelihoods and environment are at stake as more facilities are due to come online. 'Paying for, financing, funding and insuring these projects is ensuring my children's deaths,' says Roishetta Ozane, founder of the Vessel Project of Louisiana, a disaster relief and environmental justice organization, and co-director of the Gulf South Fossil Finance Hub, who lives in Sulphur, Louisiana. Ozane's six children suffer from ailments including skin, respiratory and neurological disorders. Near where her family lives, CP2 LNG, a planned LNG export facility, reached a final investment decision — a key milestone for large energy projects — last month, thanks in part to a political and regulatory environment that is proving to be as accommodating to fossil fuel development as it is hostile to climate policies and renewable energy. Redrawing the energy map The U.S. government is doing everything in its power to move gas projects ahead, with Trump kicking off a wave of environmental deregulation and oil and gas permitting. On his first day back in office, the president signed an executive order called Unleashing American Energy, undoing predecessor Joe Biden's investments in clean energy and electric vehicles and boosting production of oil and gas — the 'liquid gold under our feet,' as Trump called it in his inaugural address. Fishing boats in the Calcasieu Ship Channel, which connects Lake Charles, Louisiana, with the Gulf of Mexico. Since Calcasieu Pass LNG started production in 2022, catches of shrimp, crabs and fish have decreased dramatically year after year, local fishers say. | Mara Budgen Soon after, Washington established the National Energy Dominance Council, headed by Interior Secretary Doug Burgum and Energy Secretary Chris Wright, a fracking millionaire. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the gargantuan Republican spending legislation adopted in July, incentivizes oil and gas leasing, including by lowering federal royalties rates, and repeals a fee on methane emissions. Trump also lifted a moratorium on permits for new LNG export facilities that was adopted by Biden in January 2024. Among such facilities, CP2 LNG, located in the Calcasieu Ship Channel in Cameron Parish, Louisiana, has received federal approval; if constructed, it would put the company that owns the project, Venture Global, in the lead as the United States' biggest LNG exporter. LNG has also become a major bargaining chip in Trump's trade wars. While this isn't the first U.S. administration to use the fuel as a geopolitical tool, 'Trump has taken a sticks, not a carrot approach' like others before him, says Sam Reynolds, a research lead at the U.S.-based Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA). This push 'has been largely successful' as Asian, European and Middle Eastern buyers sign on to purchase more American gas. 'The administration is trying to redraw the map of energy dependence,' says Reynolds, though the growing competitiveness of renewable energy globally 'will challenge what the U.S. can feasibly achieve by doubling down on fossil fuels.' Footing the bill On an early morning in mid-July, Ray Mallet is on his boat in the Calcasieu Ship Channel, where CP2 LNG is being built, on the coast of the Gulf of Mexico — waters he knows well, having worked there as a commercial fisher all his life. But on this day, Mallet isn't casting his nets and lines as usual. Together with other fishers, as well as scientists and local environmentalists, he's deploying hydrophones in the water to test whether noise pollution from the Calcasieu Pass LNG export terminal, which sits where the channel meets the gulf, is causing a severe decline in seafood catch rates. U.S. President Donald Trump holds a joint press conference with Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba at the White House in Washington on Feb. 7. | Reuters The hydrophones are being used to scientifically verify what local fisherfolk already 'know and see,' says Alyssa Portaro, founder of the Habitat Recovery Project, a Louisiana-based conservation nonprofit that is running the data collection project: Since Calcasieu Pass LNG started production in 2022, catches of shrimp, crabs and fish have decreased dramatically year after year. 'I've had to go fish elsewhere to try to support my family,' Mallet says. Anthony Theriot, known as 'Tad,' who lives a little over 1.5 kilometers from Calcasieu Pass LNG, has also been fishing here his whole life. Shrimpers and fishers used to make a good living, he says, but income has declined sharply since the plant started. 'This was the No. 1 seafood capital of the U.S. and now it's the world capital of LNG exports,' says Portaro. What is happening in Cameron Parish mirrors conditions across the Gulf Coast. Existing socioeconomic disparities are being exacerbated as American LNG facilities 'tend to be sited in areas that are disproportionately home to communities of color and low-income communities,' according to a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) study on the impacts of U.S. LNG exports that was mandated by the Biden-era moratorium. But the consequences may be felt further afield: The U.S. Energy Information Administration expects domestic gas prices to more than double through 2026 compared with last year and the DOE study finds that increasing LNG exports will lead to higher electric bills. Rising prices are also a concern for the industry as the cost of building LNG plants has soared, compounded by 50% U.S. tariffs on imported steel and aluminium. Among those caught in the fallout is a major Japanese engineering, procurement and construction contractor, Chiyoda Corp., which in July stated that it will stop pursuing large-scale LNG projects overseas due to losses incurred from some U.S. facilities. Ultimately, international buyers will foot at least part of the bill. 'U.S. LNG prices abroad are based on that domestic gas price as well as the capital expenditure of the facilities and both of those are rising,' says IEEFA's Reynolds. In signing up for more American gas, Japan is 'essentially committing over the long term to pay more for LNG.' Unleashing a carbon bomb? The world's top LNG players, including Japan, are predicting high prices and high demand for the fuel, especially in Asia, over the next couple of decades. Yet many others foresee a glut in the market, with expected amounts of additional LNG supply above the level of demand in developing parts of Asia, according to Anne-Sophie Corbeau, global research scholar at Columbia University's Center on Global Energy Policy. 'There is a reasonable question about where all this LNG is going to go,' Corbeau says. Reynolds points, for example, to the industry's overly optimistic predictions about China. While it is the world's largest buyer of LNG, having surpassed Japan in 2021, its imports haven't grown significantly since then, in part due to a record-breaking adoption of renewable energy. In Japan, gas demand is declining year after year, though according to the economy ministry, predicting future trends is difficult given the advent of new industries and technologies. This means preparing for several scenarios, including one in which electricity demand increases due to the growth of artificial intelligence, among other factors, but energy sources such as renewables are deployed slowly. The government envisions a significant reduction of thermal power — including coal and gas — in Japan's energy mix, but continues to set high targets for how much LNG its companies should contract. A children's playground next to the Freeport LNG export terminal in Texas. Existing socioeconomic disparities are being exacerbated as American LNG facilities 'tend to be sited in areas that are disproportionately home to communities of color and low-income communities,' according to a U.S. Department of Energy study. | Mara Budgen What LNG isn't needed domestically is increasingly being resold to countries in South and Southeast Asia. The question of Asia's gas needs also hangs over what Trump hopes will become the crown jewel of American energy dominance: Alaska LNG. The project entails building a 1,300-kilometer north-south pipeline to transport gas across the largest U.S. state. From the south coast, LNG would be shipped to Asia via a much shorter route than that from the Gulf Coast — for example, gas would reach Japan in around 10 days rather than the typical 30 to 40 days. Despite being under discussion for decades, Alaska LNG has never been developed due to the huge cost of building and operating a pipeline in the state's harsh geographic and climatic conditions. In 2016, energy consultancy Wood Mackenzie called it 'one of the least competitive' LNG projects in the world. Estimated to cost $44 billion — proportionally double the price of LNG export projects in the Gulf Coast — additional expenses, such as those incurred from the new tariff regime, haven't even been factored in yet, Reynolds points out. Alaska LNG has signed a nonbinding agreement with a Thai buyer and received interest from Indian, Taiwanese and South Korean players as well as Japanese companies such as Jera, Tokyo Gas and Mitsui. In contrast, the president of Japan Petroleum Exploration told Reuters in February that Alaska LNG 'is not a realistic investment proposition due to its unclear economics and large scale.' 'If it has not taken a final investment decision, there is a very simple reason for that — economics,' Corbeau says. Chris Wright, U.S. energy secretary, speaks during a conference in February. | Eric Lee / The New York Times Climate concerns also loom large when it comes to Alaska LNG — labeled a 'carbon bomb' by environmental groups — and other such developments. As global demand for oil collapses, gas is the fossil fuel industry's last frontier. To some, this is good news, as gas emits less carbon dioxide than coal and oil when burned and can keep the lights on as societies transition to less carbon-intensive energy systems. Others are concerned that investments in gas compete with those in renewables — a fact also highlighted by the DOE study — while experts note that lower carbon dioxide emissions does not mean it is a clean alternative, particularly because of the significant amount of methane emitted along the value chain. 'It's like you're trying to eat a healthier diet and instead of eating cookies, you're going to eat candy,' says Allie Rosenbluth, U.S. campaign manager at U.S.-based nonprofit Oil Change International. Why not 'try an apple'? Some Gulf Coast communities are taking matters into their own hands. Melanie Oldham, founder and director of environmental justice organization Better Brazoria, lives a few kilometers from the Freeport LNG export facility in Freeport, Texas. Her community has started recording methane emissions from the plant using an optical gas imaging camera so that 'people can see that we're telling the truth' about LNG pollution, Oldham says. While climate skeptics such as Wright — Trump's energy secretary, who has described concerns about climate change as a 'mania' — are too vocal a contingent in the U.S. government, Oldham urges 'decision-makers in Europe and Asia (to) take a look at the whole picture.' 'People know that these projects are not a done deal,' says Rosenbluth. 'They need local and state permits. They need financiers, they need actual buyers, and many of these projects do not have all of those things.'
