Napolitano called Secure Communities “a program that helps ICE identify those who have been arrested by state and local law enforcement for non-immigration state or local crimes, who are also in the country unlawfully. It bestows no additional authorities onto local law enforcement and only identifies those who have been booked into jails. Literally, in jails.”

Opponents of Secure Communities have repeatedly called on the Obama administration to end the fingerprint-sharing program because immigrants who have committed no crime are being detained and deported, leaving behind U.S.-born children and families that, in many cases, will struggle to make ends meet.

Jonathan Fried of We Count!, a South Florida worker and immigrant advocacy organization, said during an event in August that in Miami-Dade County, as of May 2011, close to 60 percent of undocumented immigrants who have been detained under Secure Communities have not committed a crime.

Napolitano said Secure Communities “got off to a bad start.”

“We did not explain clearly how it works and who is required to participate,” she said. “It has already helped accomplish a great deal toward ensuring that we use our enforcement resources where they do the most good.”

Over the summer, three state governors — in Illinois, New York and Massachusetts — announced they were suspending their participation in Secure Communities. Members of Congress have called on California Gov. Jerry Brown to suspend the state’s participation in Secure Communities.

U.S. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi told the Spanish-language La Opinion — an online news outlet — that deporting undocumented immigrants who have not committed a serious crime, something she accepted is happening with Secure Communities, is a waste of taxpayer money.

According to Napolitano, “Secure Communities hasn’t increased the number of individuals who are removed, but it has helped change the composition – helping ICE to dramatically increase the number of convicted criminals and egregious immigration law violators,” adding that, “despite the misleading commentary about this program, it has proven to be the single best tool at focusing our immigration enforcement resources on criminals and egregious immigration law violators.”

Pablo Alvarado, director of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network, responded to Secretary Napolitano’s speech today with the following statement:

We are happy to hear Secretary Napolitano mention S-Comm and “termination” in the same sentence. Despite the political spin and marketing campaign to defend a failed program, S-Comm has proven to be a disastrous policy for our nation and for our communities. It should be ended before it leads to the further Arizonification of the country.

Napolitano said termination of Secure Communities “would only weaken public safety, and move the immigration enforcement system back towards the ad hoc approach where non-criminal aliens are more likely to be removed than criminals.”

Napolitano said it is her department’s job “to listen and make adjustments consistent with our best law enforcement judgment. That’s why Secure Communities now has new training for state and local law enforcement, and additional steps are being taken to protect witnesses, domestic violence victims, and victims of other violent crime.”

The National Immigration Forum, ”a vocal and vehement critic of the Secure Communities program,” was invited by the Department of Homeland Security in July to participate in a task force “created in response to growing criticism and concern” about Secure Communities.

The Forum resigned from the advisory committee in September, stating that despite recommendations “that – if implemented – would improve the operation of the Secure Communities program and strengthen civil rights and civil liberties protections,” they “fell short of sound policy recommendations that would cure fundamental flaws in the program.”

House Bill 515, introduced early this year by state Rep. Ellen Story (D-Hampshire District), would amend a section of the “Crimes Against Chastity, Morality, Decency and Good Order” to legally allow unmarried persons to buy birth control or contraception from a pharmacist or to be prescribed a form a birth control from a pharmacist. The law currently reads (emphasis added):

A registered physician may administer to or prescribe for any married person drugs or articles intended for the prevention of pregnancy or conception. A registered pharmacist actually engaged in the business of pharmacy may furnish such drugs or articles to any married person presenting a prescription from a registered physician. A public health agency, a registered nurse, or a maternity health clinic operated by or in an accredited hospital may furnish information to any married person as to where professional advice regarding such drugs or articles may be lawfully obtained.

The Massachusetts Chapter of the National Organization for Women describes the bill as outdated and long-irrelevant, yet still technical law that should be modified:

This bill would repeal outdated, unconstitutional, and archaic laws that remain on the books in Massachusetts, including a pre-Roe v. Wade abortion ban, a medically unjustified and burdensome hospital mandate, and a birth control ban for unmarried couples. It would ensure that abortion rights are upheld in the Commonwealth should Roe v. Wade ever be overturned.

An Harvard Crimson news article from 1970 addressed controversies to the law more than four decades ago:

The Committee on Social Welfare held a public hearing last Thursday on House Bill 520, which would repeal the current Massachusetts laws on birth control. The committee listened to testimony that Massachusetts is one of two states which still prohibit the distribution of birth control information and devices to unmarried people. They heard ecology workers describe the dangers of the population explosion. They heard a psychologist explain that the current laws discriminate against the poor. They heard a gynecologist state that laws prohibiting contraceptives encourage illegal abortions. And they heard a doctor in the Department of Public Health testify that the current laws disqualify Massachusetts from Federal funding because they discriminate between married and unmarried people.

The committee was treated to a demonstration that the laws are selectively enforced. Debby Vollmer, a member of Worchester Women’s Liberation, opened an innocent-looking brown paper bag and held up a package of contraceptive foam she had bought in a drug store down the street. She pointed out that drug stores and department stores throughout the state sell contraceptive items to anyone, a violation of the law which the state ignores. At the same time Bill Baird is sentenced to prison for giving contraceptive foam to an unmarried woman.

Baird was present at the hearing and testified briefly for the bill. The committee seemed sympathetic to him, but the reason became evident as opponents of the bill began to testify. They claimed that the legalization of contraceptive care would destroy the morals of the citizens of Massachusetts. Two state representatives, a housewife, a businessman and a Catholic priest presented this viewpoint. The committee seemed particularly interested in whether the priest agreed that enforcement of the laws is discriminatory. He said yes, that the laws should be strictly enforced, that the state probably should crack down on stores which continue to sell contraceptives. The hearing ended on this note.

[...]

THE HEARING on House Bill 520 was probably typical of Massachusetts politics, and it may be naive to hope that it could have been any different. It was a farce, but it was only momentarily funny. The women faced with the prospect of bearing unwanted children will not be laughing.

Story’s bill would also repeal parts of the law that stipulates penalties for those who attempt to “procure miscarriage“; distribute advertising “for the purpose of causing or procuring the miscarriage of a woman pregnant with child”; or lend or sell “an instrument or other article intended to be used for self-abuse, or any drug, medicine, instrument or article whatever for the prevention of conception or for causing unlawful abortion.”

Additionally, the bill would remove language from a current abortion law that mandates an abortion after 13 weeks be performed in a hospital.

The Wall Street Journal reports that new data (.pdf) from the Department of Agriculture shows that in the U.S. “some 70 percent of households that relied on food stamps last year had no earned income”:

While the recession technically ended in 2009, a sluggish economic recovery left millions out of work or underemployed and leaning on the government for assistance last year.

The Agriculture Department’s annual snapshot on the characteristics of food stamp households, released Friday, shows that seven in 10 households receiving food stamps had no earned income last year, though many got other forms of government benefits.

Nearly 21% of households on food stamps also received Supplemental Security Income, assistance for the aged and blind. Some 21.4% received Social Security benefits. Just 8% of households also received Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, the cash welfare program.

But some 20% of households had no cash income of any kind last year, up from 15% in 2007, the year the recession began, and up from 7% in 1990.

That’s partly because most household heads who were receiving food stamps were also out of work. Just 21.8% of them had jobs in 2010, while 19.8% were jobless and looking for work.

According to an interactive map on the Journal’s website, Florida had among the highest percentage of people on food stamps without an earned income. The states with a higher percentage included Kentucky, Connecticut, New Jersey and Massachusetts. Massachusetts reported the highest percentage: 80 percent.

The Journal also reported that “food stamps may be emerging as a lifeline for families after their unemployment insurance expired [and] just 6.7% of households who received food stamps were getting jobless benefits.” It as also reported that “nearly half of all food-stamp recipients, 47%, were children under the age of 18. Another 8% of recipients were age 60 or older.”

Poverty and unemployment has been a persistent problem in Florida. The last Florida jobs report shows that unemployment remained unchanged from one month to the next. In August, Florida also had the second highest number of mass layoffs in the nation. Many of Florida’s largest cities are struggling to rebound from the recession.

Gov. Rick Scott maintains the state is on the “right path.”

In addition to increasing the penalties for driving without a license and restricting undocumented immigrants’ access to public benefits and employment, the bill would encourage the implementation of the Secure Communities program in Massachusetts. The MetroWest Daily News reports:

The bill would require the state Executive Office of Public Safety to report to lawmakers on actions it takes to assist with the deployment of Secure Communities, according to a summary provided by [state Sen.] Moore. It would require individuals or businesses seeking to register a vehicle to produce documentation such as a federal tax identification number, license or social security number. The bill would also strengthen penalties for people who drive without a license or knowingly allow someone else to drive their vehicle, according to the summary.

…The legislation also ensures that state-subsidized housing is reserved for legal Massachusetts residents and aims to help local building officials prevent multi-bedroom apartments from housing several families. Employment provisions of the bill include establishing penalties for employers who knowingly hire unauthorized workers and requiring companies seeking public contracts to participate in programs to verify the eligibility of their employees, according to the documents.

The bill would also establish a complaint process by which ordinary people can report employers who hire undocumented immigrants to the District Attorney’s office, with a penalty for false reports.

Matthew Denice, a resident of Milford, Mass., was killed by Nicolas Guaman, an undocumented Ecuadoran immigrant, who struck Denice’s motorcycle with his car. The death led to calls in the community for action against unauthorized immigration. A member of the Milford Board of Selectmen, William Buckley, said of unauthorized immigration: “There’s a real impact. People are dying.”

Denice’s family, together with the selectmen and other members of the Milford community, have called on Gov. Deval Patrick (D) to support Secure Communities, a program in which local police give the biometric information of people they arrest to the federal government. Police can then hold suspected undocumented immigrants until they are taken into custody by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Although some states, including Massachusetts, have tried to resist implementing Secure Communities, Patrick’s administration has recognized that they have no legal authority to do so.

Well-publicized violent or criminal incidents involving undocumented immigrants have frequently prompted immigration policy crackdowns by state or municipal lawmakers. In Hazleton, Pa., a fatal shooting committed by two undocumented immigrants lead to a stringent enforcement law which became the model for statewide immigration laws like Arizona’s S.B. 1070 and Alabama’s H.B. 56.

Efforts to regulate immigration through housing policy have had little support from federal courts, as both the Hazleton law and a similar policy in Farmer’s Branch, Texas, were blocked by the circuit appellate courts (Hazleton is currently once again on the docket of the Third Circuit after the Supreme Court asked the court to revisit the decision). State-level employment regulation has proven more successful, with the Supreme Court recently ruling that employers could be penalized for hiring undocumented immigrants by revoking their business licenses.

Cosponsors of the new Massachusetts bill include Milford’s state Rep. John Fernandes (D), as well as state Rep. George Peterson Jr. (R-Grafton). State Sen. Richard Moore (D-Uxbridge) and state Sen. Bruce Tarr (R-Gloucester) sponsored similar legislation in the state Senate.

Now, Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) is accusing the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and Secretary Janet Napolitano of engaging in preferential treatment by releasing Onyango Obama. On Fox News, King said that “We have to bring drunken ‘Uncle Omar’ in front of the House Judiciary Committee, drill down into this, and tell America what’s going on.”

The accusations of double standards come at a time when the administration has declared its intent to use its power of prosecutorial discretion to grant indefinite stays of deportation on many undocumented immigrants. King, House Judiciary Chair Lamar Smith (Texas) and other immigration-enforcement hawks in Congress are jumping on Onyango Obama as a way to paint deportation reform as an erosion of the rule of law.

They have also pointed to Zeituni Onyango, Obama’s aunt, who was living in the United States without authorization but was granted asylum in 2010. King says Zeituni’s asylum was a product of the “bleeding heart” of Napolitano, in spite of the fact that the order to grant Zeituni Onyango political asylum was issued by an immigration judge, not Napolitano herself.

Here’s video of King on Fox News accusing the Obama administration of double standards, via The Hill:

Massachusetts topped the list of states with the lowest number of uninsured at 5.3 percent. In 2006, the state instituted a mandate requiring residents to carry health insurance. Vermont has the second lowest uninsured rate at 9.2 percent. Vermont recently enacted the nation’s first single-payer health care system.

Rounding out the top 10 were Connecticut, Hawaii, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Maryland, New Jersey and Delaware.

Despite the strong showing in the state-based rankings, Minnesota’s rate of uninsured has climbed over the last few years from 8.7 percent in 2009.

Minnesota also placed third in 2010 and 2009, according to Gallup. The Midwest and Northeast have historically had low uninsured rates.

The bottom ten were all southern states, except for California and Alaska. Texas had the highest percent of uninsured with 27.4 percent followed by Mississippi, Alaska, Florida, Oklahoma, California, Louisiana, Arkansas, North Carolina and Georgia. Texas has consistently led the nation in having the highest percentage of its population without health insurance in the Gallup survey.

The news of Onyango Obama’s arrest comes two weeks after an announcement by the secretary of the U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano that many immigrants without criminal records who are up for deportation will be allowed to indefinitely stay in the United States and apply for work permits. Which immigrants will be allowed to stay will be determined according to a list of criteria outlined in a prior memo by ICE director John Morton which advised prosecutors to exercise discretion when deciding whether to place someone in deportation proceedings.

Conservatives and Republican leaders have used the news of Onyango Obama’s arrest to denounce the new deportation policy, which many of its opponents have taken to calling “administrative amnesty” (although the policy does not offer legal status or a path to citizenship to undocumented immigrants, which would require an act of Congress).

Conservative media website Newsmax ran a story Monday about Onyango quoting three different Republican U.S. representatives, each of whom drew associations between Onyango Obama’s arrest and the administration’s deportation reform. One of the representatives quoted is Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), a tea party movement leader and prominent opponent of any legalization of undocumented immigrants:

…King, who sits on the House immigration subcommittee, said the Onyango Obama case “raises a troubling list of questions about the potential for preferential treatment.

“It is yet another reason Congress should hold hearings to expose President Obama’s executive amnesty program,” he said. “With an existing deportation order, it is not surprising to learn that ‘Uncle Omar’ Obama told police officers that his first call would be to his nephew in the White House. Now that the executive branch has gotten into the business of undermining the rule of law, there is little question that anyone who is connected to the president, politically or otherwise, will have an advantage.”

The article also quotes Rep. Joe Walsh (R-Ill.), who called the arrest “the height of irony” and a potential “massive conflict of interest,” and Rep. Louis Gohmert (R-Texas), who said, “This is one more example of where the president is in a position where he can give favorable treatment to his cronies, and in this case a relative … It’s one more step making us look like a Third World corrupt government where it’s all about who you know.”

National Review blogger Mark Krikorian, who is also the director of the Center for Immigration Studies, one of a family of restrictionist organizations founded by John Tanton, said of Onyango Obama’s arrest, “Now [President Obama] has two illegal-alien relatives,” referring to Zeituni Obama, Onyango Obama’s sister and Barack Obama’s aunt who applied for asylum in November 2008, the month her nephew was elected president.

Prominent conservative blogger Michelle Malkin echoed Krikorian, writing, “Entry into this country is no longer treated as a privilege, but an irrevocable right for every last griping Zeituni and reckless Omar.” (Omar is what Barack Obama called his uncle in his memoir.)

Cecilia Muñoz, White House director of intergovernmental affairs, wrote at the time of Napolitano’s announcement that the administration “will be reviewing the current deportation caseload to clear out low-priority cases on a case-by-case basis and make more room to deport people who have been convicted of crimes or pose a security risk. And they will take steps to keep low-priority cases out of the deportation pipeline in the first place.”

But as The Florida Independent reported last week, how the deportation reform will play out in practice is very uncertain at this time. Someone convicted of a DUI, which Onyango Obama is accused of, may or may not be a “low priority” case according to ICE’s definition.

In a sign that Republican-led attacks on public unions’ collective bargaining rights may be reaching a tipping point on their way to widespread application, the Massachusetts House of Representatives Tuesday night passed Amendment 749 to its 2012 budget. The amendment, introduced by Rep. Brian (D-Essex), is said by its backers to save money by limiting the ability of public employee unions to negotiate over health coverage.

The Massachusetts amendment is different from similar legislation in other states because it was introduced by a Democrat and garnered the support of Democrats, passing in a 113 to 42 vote (the tally reported in the Boston Globe doesn’t reflect two late votes). The Massachusetts House of Representatives is overwhelmingly Democratic.

The Boston Globe’s Michael Levenson reports that Speaker of the House Robert DeLeo, another Democrat, defended the bill as debate heated up Tuesday:

DeLeo said the House measure would save $100 million for cities and towns in the upcoming budget year, helping them avoid layoffs and reductions in services. He called his plan one of the most significant reforms the state can adopt to help control escalating health care costs.

“By spending less on the health care costs of municipal employees, our cities and towns will be able to retain jobs and allot more funding to necessary services like education and public safety,’’ he said in a statement.

The push to defend cuts to union rights in the name of saving jobs didn’t sit well with union leaders in Massachusetts, a state traditionally considered union-friendly. The Globe’s Levenson reports:

Unions fought hard to stop the bill, launching a radio ad that assailed the plan and warning legislators that if they voted for the measure, they could lose their union backing in the next election. After the vote, labor leaders accused House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo and other Democrats of turning their backs on public employees.

“It’s pretty stunning,’’ said Robert J. Haynes, president of the Massachusetts AFL-CIO. “These are the same Democrats that all these labor unions elected. The same Democrats who we contributed to in their campaigns. The same Democrats who tell us over and over again that they’re with us, that they believe in collective bargaining, that they believe in unions. . . . It’s a done deal for our relationship with the people inside that chamber.’’

“We are going to fight this thing to the bitter end,’’ he added. “Massachusetts is not the place that takes collective bargaining away from public employees.”

The site has gone largely unnoticed since its inception, but now — as the legislative session (during which several abortion-related bills were introduced) wraps up, the website is making local headlines. This week, two state representatives have joined the bandwagon, calling on Gov. Deval Patrick to shut down the site.

The website, MariaTalks.com (“about sex, birth control and issues that matter”), features fictional “Maria,” an 18-year-old Boston resident who is a “sexpert” among her friends and whose “Aunt Lucia” is an OB/GYN. The site uses conversational language from Maria and her “friends” to address sexual health issues, including sexual anatomy, sexually transmitted infections, birth control, emergency contraception, abstinence, abortion, adoption, sexual violence and LGBT issues. The website redirects all questions to an anonymous Massachusetts Sexual Health Helpline (877-MA-SEX-ED).

There’s a section on Maria Talks that details various sexual practices, such as masturbation, digital sex and anal sex, and clarifies clinical terms to ensure comprehension — “cum” for semen, “butt” for anal sex, and  “going down on her” for cunnilingus. However, what has led anti-abortion rights groups like Massachusetts Citizens for Life and Americans United for Lifeto suddenly demand that Gov. Patrick shut down the site is the 846-word section on abortion.

Anti-abortion rights group Massachusetts Citizens for Life last Thursday hand-delivered a letter to Gov. Patrick (as well as Lt. Gov. Timothy Murray, Health and Human Services Secretary JudyAnn Bigby and Department of Public Health Commissioner John Auerbach) calling on him to take down the website while “an inquiry is made into its content and authorization.” The group has requested a public accounting of the funding and wants to know who specifically authorized these funds.

“Members of our organization and the general public are appalled by the content of the site,” writes MCL President Anne Fox in the letter. “There is medical and psychological misinformation as well as serious infringements on the rights of parents and families. The site practices deception and misleading omission when discussing the realities and risks of abortions and, literally, coaches minors on how to obtain abortions without telling their parents. This is clearly in violation of the legislative intent of the Massachusetts Parental Consent Law.”

Maria Talks has been produced by the AIDS Action Committee of Massachusetts for the past three years and is funded through an annual $100,000 grant by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health.

Passages from Maria Talks’ abortion section that have been highlighted by abortion groups and media outlets include:

“An abortion is when the contents of the womb (uterus) are removed, so that the uterus goes back to how it was before a woman got pregnant. Abortions can happen naturally (sometimes referred to as a spontaneous abortion or miscarriage) or can be done with medications or surgery.”

“My Aunt Lucia says that abortions are safe and effective, though some people may experience temporary discomfort. She also says that early abortions have less risk than those done later in the pregnancy.”

Massachusetts Citizens for Life refers to the content on the Maria Talks site as “one-sided and misleading.” MCL also publishes information about abortion, sourcing various media articles, books, medical journals and congressional documents gathered by the National Right to Life:

• From Keith L. Moore’s The Developing Human (1988): “Abortion ends a pregnancy by destroying and removing the developing child. That baby’s heart has already begun to beat by the time the mother misses her period and begins to wonder if she might be pregnant.”
• From Centers for Disease Prevention and Control: “Surgical abortions are usually not performed before seven weeks, or 49 days.”
• From From Conception to Birth, written by Robert Rugh, Ph.D., and Landrum Shettles, M.D., Ph.D., (1971): By [day 45] the baby has identifiable arms and legs.
• From the CDC: “During the seventh through the tenth weeks, when the majority of abortions are performed, fingers and genitals appear and the child’s face is recognizably human.” [According to more recent stats from the CDC, a study in 2007 found that 62.3 percent of abortions were performed at eight or fewer weeks’ gestation, and 91.5 percent were performed at 13 or fewer weeks’ gestation. About 7.2 percent were performed at 14-20 weeks, and 1.3 percent were performed at 21 weeks or greater.]
• From Jane E. Hodgson, M.D.’s Abortion and Sterilization: Medical and social aspects, published in 1981: Great care must be taken to prevent the uterus from being punctured during this procedure, which may cause hemorrhage and necessitate further surgery. Also, infection can easily develop if any fetal or placental tissue is left behind in the uterus. This is the most frequent post-abortion complication.

In response to the MCL’s letter and subsequent media attention, AIDS Action Committee released the following statement:

Maria Talks is a collaborative effort between AIDS Action Committee and the Massachusetts Department of Public Health. All of the content on MariaTalks.com has been developed with input from public health and pediatric experts. The website is designed to provide comprehensive, accurate and culturally appropriate health information and resources in a youth friendly and accessible format. Information is provided about sex, abstinence, birth control, pregnancy, sexually-transmitted infections, and sexual violence. We feel strongly that the issues that are addressed through the Maria Talks website are essential in safeguarding the general, sexual health of youth by informing them of their risk for unintended pregnancies, HIV and other sexually transmitted infections.

A recent editorial in the Boston Herald rails on the website, saying: “[H]ow the heck could anyone in the Patrick administration sign off on this? MariaTalks.com doesn’t just explain abortion, it encourages teens to make this life-and-death moral decision. It downplays the emotional aspects, ignores research on possible long-term negative effects…”

NARAL Pro-Choice America Executive Director Andrea Miller told the Herald she stands behind Maria Talks.

“It’s really a complete and medically accurate set of information,” Miller said. “I’m impressed that the state has provided this information in a youth-friendly, nonjudgmental manner.” It should be noted that Maria Talks refers to NARAL, Planned Parenthood, Exhale and Pregnancy Options as resources for more information on abortion. Pregnancy Opitons’ site includes “A Guide to Emotional and Spiritual Resolution After an Abortion.”

Americans United for Life has condemned the site for providing information on how to use the state’s judicial bypass process. Massachusetts law requires unmarried women under age 18 to obtain the consent of one parent or a legal guardian or the authorization by a judge before they can receive an abortion.

“If you are under 18 and have decided that abortion is right for you, you can call the Planned Parenthood Counseling and Referral Hotline at 1-800-258-4448 (option 3),” Maria says. “They can either help you talk to your parents, or if you decide that you can’t or don’t want to do that, they will provide you with a free lawyer who will help you go to court and talk to a judge.  These hearings are scheduled quickly, are kept completely confidential and so far, no minor who’s gone through this process has ever been denied access to an abortion by a judge.”

“While Maria gives lip service to involving parents in an abortion decision, she fails to emphasize the unique quality of the parent-child relationship, and the fact that parents usually possess information essential to a physician’s exercise of his or her best medical judgment concerning their daughter,” writes AUL’s Mary Harned in an article for AUL’s site that was republished by anti-abortion rights news site LifeNews.

On Monday, the Associated Press reported that Reps. Marc Lombardo (R-Billerica) and Colleen Garry (D-Dracut) support MCL’s effort to tear down the site, for its use of graphic language and explanation of abortion.

Jeff McMahon blogs for Forbes:

“It is important to note that the corresponding MCL for iodine-131 was calculated based on long-term chronic exposures over the course of a lifetime – 70 years. The levels seen in rainwater are expected to be relatively short in duration,” the agency states in a FAQ that accompanied yesterday’s brief news release.

EPA said it is receiving “verbal reports” of higher levels of radiation in rainwater samples from other states as well, and that Americans should continue to expect short-term contamination of rainwater as radioactive isotopes spread through the atmosphere from Japan.

“We continue to expect similar reports from state agencies and others across the nation given the nature and duration of the Japanese nuclear incident.”

The agency said it has ordered samples from 78 drinking water systems. It has also ordered immediate sampling of cow’s milk around the country. Milk sampling is important, EPA said, because in situations involving large releases of radioactive iodine, cows grazing on contaminated grass will accumulate the iodine in their milk. A complete analysis of the cow milk can take three days.

EPA’s only recommendation to state and local governments is to continue to coordinate closely with EPA, CDC and FDA – EPA will continue to communicate our nationwide sampling results as they come in.

EPA’s daily updates are available here.