Public Policy & NGOs
Here's a look at documents from public policy and non-governmental organizations
Featured Stories
WildEarth Guardians: Federal Agency Re-Approves Highway Through Red Cliffs National Conservation Area, Abandons Own Scientific Findings
SANTA FE, New Mexico, Jan. 22 -- WildEarth Guardians issued the following news release on Jan. 21, 2026:
* * *
Federal Agency Re-Approves Highway Through Red Cliffs National Conservation Area, Abandons Own Scientific Findings
Coalition of Local Residents and State and National Organizations Vow to Continue Decades-Long Fight
*
ST. GEORGE, Utah - The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) re-approved a proposal from the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT), at the behest of Washington County, for the construction of a four-lane Northern Corridor Highway through the Red Cliffs National Conservation
... Show Full Article
SANTA FE, New Mexico, Jan. 22 -- WildEarth Guardians issued the following news release on Jan. 21, 2026:
* * *
Federal Agency Re-Approves Highway Through Red Cliffs National Conservation Area, Abandons Own Scientific Findings
Coalition of Local Residents and State and National Organizations Vow to Continue Decades-Long Fight
*
ST. GEORGE, Utah - The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) re-approved a proposal from the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT), at the behest of Washington County, for the construction of a four-lane Northern Corridor Highway through the Red Cliffs National ConservationArea near St. George, Utah. Today's decision reverses a December 2024 rejection of the same proposal by the BLM and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and marks the eighth time the controversial highway has been considered. The project has been halted on every previous attempt over concerns related to wildlife, public safety, legal compliance, and community opposition.
"This is a deeply disappointing decision for our organization and for the thousands of community members who have continually voiced their opposition to the highway," said Stacey Wittek, the Executive Director of Conserve Southwest Utah. "But the fight to protect Red Cliffs National Conservation Area is far from over. We are carefully assessing every available option to protect this important and iconic land for future generations."
The proposed Northern Corridor Highway would carve a four-lane, high-speed road through designated critical habitat for the threatened Mojave desert tortoise within Red Cliffs National Conservation Area, damage iconic red rock landscapes, disrupt treasured outdoor recreation opportunities, and set a dangerous precedent for Congressionally-protected public lands across the U.S.
BLM's 2024 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement found the project would increase wildfire probability and frequency, permanently eliminate designated critical tortoise habitat, spread noxious weeds and invasive plants, and harm more cultural and historical resources than any alternative considered.
"Despite BLM's 2024 findings, Washington County and UDOT continue to push for an illegal highway while ignoring past promises to protect Red Cliffs National Conservation Area," said Wittek. "The idea that rock climbing, mountain biking, and other cherished recreation in the Greater Moe's Valley can only be protected if the Northern Corridor Highway is approved is simply false. Local elected officials can decide to decouple the two issues, and commit to engaging stakeholders in finding ways to protect Greater Moe's Valley and follow through on promises to protect Red Cliffs."
Below are statements on behalf of local residents and Utah-based and national conservation organizations:
"This is a very disturbing decision. The pollution, lights, and noise will significantly reduce my quality of life. It also sets a precedent that public lands are open for development. I am highly disappointed in BLM for this reckless decision," said Mary Jo Vilicich, Green Springs Neighborhood resident.
"I don't understand how the BLM can move forward with a highway when the agency has already acknowledged how harmful it would be. The Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement stated an increased risk of wildfires. A lot of us already struggle to get home insurance because of fire danger, and I honestly worry it'll become impossible if the highway is built," said Ken Bouvier, Green Springs Neighborhood resident.
"Today's decision is a major misstep by the BLM, which is doing the bidding of Utah politicians insistent on punching a broadly opposed and illegal highway through protected public lands. We won't stand idly by while BLM blatantly ignores its own scientific findings and a Congressionally-mandated requirement to manage Red Cliffs National Conservation Area for conservation and recreation," said Hannah Goldblatt, staff attorney at Advocates for the West and counsel for conservation groups.
"When Congress designated Red Cliffs as a National Conservation Area, that was a promise to the American people that this landscape would be protected forever. Allowing a four-lane highway to bulldoze through a Congressionally-protected National Conservation Area betrays that promise, obliterates the very concept of permanent protection and puts every single acre of America's protected public lands directly in harm's way. Today it's Red Cliffs. Tomorrow it could be any of the millions of acres of protected public lands Americans and rural communities depend on. We won't let that happen, and we will fight this decision with everything we have," said Charlotte Overby, Vice President of Conservation Field Programs for Conservation Lands Foundation.
"The Bureau of Land Management's decision to reverse itself is a disastrous mistake. Bulldozing a highway through Red Cliffs National Conservation Area would destroy some of the last best habitat for threatened desert tortoises and forever scar this rare natural refuge," said Lisa Belenky, senior counsel at the Center for Biological Diversity. "We'll keep fighting this high-speed roadway because it's both unlawful and unwise to sacrifice important wildlife habitat on our protected public lands for more urban sprawl."
"The Red Cliffs National Conservation Area is a shared public treasure that should continue to be managed for the purposes for which it was established by Congress in 2009: 'to conserve, protect and enhance for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations the ecological, scenic, wildlife, recreational, cultural, historical, natural, educational and scientific resources of the National Conservation Area' and 'to protect each species that is located in the National Conservation Area,'" said Gregg DeBie, senior staff attorney at The Wilderness Society. "Bulldozing a four-lane highway through this landscape would permanently destroy these irreplaceable resources and deny us the freedom to continue enjoying them."
"Even after a long history of analysis and rejection by federal land managers, the ill-advised Northern Corridor Highway proposal seems to return every few years," said Kya Marienfeld, Wildlands Attorney at the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance. "Continuing the crusade to build a highway in a Congressionally-designated conservation area is not only illegal, it is-after more than a decade of failed attempts-downright foolish. But these public lands, and the critical habitat and cultural sites they contain, are too important to abandon, and the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance and our members remain committed to protecting them."
"It's pathetic that state and local politicians want to put a highway through the Red Cliffs and ruin what is an astonishing asset for all of us, but especially for the people of Washington County," said Chris Krupp, Public Lands Attorney for WildEarth Guardians. "It's even worse that BLM is bending over backward to endorse the scheme. So we'll keep fighting for the Red Cliffs, regardless of how long it takes to overcome this short-sighted plan for the highway."
"UDOT and Washington County have for years refused to engage their constituents in open discussions on issues with their proposed solution to anticipated future traffic congestion and on alternative solutions that would protect both Red Cliffs National Conservation Area and the Greater Moe's Valley Area, which the county proposed as mitigation," said Tom Butine, Washington County resident.
A History of Rejection
Today's decision overturns the most recent federal rejection of the Northern Corridor Highway in a decades-long fight led by local residents, conservation organizations, and outdoor recreationists to block the highway. The Northern Corridor proposal has been rejected seven times since 2006, when local residents first raised concerns about routing a highway through protected public lands.
Despite immense local opposition, the BLM and Fish and Wildlife Service approved a right-of-way for the Northern Corridor Highway in the final days of the first Trump Administration. Conservation groups sued, arguing that the approval violated multiple federal laws, including the Omnibus Public Land Management Act, Endangered Species Act, National Environmental Policy Act, National Historic Preservation Act, and others.
The case resulted in a settlement agreement in August 2023 and a U.S. District Court decision sending back the project's 2021 right-of-way approval. Agencies acknowledged that the approval did not comply with the National Historic Preservation Act and required additional environmental analysis in light of recent wildfires that further degraded Mojave desert tortoise habitat and native vegetation. After updating its environmental analysis, the BLM again rejected the project in late 2024.
In October 2025, the agency said it would reconsider the application after UDOT argued that the federally endorsed alternative was economically infeasible, despite documented environmental and community costs associated with the Northern Corridor.
Background on Red Cliffs National Conservation Area (NCA):
The 44,724-acre Red Cliffs National Conservation Area is part of the larger Red Cliffs Desert Reserve, which is jointly managed by the BLM, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the state of Utah, Washington County, and local municipalities. The reserve was established under a 1995 Habitat Conservation Plan as a compromise to protect roughly 61,000 acres of public lands for the threatened Mojave desert tortoise while allowing development on about 300,000 acres of state and private land. Congress designated the Red Cliffs National Conservation Area in 2009 to "conserve, protect, and enhance...ecological, scenic, wildlife, recreational, cultural, historical, natural, educational, and scientific resources" of the public lands within the unit.
The region supports key populations of the threatened Mojave desert tortoise and other at-risk plants and animals, including the Gila monster, burrowing owl, and kit fox. Researchers say the Mojave desert tortoise is on a path to extinction, and its habitat in Southwest Utah -- which houses some of the densest tortoise populations -- is especially vulnerable amid rapid growth in the region.
Located about 45 miles from Zion National Park, the conservation area includes 130 miles of trails, two wilderness areas, heritage public use sites, Native American cultural artifacts, several threatened or endangered species and one of Utah's most popular state parks, Snow Canyon State Park. Visitors come from around the world to hike, mountain bike, rock climb, horseback ride, photograph and marvel at the expansive red rock landscape.
Additional Information and Resources:
1. Informational website: protectredcliffs.com
2. BLM Again Considering Four-Lane Highway Through the Red Cliffs National Conservation Area - October 7, 2025
3. Decades-Long Highway Fight Ends with Victory for Red Cliffs NCA - December 20th, 2024
4. Petition to Permanently Protect the Greater Moe's Valley Area
5. Local and National Organizations Applaud Plan Signaling Denial of Highway Right-of-Way - November 7th, 2024
6. Conservation Organizations Respond to Washington County's Continued Attacks on Red Cliffs National Conservation Area - August 7th, 2024
7. Federal Agencies Release Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement on a Highway Right-of-Way Through Red Cliffs National Conservation Area - May 9th, 2024
8. BLM and FWS Press Release, November 15th, 2023
9. Report - Washington County at a Crossroads: An analysis of the proposed Northern Corridor Highway project in Southwest Utah
10. Summary of Desert Tortoise Study in Red Cliffs NCA: Population Trends, Threats to Persistence, and Conservation Significance
* * *
Original text here: https://wildearthguardians.org/press-releases/federal-agency-re-approves-highway-through-red-cliffs-national-conservation-area-abandons-own-scientific-findings/
[Category: Environment]
Peterson Institute for International Economics: Can Trump Legally Apply Tariffs on US Allies Over Greenland?
WASHINGTON, Jan. 22 -- The Peterson Institute for International Economics issued the following commentary on Jan. 21, 2026:
* * *
Can Trump legally apply tariffs on US allies over Greenland?
By Alan Wm. Wolff (PIIE)
The short answer, under international law, is no: The use of coercion to acquire another country's territory is forbidden. The question arises since President Donald Trump threatened on Saturday to impose new tariffs on several European countries unless Denmark sells Greenland to the United States. He said that the United States must purchase Greenland to safeguard its national
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Jan. 22 -- The Peterson Institute for International Economics issued the following commentary on Jan. 21, 2026:
* * *
Can Trump legally apply tariffs on US allies over Greenland?
By Alan Wm. Wolff (PIIE)
The short answer, under international law, is no: The use of coercion to acquire another country's territory is forbidden. The question arises since President Donald Trump threatened on Saturday to impose new tariffs on several European countries unless Denmark sells Greenland to the United States. He said that the United States must purchase Greenland to safeguard its nationalsecurity and ensure "world peace." As a matter of domestic law, however, the US president has no authority to apply tariffs for this purpose.
The president does not have the authority to acquire territory on his own. He can negotiate a treaty for the United States to acquire a territory and ask the Senate to ratify it and the House of Representatives to initiate a bill to pay for it (if any payment is needed). Every recognized US territorial acquisition involved Congress: the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, by treaty ratified by the Senate and with House Appropriations; Florida in 1819 by treaty; the annexation of Texas in 1845 by joint resolution of Congress; the Mexican Cession in 1848 by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo; the Alaska Purchase in 1867 by treaty ratified by the Senate; the annexation of Hawaii in 1898 by joint resolution of Congress; and Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines, by the Treaty of Paris in 1898.
A recent Reuters/Ipsos poll, conducted before Trump's announcement Saturday, found just 17 percent of Americans approved of his efforts to acquire Greenland. Some 47 percent of respondents to the poll disapproved of US efforts to acquire Greenland, while 35 percent said they were unsure.
Presidents can order US military occupation of territory temporarily under war powers, as in Germany and Japan after WWII, and Iraq in 2003. But occupation does not equal sovereignty. Territory is not "acquired" unless Congress acts. The foundational legal case addressing this point is American Insurance Co. v. Canter (1828), under Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall.
The current situation also raises the question: Has Congress granted the president legal authority to impose tariffs on North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) allies that refuse to agree to recognize Trump's threatened annexation of Greenland? The answer is "no."
Trump's mention of US national security as a justification for his threatened tariffs over Greenland suggests he might again invoke the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) as a source of legal authority, as he did with tariffs against most countries he ordered in 2025. The Supreme Court has alerted the press that it could rule any day now on legal challenges to those tariffs. My guess is that the court will rule against the blanket "reciprocal tariffs" that Trump announced on April 2, 2025, but may allow more selective tariffs that might be more closely related to an emergency. Several IEEPA tariffs cases have been stayed awaiting the court's decision. The IEEPA cases would not necessarily resolve whether Trump could use IEEPA in the case of Greenland because no such tariffs have been imposed yet.
A lot has happened involving IEEPA since I wrote about a possible US acquisition of Greenland a year ago--most prominently, the challenges on which the Supreme Court will rule. We know more about IEEPA. (The Amicus brief that I co-wrote can be read here (https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24-1287/380633/20251024171253713_25-250acCarlaAndersonHillsAndAlanWilliamWolff.pdf).) For example: We know that this kind of statute has never been used before to impose US tariffs by presidential decree. Trump administration lawyers claimed during litigation in the lower courts last year that President Richard Nixon had invoked emergency authority to impose tariffs in the 1970s. He didn't. We know that the Congress did not view IEEPA as a general tariff statute but as an economic sanctions statute.
Courts have never overturned presidential declarations of emergency under IEEPA. Congress entrusted the president acting in an emergency that he had identified. But a Supreme Court ruling on using IEEPA tariffs to coerce allies over the United States acquiring Greenland might overcome previous judicial restraint. Nearly all instances of IEEPA economic pressure (none including using tariffs) have been against enemies. There are exceptions, for example, such as using the IEEPA to press foreign banks in neutral and allied countries to align their practices with US sanctions policy. Those instances are not relevant here, as the US government would be pressing foreign governments not to oppose the forced US acquisition of Greenland contrary to international law.
It would be reasonable for the Supreme Court to cast aside its traditional deference to the executive in matters involving foreign affairs and declare that the Congress needed to be directly involved in an act of economic aggression. The court should not countenance the manufacture of an emergency as a pretext to invoke IEEPA. Congress, when passing IEEPA, never contemplated a use so unbounded by all precedent and past US policy. In effect, the court could well hold that IEEPA was designed as a defensive measure and not a means to attack allied and neutral countries' commerce. Such an attack would require congressional approval.
To stay out of foreign wars (at that time between Great Britain and France), both presidents George Washington and Thomas Jefferson worked with Congress to apply embargoes to US trade with those countries to avoid becoming entangled in foreign conflicts. Congress allowed both presidents to administer the embargoes. Their purpose was to avoid confrontation, not provoke it. The founders all would have been astounded if the president thought that he could under any pre-existing delegated or constitutional power on his own engage in economic warfare against any other country. Furthermore, they knew that the power to tax Americans for this purpose through a tariff would require very explicit and special authority from Congress. They had just fought a long and hard war with Great Britain to avoid paying for wars unless their own elected representatives first authorized the taxes.
* * *
Alan Wm. Wolff is a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.piie.com/blogs/realtime-economics/2026/can-trump-legally-apply-tariffs-us-allies-over-greenland
[Category: Economics]
New RAND study shows U.S. poison centers save the nation billions each year
RICHMOND, Virginia, Jan. 22 [Category: Medical] -- VCU Health, an academic medical center on the forefront of health care, providing patients with treatments and medical technology available, issued the following news release:
* * *
New RAND study shows U.S. poison centers save the nation billions each year
By Danielle Pierce
United States poison centers, including those based at VCU Health and UVA Health, save $3.1 billion every year in medical costs and lost productivity, according to a new independent study released by America's Poison Centers(r).
Conducted by RAND, the report Poison
... Show Full Article
RICHMOND, Virginia, Jan. 22 [Category: Medical] -- VCU Health, an academic medical center on the forefront of health care, providing patients with treatments and medical technology available, issued the following news release:
* * *
New RAND study shows U.S. poison centers save the nation billions each year
By Danielle Pierce
United States poison centers, including those based at VCU Health and UVA Health, save $3.1 billion every year in medical costs and lost productivity, according to a new independent study released by America's Poison Centers(r).
Conducted by RAND, the report PoisonPrevention, Treatment, and Detection as Public Health Investments confirms that poison centers provide substantial economic and societal benefits for communities across the country. Across Virginia, the VCU Health Virginia Poison Center and UVA Health's Blue Ridge Poison Center responded to more than 53,000 calls in 2025 for potential poison exposures. More than 85% of the calls from patients and families were managed without requiring a visit to a health care facility. Along with 24/7 support to respond to potential poison exposures through their dedicated call centers, both poison centers also work to prevent poisonings and improve care through educational efforts for the public and healthcare professionals.
"This study reinforces what our team sees every day. Quick access to poison center experts saves lives, reduces unnecessary medical visits, and keeps families safer at home," said John Downs, M.D., MPH, FACP, FAACT, director of the VCU Health Virginia Poison Center. "We are here 24/7 to provide fast, reliable guidance, and we remain a trusted resource for people across Virginia whenever they need support."
The RAND report also found that for every $1 invested in poison center services, communities receive $16.77 in benefits. These cost-saving benefits reflect reduced emergency department use, shortened hospital stays, decreased risk of death, enhanced public health surveillance and improved patient outcomes.
"Poison centers like those that serve Virginia are a cost-effective way to keep our neighbors safe and well-informed about potential poisoning hazards," said Christopher Holstege, M.D., director of the Blue Ridge Poison Center. "Our teams are always available to protect the health of our fellow Virginians if they may have been exposed to a poisonous substance of any kind."
For additional information, or to read the full report, visit poisoncenters.org/national-impact-study. For fast, free, confidential help for a potential poisoning or question, contact the Poison Help line at 800.222.1222, PoisonHelp.org, or reach your local poison center by visiting the Virginia Poison Center's website or the Blue Ridge Poison Center's website.
Stay informed, stay healthy. For the latest health care new s from trusted experts, subscribe to VCU Health's e-mail new s l etter.
***
Original text here: https://www.vcuhealth.org/news/new-rand-study-shows-us-poison-centers-save-the-nation-billions-each-year/
Nature Conservancy: Smart Siting Guide for Portugal Sets Blueprint for Nature-Positive Renewable Energy Expansion
ARLINGTON, Virginia, Jan. 22 (TNSrpt) -- The Nature Conservancy issued the following news:
* * *
New Smart Siting Guide for Portugal Sets Blueprint for Nature-Positive Renewable Energy Expansion
Research from The Nature Conservancy and ZERO shows the country can meet its renewable energy ambitions while prioritising nature and people
*
The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and ZERO today announced the launch of the Smart Siting Guide for Portugal, a science-based roadmap to accelerate renewable energy deployment while safeguarding biodiversity and social values.
Portugal has committed to generating
... Show Full Article
ARLINGTON, Virginia, Jan. 22 (TNSrpt) -- The Nature Conservancy issued the following news:
* * *
New Smart Siting Guide for Portugal Sets Blueprint for Nature-Positive Renewable Energy Expansion
Research from The Nature Conservancy and ZERO shows the country can meet its renewable energy ambitions while prioritising nature and people
*
The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and ZERO today announced the launch of the Smart Siting Guide for Portugal, a science-based roadmap to accelerate renewable energy deployment while safeguarding biodiversity and social values.
Portugal has committed to generating93% of its electricity from renewables by 2030, a target that demands rapid expansion of wind and solar. The Smart Siting Guide provides the spatial evidence and stakeholder engagement framework to support the final designation of Renewable Acceleration Areas (RAAs) and coordinated spatial planning for renewables, in line with the European Union's Renewable Energy Directive (RED III).
Key Findings from the Smart Siting Guide:
* Solar Energy: Mainland Portugal has more than five times the low-conflict land needed to meet its 2030 ground-mounted solar goal, giving policymakers and developers flexibility to choose sites that work for both energy and the environment.
* Wind Energy: Up to 70% of the onshore wind target can be met on low-conflict sites, with the remainder achievable through the adoption of extra mitigation measures to repower some of the existing wind farms
* Moderate Conflict Zones: These areas offer a strategic reserve for future expansion, with opportunities for biodiversity net gain investment co-benefits through nature-inclusive project development as technology and policy evolve.
* Grid Expansion: Smart siting data can guide grid upgrades, focusing investment in regions with high renewable potential and low biodiversity and social conflict, supporting efficient energy delivery and minimising unnecessary impacts.
* Social Inclusion: Social value mapping and introduction of participatory community engagement methods highlight the importance of taking into account aesthetic values, listening to communities, ensuring projects reflect people's priorities and deliver lasting benefits.
The Guide's evidence-based approach combines technical mapping of wind and solar potential with biodiversity and social value filters, integrating stakeholder input throughout. It offers actionable recommendations for improving data access, stakeholder engagement, and adaptive management, and aligns closely with the EU's call for science-based spatial planning and community benefit-sharing while offering a holistic approach to land-use planning.
* * *
"As Portugal spearheads Europe's renewable energy ambitions, it can also be a leader in showing that climate ambition and nature protection can go hand in hand. The Smart Siting Guide complements existing work in the country by demonstrating how rigorous science, transparent mapping, and genuine engagement can accelerate renewables while safeguarding what matters most. This Guide sets a precedent for nature-positive energy development across Europe to be used and replicated by various stakeholders."
Elif Gunduzyeli, Renewable Energy Program Director, Europe, The Nature Conservancy
* * *
"Portugal stands at a crossroads on the path to reducing the use of fossil fuels. On the one hand, it requires major decarbonisation efforts, in which electrification is an essential component that must be ensured through renewable sources. This, in turn, requires investment, including in centralised renewable energy production projects which, in another hand, must not undermine territorial cohesion, public acceptance, or the need to restore nature.
In Portugal, several large-scale solar power plants have sparked strong opposition and popular mobilisation in many respects, as a result of the selection of areas with significant environmental and social impacts. This study represents a very important contribution to overcoming these conflicts by reconciling renewable electricity generation with respect for landscape, biodiversity, and local communities, and by setting out guidelines and regulatory framework to achieve a desirable balance."
Francisco Ferreira, President, ZERO - Association for the Sustainability of the Earth System
* * *
Smart Siting Guide: Portugal
Developed using TNC's smart siting approach already deployed to create national siting maps in Croatia, Serbia, and North Macedonia - the Smart Siting Guide is a practical tool for decision-makers, developers, and civil society, supporting the final adoption of RAAs, informing permitting processes including Environmental Impact Assessments and Strategic Environmental Assessments, and embedding stakeholder engagement into national frameworks.
It is designed to support Portugal meet its National Energy and Climate Plan (NECP) targets while setting a replicable model for responsible, inclusive, and forward-looking energy planning.
* * *
The Nature Conservancy is a global conservation organization dedicated to conserving the lands and waters on which all life depends. Guided by science, we create innovative, on-the-ground solutions to our world's toughest challenges so that nature and people can thrive together. We are tackling climate change, conserving lands, waters and oceans at an unprecedented scale, providing food and water sustainably and helping make cities more resilient. The Nature Conservancy is working to make a lasting difference around the world in 83 countries and territories (39 by direct conservation impact and 44 through partners) through a collaborative approach that engages local communities, governments, the private sector, and other partners. For more news, visit our newsroom or follow The Nature Conservancy on LinkedIn.
* * *
REPORT: https://www.nature.org/content/dam/tnc/nature/en/documents/s/m/Smart-Siting-Guide-Portugal-EN.pdf
* * *
Original text here: https://www.nature.org/en-us/newsroom/portugal-smart-siting-study-published/
[Category: Environment]
Indiana Chamber's Wellness Council Kicks Off Recovery at Work: Empowering People, Strengthening Business
INDIANAPOLIS, Indiana, Jan. 22 -- The Indiana Chamber of Commerce issued the following news release:
* * *
Indiana Chamber's Wellness Council Kicks off Recovery at Work: Empowering People, Strengthening Business
The Indiana Chamber's Wellness Council of Indiana (WCI), in collaboration with the Indiana Family and Social Services Administration, Division of Mental Health and Addiction is launching Recovery at Work, a statewide training series designed to help employers build supportive, recovery-ready workplaces.
Substance use disorder continues to affect employees, families and workplaces across
... Show Full Article
INDIANAPOLIS, Indiana, Jan. 22 -- The Indiana Chamber of Commerce issued the following news release:
* * *
Indiana Chamber's Wellness Council Kicks off Recovery at Work: Empowering People, Strengthening Business
The Indiana Chamber's Wellness Council of Indiana (WCI), in collaboration with the Indiana Family and Social Services Administration, Division of Mental Health and Addiction is launching Recovery at Work, a statewide training series designed to help employers build supportive, recovery-ready workplaces.
Substance use disorder continues to affect employees, families and workplaces acrossIndiana. According to the CDC, in 2022, 30.1 million U.S. employees experienced substance use disorders. In that same year, over 52% of organizations suffered consequences like absenteeism and decreased productivity due to drug/alcohol misuse.
WCI Executive Director Ashley O'Rourke says, "Employers play a critical role in both preventing and addressing substance misuse, yet many feel unsure of where to start or how to expand their efforts. Whether you're just getting started or expanding your efforts, this training series will provide valuable insights to move forward.
"Substance use disorder impacts every workforce in some way, regardless of industry or size," she adds. "Recovery at Work is designed to give employers practical tools, trusted partnerships and clear next steps to build recovery-ready workplaces that support their people while strengthening business stability and performance."
The two-part training series will be held in seven counties across the state, with WCI hosting two convenings in each location. While part one and part two may be attended as standalone sessions, participants are encouraged to attend both, as the sessions build upon one another.
Part one explores the impact of substance use disorder in Indiana and the workplace, connects participants to local resources and supports and shares best practices for implementation.
Part two offers a deeper dive into recovery support strategies, includes legal guidance from WCI's partners at Krieg DeVault, and provides hands-on training in Naloxone/Narcan administration for workplace settings.
All trainings are free and open to employers of all industries and sizes. Employers can register for Recovery at Work events near them at www.wellnessindiana.org under the "events" tab.
For more information, please email info@wellnessindiana.org.
* * *
The Indiana Chamber partners with 25,000 members and investors - representing over four million Hoosiers - to achieve the mission of "cultivating a world-class environment which provides economic opportunity and prosperity."
The Wellness Council of Indiana, a subsidiary of the Indiana Chamber, works to improve the quality of life for Hoosiers by empowering employers and communities to create thriving places to live, work, learn and play through connection, collaboration, education and evaluation.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.indianachamber.com/indiana-chambers-wellness-council-kicks-off-recovery-at-work-empowering-people-strengthening-business/
[Category: Business]
FAIR Defends Lawsuit Targeting Alien Voting
WASHINGTON, Jan. 22 -- The Federation for American Immigration Reform issued the following news release on Jan. 21, 2026:
* * *
FAIR Defends Lawsuit Targeting Alien Voting
Shows letting aliens vote violates Americans' constitutional rights
*
Yesterday, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) filed its opposition to a renewed motion to dismiss made by the DC Board of Elections, which FAIR is suing over DC's law letting aliens--including illegal aliens and diplomats--vote in DC local elections. In the suit, FAIR represents
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Jan. 22 -- The Federation for American Immigration Reform issued the following news release on Jan. 21, 2026:
* * *
FAIR Defends Lawsuit Targeting Alien Voting
Shows letting aliens vote violates Americans' constitutional rights
*
Yesterday, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) filed its opposition to a renewed motion to dismiss made by the DC Board of Elections, which FAIR is suing over DC's law letting aliens--including illegal aliens and diplomats--vote in DC local elections. In the suit, FAIR representsRalph Chittams and five other registered U.S. citizen voters in DC. (DC politician Stacia Hall, formerly the lead plaintiff in the case, has moved away from DC and withdrawn from the case.)
In its motion to dismiss, the Board of Elections claims that DC has a rational basis for the alien voting law, since the law is meant to expand DC's political community to include resident aliens who are affected by the outcome of local elections.
In its opposition (https://www.fairus.org/sites/default/files/2026-01/Chittams-oppo-to-MTD-FILE-STAMPED.pdf), FAIR shows that DC's law in fact has no rational basis. The Supreme Court has ruled that, under the Constitution, the political community of the United States--including localities such as DC--consists only of U.S. citizens. DC has no legitimate governmental interest in, and therefore no rational basis for, expanding its political community beyond the limits set by the Constitution.
The reason for these limits is obvious. Since 1776, the people of the United States--that is, American citizens--have always been regarded as the ultimate sovereign of this country. That is, citizens have a right to govern themselves through voting and holding office. This right is infringed if U.S. citizens are, in part, governed by the votes of citizens of foreign countries.
"'We the People' established the Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land," said Christopher J. Hajec, deputy general counsel of FAIR. "That means the people are sovereign, and laws like DC's that diminish that sovereignty and deprive Americans of their right to govern themselves violate the Constitution. We hope the Court sees that, because DC's law lets those who are not part of the American people govern in America, it is unconstitutional at the most basic level."
The case is Chittams v. DC Bd. Of Elections, No. 1:23-cv-01261 (D.D.C.).
* * *
Original text here: https://www.fairus.org/press-release/fair-defends-lawsuit-targeting-alien-voting
[Category: International]
Americans Across Party Lines Want the U.S. to Keep Nuclear Limits With Russia, New Poll Finds
WASHINGTON, Jan. 22 -- The Nuclear Threat Initiative issued the following news:
* * *
Americans Across Party Lines Want the U.S. to Keep Nuclear Limits with Russia, New Poll Finds
As the last remaining U.S.-Russia nuclear limitations treaty expires on Feb. 5, an overwhelming majority of Americans (91 percent) say the United States should negotiate a new agreement with Russia to either maintain current limits on nuclear weapons or further reduce both countries' arsenals, according to a new YouGov poll commissioned by ReThink Media and the Nuclear Threat Initiative.
The poll of 1,000 registered
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Jan. 22 -- The Nuclear Threat Initiative issued the following news:
* * *
Americans Across Party Lines Want the U.S. to Keep Nuclear Limits with Russia, New Poll Finds
As the last remaining U.S.-Russia nuclear limitations treaty expires on Feb. 5, an overwhelming majority of Americans (91 percent) say the United States should negotiate a new agreement with Russia to either maintain current limits on nuclear weapons or further reduce both countries' arsenals, according to a new YouGov poll commissioned by ReThink Media and the Nuclear Threat Initiative.
The poll of 1,000 registeredvoters also finds that the vast majority of Americans--including 85 percent of those who voted for President Trump--believe the president should agree to Russia's proposal to continue abiding by the limits imposed by the New START treaty for at least another year after the treaty expires. In addition, 72 percent of registered voters believe that removing all nuclear limits on U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals would make the United States less secure.
When New START expires, it will be the first time in decades that there are no limits capping the number of nuclear weapons for the world's two largest arsenals. Together, the U.S. and Russia own almost 90 percent of all nuclear weapons in the world.
President Trump recently said he intends to negotiate a better agreement with Russia after New START expires. Previously, he warned that "when you take off nuclear restrictions - that's a big problem" and made favorable comments about Russia's one-year offer to voluntarily maintain the treaty's limits. He repeatedly has warned of the threat posed by nuclear weapons. However, his administration has not yet taken concrete actions to secure a new nuclear limitations agreement with Russia.
The poll was fielded by YouGov from Thursday, Jan. 8 to Friday, Jan. 9, with an online sample of 1,000 registered voters and a margin of error of +-3.7 percent.
Highlights of the poll include:
* 72 percent of registered voters believe that removing all nuclear limits on the U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals would make the U.S. less secure.
* (82 percent of Democrats, 74 percent of Independents, 61 percent of Republicans)
* 87 percent of registered voters believe the U.S. should accept Russia's offer to continue to limit both countries' nuclear weapons for at least another year.
* (90 percent of Democrats, 83 percent of Independents, 86 percent of Republicans)
* 91 percent of registered voters believe the U.S. should negotiate a new deal with Russia to maintain current nuclear limits or further reduce both countries' nuclear weapons.
* (Further reductions: 57 percent overall, 72 percent of Democrats, 56% of Independents, 43 percent of Republicans)
* (Maintaining current levels: 34 percent overall, 23 percent of Democrats, 28 percent of Independents, 45 percent of Republicans)
* 54 percent of registered voters say they would be more likely to vote for a political candidate that favors making a deal with Russia to maintain current limits or further reduce both countries' arsenals. 41% say this would make no difference in their vote, and only 6 percent said this would make them less likely to vote for said candidate.
* (More likely: 66 percent of Democrats, 49 percent of Independents, 41 percent of Republicans)
* (No difference: 29 percent of Democrats, 45 percent of Independents, 53 percent of Republicans)
* * *
Original text here: https://www.nti.org/news/americans-across-party-lines-want-the-u-s-to-keep-nuclear-limits-with-russia-new-poll-finds/
[Category: National Defense]
