Archive for March, 2017

Republicans in Maine, Utah want Trump to undo monuments – Fox News

PORTLAND, Maine Republican leaders in Maine and Utah are asking President Donald Trump to step into uncharted territory and rescind national monument designations made by his predecessor.

The Antiquities Act of 1906 doesn't give the president power to undo a designation, and no president has ever taken such a step. But Trump isn't like other presidents.

Former President Barack Obama used his power under the act to permanently preserve more land and water using national monument designations than any other president. The land is generally off limits to timber harvesting, mining and pipelines, and commercial development.

Obama created the Katahdin Woods and Waters National Monument in Maine last summer on 87,500 acres of donated forestland. The expanse includes part of the Penobscot River and stunning views of Mount Katahdin, Maine's tallest mountain. In Utah, the former president created Bears Ears National Monument on 1.3 million acres of land that's sacred to Native Americans and is home to tens of thousands of archaeological sites, including ancient cliff dwellings.

Trump's staff is now reviewing those decisions by the Obama administration to determine economic impacts, whether the law was followed and whether there was appropriate consultation with local officials, the White House told The Associated Press.

Maine Republican Gov. Paul LePage is opposed to the designation, and says federal ownership could stymie industrial development; and Republican leaders in Utah contend the monument designation adds another layer of unnecessary federal control in a state where there's already heavy federal ownership.

The Utah Legislature approved a resolution signed by the governor calling on Trump to rescind the monument there. In Maine, LePage asked the president last week to intervene.

Newly sworn-in Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke has said he'll fight the sale or transfer of public lands. But he also believes states should be able to weigh in. The National Parks Conservation Association has vowed to sue if Trump, the Interior Department or Congress tries to remove the special designations.

"Wherever the attack comes from, we're ready to fight, and we know the public is ready to fight if someone comes after our national parks and monuments," National Parks Conversation Association spokeswoman Kristen Brengel said.

In Maine, the prospect of undoing the designation is further complicated by deed stipulations requiring the National Park Service to control the land and a $40 million endowment to support the monument, said Lucas St. Clair, son of Burt's Bees co-founder Roxanne Quimby, who acquired the land.

Three of the four members of Maine's congressional delegation want the monument to stand to avoid reopening a divisive debate in towns surrounding the property.

"Rather than re-ignite controversy in a region that is beginning to heal and move on, I hope we can allow the monument to continue to serve as one important part of a multifaceted economic revitalization strategy which is already underway," said independent Sen. Angus King.

Utah Republicans, however, appear to be ready for a scrap. Rep. Jason Chaffetz raised the issue when he met with Trump and he asked the House Appropriations Committee to cut funding for the monument.

"Not one elected official in Utah that represents the Bear Ears region supports the designation of a national monument. With the stroke of a pen, President Obama, having never visited the area, created a monument the size of Delaware, Rhode Island and Washington, D.C., combined," he said.

In the region near Maine's Mount Katahdin, both supporters and many opponents want to see the monument work. They hope it will help revitalize the economy.

Millinocket Town Council Chairman Michael Madore once described the park as a "foolish dream." Now, he says, "We have accepted it as part of our landscape. Until such time as it's overturned, we're going to work with the people who're involved with it to help the local economy."

Link:
Republicans in Maine, Utah want Trump to undo monuments - Fox News

Quora: Look to Republicans to Lead the Trump Opposition – Newsweek

Quora Questions are part of a partnership between NewsweekandQuora, through which we'll be posting relevant and interesting answers from Quora contributors throughout the week. Read more about the partnershiphere.

Answer from Brad Porter, political watcher, writer and occasional worker:

Who is the de facto leader of the opposition for the Trump Administration in 2017?There are sort of two ways you could take this. The first sense is the practicalwho has the authority to oversee the policies of President Trump and check or push back against them in some meaningful way? In that sense, the real answer is the judicial branch. But the de facto leaders of the opposition to the Trump administration in 2017 are not, in fact, Democrats at all. Rather, they are the congressional Republicans. They are what willor will notstand in the way of bad Trump policies, and they are from whom checks and balances will have to come, if they are to come at all.

Try Newsweek for only $1.25 per week

The two men who will largely determine the course of the Trump Administration are Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell. Granted, Democrats will stand in opposition, but ultimately, theyre going to be in the minority in Congress at least for the next few years. As such, they are severely handicapped in what they will be able to accomplish, in terms of meaningful opposition. Trump has made it relatively clear that he has no interest in working with them, could not care less about their dissent, and has no plans to somehow appeal to or work with them. As such, there is not much of a political or practical cost that the Dems can inflict on Trump directly. Oh they can hold some stuff up, and they can certainly complain, but they simply dont have the critical mass needed to actually get in the way of policy. Trump and the GOP can more or less restrict them to booing on the sidelines.

That is, if the Republican caucus stays in Trumps camp.

Ultimately, much of the success or failure regarding Trumps ability to execute his policies is going to come down to whether the GOP congressional leadership stays on board, or not. If the Democrats can start peeling away Republican congressmen and start cobbling together some kind of working majority that way, then meaningful opposition to Trump can begin. Alternatively, the GOP can deny them that, but to do that they will likely have to exact some kind of influence on Trump to tamp down the worst of his excessesthey can do some inside dirty boxing and horse-trading to try to piece out of Trumps platform some kind of workable policy and talking point structure that their members can take back to their voters.

President Donald Trump delivers his first address to a joint session of Congress in Washington, D.C., on February 28th. Trump cleverly used race and rhetoric to bolster his hardline nationalist policies on trade and immigration. REUTERS/Jim Lo Scalzo

Right now, Trump has all the leverage, as hes the new president, and the Republican congressional leadership appears to be taking a mostly hands-off (or rather stay out of the way) approach. But as time goes on, that pendulum is going to swing the other way, and Trump will have to rely on Ryan and McConnell to get anything substantial done (and moderate or blue state Republicans who they will need to keep in line). Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer will certainly play roles in that, but as supporting players more than leads.

Likewise, in addition to an actual proactive agenda and legislation, any investigations, subpoenas, or direct blowback against executive overreach will have to be at the instigation of congressional Republicans. Again, the Democrats have some options, but at the end of the day, all roads will have to go through the congressional Republican caucus one way or another (note: this all changes if the Dems win a majority back, but the map for them in 2018 is tough as hell so realistically I dont know that that happens during Trumps first term).

The second way to take this question is more in the moral or political sensewho has the standing and platform to criticize Trump and rally support against him? Whose criticisms might go the farthest in spurring actual action?

There are a lot of good answers here already: I think, in the early days at least, Senator Bernie Sanders, Representative Keith Ellison, and Senator Chuck Schumer have all sort of stood out in this regard. But, again, let me throw two out there that arent Democrats at all.

The first Id throw out there is Senator John McCain. Right now, there is not a whole lot going on in terms of meaningful Republican opposition to Trump. For the most part, Trumps win has caused most of his right-leaning critics to either openly change their tune (Cruz, Rubio) or, at best, fade muttering into the background (Romney, the Bushes, etc). One of the very few voices with any great standing in the party or ability to actually be problematic for Trump who has NOT followed that pattern has been McCain.

Hes been holding his tongue largely, but already hes been sending out a lot of either passive aggressive sniping or actual congressional pushback at Trump. McCain is a lifer and well regarded within the party (particularly to the people who matter most: donors, mediaand other Republican politicians), and he also just got elected to a six-year term, likely his last, so he really doesnt have much to lose or much incentive to put up with Trumps bullshit. Already on things like torture and Russia, hes been a strong and swift voice of opposition, and I would expect that to continue and that opposition to only deepen as time goes by. So, I would keep a close eye on McCain.

The second name I would throw out there is Evan McMullin. He has already been a thorn in Trumps side, and he has consistently served as something like the good angel on Republican shoulders - and currently, a voice of sanity and refuge for folks, like me, who identify as Republican but think Trump is the current biggest threat going to traditional conservatism. He has articulated a clear, consistent and conservative opposition to the Trump administration, and it doesnt appear like hes going away any time soon.

So, all of those guys I just named are Republican. Thats not just because Im a Republican, but because, I believe, that concrete and impactful opposition to Trump is not going to originate necessarily on the left. So long as its simply a partisan divide, Trump winsDemocrats will be able to channel a lot of anger and raise a chorus of voices, but at the end of the day, theyre going to be at the mercy of the actions of others (specifically, the judicial branch and congressional Republicans). Real checks and balances are only going to come when at least some meaningful opposition to Trump emerges on the right and in the center-right. So long as Republicans stay in lineand so long as they fear Trump more than they fear their votersTrump is going to largely have the ability to enact his agenda. Where fissures begin to develop is where true opposition might begin to take hold, and in my mind its those four, far more than any Democrat, that our republic hinges on now.

Who is the de facto leader of the opposition for the Trump Administration in 2017? originally appeared on Quorathe place to gain and share knowledge, empowering people to learn from others and better understand the world. You can follow Quora on Twitter, Facebook, and Google+. More questions:

Visit link:
Quora: Look to Republicans to Lead the Trump Opposition - Newsweek

While Trump talks, progressives take action nationwide | TheHill – The Hill (blog)

Last Tuesday, Donald TrumpDonald TrumpCongress, the clock is running out on small business tax reform Barbra Streisand tweets: Trump has made me gain weight Conservative radio host: 'Evidence is overwhelming' of Obama spying MORE was invited to address a joint session of Congress to share his vision for the country. Instead, he delivered what he knows best: a good show.

In the wake of that speech, while Beltway insiders applauded Trump for exceeding expectations that could not have been set any lower, those of us who listened more closely heard the same failed routine weve come to know from conservatives: a grab bag of giveaways for corporations and the wealthiest 1 percent, continued promises to take health care away from the most vulnerable, and divisive rhetoric that shamelessly and recklessly scapegoats immigrant communities.

Progressives have a very different view of the world, and throughout this past week in states across the country we showed what real leadership looks like. Not with empty words, like weve seen from Trump and other conservatives, but through powerful action.

As part of a coordinated week of action, hundreds of state lawmakers joined together with dozens of grassroots organizations and advocacy groups to advance a progressive economic agenda one that levels the playing field for working families through policies like paid sick days, paid family and medical leave, equal pay, raising the minimum wage and expanding overtime pay. We saw results.

Take Vermont, for example. Legislators and progressive advocates there have been working hard to pass legislation that would establish a statewide paid family and medical leave insurance program, so that all working Vermonters not just the wealthy few can spend time with newborns or care for loved ones who are seriously ill.

In Michigan, lawmakers held a press conference to announce the introduction of a paid sick leave bill, while Maryland legislators passed their paid sick days bill in the House and cleared a key Senate committee where it died last year. In Oklahoma, despite conservative lawmakers blocking their efforts, progressives fought hard to advance legislation that would support working families and ensure that women can earn equal pay for doing the same work as men.

Altogether, through this nationwide effort, legislators and allied groups in more than 30 states worked to advance over 130 progressive bills aimed at building an economy that works for everyone not just those at the top.

Why? Because we know the stakes; Trump and his conservative allies want to keep delaying and derailing policies that would give Americas working families a clear path to the middle class. Progressives are refusing to let that happen. Were pushing back at the state level to stand up for all families.

The fight for progressive change and the values that define us as Americans is no longer centered in Washington, D.C. Its happening in our own backyards, in partnership with the elected leaders in our communities who are fighting for our families each and every day.

We have our work cut out for us, with progressives still facing anemic levels of control of state legislatures, governorships, and state attorneys general. But if we commit ourselves to investing more resources in state legislative races and policy battles throughout the country, this is a fight we can win.

Our work cannot and will not stop with this week of action. Were just getting started, and we will use our momentum to keep countering Trumps failed agenda with a progressive, proactive vision that ensures opportunity for all Americans no exceptions.

Nick Rathod is the executive director of SiX Action, an independent strategy and advocacy organization that seeks to aid in the development and advancement of a progressive agenda in the states. He is the former special assistant to the president and deputy director for intergovernmental affairs in the Obama White House.

The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the views of The Hill.

Here is the original post:
While Trump talks, progressives take action nationwide | TheHill - The Hill (blog)

Progressives wants to silence foes – Bradenton Herald

Progressives wants to silence foes
Bradenton Herald
Perhaps readers will notice that world-citizen progressives avoid addressing the economy, existing unenforced laws, patriotism, borders, security, debt control and time-honored ethics, etc. What do they really have in mind, not even their lemmings know?

Read the rest here:
Progressives wants to silence foes - Bradenton Herald

Liberal and Labor on a knife edge in WA, while things look up for One Nation – The Sydney Morning Herald

Despite a late poll slump, scrappy organisation and the selection of "fruitcakes" as candidates, One Nation remains in a position to seize the balance of power in Western Australia's upper house, largely due to the enduring strength of Pauline Hanson's political brand, less than a week before the state election.

A ReachTEL poll commissioned by Fairfax last week showed that the Labor opposition was leading Colin Barnett's Liberal government by 52-48 on a two-party-preferred basis.

Play Video Don't Play

Play Video Don't Play

Previous slide Next slide

A poll of around 1700 residents shows the WA state election is set to be a tight contest.

Play Video Don't Play

A Camillo man has been charged with evading police through a number of Perth suburbs in the dramatic chase captured by WA Police's air-wing.

Play Video Don't Play

Trevor Gleeson says Matt Knight is a 50-50 chance to play in Sunday's final against Illawarra.

Play Video Don't Play

Trevor Gleeson says Matt Knight is a 50-50 chance to play in Sunday's final against Illawarra.

Play Video Don't Play

Winner of over 70 international awards, Matilda the musical makes it way to Perth.

Play Video Don't Play

Mother Nature put on an impressive display overnight, with a massive thunder and lightning storm. Vision: Today Perth News.

Play Video Don't Play

Perth barrister Lloyd Rayney speaks to the media ahead of his defamation case against the state government Vision: Network Ten.

A poll of around 1700 residents shows the WA state election is set to be a tight contest.

But the Liberal Party's controversial preference deal with One Nation, which is polling at 8.5 per cent, could leave Ms Hanson's party with the balance of power in the upper house.

Dr Martin Drum, a senior lecturer in politics at the University of Notre Dame, said such a result suggests that should One Nation learnfrom its mistakes and should Ms Hanson continue to operate as effectively as she has in recent months, One Nation could wreak havocfor the Liberal and National parties in other state and federal elections in the future.

When the WA campaign began One Nation was polling at just over 13 per cent. The slump since then appears to have been inflicted by the quality of its local candidates, some of whom have proved to be "fruitcakes" saidDr Drum. "When they are in the headlines, it is normally for the wrong reasons."

Dr Drum notedthat polling throughout the campaign has shown discontent with both major parties, with Liberal losses not all flowing to Labor.

He said given that One Nation failed to find enough candidates to run in all the state's contestable seats and because some candidates appear not to have been closely vetted the scope of its impact in this environment was unpredictable.

In January an article that the party's candidate for the crucial seat of Pilbara, David Archibald, held by the National Party's leader Brendon Grylls, wrote in the musty conservative journal Quadrant was dusted off and republished to a broad audience.

Listing lifestyle choices that the government should defund, he began with "ugly" single mothers.

"The first that springs to mind is single motherhood," Mr Archibald wrote.

"These are women too lazy to attract and hold a mate, undoing the work of possibly 3 million years of evolutionary pressure.

"This will result in a rapid rise in the portion of the population that is lazy and ugly."

On Friday One Nation's candidate for another crucial seat, Kalamunda, on the eastern fringe of Perth, suddenly quit, citing a preference deal between One Nation and the Liberal Party.

"I've had enough," Ray Gould, told ABC radio.

"I'm talking to voters and they say, 'We like Pauline Hanson but she's done a deal with the Liberals and she can't be trusted'.

"I don't think I'll even get 4 per cent of the vote because she's messing with the voters' heads."

Kalamunda could help decide which party wins government. It is held by the Liberal Party with a margin of 10.3 per cent, which is almost exactly the size of the swing Labor needs to win governmentand, according to recent polling, just about the size of the swing that polling suggests we might see on election day.

The Liberal Party has faced criticism for cutting a deal with One Nation that will see it giving preferences to the insurgent outlier in the upper house in return for One Nation's preferences in the lower house.

Speaking on ABC TV on Sunday morning, during an interview in which she backed a cut to weekend penalty rates, voiced her support for the Russian President Vladimir Putin and cast doubt on the safety of vaccines, Ms Hanson was frank in support of the agreement.

"I have no problem with saying that because it is our best chance of getting One Nation candidates selected to the floor of Parliament. Of course, who is not going to do it?"

The deal has increased tensions between the Liberal Party and its National Party coalition partners, and demonstrated how seriously the Liberal Party takes the One Nation threat.

Some observers believe Mr Barnett has effectively sacrificed the lower house seat of Perth, where voters have expressed anger at the deal, in order to stave off One Nation challenges in rural and regional seats.

In the aftermath of a mining boom thatsome analysts consider to have been wasted, the election is being fought over bread and butter economic issues such as unemployment and debt. This has pitted the state's giant resources and agricultural sectors against one another, in turn increasing tension between the coalition partners.

The National Party under Mr Grylls is pushing to increase a state production tax on iron ore from 25 cents a tonne to $5, a proposal being fought by WA's Chamber of Minerals and Energy.

The Chamber's chief executive, Reg Howard-Smith, has been watching the electorate closely in the lead-up to the election.

"We've been close to the ground over the last few months and the feedback we've got is that everyone is concerned about jobs," he said.

"Resource sector jobs, but jobs more generally always comes at the top of the order."

Although the tax increase would generate an extra $3 billion in revenue for state coffers, Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton have argued it would cost jobs in the Pilbara and across WA.

Mr Howard-Smith also believes the tax rise,which would require legislation to overhaul state agreements with the two companies, would damage the investment attractiveness of the state.

"We've had fantastic support across the sector for this campaign we're running about iron ore and that's focused on two companies, but the reason is there are many, many people who can remember the RSPT [Resource Super Profits Tax]," he said.

"When the RSPT was announced, on that Saturday the Dockers and the Eagles were to play I never got to that game capital dried up instantly."

But Mr Howard-Smith was also concerned about a Nationals plan to give companies payroll tax breaks for workers in the Pilbara who were not fly-in, fly-out (FIFO), an idea which could cost jobs everywhere but in Mr Grylls' own electorate.

Mr Howard-Smith said the plan would devastate small towns in the south-west like Busselton and Manjimup where many FIFO workers choose to live, and where the Liberal Party holds a swathe of crucial seats.

"If you're coming out of Busselton and you've made the choice to live there but to maintain your job you have to travel to the Pilbara, then it's clearly a matter of choice," he said.

"Manjimup only has a small number of FIFO workers, in the twenties, but by the time you look at families and everything else, the contribution they make is significant.

"Rio reached out to those workers in Manjimup. At the time the timber industry was closing there were some good operators who they took on, so it just doesn't make any sense.

"They would have the most mature FIFO model, so you have a lot of people coming out of Busselton, a number from Albany, Geraldton, and Broome and Broome is essentially Aboriginal employment.

"That's working extremely well and I don't think the National party policy is realistic for one moment."

Unions have been quick to link the Liberal Party to One Nation.On Sunday the Victorian CFMEU leader John Setka tweeted in reference to the penalty rates decision, "Pauline Hanson is just another Liberal who hates workers!"

MsHanson herself travelled to Western Australia to begin a week's campaigning on Sunday, with an itinerary planned to include stops in Perth and towns in the south-west as well as regional centres including Port Hedland, Karratha, Kalgoorlie and Geraldton.

The Labor leader Bill Shorten is expected to join the campaign later in the week.

So far the Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, whose last WA visit was not warmly received, has no plans to make the trip.

Read more:
Liberal and Labor on a knife edge in WA, while things look up for One Nation - The Sydney Morning Herald