Loading summary
Transcript77 lines
- [00:01]
Steve Scrovan
Only on kpfk 90.7 fm los angeles
- [00:05]
Ralph Nader
and online at kpfk.org.
- [00:14]
Rick Engler
Yo, this is your brother speech from
- [00:16]
Ralph Nader
the crew, Arrested Development.
- [00:17]
Rick Engler
You rocking with KPFK 90.7 Los Angeles.
- [00:30]
Chris Hedges
This is Chris Hedges and you're listening to the Ralph Nader Radio Hour.
- [00:35]
Ralph Nader
Stand up. Stand up. You've been sitting way too long.
- [00:43]
Steve Scrovan
Welcome to the Ralph Nader Radio Hour. My name is Steve Scrovan, along with my co host, David Feldman. Hello, David.
- [00:49]
David Feldman
Hello, Steve.
- [00:50]
Steve Scrovan
And our producer, Hannah Feldman. Hello, Hannah.
- [00:53]
Chris Hedges
Hello, Steve.
- [00:55]
Steve Scrovan
And the man of the hour, Ralph Nader. Hello, Ralph.
- [00:59]
Ralph Nader
Hello, everybody. This is about getting steamed. You always have to have fire in your belly in addition to what you know in your mind to be a first rate super citizen advocate, which this country really badly needs.
- [01:13]
Steve Scrovan
Yes. And on today's program, we're going to talk about Pope Leo. Pope Leo XIV released his first encyclical entitled Magnifica Humanitas, which took on the issue of what is branded as artificial intelligence, AI. According to the Vatican News, the underlying premise of Magnifica Humanitas is that, quote, technology is not a force antagonistic to humanity, nor is it inherently evil. However, technology is never neutral because it takes on the characteristics of those who devise, finance, regulate and use it. Our first guest, Chris Hedges, as well as being a Pulitzer Prize winning war correspondent and the author of many books critiquing American policy, both foreign and domestic, is also a Presbyterian minister. We will get his theological take on the Pope's encyclical and most likely his take on the characteristics of those big tech bros who have devised and financed it. In his ongoing assault on the health and safety of the American people, President Trump is proposing to eliminate funding for the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, or csb, a small federal agency that probes chemical disasters and pushes for safety fixes. Congress created the CSB as an independent watchdog to hold polluters accountable and recommend safety improvements after major industrial accidents, like the tank collapse at the Nippon Dyna Wave paper mill in Longview, Washington, that killed 11 workers on May 26 and a toxic gas leak on April 22 that killed two workers and injured 19 at a refinery in West Virginia's Kanawha Valley, among others. Our second guest will be Rick Engler, who is a former member of the US Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, will talk to Mr. Engler about the implications of eliminating this vital safety agency, as well as the President's general mission to put corporate profits ahead of public welfare. To close out the show, Ralph pays tribute to two wonderful doctors, one of whom was a regular guest on our program. And he also has some words about Thomas Massie's call for an investigation into the USS Liberty attack by Israel in 1967. As always, somewhere in the middle. We'll check in with our intrepid corporate crime reporter Russell Mokiver. But first, the pope and AI David.
- [03:26]
David Feldman
Chris Hedges is a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist who spent nearly two decades as a foreign correspondent in Central America, the Middle East, Africa and the Balkans, is the host of the Chris Hedges Report, and he is a prolific author. His most recent book is A Genocide Foretold Reporting on Survival and Resistance in Occupied Palestine. Welcome back to the Ralph Nader Radio Hour. Chris Hedges, thank you.
- [03:54]
Ralph Nader
Thank you, Chris. I want to start with your knowledge of organized religion. Listeners may not know, but among Chris Hedges many portfolios is he's a graduate of the Harvard Divinity School and has written about organized religion and history, such as advocating for civil rights back in the sixties National Council of Churches. But my curious question, and maybe listen to share this, is that Catholics are very well organized. They have a papacy. They have a pope, in this case Pope Leo, who speaks out frequently, even challenges Trump. He's born in America, multilingual. They have a jurisdiction called the Vatican in Rome, which is recognized by all over the world and countries send ambassadors there. By contrast, the Protestant world doesn't have a single leader like that. There's no way they are able to communicate and get headlines the way the Catholic pope can. They're broken up into different denominations. Baptist, Methodist, Presbyterian, Episcopalian and even the Baptist are broken into sections. And I want to ask you, why don't they organize themselves so they can be a conveyor of the norms of a civilized society? They can speak out against tyranny, autocracy, exploitation of workers, climate, violence and the horrific impact of artificial intelligence, as the Pope Leo has just done with his encyclical.
- [05:34]
Chris Hedges
Well, I would cite two reasons. First of all, the Catholic Church traditionally has a very broad umbrella. Now, that kind of inclusiveness was damaged under John Paul II when he went after so called liberation theologians. The term was preferential option for the poor. I was in Latin America at the time. These people were not in any way Marxist necessarily, but they worked in poor communities. And he did a tremendous amount of damage to that kind of broad spectrum that traditionally was the Catholic Church stretching all the way from Opus DEI to Gustavo Gutierrez, who was a kind of Catholic Marxist, but a very prominent liberation theologian. So that's number one. The second thing is that the Protestant Church, and I'm Presbyterian and. And I don't even mention it much, but I'm actually even ordained. I'm an ordained Presbyterian minister. The Protestant church is dying. Its numbers are declining. Its congregations are aged. It is not bringing in new members, unlike the evangelicals. But the mainstream Protestant church is atrophying. And any institution that atrophies, we see this with the press, I think, becomes more cautious, more conservative, less willing to take on risk. This is, in the long term, of course, counterproductive because it means they don't stand for anything. They lose, as you correctly point out, their prophetic voice and they fold in on themselves. Reminds me very much of the New York Times. The New York Times functions as a Byzantine court. I can remember how resistant the times was when I was there to any kind of change or innovation. The answer being, well, you know, this is the way we've always done it. Well, the same is true for the Protestant church. And in fact, they are, for that reason, quite hostile to those who come into the church and attempt to reconfigure the institution. So I would say those are the two main problems. And then, of course, as you correctly point out, the Protestant church has always been fragmented and into various denominations. And because those denominations are autonomous, it's very hard to get any kind of consensus between Methodists and Baptists and Presbyterians and Unitarians and everyone else. And that has, I think, especially in the moment we're in, hurt us tremendously. We did have figures. William Sloan Coffin might be an example of Protestant, really, Presbyterian. He was the chaplain at Yale, and then he was the minister at Riverside Church. So we did have moments when figures like that rose up. He didn't necessarily speak for the church, but he spoke out of defined religious tradition. And of course, Martin Luther King. And we can't forget Malcolm X. Malcolm X also came out of a very strong religious background. But these figures, they're not here anymore. And I think part of the reason is that they can't really achieve a position of dominance within these Protestant denominations because these denominations have essentially contracted and folded in on themselves. I mean, all of these mainstream churches are losing members, losing congregants.
- [09:06]
Ralph Nader
Let me interrupt you here. William Sloan Coppen did more than speak out at Yale and at his post in New York. He was right on the front lines down the South. He'd get arrested. And he was a dynamic speaker, a dynamic thinker, an inspirer, and he put himself on the line, on the ramparts. There's nobody quite like that now. The closest is Bishop Barber, and he's the only spokesperson that's getting any press. Now, I want to convey two vignettes during the Iraq war. I was upset that this criminal invasion by Bush and Cheney lying their way to Iraq, as Ron Paul said, Congressman Ron Paul wasn't getting any pushback from the Protestant churches. So I called up a reverend and I said, here's an idea, and we'd like reverends around the country to put it into practice that every week you toll the bells of the church. The number of US Soldiers killed in Iraq by the criminal invasion, they couldn't do it for the number of Iraqis killed. They'd be totaling 24 hours a day. Over a million Iraqis lost their lives, over a million due to the war crimes of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. And her answer was, we don't do those things. We are, quote, a prayerful church. End quote. The second vignette is I called up the head of the National Council of Churches around the same time, and I said, we're not hearing from you the way we did during the civil rights era in the 50s and 60s. What's the problem? He said, well, we would like to speak out, but a significant number of our members are Southern Evangelical Baptists and they support the Republicans and support the war. So we can't jeopardize that kind of membership and break up as a result. What do you think of those two?
- [11:03]
Chris Hedges
Yeah, that's right. And I should have mentioned Bishop Barber because he is probably, as far as I can think, maybe the one exception to this rule. And he's done great stuff. And like William Sloan Coffin or like Abraham Heschel, even my father, as you know, was a Presbyterian minister and involved in the anti war movement and the civil rights movement. But this did not have majoritarian support within the church. So figures like Coffin, figures like Abraham Heschel, even to this day, Jewish Theological Seminary does not really honor Heschel, a prophetic figure who marched with King along with Daniel Berrigan and Coffin and other religious leaders. So they were controversial in their day. Now, as the church atrophies, the institutions are so terrified of driving more members of, especially those members with resources, with money out of the church that they've self censored, they've silenced themselves. And I think that in the long term, this only accelerates the decline, of course. But that is. I mean, the vignettes that you just shared are emblematic of a decaying institution that's lost its way. And that vignette about a prayerful is important because what happened in the church is there was such controversy within the institution among those figures like my father and others who were involved. My father was a World War II veteran, by the way. He was in North Africa. There was such controversy that as the church struggled, it essentially embraced the narcissism of the consumer, of the wider society. So spirituality didn't anymore revolve around standing up for the poor and the oppressed. It was that, how is it with me? Which is just narcissistic? And that infected the institution of the Church just as it did the wider society.
- [12:52]
Ralph Nader
Well, you know, there are nuns who are organized on the ramparts anti war. They'll go to military bases. They'll go to places like the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, exposing nuclear weapons. They'd get arrested. But I haven't heard much from. From them in recent years. Maybe they're still doing these valiant activities, but they're not getting any media. What do you know about them?
- [13:18]
Chris Hedges
Well, first of all, they're outliers within the institution, number one. And number two, you know as well as anyone that the media is very effective at essentially blacking out whole segments of the society.
- [13:35]
Ralph Nader
Let's go to Pope Leo's encyclical on artificial intelligence, which has gotten a lot of press in recent days. He called it Magnifica Humanitas, and it was released on the 135th anniversary of Rerum Novarum, known in English as Rights and Duties of Capital and Labor. And that was written by Pope Leo XIII, who was inspiration for Pope Leo XIV's papal name. And he was talking in Those days, late 19th century, about the industrial exploitation of labor and the modern factory. Now Pope Leo is speaking out on the tremendous potential damage of artificial intelligence, especially on the workforce, but on the essence of human dignity. I was surprised to see that the word dignity appeared 100 times or so in this encyclical, which was the size of a small book at 43,000 words to the world's 1.4 billion Catholics, which covers a lot of ground. Could you give me your take on that and first describe what an encyclical is?
- [14:49]
Chris Hedges
Well, an encyclical is. I mean, perhaps the easiest way to define it is papal law. And some encyclicals are very good. I'm no fan of John Paul, but he actually wrote a very, very good encyclical on work, on labor, in which he talked about the importance of a job, not only in terms of economic remuneration, but dignity and a place within society. Actually talks about Unemployment as a force for the breaking up of society and family. So within the Catholic Church, these are very important. I think that Pope Leo kind of missed the point of AI in that he describes that it could be a positive force for Catholic education. These are his words. Compassionate healthcare, creative platforms that tell the Christian story with truth and beauty. I think those were all indications to me. They didn't quite understand what AI is about. It's not about education, it's not about compassion, and it's not about truth and it's not about beauty. It's. It is a very pernicious force that will go beyond, of course, replacing all sorts of labor, but creating a world where fact and fiction are blurred together. You're already seeing AI within universities and schools at this point, but what is the consequence of it? When people are using AI to write their papers and do their research, they're essentially denying themselves the ability to write and the ability to search for their own facts, which is really a form of illiteracy. And I once had a great professor like you, a graduate of Princeton, who said the purpose of an education is learning how to read and how to write in the sense that when you truly know how to read and absorb information and you know how to write clearly, that organizes your thoughts. Those are absolutely crucial skills by which one can become not just an intellectual, but autonomous. And AI is ravaging those skills. And if you don't have those skills, then you become hostage to these forces. And I don't think any of this. I didn't read the full encyclical, but I don't sense that Leo was, from what I read of it, awareness of this.
- [17:12]
Ralph Nader
Let me just quote a sentence from the encyclical. In the words of Pope Leo, quote, so called artificial intelligences do not undergo experiences, do not possess a body, do not feel joy or pain, do not mature through relationships, and do not know from within what love, work, friendship or responsibility mean. End quote. And you also talk about workplace exploitation of the workers who have to work in these critical mineral mines to produce the raw materials, the people who are dispossessed, writing computer code and so forth. He didn't ignore that. And how much can you expect from him? He's gone further than any other religious leader. And he talks about, quote, the various kinds of job insecurity, fragmented career paths and automation must not be evaluated solely in terms of efficiency, but in relation to the dignity of the worker, the right to suffer remuneration, and a genuine possibility of participating in society. End quote. I would have preferred that he point more toward corporate power and this being maybe end of the world arm of corporate commercial power, global corporate power. But it was well received. But there was an op ed in the New York Times recently, Chris, that from the editor of the Lamp, which is a Christian publication, that said that. That the encyclical was too weak. Could you address that?
- [18:38]
Chris Hedges
Yeah, I think you make a good point that in terms of human dignity, in terms of labor, the encyclical was good. But I would agree. This was by Matthew Walther, I think, was the editor, as you said, of this Catholic literary journal. I think that, as you mentioned, the potential for AI to essentially wreak havoc on the society was not part of the encyclical. I think the potential of AI to wreak havoc on the individual was. But I'm not sure that Pope Leo quite realizes, as you mentioned with this issuing 12 years ago of this statement, that the potential to destroy us is built within AI because as it perfects itself, as it essentially teaches itself, it accumulates greater, greater power. And then the point I tried to make earlier is that reliance on AI essentially diminishes our capacity for critical thought and critical judgment.
- [19:39]
Ralph Nader
This encyclical by Pope Leo focuses also on children. He talked about, quote, research on the impact of technology on child development, including how early and unsupervised access to cell phones leaves children vulnerable to addiction, bullying, and sexual exploitation, end quote. And, of course, that's what's going on every day in millions of family situations. These companies, regardless of their promises and their ads about family safety and what they're doing, they're relentless. Let's have your thoughts on that.
- [20:13]
Chris Hedges
Yeah, I think this was probably maybe the strongest part of the encyclical in that he talked about how these devices create the illusion of friendship. He talked about the intellectual and neurological risks, premature and unsupervised access to these digital images that you talked about, Ralph, and the effects on attention spans, on emotional regulation, as I mentioned before, on critical thinking, the manipulation by algorithms, all of that was in there. That was, for me, probably maybe the strongest part of the encyclical. And it's an issue you've been raising for a long time. But it's a very, very important issue because this is the next generation. And what you're really doing is stunting, deforming, corrupting, and intellectually diminishing those who will come next.
- [21:13]
Ralph Nader
Now, I'm curious about this. When the Pope speaks out like this, what happens to thousands of Catholic churches on Sunday in terms of informing the sermons by the priests in these churches, do they reflect the Pope or do they look over the people in the church and say, some of these people are voters for Trump and we don't want to alienate them? Do you know anything about that?
- [21:39]
Chris Hedges
Yeah, they say some of these people are voters for Trump and we don't want to alienate them. So encyclicals do not have a profound effect. I mean, for instance, the Catholic encyclical on birth control is not something most Catholics abide by. So the Catholic Church, even though it has a broader and deeper reach than the Protestant church, is also suffering from diminishing numbers and its kind of far right element, priests for life, these kinds of groups, JD Vance comes out of this, are growing. So, yes, the problem is when it finally comes to Sunday Mass or the Sunday service, these priests and preachers do not want any more of their declining congregations to walk out the door.
- [22:26]
Ralph Nader
And that's very unfortunate because the Pope's message is not relayed to tens of millions of conflicts in the United States and around the world or 1.3 billion Catholics Sunday after Sunday. I don't think enough attention has been brought to that issue. In case we have concerned Catholics in our audience, you might want to raise that with your priest before we close. Chris, you spoke out on artificial intelligence, robbing workers of labor power. You've spoken about the need for collective labor organizing, general strikes. What's your view on all this?
- [23:04]
Chris Hedges
I think that that mass organization is kind of all we have left as we barrel towards an authoritarian state. Congress doesn't function, not certainly doesn't function as Congress was designed to function. They have surrendered their traditional constitutional authority, including, of course, the call for Congress to declare war and this kind of unitary executive branch. This was put into place, by the way, before Trump. He's just taken advantage of it. It's something you've spoken out against for many, many years because of potential for abuse, which we're now seeing. This fall, I was in Italy with Francesca Albanese, who's been sanctioned by the Trump administration. She can't use a credit card. She's locked out of the world financial system. We joined dock workers who refused to load weapons onto ships bound for Israel. And I went, because we did a short film on it called Resistance 101, which people can see on YouTube. And I think that it's absolutely fundamental that we recapture that kind of militancy, that kind of organized workforce that has traditionally, throughout our history, been such an important corrective to democracy, along with of course, journalism. And we don't have a moment to lose because as the Pope correctly pointed out, AI has the potential to obliterate entire job professions. Entire professions.
- [24:37]
Ralph Nader
Well, as you note, the courageous UN Representative on the Palestine matter, Francesca Albanesi, who's been subject to horrible counterattacks, vicious personality attacks, exclusion. And one of the reasons is she's come out and said that the number of Palestinian civilians killed by the Israeli genocide is over 600,000. It isn't 74,000 listeners. That's the minimal Hamas figure, which doesn't include all the horrible secondary effects of starvation, contaminated water, no food, no medicine, no health care, no electricity, no fuel, no shelter. And it doesn't include all the victims under the rubble. It's a very minimal figure. And she correctly says that her closeness to this subject is peerless and she's honest. And over 600,000 have been killed. Thank you very much, Chris Hedges.
- [25:41]
Chris Hedges
Thank you, Ralph.
- [25:42]
Steve Scrovan
We've been speaking with Chris Hedges. We will link to his extensive body of work@ralph naderradiohour.com when we come back. Donald Trump has another vital federal agency in his crosshairs. But first, let's check in with our corporate crime reporter, Russell Mulkheimer from the
- [25:58]
Russell Mulkiver
National Press building in Washington, D.C. this is your corporate crime reporter Morning minute for Friday, June 12, 2026. I'm Russell Mulcaiber. A Georgia Piggly Wiggly has been hit with nearly $200,000 in federal penalties after a worker lost four fingers while cleaning a commercial meat grinder. That's according to a report from People magazine. Investigators said the employee was cleaning the grinder at the grocery chains store in Bowdoin, Georgia on June 29th when a co worker accidentally stepped on the machine's foot control pedal, causing it to start unexpectedly and pull the worker's hand into the equipment. The employee suffered the amputation of four fingers. OSHA later cited the store for a wolf of violation, alleging it had bypassed safety guards designed to protect workers from dangerous moving parts and flying debris. For the corporate crime reporter, I'm Russell Mulcyver.
- [26:53]
Steve Scrovan
Thank you, Russell. Welcome back to the Ralph Nader Radio Hour. I'm Steve Scrovan along with David Feldman. Hannah and Ralph. Hey, who cares if a chemical plant spews toxic waste all over your community? Donald Trump sure doesn't. David.
- [27:06]
David Feldman
Rick Engler is a former US Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation board member and labor advocate who founded the New Jersey Work Environment Council. He has advocated for successful landmark state and national public policies that ensure workers and the public's right to know about potential chemical dangers and that promote safer processes, chemical incident prevention and whistleblower protection. Welcome to the Ralph Nader Radio Hour. Rick Engler, thank you.
- [27:37]
Rick Engler
Glad to be with you today.
- [27:39]
Ralph Nader
Welcome, Rick. People may not have heard of the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board. It's like the ntsb, which investigates transportation collisions, airlines, railroads, trucks and and so forth. I remember, Rick, I went to Philadelphia decades ago because Philadelphia is a leader in passing an ordinance on the right to know. And that's where I want to start in the interview with you. You have been a great supporter of the public's right to know about potential chemical dangers that they may be exposed to on the job and in the community where they live, and also openness in government transparency. Tell people what the right to know in the community really means and how widespread are those legal requirements.
- [28:29]
Rick Engler
Well, you have to back up, I think, a little bit beside, I do believe that the origin of the phrase, which was designed by the first attorney that I believe you hired for the center for Responsive Law was, you know, he coined the phrase, but the late great leader of the Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers Union, Tony Misaki, coined the phrase. And it developed out of experience in the workplace. It expanded to the community into a broader public right to know. But it began with worker exposure to hazardous material. So let me give you an example from Philadelphia. A fellow named John Winfelder, who worked at Lee Tire and Rubber in Conshohocken, which was a tire manufacturing site, walked into the office where I worked at the Philadelphia Project on Occupational Safety and Health. One day in the mid to late 70s, he had his green work uniform on, except it was sort of obscured by black dust. And he brought with him a list of chemicals, but the list was not indicating what the actual chemical was. It was a list of numbers and code names and trade names that made it virtually impossible to figure out what the health effects of those substances were that he worked with all the time in making tires. So that kind of experience informed Tony from members Tony Mazzaki, from members in the Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers Union who participated in town hall meetings inside the union all around the country in the late 60s and prior to the passage of the OSHA act in 1970. And it led to eventually, it's a long story to right to know laws for workers, but they were soon expanded at the state and local level, a right to know for communities. And so what was being used, how much of particular chemicals, hazardous substances were used in the workplace, what their names were, their real names, not their code names and what the quantities were and at what sites. And that eventually fast forward became expanded to federal protections. And so today, looking back on it, on something that people I think take for granted quite a bit, there really is a substantial, not perfect, much more needs to be done. Right to know for both workers and many, but not all workplaces and communities through a combination of local, state and federal laws. The two most, well, the most prominent federal laws are under OSHA where workers have a right to their own medical records. If they've had test results in the workplace of an exposure level, they have a right to that. They have a right to have chemicals labeled, to have training before working with chemicals and also to have data sheets about what the health hazards are and protective measures they can take for the community. There's a number of right to know laws, including the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know act, which covers the storage of chemicals. And also the Toxic Release Inventory which talks about. You can look this up by location or by facility. You can look up how much of a certain range of chemicals is being emitted into the air or water and see just how much potential exposure there is in your own community.
- [31:48]
Ralph Nader
Rick Engler, how do you look it up?
- [31:50]
Rick Engler
Well, go to EPA and if you search for EPA TRI or Toxics Release Inventory and last I looked, it still was a relatively user friendly site that would give you a lot of information about major facilities in your state or even neighborhood and you can go from there to try to get a better handle on what you might potentially be exposed to.
- [32:15]
Ralph Nader
Rick, you were appointed by Obama to be a member of the U.S. chemical Safety Board. And I want to give our listeners an idea of what this board does. It has a budget of about 14 and a half million dollars. Just consider that Trump wants to abolish this board. That's why we're having this interview. He wants to get rid of it. And he's spending $17 billion building the Bundago wall along the Mexican border with contracts going to his cronies and his buddies. Tremendous waste and corruption, but he wants to get rid of this tiny life saving board. Here's what it's done. Recently there was a massive chemical tank implosion at a paper mill in the state of Washington. In May, 11 people were killed. Days earlier in Southern California, authorities ordered 50,000 people to evacuate their homes when a tank filled with highly toxic chemicals was in danger of exploding. And in April, two people died after inhaling fumes from a chemical tank. And at a silver recovery plant in West Virginia. All of these were investigated by the Chemical Safety Board, which not only produces a report about how these disasters happen, but it makes suggestions on how to substitute dangerous chemicals for certain functions with less dangerous chemicals or how to change the inspection process. And this is what is being slated for extinction, this tiny Chemical Safety Board. Describe more what your concern is here, Rick.
- [33:55]
Rick Engler
Well, the CSB is unique. I mean, nobody would think of abolishing the National Transportation Safety Board, and no one should think about abolishing the Chemical Safety Board, which does the same thing. It's not about issuing, in this case, fines or violations. It's about trying to understand the underlying causes of what led to these incidents. So what OSHA does, for example, when there's a chemical explosion is they have six months to compare their standards to whether any were actually violated by the employer and then to issue violations and penalties. The CSP doesn't face that restriction and can dive much deeper into what the causes are of these incidents. For example, there's all kinds of issues that can lead to to a major catastrophe, including things like there was inadequate numbers of staff, disinvestment. You know, we see so much less funds going into manufacturing in this country. And a recent insurance report noted that major losses were more frequently in facilities that were 30 years old or older. And so these are the kind of things the CSB can look into that the regulatory agencies such as OSHA and EPA do not. So it performs really a unique role. And while it's not a regulatory agency and cannot order companies to comply with findings, it can have an outside influence in moving safety advances.
- [35:27]
Ralph Nader
Well, if any of our listeners think it doesn't relate to them, listen to this figure. Over 177 million Americans live in what are called worst case scenario zones near facilities that use hazardous chemicals. Two questions, Rick. Does the Chemical Safety Board cover the deadly chemicals transported by railroads coursing through American cities and towns every day, 24 hours a day? And second, give us some idea of what a worst case scenario is.
- [36:00]
Rick Engler
Well, no, it does not cover the transportation sector. That's what nts and it's not really an option. When Congress passed the Clean Air act amendments in 1990, they defined the role of the CSB and they were very clear that CSB was to focus on fixed industrial facilities. But that includes a wider range of sites than one might normally think. For example, it's not just chemical plants and oil refineries, but it's also pulp and paper mills like the site in Longview, Washington, where 11 workers needlessly died due to a major chemical incident that you highlighted. It also includes water treatment and wastewater treatment plants that use large quantities of chlorine. So there's lots of types of facilities in the country that are subject to CSB jurisdiction and that don't necessarily need to be regulated by an EPA risk management program.
- [36:55]
Ralph Nader
Well, you know, Trump wants to build more liquefied natural gas terminals, such as the ones that are off the cities in the Gulf of Mexico, like Houston and New Orleans. I've often warned about the dangers because looking into this over the years, the regulation is not as strict as it should be by the federal government and the state government, and there could be a mega disaster. Give us an idea what could happen if a LNG plant blew up.
- [37:24]
Rick Engler
You know, to be frank about this, I haven't looked at that issue with any particularity, but one of the things that can happen in the event of a chemical catastrophe is that you have a series of cascading reactions. In other words, some of the Federal regulation by EPA is based on the idea that one process, one unit at a complex continuous flow operation that runs 24 hours a day has a leak, and then bad things happen. And there might be an evacuation, there might be fatalities or injuries. But the fact is, the worst case scenarios can be of a cascading reaction where multiple units explode and leak. And so it's very difficult to estimate the potential human risks. But we, we certainly know from history that major number of fatalities can result from these kind of incidents. In fact, you narrated in 1990 a video for the then oil, chemical and atomic workers called out of control. I'm sure you remember it. And that came on the heels of when we had explosions in the Houston area at Arco and Phillips that killed, I think together about 40 people. So the largest explosion in the last couple of years. When I say explosion, I should say the largest impact in terms of fatalities has been this Longview, Washington paper mill incident. Most people don't think of paper mills as chemical plants, but they are. And here we have 11 people dead. So it's, it's really time for this carnage to stop.
- [38:55]
Ralph Nader
Well, you know, Trump's war on worker safety is at full throttle. He wants more chemical plants, he wants more LNG plants, but he's trying to weaken the already inadequate regulations for safety at these plants in addition to abolishing the Chemical Safety Board. What's his motivation here other than total ignorance and being in the pockets of the big corporations? But, you know, you don't have to be a smart politician to know that you're going to be blamed if we lose a good part of a city due to a chemical plant explosion and the consequence deadly cloud that goes over the neighborhoods.
- [39:36]
Rick Engler
Well, I find it very, I don't know, curious. I mean I looked at the last nine CSP on site investigations and seven of them were in red states, states, you know, that majority of the voters voted for Trump and I thought, well, it seems to me this is an example of he's attacking his own. To the extent there is some working class base for Trump, abolishing the CSB which has open investigations would be incredibly harmful to working class Americans. So I'm puzzled by it politically, but I do think it's fundamentally at its core about heeding the wishes of the oligarchs and the big corporations and it's just a matter of power. But clearly if the trade association, for example, the American, I think it's called the American Forest and Paper association, said to Trump, don't withdraw the chemical safety and pulp mill safety rules as Trump is now proceeding to do, I think he would do it a heartbeat. None of those industries have stood up despite the recent incidents and said to epa, you've gone too far in rolling back. They've been a slightly more friendly to the Chemical safety board because I think they recognize it as a non regulatory agency and ultimately they can accept or not accept its recommendations. And I think support for the CSB positions themselves a little bit in terms of priority to then fundamentally attack safeguards by OSHA and most currently by EPA through this proposed rollback of its risk management plan. Ultimately it's a matter of corporate power and corporations simply having too much power to influence and at this point really control public policy.
- [41:25]
Ralph Nader
Well, you know, they don't want another Bhopal disaster like in India and a Dow Chemical plant. Rick, what does the New York Times about a year ago mean when they said the White House is planning to eliminate the Chemical Safety Board? Even industry groups are opposed. What do they mean by even industry groups are opposed or are they wrong?
- [41:47]
Rick Engler
I think there is some truth that the ideologues in the, in the White House, the Russell Voits and etc. You know, they have a certain religious fervor about this. When I talk to plant managers, the plant managers of the corporations are much more careful and nuanced. In most cases they don't want their own plants to explode. But somewhere at the higher corporate levels I think they're just willing to take the risks that the trade off for them is Trump is supporting them in so many ways. Why interfere? Why become part of some nuanced opposition to the most extreme EPA attacks? But I do think the elimination of the CSB is driven by the Trump administration in a way that wouldn't be happening if it was just left to the chemical industry trade associations alone. I'm not sure that's an adequate answer. I'm actually kind of puzzled by it because it's also really clear that if there was any one major incident cost so much money, not only in the human tragedy of the lives lost and neighbors harmed and evacuations and shelter in place and property dam, but these incidents destroy facilities. So you look at Philadelphia Energy Services, which is the big former refinery in Philadelphia, they had a series of major fires and explosions in June 2019. It was the straw that broke the camel's back. The plant wasn't doing all that well anyway. The CSB found that there were lack of inspection in piping that led to corrosion. That was one of the factors that led to the explosion. But the point I want to make here is that when the plant shut down permanently, a thousand jobs were lost, facilities closed. They have a major economic impact not only on to some extent, I guess on their owners, but certainly to the community's economy as well and to the thousands. Well, about a thousand workers permanently lost their job at that refinery. So they have a very broad impact. But this is. But maybe before we talk about international pressures, maybe this is about disinvestment in the U.S. i think the effort to run facilities to failure is probably not just a short term process, but is also some corporations are looking that they're going to merge or they're going to export production overseas or elsewhere. And so they run these facilities to failure. And that's part of their business plan, even if they don't acknowledge the safety risks to neighbors and workers.
- [44:24]
Ralph Nader
Interesting point. Is there a map that people can go to to determine whether they're living in areas of potential jeopardy near a chemical plant or some toxic chemical storage site?
- [44:38]
Rick Engler
Well, there's a couple things people can do. They can go to the website of the Coalition to Prevent Chemical Disasters and took a look at a map of where there have been recent chemical incidents. I think that's CPCD.org and they can also push the EPA to restore its online RMP tool. One of the things that EPA did a few months ago was take it off the Internet on the EPA's own website, a way to find what facilities used highly hazardous chemicals. And they claim they're going to put that back on, you know, as public information eventually, but they haven't done it yet.
- [45:16]
Ralph Nader
Can you give that website again?
- [45:18]
Chris Hedges
Sure.
- [45:18]
Rick Engler
Cpcd.org cpcd.org Coalition to Prevent Chemical Disasters and there's a wealth of information on that site.
- [45:28]
Ralph Nader
Let's go to a success story, and this is right out of a Hollywood movie. A poultry processor. There is a leak of liquid nitrogen, which is widely used in industrial freezers. It overflowed and quickly vaporized, killing two maintenance workers by asphyxiation. During the ensuing evacuation, 14 other workers rushed to enter the freezer room to rescue their buddies. Four of them also died from asphyxiation. Investigators from Chemical Safety Board traced the accident to a device called the bubbler tube used to measure liquid nitrogen levels inside the freezer. The tube was likely bent during maintenance rendering, unable to measure and control the freezer's liquid nitrogen levels. Following the Chemical Safety Board's findings, the freezer's manufacturer, the name is Messer M E S S E r revised its freezer design to include several layers of protection against liquid nitrogen overflow. The poultry processor, now part of Gold Creek Corporation, also developed emergency response protocols which the Chemical Board said would help prevent future accidents. Quote Then these incident details are documented and the knowledge becomes a very valuable guidance, end quote, said Faisal Khan, director of the Mary Kay o' Connor Process Safety center at Texas A and M University. He added, quote we can learn and improve, end quote. That's the kind of work the Chemical Safety Board does with a tiny budget of a little over $14 million a year that Trump, in his ignorance, violence, cruelty and viciousness, wants to eliminate while he spends 17 billion with a B dollars of your money to build a boondoggle wall on the Mexican border to satisfy his political ego and crony company contractors who are probably investing in his enterprises. What would you like to add before we conclude?
- [47:42]
Rick Engler
Rick Engler well, I think there are two things at least to pay attention to. One is the EPA's attempt to gut the main regulation, the risk management program, to prevent major chemical incidents. And right now EPA has a proposal to do that. The comment period is closed and we expect them to issue this dismantling within the coming year. So people should try to stay on top of that. And you can catch up with all this go to the EPA website. The CSB has a website as well, but there you can get really useful information about what the CSP is up to. CSP also produces videos for many, not all, of its incident investigations. And the CSB videos are very useful teaching tools in explaining what the at least the technical causes are of how these incidents happened and illustrate the value of csb. And I would also urge people to contact their member of Congress about CSB's funding because CSB's funding has been restored each of the at least six years or so that Trump has attempted to abolish the budget. So right now for the budget year that starts October 1st, still unknown what the CSB budget will be. And I think given especially given these recent incidents, I think congresspeople will listen to some extent to constituents if they speak up to demand that the CSB be at a minimum funded at the 14 million plus level.
- [49:09]
Ralph Nader
Thank you very much. Rick Engler.
- [49:11]
Rick Engler
Thank you very much for allowing me to talk today. Most appreciated.
- [49:15]
Steve Scrovan
We've been speaking with Rick Engler. We will link to his work@ralphnaderradiohour.com Stand up.
- [49:22]
Ralph Nader
Stand up.
- [49:23]
Steve Scrovan
Before we go, Ralph, you have a couple more topics you want to touch on, beginning with a couple of people you'd like to pay tribute to.
- [49:31]
Ralph Nader
Two of the greatest doctors in American history passed away recently. One of them, most people may not have heard of. John Payne Gaiman G U I M A N He's a family physician coming out of Princeton and graduating from medical school. Passed away age 95. What a life he led. A family physician, a professor of medicine, an educator, an advocate for health reform. A few years ago, he would fly cancer patients from an island off of Seattle where he lived, to a hospital with other volunteers who flew these Cessna planes. He did it all. He represented the finest traditions and principles of medicine. But he also wrote over 12 books on the corruption of the health care system. And he never let corporations off the hook. And the books were tremendously graphic, easy to read, clearly printed. And he kept writing them and he sent copies to every member of Congress who for the most part hardly responded. The press wouldn't give him his due because he wasn't particularly flamboyant like some physicians are today. He doesn't just talk on micro malpractice or some denial of benefits such as under Medicare disadvantage. He did the whole range of corruption. Very few of the corruptors escaped his eloquent and graphic pen. The doctor, John Gaiman, he was one of a kind. The other doctor was far better known. He died recently at age 97. Professor Robert Coles, a Pulitzer winner child psychiatrist. And he really broke ground. He documented with interviews and spending a lot of time with children, traveling with them, interviewing them. He documented that they have a well developed moral sense of right and wrong of being fair and unfair when they're five years old, six, seven, eight, nine years old. And the beauty of his discovery is that these children were not encumbered by vested interests such as maybe their parents were, or adults. They could clearly signal the right path for a humane society. And some of his interviews were staggeringly illustrated, particularly a six year old African American girl harassed on her way to desegregated school in a southern state. And he interviewed you after that? She was being taunted and threatened before she entered the school building. And that interview is a world classic that this young girl had the perspective to transcend her experience and evaluate what is happening in a moral context. And so Robert Coles was a great doctor. He wrote many books and he testified, he went to civic gatherings. He knew the power of communication. Actually he inspired Claire to write her book you're you best teacher because he showed that it is folly for adults to underestimate the curiosity, intellect, idealism of youngsters. And that is a super Nobel Prize discovery in my mind. If we listened more to our children, if we didn't degrade their bringing up experience by putting them on screens instead of having them play outside or exercise their minds in other ways, we'd be a much better and safer and healthful society and would be respecting what our founding fathers always called posterity. So there are great obituaries in the New York Times, Washington Post of Professor Coles. Dr. Gaiman hasn't yet received an obituary in those newspapers, but if you go to his website which is John Gaiman, M.D. one word. John Gaiman, G Y M A N M D you'll get a sense of his great work as a practicing physician, writer, advocate and fearless defender of patients being done in regularly by corporate greed.
- [54:00]
Steve Scrovan
Ralph Recently Congressman Thomas Massie made a statement about an incident that we've talked about on the program before. He was asking for a probe into Israel's attack on the USS Liberty in 1967. What's that all about? And what do you think about that?
- [54:16]
Ralph Nader
Well, he went on the floor of the House asking for a new investigation because the former investigation was a cover up like there's never been in American military history. Israeli jets attacked this ship. It was clearly marked, the day was sunny, the American flag was fine. They knew it was a non warship, it was an electronic detection warship. This was in their war with Egypt and Syria at the time. They were doing things in the Suez that maybe they didn't want the American military to find out about. And the jets came and then they came back and they strafed. They killed 34 sailors, 174 injured, almost sank the ship. And listen to this. For 17 hours, the US Navy and Air Force didn't come to the rescue. The orders came out immediately after the first attack to get to the boat and defend it against the attackers. And the U.S. navy and Air Force were on the way. And suddenly they were called back by Washington, Lyndon Baines Johnson and an Admiral McCain, the father of Senator John McCain. And seven books have been written on this by the survivors and others on USS Liberty demanding an investigation. Major established diplomatic and military figures in the US have described what happened as a cover up, that the investigation did not pursue the truth. And Tom Massie went on the floor of the House as a courageous lawmaker, laid it all out and demanded a new investigation. So this illustrates, I think, why Trump wanted to Tom Massie defeated. He was defeated in the primary in Kentucky by aipac. Supported opponent, huge money, huge slander of Tom Massie MIT grad, very smart, principled and disagreed with Trump on the war in Iran. Disagreed with Trump on a deficit, disagreed with Trump on a couple other matters. But for the most part, he supported Trump's legislation. That wasn't enough for Trump. You want to get the transcript, just go to Congressman Tom Massie's office, call him up. He'll send you a transcript free. And you can also look it up in the Congressional Record.
- [56:38]
Steve Scrovan
Ralph, what do you think? You know, Massey was defeated in his primary. He's got about six months to go. What do you think his motivation was in bringing this up?
- [56:46]
Ralph Nader
Now he is going to make his seven months since he was defeated to January of next year count in ways that are going to drive Trump nuts. And nothing Trump does anymore can stop him. He's already been defeated. So he's not going to go away quietly. He's not going to slink back in a corner. He's not going to quit like Taylor Greene did when she was criticized by Trump from her House seat in Georgia. He's going to stand tall and he may run again in some other undefined campaign that he's going to let us know later.
- [57:20]
Steve Scrovan
I want to thank our guests again, Chris Hedges and Rick Engler. For those you listening on the radio, that's our show for you podcast listeners. Stay tuned for some bonus material we call the Wrap Up Featuring Francesco de Santis with in case you haven't heard, a transcript of this program will appear on the Ralph Nader Radio Hour substack site soon after the episode is posted.
- [57:40]
David Feldman
The producers of the Ralph Nader Radio Hour are Jimmy Lee Wirt, Hannah Feldman and Matthew Marin. Our executive producer is Alan Minsky.
- [57:49]
Steve Scrovan
Our theme music, Stand Up, Rise up, was written and performed by Kemp Harris. Our proofreader is Elizabeth Solomon.
- [57:55]
David Feldman
Join us next week on the Ralph Nader Radio Hour. Thank you, Ralph.
- [57:59]
Ralph Nader
Thank you, everybody. Stand up, step up, step up. You ought to step up. Rise up, rise up. I know you wanna rise up. Stand up, stand up.
- [58:38]
Rick Engler
This is Chuck Foster. I host Reggae Central every Sunday afternoon right here on KPFK at 2 o', clock, where you'll hear ska, rocksteady, roots, dub and dancehall every Sunday afternoon at 2 right here on KPFK 90.7 FM in LA.
- [59:01]
Chris Hedges
If your automobile, truck, boat, motorcycle, RV or aircraft is no longer reliable, it can still go a long way towards supporting the programs you rely as a donation. To donate it to KPFK, call 877, KPFK Auto. That's 877-KPFKAuto.
- [59:23]
Wilgeir Theatricum Botanicum Announcer
Wilgeir Theatricum Botanicum returns this June 6th through October 4th with outdoor repertory theater events and educational programs for all ages. In Midsummer, Night's Dream is back alongside Romeo and Juliet, Treasure Island, Noel Coward's Waiting in the Wings, and Bernardo Cubria's dark and incisive new comedy, the People of Pompeii. Set in the Aftermath of the 2025 Palisades fire, Siatricum is located in Topanga Canyon, just off the 101 freeway in the shade of the California live oaks. Explore and picnic in the gardens before the show. Further information available.