New York Times | Donald Trump's Trade Policy Is in Disarray New York Times President Trump's populist, antitrade deal rhetoric was always hard to believe coming from someone who outsourced production of his clothes and other merchandise to low-wage countries like China. Now it is becoming clearer that he has no coherent plan ... |
Read this article:
Donald Trump's Trade Policy Is in Disarray - New York Times
Over the last several decades, top government officials and even military brass have come to view climate change as a national security issue. Under President Barack Obama, the notion was codified through recognition of the link by the Department of Homeland Security, the Defense Department, the State Department, and the National Intelligence Council.Now, President Donald Trump, with nearly all the governments climate change work in his crosshairs, is poised to dramatically scale back environmental security programs perhaps eliminating many entirely through dramatic budget cuts.
Many of these programs help cities cope with water emergencies. In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in 2005, one microbiologist interviewed by ABC News sampled floodwaters in New Orleans and found bacteria linked to sewage at 45,000 times the level considered safe for swimming. Seven years later, Hurricane Sandy inundated East Coast water treatment plants to the point of overflow, releasing a total of 10.9 billion gallons of sewage into waterways and streets along the mid-Atlantic coast. In places like Camden, New Jersey, an economically depressed, mostly black and Latino community with an outdated sewer system, the risk of contaminated water is more routine: Sewage flows into the streets amid hard rains.
At the federal level, the task of helping cities like New Orleans and Camden deal with these water crises falls in part to Homeland Security. Its not one of the departmentsflashiest mandates, but the work, in partnership with the Environmental Protection Agency, helps to secure public health by stopping toilet water from entering streets, homes, and waterways during extreme weather events.
If youre going to have catastrophic flooding that threatens public health, then thats something we need to look at, said Alice Hill, a fellow at the Hoover Institution and an architect of the Department of Homeland Securitys early efforts at addressing climate change under Obama. To the extent you see chronic seepage of wastewater endangering routinely the health of American citizens, thats something Homeland Security will worry about.
The Trump administration, however, has focused on security in purely military and law enforcement terms, whether through $54 billion in new Defense Department spending or increased funding for immigration enforcement and border protection. Those efforts are likely to come at the expense of environmental security. Despite his defense chief James Mattiss public statements endorsing the links, Trump already issued an order canceling Obamas push to consider climate change in national security planning. And Trumps budget outline portends even more drastic moves away from protecting the nation against climate-related threats.
Among the most draconian proposed cuts, the EPA stands to have about a third of its budget eliminated. EPA programs targeted for wholesale cuts include those designed to protect critical water infrastructure from terror attacks, accidents, pandemics, and extreme weather caused by climate change. A March 21 itemized 2018 EPA budget proposal, first released by the Washington Post, suggested eliminating EPAs $7.7 million critical infrastructure protection program. Although the budget is expected to change dramatically as Congress weighs in, the draft version provides an insight into Trumps conception of security.
The EPAs homeland security efforts provide tools to help water utilities determine risks and plan for catastrophe whether it be an accident that introduces a contaminant into drinking water, a terrorist attempt to access some of the massive volumes of chemicals utilities use to clean the water, or flooding extensive enough to bring down drinking and wastewater facilities.
Camden, where the threat from rain seems ever more immediate than a terrorist attack, hosted a pilot program for one of the EPAs critical infrastructure projects. According to Andy Kricun, head of the Camden County Municipal Utilities Authority, officials sped up flood prevention efforts after an EPA projection suggested a rapid rise in the Delaware River, according to data local water managers received from the EPA. The EPA helped the city draw up plans to deal with the issue through updating treatment plants, building a sea wall, and installing rain gardens that absorb millions of gallons of stormwater. Kricun said flooding has been reduced as a result.
Alan Roberson, who runs the Association of State Drinking Water Administrators, does not see the project as a climate-specific program. The EPA branded it with climate under Obama because that fit the administration, he said, adding that water managers are interested in protecting the water, period. From my point of view, it doesnt matter if your pump station is hit by a tornado or loses power from an ice storm or someone puts a bomb on it the end result is the same.
Yet the climate change-related branding that helped advance the project under Obama has made it a target under the Trump administration. As White House budget director Mick Mulvaneyput it, Regarding the question as to climate change, I think the president was fairly straightforward were not spending money on that anymore. We consider that to be a waste of your money. In early April, the EPA closed its climate adaptation program, reassigning four staffers. And the March budget memo would slash 224 jobs focused on climate protection.
Trump has proposed boosting funding for the Department of Homeland Security overall, but none of that money would make up for the proposed EPA cuts. In fact, the proposed DHS budget would reportedly pay for increased border enforcement in part by reducing the budget of another federal agency that helps deal with climate change fallout, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, by 11 percent.
Funding for the EPAs office of civil enforcement would be slashed by 37 percent, according to the March memo. Consent decrees originating inthe office have been key to forcing communities to update their sewer systems, protecting residents from floods of sewage that will worsen with climate change. Roberson, of the drinking water association, pointed to a proposed 30 percent cut to public water system supervision grants, which help local agencies pay for public inspectors. Roberson said the cut would be devastating.
Asked to comment, and EPA spokesperson replied, EPA is evaluating different approaches to implementing the presidents budget that would allow us to effectively serve the taxpayers and protect the environment. While many in Washington insist on greater spending, EPA is focused on greater value and results. The EPA will partner with the states to ensure a thoughtful approach is used to maximize every dollar to protect our air, land, and water.
When it comes to the climate, the Camden Utilities Authoritys Kricun argued that focusing on the idea of climate change misses the point. Our current infrastructure is inadequate to the way the climate is now, he said.
Its a perspective that surely resonates in Camden, where environmental-related human security is already a major worry today. But with the Delaware River rising thanks to climate change, and without effective climate adaptation efforts, the citys problems will only worsen. Instead of helping cities beef up their efforts, the Trump administration is withdrawing a lifeline.
Top photo: Wastewater sits inside a partially operating treatment tank at the Passaic Valley Sewerage Commission, Nov. 15, 2012, in Newark, N.J., as the states largest wastewater treatment plant suffered a complete power outage during Superstorm Sandy and pumped hundreds of millions of gallons of untreated and partially treated waste into New Jerseys waterways.
See the article here:
Donald Trump Is Slashing Programs Linking Climate Change to US National Security - The Intercept
Silicon Valleys top tech executives have tangled with President Donald Trump over everything from his travel ban to his approach on issues like climate change.
But the likes of Apple and Google appear to have put aside their differences with the Republican commander-in-chief, after he unveiled a tax reform plan on Wednesday that could dramatically lower their tax bills and help them return to the U.S. billions of dollars in profits currently overseas.
Trumps plan is still just an early set of ideas its a single page, not some complex, comprehensive piece of legislation and its already drawing complaints from Congress about its cost.
But the contours of it are catnip to the tech industry. Under his blueprint, for example, the corporate tax rate would fall to 15 percent, a major decrease from the current 35 percent rate. The plan also backs shifting the U.S. to a territorial tax system, meaning that only U.S.-based companies domestic earnings could be taxed.
And itd make it significant cheaper for companies to return their foreign profits to the United States. Currently, companies are taxed at a rate of 35 percent when they repatriate those dollars. If Trump has his way, though, businesses might get a one-time tax break perhaps a rate even as low as 10 percent to bring their cash back.
Thats a major boon for the tech sector, where five companies alone are estimated to have $505 billion in cash overseas, according to an analysis done last year by Moodys Investors Service. But the idea, known as a repatriation holiday, hasnt always delivered the economic benefits its proponents claim.
The likes of Apple, Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Intel through their leading Washington, D.C.-based lobbying group offered rare praise of Trump on Wednesday.
We stand ready to support tax reform that lowers the corporate rate, moves to a territorial system in which profits are taxed where they occur and invests in innovation that is needed to drive our economy to new heights of prosperity and job creation for the American people, said Andy Halataei, the senior vice president for government affairs at the Information Technology Industry Council. We appreciate todays announcement from the Trump administration and see it as a step toward advancing these objectives.
Tech giants have lobbied for years to advance robust reforms to U.S. tax laws, without much success. That includes Apple, where CEO Tim Cook has worked vigorously behind the scenes to make his case to congressional lawmakers and Trump administration officials. Others, like Google and Microsoft, have devoted millions of dollars toward lobbying federal regulators to lessen their tax bills, federal records show.
As part of the tech industrys push, those companies also fought aggressively against applying a new special tax on many imports, an idea called border adjustment. The idea is backed by the likes of House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wisc., but so far, Trump hasnt pursued it.
View original post here:
Finally, Silicon Valley and Donald Trump agree on something: Taxes - Recode
The Trump SoHo building in New York City.
Drew Angerer/Getty Images
Ethics watchdogs and good-government types were quick to sound the alarm over Donald Trumps apparent violation of the Foreign Emoluments Clause. Even before Trump was sworn in, experts were warning that his continued ownership of his business empire meant that hed be accepting payments from foreign governments in violation of the U.S. Constitution. These could come in the form of payments for hotel stays by foreign diplomats, lease payments for office space from foreign state-controlled businesses, or any number of other ways. The issue is at the center of the firstand to date, most high profilelegal challenge to the presidents continued ownership of his for-profit business.
Josh Voorhees is a Slate senior writer. He lives in Iowa City.
It turns out, though, that Trump may also be violating a different emoluments clause, one that specifically bars him from receiving money or gifts above and beyond his mandated salary from governments right here at home. Via Article II (emphasis mine):
The general possibility that Trump would run afoul of that clause earned a brief mention in the larger emoluments lawsuit filed by the Center for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington, or CREW, in January, but it has remained mostly an undeveloped afterthought. On Wednesday, however, an investigative report from Reuters uncovered the evidence needed to turn the question from the general to the specific:
The payment flow chart is a little complicatedas is usually the case given the nesting doll of LLCs and trusts that make up the Trump Organizationbut it boils down to this: State or city-run pension funds in California, New York, Texas, Arizona, Montana, Michigan, and Missouri pay millions of dollars per quarter to CIM, which then turns around and pays a portion of that money via a subsidiary to a pair of Trump-owned companies to manage, market, and operate the SoHo hotel. According to the most recent publicly available numbers, the Trump-owned businesses bring in an estimated $9 million a year from the CIM deal.
The Domestic Emoluments Clause differs from its foreign counterpart in at least two important ways beyond where the emolument is coming from. First, while the foreign clause covers all office holders, the domestic one is focused exclusively on the chief executive. Second, while the Constitution allows Congress to make exceptions for some foreign emoluments, theres no such loophole for domestic ones. The rationale for including the domestic clause was to prevent a stateor even Congressfrom buying a favor from the president. The fact the framers felt it necessary to include two different emoluments clauses should tell you how serious of a concern they thought this was. In this case, the fear would be that other states might invest in this fundor some other one that also does business with Trumpin order to gain Trumps favor, or even avoid his ire.
Still, this might not be an open-and-shut case. As with foreign emoluments, there is the question of standing for any legal challenge. And as we saw with the convoluted workaround Trump found to maintain his government lease for his D.C. hotel, its possible the president can carve out some wiggle room if he were to restructure his company in a way where he did not receive any of the cash while still in office. It will ultimately come down to how broadly a court is willing to interpret a clause with little precedent. As Brianne Gorod, chief counsel at the Constitutional Accountability Center, a Washington public advocacy law firm, put it to Reuters: Were in largely uncharted territory given that past presidents have gone to great lengths to avoid the kinds of issues were now confronting. Trump, however, appears content to sail headlong into them.
Know anything about a potential conflict of interest in the Trump administration? DM Josh Voorhees on Twitter, or email him at josh.voorhees@slate.com.
Read the original:
Donald Trump May Also Be Violating a Different Emoluments Clause - Slate Magazine (blog)
President Trump signed an executive order Wednesday to start pulling the federal government out of K-12 education, following through on a campaign promise to return school control to state and local officials.
The order, dubbed the Education Federalism Executive Order, will launch a 300-day review of Obama-era regulations and guidance for school districts and directs Education Secretary Betsy DeVos to modify or repeal measures she deems a overreach by the federal government.
For too long the government has imposed its will on state and local governments. The result has been education that spends more and achieves far, far, far less, Mr. Trump said. My administration has been working to reverse this federal power grab and give power back to families, cities [and] states give power back to localities.
He said that previous administrations had increasingly forced schools to comply with whims and dictates from Washington, but his administration would break the trend.
We know local communities know it best and do it best, said Mr. Trump, who was joined by several Republican governors for the signing. The time has come to empower teachers and parents to make the decisions that help their students achieve success.
Ms. DeVos and Vice President Mike Pence were on hand for the ceremony, which was attended by about 25 people, including teachers, lawmakers and the governors.
The executive order is not expected to have an immediate impact on school districts. Policy changes will follow a report on the findings of the review.
The review will will be spearheaded by the Department of Educations Regulatory Review Task Force, according to the order.
Ms. DeVos already has authority to modify or repeal regulations that are deemed a violation of federal law. The order, however, creates a review for identifying those areas and makes clear her mandate from the president to take action.
Reducing the federal governments role in K-12 is part of Mr. Trumps reform agenda that also includes the expansion of school choice programs.
Among those at the signing ceremony were Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey, Utah Gov. Gary Herbert, Maine Gov. Paul LePage, Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval and Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad, who is Mr. Trumps nominee for ambassador to China.
Also in attendance were Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee Chairman Lamar Alexander of Tennessee and House Education and Workforce Committee Chairman Virginia Foxx of North Carolina.
The rest is here:
Donald Trump to pull feds out of K-12 education - Washington Times