Wisconsin Supreme Court delivers win for environmentalists in fight over ‘forever chemicals'
The liberal-controlled court ruled that state regulators can force landowners to clean up emerging pollutants such as PFAS before they are officially designated as hazardous substances.
The 5-2 ruling is a defeat for the state's powerful group representing businesses and manufacturers, which had argued the state couldn't enforce regulations on substances before they were officially designated as hazardous.
It is the latest development in a yearslong battle in Wisconsin and nationally involving regulators, environmentalists, politicians and businesses over how to deal with PFAS contamination.
The PFAS problem
Cities large and small across Wisconsin, from Madison to Marinette and La Crosse to Wausau, are grappling with PFAS contamination. The U.S. Geological Survey has estimated that at least 45% of the nation's tap water is contaminated with PFAS.
PFAS, or perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are a group of chemicals that have been around for decades and have now spread into the nation's air, water and soil.
They were manufactured by companies such as 3M, Chemours and others because they were incredibly useful. They helped eggs slide across nonstick frying pans, ensured that firefighting foam suffocates flames and helped clothes withstand the rain and keep people dry.
The chemicals resist breaking down, however, which means they stay around in the environment and have a hard time breaking down in the body. There is a wide range of health harms now associated with exposure to certain PFAS, including low birth weight, cancer and liver disease.
Democratic Gov. Tony Evers and Republican legislators have been at odds over how to address the problem for years, with both sides blaming the other for not earmarking more money for clean up efforts.
The Wisconsin case
The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled in a case brought by the state's largest business group, Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, which sued the DNR in 2021 on behalf of Leather Rich, a dry cleaning business in Oconomowoc.
Leather Rich became aware of PFAS contamination in 2018 and was working on cleaning it up when the DNR posted a message online in 2019 saying it now considered PFAS chemicals a hazardous substance. The agency ordered the dry cleaner to test its groundwater for PFAS but didn't tell the business which compounds it needed to test for or what levels would be considered dangerous.
They argued the DNR can't force businesses to test and clean up contamination from emerging pollutants like PFAS without first designating them as hazardous substances. That process can take years and requires approval from the Legislature.
A Waukesha County judge and the state appeals court sided with Leather Rich.
The DNR appealed, arguing that it could unilaterally force testing because state law gives the agency broad authority to protect the environment. It also argued that the lower court's ruling would neuter the state's 'spills law,' which was designed to confront pollution.
That law, enacted about 50 years ago, requires anyone who causes, possesses or controls a hazardous substance that's been released into the environment to clean it up.
Wednesdays
Columnist Jen Zoratti looks at what's next in arts, life and pop culture.
Fight over PFAS regulation
Since the lawsuit was filed, additional state and federal regulations of PFAS have been put in place.
Federal regulators placed the first-ever national standards on PFAS in drinking water last year, but the Trump administration said in May that it planned to weaken those limits.
The state has imposed less restrictive limits on PFAS in surface and drinking water, defined as piped water delivered through public systems and noncommunity systems that serve places such as factories, schools and hotels.
But it has not implemented PFAS standards for groundwater, the source of drinking water for about two-thirds of Wisconsin residents. The agency stopped efforts to draft them in 2023 after determining that compliance would be too expensive.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Winnipeg Free Press
3 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
How a GOP rift over tech regulation doomed a ban on state AI laws in Trump's tax bill
NEW YORK (AP) — A controversial bid to deter states from regulating artificial intelligence for a decade seemed on its way to passing as the Republican tax cut and spending bill championed by President Donald Trump worked its way through the U.S. Senate. But as the bill neared a final vote, a relentless campaign against it by a constellation of conservatives — including Republican governors, lawmakers, think tanks and social groups — had been eroding support. One, conservative activist Mike Davis, appeared on the show of right-wing podcaster Steve Bannon, urging viewers to call their senators to reject this 'AI amnesty' for 'trillion-dollar Big Tech monopolists.' He said he also texted with Trump directly, advising the president to stay neutral on the issue despite what Davis characterized as significant pressure from White House AI czar David Sacks, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and others. Conservatives passionate about getting rid of the provision had spent weeks fighting others in the party who favored the legislative moratorium because they saw it as essential for the country to compete against China in the race for AI dominance. The schism marked the latest and perhaps most noticeable split within the GOP about whether to let states continue to put guardrails on emerging technologies or minimize such interference. In the end, the advocates for guardrails won, revealing the enormous influence of a segment of the Republican Party that has come to distrust Big Tech. They believe states must remain free to protect their citizens against potential harms of the industry, whether from AI, social media or emerging technologies. 'Tension in the conservative movement is palpable,' said Adam Thierer of the R Street Institute, a conservative-leaning think tank. Thierer first proposed the idea of the AI moratorium last year. He noted 'the animus surrounding Big Tech' among many Republicans. 'That was the differentiating factor.' Conservative v. conservative in a last-minute fight The Heritage Foundation, children's safety groups and Republican state lawmakers, governors and attorneys general all weighed in against the AI moratorium. Democrats, tech watchdogs and some tech companies opposed it, too. Sensing the moment was right on Monday night, Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, who opposed the AI provision and had attempted to water it down, teamed up with Democratic Sen. Maria Cantwell of Washington to suggest striking the entire proposal. By morning, the provision was removed in a 99-1 vote. The whirlwind demise of a provision that initially had the backing of House and Senate leadership and the White House disappointed other conservatives who felt it gave China, a main AI competitor, an advantage. Ryan Fournier, chairman of Students for Trump and chief marketing officer of the startup Uncensored AI, had supported the moratorium, writing on X that it 'stops blue states like California and New York from handing our future to Communist China.' 'Republicans are that way … I get it,' he said in an interview, but added there needs to be 'one set of rules, not 50' for AI innovation to be successful. AI advocates fear a patchwork of state rules Tech companies, tech trade groups, venture capitalists and multiple Trump administration figures had voiced their support for the provision that would have blocked states from passing their own AI regulations for years. They argued that in the absence of federal standards, letting the states take the lead would leave tech innovators mired in a confusing patchwork of rules. Lutnick, the commerce secretary, posted that the provision 'makes sure American companies can develop cutting-edge tech for our military, infrastructure, and critical industries — without interference from anti-innovation politicians.' AI czar Sacks had also publicly supported the measure. After the Senate passed the bill without the AI provision, the White House responded to an inquiry for Sacks with the president's position, saying Trump 'is fully supportive of the Senate-passed version of the One, Big, Beautiful Bill.' Acknowledging defeat of his provision on the Senate floor, Cruz noted how pleased China, liberal politicians and 'radical left-wing groups' would be to hear the news. But Blackburn pointed out that the federal government has failed to pass laws that address major concerns about AI, such as keeping children safe and securing copyright protections. 'But you know who has passed it?' she said. 'The states.' Conservatives want to win the AI race, but disagree on how Conservatives distrusting Big Tech for what they see as social media companies stifling speech during the COVID-19 pandemic and surrounding elections said that tech companies shouldn't get a free pass, especially on something that carries as much risk as AI. Many who opposed the moratorium also brought up preserving states' rights, though proponents countered that AI issues transcend state borders and Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce. Eric Lucero, a Republican state lawmaker in Minnesota, noted that many other industries already navigate different regulations established by both state and local jurisdictions. 'I think everyone in the conservative movement agrees we need to beat China,' said Daniel Cochrane from the Heritage Foundation. 'I just think we have different prescriptions for doing so.' Many argued that in the absence of federal legislation, states were best positioned to protect citizens from the potential harms of AI technology. 'We have no idea what AI will be capable of in the next 10 years and giving it free rein and tying states hands is potentially dangerous,' Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene wrote on X. A call for federal rules Another Republican, Texas state Sen. Angela Paxton, wrote to Cruz and his counterpart, Sen. John Cornyn, urging them to remove the moratorium. She and other conservatives said some sort of federal standard could help clarify the landscape around AI and resolve some of the party's disagreements. Wednesdays Columnist Jen Zoratti looks at what's next in arts, life and pop culture. But with the moratorium dead and Republicans holding only narrow majorities in both chambers of Congress, it's unclear whether they will be able to agree on a set of standards to guide the development of the burgeoning technology. In an email to The Associated Press, Paxton said she wants to see limited federal AI legislation 'that sets some clear guardrails' around national security and interstate commerce, while leaving states free to address issues that affect their residents. 'When it comes to technology as powerful and potentially dangerous as AI, we should be cautious about silencing state-level efforts to protect consumers and children,' she said. ___ Associated Press writer Matt Brown in Washington contributed to this report.
Winnipeg Free Press
3 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Trump will kick off a yearlong celebration of America's 250th anniversary with event in Iowa
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump campaigned on a promise to deliver a 'spectacular' yearlong birthday party to mark 250 years of American independence. On Thursday, he will be in the U.S. heartland to kick off the patriotic festivities leading up to next year's anniversary. The event at the Iowa State Fairgrounds in Des Moines will feature 'dazzling' displays of Americana and American history, musical performances and a fireworks show to cap the night, said U.S. Ambassador Monica Crowley, Trump's liaison to the organizing group, America250. Organizers see the coming year of festivities as a way to help unite a polarized nation and bridge partisanship — a monumental task given the country's divides. Thursday's event comes as the Republican-controlled Congress pushed for final passage of a sweeping tax cuts and spending package that's at the heart of Trump's legislative agenda but has united all Democrats against it. More U.S. adults also disapprove than approve of how the Republican president is doing his job. Iowa was a 'logical choice' for the kickoff, Crowley said, because of its central location and Trump's affinity for the state, which supported him in each of the last three general elections. She also said Iowa's middle-of-the-country geography is symbolic of the desire to use the coming celebrations to help bring people together. 'We've had so much division and so much polarization over the last many decades, but certainly over the last few years, that to be able to bring the country together to celebrate America's 250th birthday through patriotism, shared values and a renewed sense of civic pride, to be able to do that in the center of the country, is incredibly important,' she said. A recent Gallup poll showed the widest partisan split in patriotism in over two decades, with only about a third of Democrats saying they are proud to be American compared with about 9 in 10 Republicans. About 4 in 10 U.S. adults approve of Trump's performance as president, according to a June AP-NORC poll, while about 6 in 10 disapprove. That poll also showed a majority of Americans said the June military parade that Trump greenlit in Washington for the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army — an event that fell on his 79th birthday — was 'not a good use' of government money. Crowley spoke to the political and ideological schisms that left the country 'torn apart' ahead of its last big birthday celebration, noting that 1976 closely followed the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal that led Richard Nixon to resign from the presidency. 'That moment was critical to uniting the country and moving forward, and I am very optimistic and hopeful that the yearlong celebration that we're about to launch will do the same thing in this present moment,' she said in an interview. America's 250th birthday 'is something that I think that all Americans can come together to celebrate and honor our history as well as our present and our future,' Crowley said. On July 4, 1776, the Continental Congress adopted the Declaration of Independence, officially marking the 13 colonies' split from Great Britain. 'We're gonna have a big, big celebration, as you know, 250 years,' Trump said about the birthday during his Memorial Day address to a solemn audience at Arlington National Cemetery. 'In some ways, I'm glad I missed that second term where it was because I wouldn't be your president for that.' Video of then-candidate Trump proposing a 'Great American State Fair' in Iowa in May 2023 began to recirculate after his reelection last November. Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds, a Republican, told the White House earlier this year that Iowa stood 'ready' to host the event and that Trump had the state's full support, according to a draft of Reynolds' letter obtained by The Associated Press. The culminating fair instead will be held next year on the National Mall in Washington, according to a White House official who was not authorized to share details publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity. But Trump honored his initial proposal with a kickoff in the first-in-the-nation caucus state. The lineup Thursday night will include Lee Greenwood, according to social media posts advertising the event, whose song, 'God Bless the USA,' is a regular feature at Trump rallies and official events. Also attending will be Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins. ___ Fingerhut reported from Des Moines, Iowa. AP Polling Editor Amelia Thomson DeVeaux in Washington contributed to this report.
Winnipeg Free Press
4 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Massachusetts advocates fear Trump's bill will unravel health safety net in Obamacare's model state
BOSTON (AP) — In the state that served as the model for Obamacare, advocates and health care workers fear the Trump administration is trying to dismantle piece-by-piece a popular program that has provided insurance, preventive care and life-saving medication to hundreds of thousands of people. Provisions contained in both the Senate and House versions of the massive tax and spending cuts bill advancing in Congress — a centerpiece of President Donald Trump's agenda — could strip health insurance from up to a quarter of the roughly 400,000 people enrolled in the Massachusetts Health Connector, according to state estimates. The changes would create anew the coverage gaps state leaders were working to close when Massachusetts in 2006 became the first U.S. state to enact a law requiring nearly every resident to have health insurance, state officials say. Beyond the effect on residents' health, losing care could have broader repercussions — both for the program's finances and residents' ability to make a living. 'The idea of needing to unwind that now and pull back on that promise and commitment is really frustrating and heartbreaking and cruel and counterproductive,' said Audrey Morse Gasteier, executive director of Massachusetts' health insurance marketplace. Trump and Republican supporters in Congress say the changes, which include new documentation requirements and limitations on who can apply for tax credits to help pay for insurance, are necessary to root out what they call fraud, waste and abuse. The Affordable Care Act changes proposed in both versions of the bill, along with massive cuts to Medicaid and other programs, would eliminate roughly $1.1 trillion in health care spending over the next decade, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. In Lawrence, a mill community of around 90,000 people on the Merrimack River, where more than 80% of the population is Hispanic or Latino, Kesia Moreta said she's already seeing people slip out of the state's health care network because of the Trump administration's aggressive effort to crack down on illegal immigration. Moreta, who manages a program created under the ACA that helps people sign up for coverage, said clients have been missing meetings out of fear that being enrolled for health insurance will harm their effort to stay in the U.S. legally. Recently, a father of a U.S.-born teenage son with epilepsy deleted every email related to his health plan and stopped answering calls from the Connector after watching reports about deportations on social media. When his son's medication ran out, Moreta said the father finally reached out, whispering over the phone, 'Is this going to get me deported?' 'That breaks our hearts,' Moreta said. Proposed changes More than 98% of Massachusetts residents have health insurance, the lowest rate of uninsurance in the country, according to the Massachusetts Health Insurance Survey. Vicky Pulos, an attorney for the Mass Law Reform Institute who helps low-income people gain access to health care, said Republicans who tried and failed to repeal the Affordable Care Act during the first Trump administration have decided to take it apart incrementally despite its growing popularity. 'It really seems like this is just a less transparent way of effectively dismantling the accomplishments of the Affordable Care Act in both Medicaid and the marketplace,' Pulos said. The changes, she added, 'will massively drive up the number of uninsured but without openly repealing the ACA.' Another provision included in both the House and Senate bills would require people applying for or renewing coverage to provide more documentation of their income, household size and immigration status to be eligible for premium tax credits when the state marketplace already has that information, which Morse Gasteier said would cause 'friction, red tape and delays.' The Trump administration has said the proposals will 'put a stop' to immigrants 'stealing taxpayer-funded health care benefits meant for American citizens.' No states use federal money to provide health insurance to people who are in the U.S. illegally. Some, like Massachusetts, use state tax dollars to do so to provide basic primary care services for a small population of vulnerable residents, like children. No undocumented immigrants receive insurance through the state marketplace. Of the 400,000 enrolled in the state marketplace, around 60,000 are noncitizens who are in the U.S. legally and would lose access to federal premium tax credits if either chamber's version of the bill becomes law. The number includes domestic violence and human trafficking victims, refugees, people granted asylum or humanitarian parole, temporary protected status and other work-authorized immigrants. Without the credits, premiums will cost upwards of $500 or $600 — an increase many people can't afford, Morse Gasteier said. Around half are green-card holders with an annual income of $15,000 a year or less. The remaining 40,000 people expected to lose coverage are U.S. citizens Morse Gasteier said could be stymied in applying or recertifying coverage by provisions like the increased documentation requirements. Fears of trust l ost Morse Gasteier said Massachusetts' marketplace worked 'tirelessly' to enroll vulnerable and hard-to-reach populations after the state program — formed under the leadership of then-Gov. Mitt Romney and known as 'Romneycare' — was created. She worries that if people hear help is no longer available, 'entire populations will just sort of give up on health insurance.' In addition to affecting residents' health, that could have an economic impact in the state. Immigrants with legal status enrolled in the state marketplace tend to be younger than the rest of the population, Morse Gasteier said. Their presence brings premiums down for others because they tend to be healthier. Wednesdays Columnist Jen Zoratti looks at what's next in arts, life and pop culture. In Lawrence, advocates who help people obtain insurance coverage though the ACA marketplace say the burden would fall disproportionately on people with chronic health issues like diabetes and chronic heart disease. The Greater Lawrence Community Action Council assists around 10,000 people a year with either signing up for or renewing health insurance. 'If you're not healthy, let me tell you, you can't work. If you can't work, you can't pay your bills. It's just as simple as that,' said GLCAC CEO Vilma Martinez-Dominguez. Moreta said one man who called her from the emergency room recently said he discovered his health insurance had lapsed. Moreta said she could help him renew it, and urged him to wait at the hospital. He told her not to do anything. He was leaving the hospital. She has no idea what became of him.
