Diligent opposition has a place in our republic ; hysteria does not .\nDemocrats have been in power for so long that they ’ ve forgotten how to oppose . Their party has been on a roll since 2005 , when the botched Social Security reform , the slow bleed of the Iraq war , and Hurricane Katrina sent the Bush administration into a tailspin . The Democrats won the Congress the following year and the White House two years after that . And while they lost the House in 2010 and the Senate in 2014 , Democrats still had the advantage of retaining the White House , a president seemingly immune from criticism , the courts , the bureaucracy , and large portions of the media . The correlation of forces in Washington has weighed heavily in favor of the Democrats for a decade .\nNo longer . The election of Donald Trump has brought unified Republican government to Washington and overturned our understanding of how politics works . Or at least it should have done so . The Democrats seem not to understand how to deal with Trump and the massive change he is about to bring to the nation ’ s capital . During the general election they fell for the idea that Trump can be defeated by conventional means , spending hundreds of millions of dollars in negative television advertising and relying on political consultants beholden to whatever line Politico was selling on a given day . This strategy failed Trump ’ s Republican primary opponents , but Democrats figured that was simply because the GOP was filled with deplorables . It was a rationalization that would cost them .\nRepublicans control the House , the Senate , 34 governor ’ s mansions , and 4,100 seats in state legislatures . But Democrats act like they run Washington . Nancy Pelosi ’ s speech to the 115th House of Representatives was a long-winded recitation of the same liberal agenda that has brought her party to its current low . Give her points for consistency I guess . Chuck Schumer is just being delusional .\nSmarting from the failed nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court , the Senate minority leader pledged to oppose Donald Trump ’ s nominee weeks before inauguration day . “ If they don ’ t appoint somebody good , ” he said on MSNBC , “ we ’ re going to oppose them tooth and nail. ” That would “ absolutely ” include keeping the seat held by the late Antonin Scalia empty , he said . “ We are not going to make it easy for them to pick a Supreme Court justice . ”\nI suppose it ’ s too much to expect a graduate of Harvard Law School to grasp the difference between majority and minority . Mitch McConnell was able to block Garland ’ s appointment because the Republicans controlled the Senate . The Democrats do not . And McConnell was able to hold his caucus together because he was on solid historical ground . Lyndon Johnson ’ s nomination of Abe Fortas as chief justice failed in the election year 1968 , and the so-called “ Biden Rule ” of 1992 stipulated no Supreme Court replacements during the last year of a presidency . Schumer himself , in a 2007 speech , expanded the waiting period to the final 18 months of a president ’ s term . Now , despite a record of calling on the Senate to confirm the president ’ s nominees — as long as the president is a Democrat — Schumer has adopted the strategy of no Supreme Court confirmations at all . How does he think President Trump will respond ? By caving ?\nAn attempt to filibuster the Scalia replacement may force McConnell to change the rules so that Supreme Court vacancies can be approved by a majority vote . And where would Democrats be then ? Not only will they have lost the Scalia seat , they will be completely vulnerable should another vacancy arise in the next two years . And Schumer has a reputation for political savvy .\nI don ’ t expect the Democrats to roll over for Trump . But I am surprised by their hysterics , and by their race to see who can be the most obnoxious to the new president .\nThe blanket opposition to President-elect Trump extends to his appointments at large . Democrats can thank Harry Reid for allowing executive-branch officials and lower-court judges to be approved by a majority vote . But the Washington Post reports that Schumer wants to prolong the confirmation process so that some Trump cabinet officials are not confirmed until March . The reason : “ Democrats have been troubled by a lack of personal disclosure by Cabinet choices that they say mirrors Trump ’ s refusal to disclose personal tax information during the presidential campaign. ” The presidential campaign that , in case the Democrats have forgotten , Trump won .\nReviving the issue of the tax returns makes little sense . It generates headlines but doesn ’ t move votes . And though it ’ s entirely possible that one or more of Trump ’ s nominees won ’ t be confirmed , I seriously doubt it . In every incoming administration there is a personal revelation or atrocious hearing that dooms a cabinet appointment . But hearings begin next week , whether Chuck Schumer likes it or not , and so far the quality of the opposition research against Trump ’ s picks has been remarkably blah .\n# related # Yes , the first duty of the opposition is to oppose . And I don ’ t expect the Democrats to roll over for Trump . But I am surprised by their hysterics , and by their race to see who can be the most obnoxious to the new president . They seem to have been caught off guard , to say the least , by their situation . Take for example their willingness to stand on a podium beside a sign that reads , “ Make America Sick Again. ” By embracing this message , such as it is , the Democrats associated not Trump but themselves with illness . Who on earth thought that was a good idea ?\nIt takes time to adjust . The Democrats may be counting on inertia and the media to slow the Republicans down and force them into a defensive crouch . Worked in the past . But here ’ s the thing about Trump : He doesn ’ t play defense .\n— Matthew Continetti is the editor-in-chief of the Washington Free Beacon , where this column first appeared . © 2017 All rights reserved


A top Clinton ally ’ s political organization gave nearly a half-million dollars to the campaign of the wife of an FBI official who would go on to help oversee the probe into Hillary Clinton ’ s email practices – a tangled web that is fueling fresh Republican complaints about the investigation .\n“ We ’ ve never had a thing like this in the history of this country , ” Donald Trump said at a Florida rally Monday afternoon , citing the “ shocking ” new findings .\nThe Wall Street Journal first reported Sunday night on the connections . According to the Journal , finance records show Virginia Gov . Terry McAuliffe ’ s PAC gave $ 467,500 to Dr. Jill McCabe ’ s 2015 state Senate campaign . The Virginia Democratic Party spent an additional $ 207,788 on the campaign , the Journal reported .\nMcCabe , who ended up losing to Republican incumbent Dick Black , is married to Andrew McCabe – the FBI ’ s deputy director .\nAt the time of the campaign and of McAuliffe ’ s support , McCabe was associate deputy director . He later was promoted to deputy after the campaign ended , assuming an oversight role in the Clinton email investigation .\nMcCabe apparently sought ethics guidance from the FBI and followed it , but his supervision of the email case was not seen as a potential conflict since Jill McCabe ’ s campaign was over and McAuliffe wasn ’ t directly involved in the email case .\nThe FBI ’ s “ Ethics and Integrity Program ” manual makes clear McCabe would have had to flag the connections to senior management , and the final decision would come in writing .\nIn the section prohibiting employees from participating in criminal investigations in certain cases where there ’ s a personal or political relationship , the manual says an exception would be if : `` The employee 's participation would not create an appearance of a conflict of interest to affect the public perception of the integrity of the investigation or prosecution . ''\nThe FBI , in a statement , confirmed that McCabe sought internal guidance “ to prevent against any actual or potential conflict-of-interest ” and when his wife chose to run , “ McCabe and FBI lawyers implemented a system of recusal from all FBI investigative matters involving Virginia politics , a process followed for the remainder of her campaign . During the campaign , he played no role , attended no events , and did not participate in fundraising or support of any kind . ”\nA law enforcement official , though , acknowledged an optics issue – given that while McCabe was barred from investigations into Virginia politics , the donation did come from the Virginia governor .\nMcAuliffe and other state figures reportedly recruited Dr. McCabe to run in the first place , but a spokesman pushed back on any suggestion of impropriety .\nMcAuliffe “ supported Jill McCabe because he believed she would be a good state senator . This is a customary practice for Virginia governors… Any insinuation that his support was tied to anything other than his desire to elect candidates who would help pass his agenda is ridiculous , ” the spokesman told the Journal .\nMcCabe continues to be involved in the email investigation aftermath . He was recently asked to brief House oversight committee members on allegations – contained in newly released FBI files – that a State Department official offered a “ quid pro quo ” with the bureau in a bid to un-classify a particular server email .\nThe revelations in the Wall Street Journal report could dovetail with Donald Trump ’ s persistent claims that the Justice Department and FBI investigation into Clinton ’ s email use was compromised . Trump repeatedly has complained about Attorney General Loretta Lynch meeting with Bill Clinton on a Phoenix tarmac days before the FBI announced no charges in its Clinton investigation .\nHe tweeted out the Wall Street Journal story Sunday night .\n'Clinton Ally Aided Campaign of FBI Official ’ s Wife ' https : //t.co/U0w99gfyKE — Donald J. Trump ( @ realDonaldTrump ) October 24 , 2016\nRepublican National Commitee Chairman Reince Priebus said in a statement the funding looked like a `` down payment '' to influence the FBI probe .\n“ Given all we know about how the corrupt Clinton machine operates , it ’ s hard not to see this as anything other than a down payment to influence the FBI ’ s criminal investigation into Hillary Clinton ’ s private email server , '' Priebus said .\nAccording to the same report , the PAC and Virginia Democratic Party money amounted to more than a third of Dr. McCabe ’ s campaign funds . She also reportedly was the third-largest recipient of the governor ’ s Common Good VA funds .


Whether you 're a homeowner who bought an energy-saving refrigerator last year or a company hoping to build a wind farm , the tax package Congress just approved may give you a reason to cheer .\n`` It 's got something in there , a Christmas gift if you will , for almost everyone — American homeowners , workers who commute via transit , and manufacturers of efficient equipment like clothes washers , dryers , refrigerators , '' says Kateri Callahan , president of the Alliance to Save Energy .\nHomeowners can save up to $ 500 on taxes for 2012 or 2013 for installing more insulation or an energy-efficient furnace , for example .\nThe tax package is especially meaningful to clean-energy businesses that rely on tax benefits to stay profitable .\nJennifer Case , CEO of New Leaf Biofuel , and her colleagues had been betting on Congress coming through for them , so they are breathing a huge sigh of relief . The San Diego company turns used cooking oil into diesel .\n`` Everybody was thrilled , and now it 's back to work today to sell the fuel that we now can afford to make , '' Case says .\nLast year was a difficult year for New Leaf because Congress let a $ 1-a-gallon tax break for biodiesel expire . Even so , Case 's company decided to triple the capacity of its plant . Case was hoping Congress would reinstate the benefit , and it did .\n`` I think coming to work every day is a gamble , but so far it 's been a good gamble , '' she says .\nDaniel Kunz runs U.S. Geothermal , a company that creates electricity from sources of superhot water that occur naturally underground . When it looked like Congress might not renew tax credits for renewable energy , his company shelved plans to expand one of its plants .\nBut then Congress not only extended the tax credit for renewable energy projects , it also changed the rules . Now , instead of needing to complete a project by the end of 2013 to be eligible , a company has to only start construction by the end of the year .\n`` In fact , this is going to help us make a decision , an economic decision , to go forward on a project that otherwise might not , '' Kunz says .\nThe tax benefits for green energy that Congress extended were originally created over the past decade . At the time , it seemed that energy sources , especially homegrown ones , were scarce . The country also seemed to be on the verge of setting limits on emissions of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide .\n`` There was a sensible reason to want to subsidize a transformation , '' says energy analyst Kevin Book . It 's harder to make a case for renewable energy now , given the booms in natural gas and oil , he says .\n`` All of these things are different now : Demand is declining , supply is increasing , the decarbonization mandate has weakened if not disappeared , and energy security is n't the risk that it used to be , '' he says .\nBook predicts that the New Year 's tax package may be the last big payday for green energy .\nBut Kunz , of U.S. Geothermal , says the United States should keep investing in renewable energy .\n`` It will never be the cure-all energy source , but it is a gift to our children when we build these things to have clean energy sources , '' he says .\nThese projects will produce less pollution , including greenhouse gases . They also can save money over the long haul because , unlike , say , a natural gas power plant , they do n't need to keep buying fuel .


Climate change , by nature , is a global problem . Each ton of carbon dioxide affects the climate , whether emitted in Stockholm or Shanghai . At the heart of the Paris Agreement in 2015 is a bargain among nations to nudge one another toward ambitious commitments to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions in an effort to stabilize global temperatures . The bargain also called on rich nations to help developing ones adapt . Now comes a test of the “ we ’ re in this together ” spirit . At the COP24 , this year ’ s United Nations climate summit , a key task is to firm up plans for developed nations to contribute more than $ 100 billion a year by 2020 to help other countries . “ [ The developed world ] has to take historical responsibility for this , ” says Nigerian climate official Peter Tarfa , noting the outsize emissions of industrialized nations . But the rationale is also pragmatic . More support translates into lower emissions in places with rising populations and aspirations for middle-class lifestyles . “ It ’ s not a question of forcing developed countries to pay , ” Dr. Tarfa says . It ’ s getting them “ to see the benefits of such action . ”\nIn 2015 , the Paris Agreement on climate change rallied the world ’ s nations around a sense of collective resolve , a spirit of “ We ’ re all in this together . ”\nLeaders embraced the idea that this global-scale problem requires ambitious action from every nation to cut greenhouse-gas emissions . They also agreed that wealthier nations should help finance the efforts of poorer ones .\nSome of that money has already started to flow . But a key moment has arrived . Three years later , it ’ s the appointed time to firm up plans to hit a $ 100-billion-a-year target for such international transfers by 2020 – and to expand this “ climate finance ” further from there .\nThe national and global initiatives are intertwined . Without help , developing nations will be less able to pursue ambitious targets for low-carbon economies . Officials from postcolonial and developing nations in the “ global south ” say industrialized nations should bring more money to the table – for everyone ’ s sake .\n“ If developed economies put off their climate payments any longer , the Paris Agreement temperature goals will slip out of reach , with tragic consequences for people and planet , '' J. Antônio Marcondes , chief negotiator for Brazil , writes in an email to the Monitor . “ These finance commitments were not mere ornaments to the Paris Agreement . They were fundamental elements in the balance of the Agreement which must be fully delivered for developed countries to meet their historical responsibilities , and for developing countries to reach an even higher gear . ”\nA higher gear may be vital . The outlook appears daunting on several fronts .\nThis week came news that , despite global efforts to date , the world ’ s greenhouse emissions continue to rise , driven especially by increases in China and India . Meanwhile , the United States under President Trump has backed away from its Paris climate commitments , and recent protests prompted the French government to cancel a gas tax designed to curb reliance on fossil fuels .\nStill , with all the challenges there ’ s also hope and a tangible sense of determined optimism in Katowice , Poland , at the 24th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change , known for short as COP24 . The ethos of “ we ’ re in this together ” hasn ’ t died out .\n“ The expected commitments that we ’ re hearing from developed countries are all positive , ” says Leonardo Martinez-Diaz , director of sustainable finance at the World Resources Institute think tank , speaking by phone from Poland . “ We do n't know yet what the numbers are going to be precisely , but we do know that there ’ s a collective sense that this has to be done . ”\nHe notes that , ahead of the summit for climate officials , Germany said it will contribute $ 1.7 billion to the Green Climate Fund for developing nations , nearly twice the support it gave the last time industrialized nations replenished that fund . That would push Germany toward the top tier of contributors , on a per capita basis .\nAnd the World Bank pledged this week to devote $ 200 billion over five years to help poorer nations develop their economies in climate-smart ways .\nTo some degree the Green Climate Fund is still earning the trust of donor and recipient nations alike . Some see room for the fund to make decisions both faster and with enhanced safeguards against misuse of the money .\nStill , there ’ s fairly wide support for the general concept behind the Green Climate Fund . The reasons voiced by officials and nongovernment organizations are both moral and pragmatic .\n“ The emissions come mostly from developed countries . If you look at the emissions produced by a small island in the Pacific , it 's almost zero , but the country can disappear because of rising sea levels , ” says Simon Wilson , head of communications at the Green Climate Fund .\n“ [ The developed world ] has to take historical responsibility for this , ” says Peter Tarfa , director of Nigeria ’ s Department of Climate Change .\nBut Mr. Wilson also notes the business opportunities for private-sector firms . And Dr. Tarfa also frames the the issue more broadly .\n“ It ’ s not a question of forcing developed countries to pay , it ’ s a question of getting developed countries to see the benefits of such action and meeting their obligations , ” Tarfa says . Reduced emissions bring a benefit to the whole planet . And helping nations adapt to the effects of climate change can mean a reduction in conflict and forced migration .\nAkintunde Akinleye/Reuters/File A power official works on an electric pole along a street in Lagos , Nigeria 's commercial capital . Nigerian officials say that Green Climate Fund support will help the country to diversify energy sources to include more renewables as it moves to expand electricity access .\nNations like Nigeria don ’ t expect richer nations to pay for all their climate responses . But the needs are significant , and with aid they can do more .\n“ In Nigeria one of the major challenges is access to electricity . We would like to have more investments in clean sources of energy , ” Tarfa says . “ We also need environmentally friendly and affordable buildings , because the population is increasing dramatically . Other issues are clean transport and smart agriculture to maximize harvest . ”\nEach ton of carbon dioxide affects the global climate whether it was emitted in Stockholm or Shanghai . And increasingly the carbon pollution stems from developing economies where growing populations aspire to join the global middle class . Some say these economies , from Asia to Africa and Latin America , are also where each dollar invested can have the biggest effect .\n“ More support translates into more action , and that benefits the whole planet , ” says a spokesperson for Brazil ’ s climate delegation , via email , calling Brazil ’ s clean-energy aspirations “ transformational ” and “ cost efficient . ”\nThe vastness of the global task – slashing greenhouse emissions to stabilize global temperatures while also embracing the rise of a global middle class – brings complexity .\nHow much money is needed , and where ? For what kinds of investments ?\n“ We look at China , we think , ‘ Oh they have all this money. ’ ... It ’ s kind of going through the Industrial Revolution on steroids , ” says Kate Gordon , an Oakland-based expert with Columbia University ’ s Center on Global Energy Policy . “ Sometimes we forget the scale of the challenge they ’ re facing to try to grow a middle class and grow a developed-country economy in a sustainable way . ”\nShe says “ the scale of doing that in China and India and other countries is bigger than the amount of money that they have to deal with it . ”\nEven when the general need is acknowledged , part of the challenge is building developed-nation commitment to climate finance .\nIn France , the recent protests by yellow-vested citizens revolved around a fuel tax with revenue going toward deficit reduction , leaving working-class citizens feeling penalized by a new burden on their finances . The uproar doesn ’ t mean that all action on climate change will be unpopular , but hints at how questions of fairness can be crucial .\n“ France points to the absolute need to think through the local impacts of macroeconomic policy , [ since ] ultimately climate policy is economic policy , ” says Ms. Gordon .\n“ There has to be a very careful political strategy to explain to the public why these initiatives and these efforts matter , both domestic and international , ” says Dr. Martinez-Diaz of the World Resources Institute . Canada has designed a carbon tax , he notes , so that it recycles revenue back to taxpayers , while giving incentives to move away from fossil fuels .\nClimate policymakers also need to ensure accountability in the process for distributing funds even as they try to scale up the dollar volume . The Green Climate Fund isn ’ t the only channel for climate finance . But it ’ s a major one , and has been designed with safeguards to ensure careful review of the projects that get funded .\nSo far its outflows toward climate projects are small – some $ 1.6 billion in commitments – compared with its longer term goals . But it ’ s active already in 96 nations .\n“ In Egypt ... [ our project is ] building the largest solar park in the world , ” says the Fund ’ s Mr. Wilson .\n“ We think that it is a good model where , at least in principle , decision-making ... ( through the Board ) relies on a system which gives equal voice to developing and developed countries , ” says Brice Boehmer of the Berlin-based watchdog group Transparency International , speaking via email . He sees room for the fund to add further safeguards , such as support for whistleblowers and “ consultation and participation of civil society . ”\nGet the Monitor Stories you care about delivered to your inbox . By signing up , you agree to our Privacy Policy\nBut in his view , such objectives “ shouldn ’ t be used as an excuse by developed countries and donors to stop or slow down the disbursements of climate finance . ”\nThis story was produced with support from an Energy Foundation grant to cover the environment .


President Trump ’ s decision to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement caused anger and anxiety across the world , with one major exception : China .\nWith the US stepping away from its role as a leader of the global fight against climate change , Beijing is already moving to fill the void , giving it a chance to benefit both diplomatically and economically .\nIt isn ’ t the first time Trump — who spent the campaign demonizing China — will have wound up giving Beijing a major chance to expand its standing on the world stage .\nAfter Trump withdrew the US from the Trans-Pacific Partnership , China inserted itself into trade talks among other nations disappointed by America ’ s reversal . As Canada and Mexico have felt spurned by Trump during the runup to renegotiating NAFTA , China has emerged as a more reliable trading prospect .\nThis isn ’ t happening quietly behind the scenes : At China ’ s first appearance at the World Economic Forum in Davos , Chinese President Xi Jinping chided the West for its flirtation with protectionism , and painted a picture of his country as a paragon of free trade and an inviting place for foreign investment .\nNow , as the US pulls out of the global community ’ s effort to curb carbon emissions , China ’ s profile as a forward-looking world leader will only grow . It ’ s set to become closer to the US ’ s allies that feel abandoned by Trump ’ s recent actions , as well as take a more aggressive lead in building a green economy .\n“ While the US is breaking these ties , China — which has traditionally been more reserved in international affairs — is building them at breakneck pace , ” Alex Wang , an environmental law professor at the University of California Los Angeles , told me . “ As the US loses good will , China is building it . ”\nThe reshuffling of the world order in the wake of Trump ’ s announcement could be seen almost immediately , with top Chinese and European leaders criticizing the US ’ s withdrawal side by side on Thursday .\nStanding next to German Chancellor Angela Merkel , Chinese Premier Li Keqiang said that “ fighting climate change is a global consensus ” and pledged that China would remain committed to the Paris agreement .\nMerkel said `` the cooperation of the European Union with China in this area will play a crucial role , especially in regards to new technologies . ''\nIn a statement to the press , Miguel Arias Cañete , the European Union commissioner on climate action and energy , made the point even more forcefully : `` No one should be left behind , but the EU and China have decided to move forward . Our successful cooperation on issues like emissions trading and clean technologies are bearing fruit . Now is the time to further strengthen these ties to keep the wheels turning for ambitious global climate action . ”\nIt won ’ t be the last time that Beijing and Brussels find themselves seeing eye to eye , or that the two sides look past the US and look to work on joint initiatives that don ’ t involve Washington . And Europe and China ’ s enhanced cooperation is quite likely to go beyond coordinating on climate change .\n“ These agreements ... build ties and align interests in ways that reduce the likelihood of conflict and bolster the opportunities for greater growth and development , ” Wang says .\nTo make that a little more concrete , let ’ s take something like China ’ s jaw-droppingly ambitious One Belt , One Road initiative . It ’ s a Chinese-funded infrastructure project designed to connect China to 64 countries in Asia , Europe , the Middle East , and Africa that make up around 60 percent of the world ’ s population .\nAs is often the case with countries that deal with trading with China , Europe has expressed concern about China ’ s compliance with global trade norms as Beijing goes about pitching its proposals for trains and tunnels . Those are big issues that aren ’ t easy to surmount , but they become a little bit easier to deal with when you ’ re able to build goodwill through cooperation on issues like climate change .\n“ As the US loses goodwill , China is building it ” —Alex Wang\nIf Europe and China are actually able to grow closer through their coordination on climate change , it could potentially build a better relationship for navigating conflicts over trade .\nIn the meantime , the US and Europe are going through the roughest patch they ’ ve had since they split over the Iraq War in 2003 . Even before Trump pulled out of the Paris agreement on Thursday , he had already alienated Europe during his trip abroad last week , when he , among other things , refused to reaffirm America ’ s commitment to NATO and accused Germany of being a trade cheat .\nTrump ’ s America First agenda has been a huge gift to China\nBut the impact of Trump ’ s withdrawal from the world stage is bigger than China ’ s relationship with Europe .\nConsider how , on his first full working day as president , he withdrew from the Trans-Pacific Partnership , an agreement that would ’ ve boosted trade ties between the US and 11 countries along the Pacific Rim and generated the largest trade bloc the world had ever seen .\nThe accord would have strengthened ties between the US and a number of China ’ s neighbors and would ’ ve served as a counterweight to Beijing ’ s increasing influence in the region ( China was n't part of the deal ) .\nNow , Trump ’ s move means that Beijing has a major opportunity to step into that vacuum and negotiate a regional trade deal that basically serves as a China-centric version of the TPP . It ’ s already been making efforts to do exactly that .\nChina has generally been eager to capitalize on Trump ’ s protectionist tendencies . In his World Economic Forum speech , Chinese President Xi warned against rising nationalism in the West and defended free trade . This is China lecturing the US and Europe about free trade . China ’ s economy has liberalized significantly in recent decades , but it ’ s a country that flagrantly disregards all kinds of global trade rules , from denying market access to foreign companies to subsidizing many of its key industries . But when you have the most powerful politician in the world calling for 45 percent tariffs against other countries , Xi doesn ’ t look so preposterous .\nIf there ’ s one realm where China is set to best the US in the wake of Paris , it ’ s in developing a sustainable economy . It ’ s already investing more than the US in clean energy — in 2016 , it invested more than $ 88 billion to the US ’ s $ 59 billion — but the gulf between the US and China will grow as the US decides that renewable energy investment isn ’ t a priority . And it will grow fast . America First is turning out to be anything but .


All too many bad ideas get endlessly recycled — the carbon tax is one of them . A carbon tax could be a tax on coal , oil and gas carbon-dioxide emissions from power plants and other sources . Do you know how much carbon dioxide is in the atmosphere ? It is a little less than 400 parts per million . Do you know what the optimum level of carbon dioxide is ? No one does , even though some have the extreme conceit to think they do .\nThe earth ’ s atmosphere is 78 percent nitrogen , about 21 percent oxygen , less than 1 percent argon , and only 0.038 percent carbon dioxide — plus a variable amount of water vapor . The gas is necessary for life . Plants can not grow without it . They absorb it and release oxygen in exchange . Animals exhale carbon dioxide and inhale oxygen . There is evidence that as carbon-dioxide levels have risen , plants are growing faster , which means cheaper food .\nThe advocates of a carbon tax claim that the tax will help reduce dangerous emissions . The argument is that carbon dioxide is a “ greenhouse ” gas and , everything else being equal , more of it in the atmosphere will result in higher atmospheric temperatures . The operative phrase here is “ everything else being equal. ” When fossil fuels are burned , they produce small amounts of carbon dioxide but large amounts of water vapor . Increases in water vapor show up as more cloud cover . Clouds both trap heat ( which increases warming ) and reflect sunlight ( which reduces warming ) , but there is no consensus about which effect is greater .\nWhat is known with a high degree of certainty is that at times in the past , the Earth has been both warmer and cooler at current levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere . What is also known is the current climate models have a dreadful record of prediction . Twenty years ago , we were told that the Earth ’ s temperatures would steadily rise from then on , yet there has been no average warming for the past 16 years — oops .\nLet ’ s assume for the moment that those who think that global warming is largely caused by increases in carbon dioxide , and that man has caused the increase , are correct . Those who think that also have a “ mainstream ” forecast of 3 degrees Celsius of global warming between now and the end of the century . At most , they also estimate that the U.S. contribution will only be about 0.2 degrees Celsius , or about 7 percent of global warming . Does it make sense for the United States to impose a carbon tax , when emissions from the rest of the world — notably , India and China — would be responsible for 93 percent of the temperature rise ? Even with very high taxes on carbon-dioxide emissions , the amount of warming that would be prevented is too small to measure on a 50-year time scale .\nA carbon tax has real costs to the American economy . Energy prices and food prices would be higher , and virtually everything else that people consume would cost more . The results of higher prices are a lower standard of living , less economic opportunity , lower real wages and fewer jobs . All for what ?\nYou may have noticed that people who have very strong empirical and theoretical evidence for their point of view usually do not feel a need to suppress dissent . Instead they let the strength of their own arguments and evidence persuade . Yet , the global-warming lobby increasingly exhibits the characteristics of an intolerant religious sect , rather than objective scientists . Rather than admitting that their climate models were flawed , many in the global-warming crowd have resorted to name-calling and active repression of those who have argued that solar activity or other phenomena might be more important than carbon dioxide in determining the earth ’ s temperature .\nAs an economist , I make no pretense to knowing what the optimum temperature of the earth ought to be and what the optimal level of carbon dioxide should be , other than to note , in general , people tend to prefer warmer over colder climates and less expensive and more plentiful food that comes from more warmth , moisture and carbon dioxide . As an economist , though , I am prepared to make judgments as to whether a proposed tax is likely to have more benefits than costs . Even many proponents of carbon taxes , when pressed , admit that they will have virtually no effect on global warming ( even using their very doubtful assumptions ) . However , we do know that these proposed tax increases will have very real negative effects on people ’ s incomes and job opportunities .\nMankind has adapted to the gradual ups and downs in temperatures and sea levels for thousands of years — without freedom-destroying government mandates and oppressive taxes . The carbon tax idea should be scrapped .\nRichard W. Rahn is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and chairman of the Institute for Global Economic Growth .


While touring areas of California ravaged by a historic drought , President Obama on Friday sounded an ominous warning and said that even if the federal government takes meaningful action to combat climate change , much of the damage already has been done .\n“ Unless and until we do more to combat carbon pollution that causes climate change , this trend is going to get worse , and the hard truth is even if we do take action on climate change , carbon pollution has built up in our atmosphere for decades . The planet is slowly going to keep warming for a long time to come , ” Mr. Obama said while touring a farm in Los Banos . “ We ’ re going to have to stop looking at these disasters as something to wait for . We ’ ve got to start looking at these disasters as something to prepare for , to anticipate . ”\nMr. Obama and many Democrats , along with their supporters in the environmental community , have held up extreme weather events such as California ’ s drought , Hurricane Sandy and others as proof that global warming is wreaking havoc all across the planet .\nBut the issue remains bitterly divisive , and many lawmakers believe Mr. Obama ’ s dire warnings are grossly overstated .\nThe heated debate over climate change has led to near gridlock on Capitol Hill , with Republicans and some Democrats standing in staunch opposition to major legislative proposals to address the issue . That opposition helped kill the controversial 2010 cap-and-trade bill , which would have put a limit on carbon emissions nationwide .\nIn lieu of congressional action , the Obama administration has taken a number of executive steps . The most notable were the ambitious automobile fuel standards , which call for American cars and trucks to average 54.5 mpg by 2025 , and the Environmental Protection Agency ’ s strict new rules limiting carbon emissions from power plants .\nThe White House on Friday also announced that in the president ’ s new budget proposal , due out next month , Mr. Obama will ask Congress to create a new $ 1 billion “ climate resilience ” fund to spur new research into how communities and infrastructure can be better prepared for the impacts of climate change .\nThe initiative , if approved , also would fund new technologies “ that will make us more resilient in the face of changing climate , ” the White House said in a statement .\nMoving forward , the president said , such efforts will become more critical — especially in states such as California , which will have to deal with longer , more severe droughts and less water as the climate situation worsens .\n“ Everybody , from farmers to residential areas to the north of California and the south of California and every place in between , as well as the entire Western region , are going to have to start rethinking how we approach water for decades to come , ” the president said .\nWhile in California , the president also attended a town hall meeting with the state ’ s Democratic governor , Jerry Brown , Sens . Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein , both Democrats , and other state and local officials .\nMr. Obama will spend the rest of the weekend in California . Later on Friday , he ’ ll hold a bilateral meeting with King Abdullah II of Jordan at a private retreat in Rancho Mirage .


Unsustainable use of resources is wrecking the planet but recycling is falling , report finds\nThe amount of material consumed by humanity has passed 100bn tonnes every year , a report has revealed , but the proportion being recycled is falling .\nThe climate and wildlife emergencies are driven by the unsustainable extraction of fossil fuels , metals , building materials and trees . The report ’ s authors warn that treating the world ’ s resources as limitless is leading towards global disaster .\nThe materials used by the global economy have quadrupled since 1970 , far faster than the population , which has doubled . In the last two years , consumption has jumped by more than 8 % but the reuse of resources has fallen from 9.1 % to 8.6 % .\nThe report , by the Circle Economy thinktank , was launched at the World Economic Forum in Davos . It shows that , on average , every person on Earth uses more than 13 tonnes of materials per year . But the report also found that some nations are making steps towards circular economies in which renewable energy underpins systems where waste and pollution are reduced to zero .\n“ We risk global disaster if we continue to treat the world ’ s resources as if they are limitless , ” said Harald Friedl , the chief executive of Circle Economy . “ Governments must urgently adopt circular economy solutions if we want to achieve a high quality of life for close to 10bn people by mid-century without destabilising critical planetary processes . ”\nMarc de Wit , the report ’ s lead author , said : “ We are still fuelling our growth in population and affluence by the extraction of virgin materials . We can ’ t do this indefinitely – our hunger for virgin material needs to be halted . ”\nTrump blasts 'prophets of doom ' in attack on climate activism Read more\nThe report found that 100.6bn tonnes of materials were consumed in 2017 , the latest year for which data is available . Half of the total is sand , clay , gravel and cement used for building , along with the other minerals quarried to produce fertiliser . Coal , oil and gas make up 15 % and metal ores 10 % . The final quarter are the plants and trees used for food and fuel .\nThe lion ’ s share of the materials – 40 % – is turned into housing . Other major categories include food , transport , healthcare , communications , and consumer goods such as clothes and furniture .\nAlmost a third of the annual materials remain in use after a year , such as buildings and vehicles . But 15 % is emitted into the atmosphere as climate-heating gases and nearly a quarter is discarded into the environment , such as plastic in waterways and oceans . A third of the materials is treated as waste , mostly going to landfill and mining spoil heaps . Just 8.6 % is recycled .\n“ This report sparks an alarm for all governments , ” said Carolina Schmidt , Chile ’ s environment minister . “ We need to deploy all the policies to really catalyse this transformation [ to a circular economy ] . ”\nCristianne Close of the conservation group WWF said : “ The circular economy provides a framework for reducing our impacts , protecting ecosystems and living within the means of one planet . ”\nThe report said increasing recycling can make economies more competitive , improve living conditions and help to meet emissions targets and avoid deforestation . It reported that 13 European countries have adopted circular economy roadmaps , including France , Germany and Spain , and that Colombia became the first Latin American country to launch a similar policy in 2019 .\nChina ’ s ban on waste imports aims to encourage domestic recycling , the report said , but has also stimulated the development of circular economy strategies in Australia and other countries which previously exported their waste to China .\nJanez Potočnik , a former European environment commissioner and the co-chair of the UN Environment Programme international resource panel , said the world needed to learn to do more with less and replace ownership with sharing , as is increasingly being seen with cars .


Employers hired more workers in March even as the number of job openings fell slightly , the Labor Department said Tuesday .\nThe Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey points to a stronger labor market two months ago than another government report suggested Friday .\nLabor said last week that employers added a net 85,000 jobs in March , including hiring and layoffs , as payroll growth sputtered amid frigid weather and a pullback in drilling by oil producers , among other factors . That was the lowest total since June 2012 . Job gains rebounded to 223,000 in April .\nTuesday 's JOLTS report provides a more granular view of employee movements and shows a more encouraging picture . The number of hires , for example , increased by 56,000 to about 5.1 million .\nHiring increased in retail , professional and business services , and leisure and hospitality . It declined in construction , manufacturing and education and health services .\nPart of the reason net job gains were weak is that layoffs and discharges also picked up , rising by 105,000 , or 6.2 % , to 1.8 million . At least some of those job cuts were in the oil industry , which continues to shed workers in response to low crude prices .\nMeanwhile , about 2.8 million Americans quit their jobs — the most since April 2008 — up from 2.7 million in February . A large number of quits is a sign of a dynamic labor market in which workers feel confident enough to leave one job for another .\nOverall , the report `` helps ease concerns that the weak 85,000 ( job gain total ) for March was the start of a new trend , '' says Barclays Capital economist Jesse Hurwitz . `` Confidence remains intact . ''\nLess encouraging is that job openings fell by 150,000 to 5 million after hitting a 14-year high in February . But economist Daniel Silver of JPMorgan Chase notes that openings were still up about 18 % from the year-ago period .\nAnother measure of the labor market 's progress is that there were 1.7 unemployed workers for each job opening in March , down sharply from a high of 6.7 in 2009 .\nThat shows the labor market is continuing to tighten , aiding job seekers , though at a slower pace than last year , Hurwitz says . He expects job gains to pick up to a solid monthly average of 200,000 to 225,000 for the rest of 2015 . That would mark an uptick from the 184,000 monthly pace in the first quarter but a slowdown from last year 's brisk clip of 260,000 .\nLast week , Labor said that employers added 223,000 jobs in April .


President Obama ’ s relationship with blue-collar unions has hit an all-time low , with several powerful labor groups ripping into the administration — and the Democratic Party as a whole — for its rejection of the Keystone XL oil pipeline and its promotion of the highly controversial trade deal known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership .\nMr. Obama ’ s decision to reject Keystone on environmental grounds , which he announced Friday after a review process that lasted nearly seven years , deeply angered the president ’ s traditional supporters in the labor movement .\nIn addition to unprecedented verbal criticism of Mr. Obama — including from the Laborers ’ International Union or North America , which branded the president “ cowardly ” and his actions “ shameful ” — other unions hinted that they may rethink their support for Democrats in 2016 .\n“ President Obama has chosen to place politics over substantive policy that only serves to advance the agenda of well-funded radical environmentalists , ” Sean McGarvey , president of the North America ’ s Building Trades Unions , said in a statement Friday . “ All of which begs the question : Where does this leave the Democratic Party ’ s historical core constituency of working Americans ? We won ’ t know the answer to that question until November 2016 . But , to paraphrase Senator Ted Kennedy , for all those whose jobs have been our concern , the work goes on , the cause endures , and the dream shall never die , and hope springs again in January of 2017 . ”\nMr. Obama , who has tried to cultivate close ties with labor leaders throughout his time in the White House , now finds himself in a situation where his relationship with some major unions is tense at best and fatally wounded at worst . In addition to the lambasting the administration has taken over Keystone , it is enduring equal criticism on the Trans-Pacific Partnership ( TPP ) , a major trade deal involving the U.S. and 12 Pacific Rim nations .\nThe full text of the deal , which is opposed by many key figures in the Democratic Party , including 2016 presidential front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton , finally was released last week .\n“ Officials have talked about side deals and special arrangements that they say will improve the agreement , ” Teamsters General President James P. Hoffa said in a statement . “ But they are unenforceable and won ’ t help protect the jobs of hardworking Americans . That ’ s why there is only one right answer for lawmakers when it comes to TPP . Just say no . ”\nTeamsters also launched a # TPPWorseThanWeThought campaign on Twitter seeking to rally opposition to the deal within the Democratic Party .\nWhile the administration flat out rejects many criticisms of TPP — including that the deal ’ s labor standards aren ’ t strong enough — Mr. Obama took a slightly different tack when explaining why he blocked the Keystone pipeline .\nThe project — which would have crossed the U.S.-Canada boundary , connected with existing pipeline infrastructure and transported more than 800,000 barrels of Canadian oil to refineries on the Gulf Coast — would have created more than 40,000 jobs , according to State Department research . Supporters argue it would have greatly enhanced North American energy security and potentially would have lowered U.S. gas prices .\nBut the president , while also casting doubt on the true job-creation potential of Keystone , made clear that his chief motivation for killing the project is to prove to the world that America will voluntarily lessen its reliance on fossil fuels and lead the world in the fight against climate change .\n“ Today we ’ re continuing to lead by example , ” Mr. Obama said in a White House speech Friday , flanked by Vice President Joseph R. Biden and Secretary of State John F. Kerry . “ Because , ultimately , if we ’ re going to prevent large parts of this earth from becoming not only inhospitable but uninhabitable in our lifetimes , we ’ re going to have to keep some fossil fuels in the ground rather than burn them and release more dangerous pollution into the sky . ”\nFrom the perspective of some unions , the president ’ s decision proves he ’ s more interested in securing an environmental legacy than he is in creating jobs and boosting the economy .\n“ After a seven-year circus of cowardly delay , the president ’ s decision to kill the Keystone XL pipeline is just one more indication of an utter disdain and disregard for salt-of-the-earth , middle-class working Americans , ” said Terry O ’ Sullivan , general president of the Laborers ’ International Union of North America .\n“ The politics he has played with their lives and livelihoods is far dirtier than oil carried by any pipeline in the world , and the cynical manipulation of the approval process has made a mockery of regulatory institutions and government itself . We are dismayed and disgusted that the president has once again thrown the members of LIUNA and other hard-working , blue-collar workers under the bus of his vaunted ‘ legacy , ’ while doing little or nothing to make a real difference in global climate change . His actions are shameful . ”


The recent economic upheaval caused by the COVID-19 pandemic is unmatched by anything in recent memory . Social distancing has resulted in massive layoffs and furloughs in retail , hospitality , and entertainment , and millions of the affected workers—restaurant servers , cooks , housekeepers , retail clerks , and many others—were already at the bottom of the wage spectrum .\nThe economic catastrophe of the previous decade , the Great Recession , hit young adults and those with lower levels of education especially hard . As we approach another nationwide recession , we are about to see history repeat itself .\nMillions of young adult workers were economically vulnerable before COVID-19\nIn a pre-pandemic analysis , we identified 53 million low-wage workers in America who earn median hourly earnings of just $ 10.22 . Of these workers , a disproportionate share are young adults ages 18 to 24 : 13 million , or 24 % of all low-wage workers . These 13 million young adults are especially concentrated in industries that have been shuttered by stay-at-home and social distancing orders , and are likely to experience an outsized share of pandemic-related layoffs .\nFor some young people ( primarily those with a college degree ) , a low-wage job is a temporary waystation , and they are likely to advance to higher-paying work . Given the importance of education in the labor market , those without college credentials are not so well-situated , and future wage growth for them is much less likely . The current economic crisis may exacerbate these differences in outcomes by education level—job losses are thus far more concentrated among workers without college degrees .\nOf the 13 million young adults in low-wage jobs , 7.1 million do not have a college degree ( associate or bachelor ’ s ) and are not making any progress toward one as they work . In our pre-pandemic analysis , we referred to this group as “ Cluster 1 , ” and will refer to them as such throughout the remainder of this brief .\nThe 7.1 million young adults in Cluster 1 are employed most commonly in occupations such as retail sales , cooks , or servers . The majority are male ( 57 % ) and it is a racially diverse group : 51 % are white , 27 % are Latino or Hispanic , 16 % are Black , and 2 % are Asian American . They have median hourly wages of $ 8.55 and median annual earnings of $ 12,700 .\nNearly half ( 47 % ) of all workers in Cluster 1 work full-time year-round , and they report median annual earnings of about $ 21,000—considerably higher than those working fewer hours , but still a low sum to cover living expenses .\nThe majority ( 54 % ) of Cluster 1 report that a high school diploma is their highest level of education , and another third have attended college or training but did not earn a degree . A portion of this “ some college ” group may have completed a nondegree credential , but the majority likely did not . Without a credential , most are unlikely to see an economic payoff for their time spent in school and are more likely to default on school-related debt than their peers who completed a degree .\nThirty-one percent of workers in Cluster 1 receive safety net assistance ( SSI , public assistance income , SNAP , or Medicaid ) and about half ( 48 % ) live below 200 % of the federal poverty line , a common threshold used to identify the working poor . A little over half ( 54 % ) are still living with a parent , but one in five are the sole wage earner in their family . Only one-third are secondary earners , defined here as living in a family in which at least one member works and earns moderate to high wages .\nNearly half of low-wage young adults without a college degree work in sectors immediately impacted by COVID-19\nA number of industries have rapidly lost jobs due to social distancing measures , travel restrictions , and related government actions in response to COVID-19 . These immediate-risk industries were compiled in previous Brookings analyses and include retail , passenger transportation , arts and entertainment , accommodation , restaurants and bars , and a variety of other personal services . ( Refer to the appendix for a full list of immediate-risk industries . )\nForty-six percent of workers in Cluster 1 are in immediate-risk industries , compared to 23 % of all U.S. workers . Another 20 % of these young workers are in near-term risk industries . Near-term risk industries—including construction , some manufacturing , and real estate—are less immediately impacted than retail and restaurants , but have started to see layoffs in recent weeks .\nTo learn more about the characteristics and risk exposure of Cluster 1 in your metro area , please refer to the data appendix .\nThe next federal relief package should include a massive jobs program\nYoung people typically have unemployment rates much higher than those of prime-age workers . Given that the current unemployment rate is estimated to be at least 20 % , unemployment rates among young people are likely to be staggeringly high . Moreover , at all ages , unemployment is higher among those with lower levels of education—another strike against the young adults in Cluster 1 .\nMassive unemployment requires a proportionate response , and any future COVID-19 relief legislation should include a large-scale , federally funded employment initiative . Given the extent of the job losses and the likelihood of an economic depression , we should aim to employ millions of people , and authorize such a program for at least three years .\nLooking only at less-educated young adults , it ’ s likely that more than 3 million are recently out of work . And that is only a fraction of the newly unemployed , based on the record number of unemployment claims—30 million—filed in the past six weeks .\nWe don ’ t know when the private sector will start hiring again , but in the meantime , tens of millions of people have bills to pay and mouths to feed . They can ’ t wait . The CARES Act ’ s expansions to unemployment insurance and the $ 1,200 one-time stimulus payment were good initial steps , but they are not enough .\nA federal jobs initiative should encompass various approaches . It should target a wide range of people , including those at the end of the labor market queue : the last-hired/first-fired workers who typically have less experience and lower levels of education . It should also reach those who ordinarily would not have much trouble finding employment , because even the most qualified candidates will not be able to find a job when there is little demand for workers .\nThe jobs initiative should also explicitly target young people , such as those in Cluster 1 , who are often at the back of the line of job candidates . People in their early 20s are at the beginning of their careers , and early unemployment can have lasting negative consequences . Work begets work .\nTo reach young people and provide them with the skills and supports to prepare them for a successful career , we could dramatically expand YouthBuild , service and conservation corps , or AmeriCorps . There are already two active legislative proposals to expand AmeriCorps : the Pandemic Response and Opportunity Through National Service Act and the UNITE Act of 2020 . ( Support for AmeriCorps , however , does not eliminate the need for other programs targeted at young adults , since it is only one model and not necessarily the best fit for all young people . )\nAge-agnostic approaches could include subsidized employment in direct aid to states ( as was done in 2009 ’ s Recovery Act ) or in any future expansions of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act , as has been suggested by Heather Boushey and the Heartland Alliance . The programs could place subsidized workers at nonprofits and businesses , as well as directly employ people in the public sector ; for example , in emergency response , public works , and infrastructure jobs .\nA federal initiative could also place workers in jobs that aid the COVID-19 relief effort , such as contact tracing , making and distributing personal protective equipment , organizing food drives , and delivering groceries to those who are home-bound . They could pursue projects that focus on other community needs , such as providing computer equipment and digital skills training to address the digital divide so clearly highlighted in the stay-at-home era . Of course , any of these employment opportunities should be safe , allowing for adequate social distancing as well as any necessary personal protective equipment .\nReaching millions of people over several years will require hundreds of billions of dollars . We must not flinch at the price tag . We should calibrate our response to the scale of the problem , and not use the size of existing employment-related funding streams as the benchmark . Providing a chance at employment and preventing economic disaster for workers is just as important as—and could be a complement to—the relief for businesses in previous legislation . America ’ s young workers are a worthy investment , and we would reap the benefits for years to come .


Series : Desperation Town How Youngstown Gave Itself Away for the Promise of Jobs\n███ is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power . Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they ’ re published . This article was produced in partnership with The Business Journal , based in Youngstown , Ohio , which is a member of the ███ Local Reporting Network .\nThe state of Ohio has put General Motors on notice that it may be forced to repay more than $ 60 million in public subsidies as a result of the automaker closing its massive assembly plant last year in Lordstown .\nThe state ’ s collection effort , initially outlined in a letter to GM in March , has not been previously reported , and the automaker itself has not disclosed the potential liability to shareholders in its corporate filings .\nState officials say the Lordstown shuttering , which made national headlines and drew the ire of President Donald Trump , violated the terms of two state economic development agreements that GM signed more than a decade ago , according to documents obtained by The Business Journal and ███ through public records requests . In return for tens of millions of dollars in tax breaks , the company had pledged to maintain operations at the Lordstown site until at least 2027 .\n“ If the state were to claw back $ 60 million , that would be one of the biggest clawback events in U.S. history , ” said Greg LeRoy , executive director of Good Jobs First , a national nonprofit that advocates for accountability in economic development . “ This is very significant , very interesting that it would come from a Rust Belt state from a very pro-business administration . ”\nThe state Development Services Agency , which oversees economic incentive programs , notified GM in March that it would recommend that the state ’ s tax authority terminate the company ’ s tax agreements and collect a full refund . Spokesman Todd Walker said the authority would consider the matter at an upcoming meeting , though he declined to specify a date . The authority ’ s next session is July 27 , according to its website . Provisions in GM ’ s tax agreements allow for state regulators to consider market conditions and whether the company continues to maintain “ other operations in the state ” before issuing a final determination .\nAnd GM is making its case . In a letter in April , the company urged the state to take into account the collapsing market for small cars — the hallmark of the Lordstown plant — and the economic downturn precipitated by the coronavirus pandemic . GM reported net income of $ 294 million for the quarter that ended on March 31 , down from $ 2.1 billion during the same period last year , according to filings .\n“ Cash preservation is critically important to General Motors to support a vigorous emergence from the economic and global health crisis , ” Troy D. Kennedy , the company ’ s U.S. property tax manager , wrote to the Ohio Development Services Agency . “ We respectfully request your assistance to help us drive towards a full recovery by choosing not to require repayment of all , or a significant portion of , the tax credits . ”\nGM also highlighted its six manufacturing and distribution facilities throughout Ohio , as well as a planned joint venture that would manufacture battery cells for electric vehicles near the Lordstown plant . On Monday , spokesman Dan Flores said in a statement , “ We are respectfully asking the state to consider our belief that a repayment of the tax credits would be inconsistent with our significant manufacturing presence in Ohio and the Mahoning Valley . ”\nGet Our Top Investigations Subscribe to the Big Story newsletter .\nThe fight over GM ’ s corporate tax credits has played out quietly over the last few months and underscores the political bind facing leaders in Ohio and elsewhere as they struggle to revive their economies while also balancing their budgets . Last month , Gov . Mike DeWine ordered $ 775 million in budget cuts to plug a yawning hole in this year ’ s spending plan , and state officials are already estimating a $ 2.4 billion deficit for the fiscal year that begins July 1 .\nTaking on one of the country ’ s largest automakers would represent a shift for a state and region that has relied heavily on economic incentives to attract new employers and to retain its beleaguered manufacturing base . As The Business Journal and ███ reported last month , local governments like Youngstown have offered businesses free land , tax abatements , development grants , low-interest loans and other inducements to spur investment across Ohio ’ s Mahoning Valley .\nAn electronics tester works on a Chevrolet Cruze at Jamestown Industries in Youngstown , Ohio , on Nov. 28 , 2018 . Jamestown Industries supplied parts for the Cruze , the key product at the former Lordstown GM plant . ( Tony Dejak/AP Photo )\nIn 2009 , with gas prices soaring , the state offered the company massive tax breaks to help it expand and retool the Lordstown plant to produce a new , fuel-efficient model , the Chevrolet Cruze . Under the terms of the deal , GM got a 75 % reduction in its income taxes over 15 years — worth $ 14.2 million — in exchange for agreeing to add 200 jobs and maintain operations at the site until 2039 . A separate agreement awarded the company an additional $ 46.1 million in tax breaks on the condition that it retain 3,700 employees over 15 years and maintain operations at the site until 2027 .\nBut eight years after signing those pacts , the small car market softened , and GM started to slash jobs at the plant . In January 2017 , it eliminated the so-called third shift at Lordstown . A second shift was cut in June 2018 , the same day the automaker announced it would build its new Chevrolet Blazer in Mexico . Together , the reductions resulted in the loss of more than 2,700 jobs , according to an economic impact report by Cleveland State University .\nIn November 2018 , the automaker announced that it would end production of the Lordstown-built Cruze and place the plant on “ unallocated ” status , meaning a new product had not been selected for the factory . Trump , who had pledged to resuscitate manufacturing in Ohio and across the Rust Belt , lashed out . “ The U.S. saved General Motors , and this is the THANKS we get ! We are now looking at cutting all @ GM subsidies , ” he wrote on Twitter .\nThe president did not follow up on the threat , and the last vehicle rolled off the assembly line on March 6 , 2019 . The shutdown eliminated the remaining 1,500 jobs , while hundreds of other automotive supplier positions tied to the plant were also lost .\nOfficials were outraged . U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown , D-Ohio , said at the time that GM ’ s decision was “ corporate greed at its worst . ”\nCommunity groups held prayer vigils throughout the area in support of attracting a new vehicle , while children whose parents were employed at the plant wrote letters to GM CEO Mary Barra pleading to keep it open . A choir of middle school students even produced a video singing “ We Love GM ! ” to the tune of “ Under the Sea ” from Disney ’ s animated film “ The Little Mermaid . ”\nIt came to nothing . In October , after a 40-day strike was settled with the United Auto Workers union , GM announced it would officially close Lordstown and not award a new product to the plant . In a five-page letter to Ohio regulators in April , Kennedy , the GM official , called it an “ extremely difficult decision . ”\n“ It had been our hope to keep operations at Lordstown going , ” he wrote , noting that GM had exceeded its job creation and retention targets through 2016 . “ However , we have continued to maintain significant operations in Ohio and make important new investments in the Mahoning Valley . ”\nRead More Why a Struggling Rust Belt City Pinned Its Revival on a Self-Chilling Beverage Can Welcome to Youngstown , Ohio , home of Chill-Can , the self-chilling beverage container you ’ ve probably never heard of . Officials have gambled millions of dollars and demolished a neighborhood for the product . Not one job has been created yet .\nThe company highlighted its sale of the Lordstown plant to startup automaker Lordstown Motors , which plans to introduce its first electric-powered pickup , the Endurance , next week and begin production in the first quarter of next year . The Business Journal reported in December that GM had provided $ 40 million in financing to the firm so it could purchase the facility and retool the operation .\nGM also underscored its plans to build a $ 2.3 billion electric-vehicle battery plant in Lordstown , next to the shuttered auto facility . The automaker is partnering with Korea-based LG Chem as part of a new joint venture named Ultium . The new battery plant would employ about 1,100 workers earning between $ 10 and $ 17 per hour , lower than those who work in auto assembly .\n“ GM ’ s plans for the Mahoning Valley position Lordstown as a crucial manufacturing location for the electric vehicle supply chain , ” Kennedy said in his letter .\nIn the meantime , Lordstown is coping with the loss of GM as one of its biggest revenue generators . Eager for the new battery plant , its village council approved new tax breaks for the joint venture in February . The project will receive a 75 % abatement on property levies for 15 years .\n“ What we had to get done and needed to get done for General Motors , we did , ” Mayor Arno Hill said after the vote .


New York governor Andrew Cuomo is attempting to prop up public-sector unions in anticipation of a Supreme Court ruling that could end coercive payments .\nA group of Illinois government workers are asking the Supreme Court to overturn four decades of precedent that allow agencies to require union dues or fee payments as a condition of employment . The plaintiffs argued in Janus v. American Federation of State , County , and Municipal Employees that public-sector unions are inherently political and funding them violates an individual 's association and speech rights . Many in labor circles fear the Supreme Court will endorse this view , dealing a severe blow to union coffers if partial fee payers win the right to opt out of union membership entirely . New York Democrats passed a bill to shore up public-sector dues collections , limit employees ' ability to cut off the unions representing their workplaces , and `` deter the federal government 's attempts to dismantle unions . ''\n`` Too often , and at the hands of this federal administration , we are seeing the labor movement going backwards … our efforts to protect working men and women are moving labor forward , making the workplace fairer and more just than ever before , '' Governor Cuomo said in a statement . `` We will not let this federal administration silence New York 's working class , we will support every voice in every community and in every industry , and we will do everything in our power to protect the right to achieve the American Dream . ''\nThe law would automatically reenroll workers into labor organizations each year and bolster union officials ' ability to approach new hires . New York has the highest union membership rate in the country—one in four workers belong to labor groups , more than double the national rate of 10.7 percent , according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics . The Janus case could deal a heavy blow to New York unions . An analysis from the Empire Center for Public Policy estimated they could lose as much as $ 110 million if workers win the right to withdraw their support .\nBig Labor has been one of Cuomo 's strongest financial supporters . Union organizations have donated about $ 2 million to his campaigns , according Project Vote Smart . The Cuomo administration did not return requests for comment about the legislation .\nCuomo said the Janus case is designed to hurt workers ' collective bargaining rights . He praised public-sector unions as an `` equalizer '' in a speech to labor leaders as he signed the bill into law .\n`` You are the equalizer at the bargaining table during collective bargaining and they do n't want that , '' he said . Republicans `` want more power in the hands of management so they can exploit the worker . ''\nLabor watchdogs criticized Cuomo for using the legislation to prop up his political allies . Vinnie Vernuccio , a labor policy expert at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy , said it would `` trap '' government workers .\n`` Gov . Cuomo is trying to circumvent a Supreme Court case before it 's even decided to trap public employees into paying union dues , '' he said . `` Gov . Cuomo in New York and other states are looking to do anything they can for unions to keep collecting forced dues including making arbitrary windows in which workers can exercise their rights . ''\nPeter List , a former union organizer who now works as a labor consultant , said Cuomo 's bill should be seen in light of his tough primary fight with Sex and the City actress Cynthia Nixon .\n`` Cuomo 's action is nothing more than a not-so-hidden attempt to curry favor with his union backers . He needs the union bosses in his back pocket as he tries to fend off Cynthia Nixon . This action does that , '' List said in an email . `` Meanwhile , it puts New York State 's public-sector employers into the position of being likely accomplices in potentially circumventing whatever the Supreme Court rules in the Janus decision . ''\nGreg Mourad , vice president of the National Right to Work Committee , called the bill `` shameful . ''\n`` This is a shameful handout to the union bosses that fund the campaigns of Governor Cuomo and his allies , all at the expense of taxpayers and independent workers who would never join or financially support a union if it were actually voluntary . ''\nCuomo said he hopes the legislation inspires other states to take measures to safeguard union privileges—similar legislation has passed in New Jersey as well .\n`` We 're going to be the state that shows how to mobilize and how to win , '' he said .


Like more than half of Americans , I live in the suburbs . Luckily , I don ’ t have to commute to the city every day—or even wear pants—because I ’ m a writer . But if I had a real job , it would take me well over an hour to get from my door to ███ ’ s offices . As it is , going into New York City for a meeting starts with a 12-minute walk from my house to the commuter rail . That train takes 38 minutes to get to Grand Central station . I then spend about six minutes walking up and down various ramps to get to a subway . The subway takes about eight minutes to get to Port Authority . From there it ’ s a 10-minute walk to the office . And that ’ s when everything is running on time . Everything takes longer if it ’ s raining or snowing or if I ’ m hungover . The whole process has to be reverse engineered to get home . Ad Policy\nThat was before the coronavirus . Now commuting to a meeting takes one minute from my bedroom door to my desk chair . Sometimes I take the scenic route and chat with my wife on my way to work . I ’ ve gone two months without being within coughing distance of any office . Why would I ever go back ? Why would anybody ? Office workers have known forever that spending hours per day commuting is nonessential and a gigantic waste of time .\nSuburban living isn ’ t a phase . It ’ s not new . Americans have been moving to the suburbs for nearly a century . That trend has had all sorts of deleterious social and political ramifications . Urban decay , white flight , housing market bubbles , and massively unequal school resources are just a few of the ills caused by suburbanization . And don ’ t even get me started on the anodyne , sterile , normative consumerist “ culture ” championed by the suburban ideal .\nIt would be good for the country if the suburbs were razed to the studs and the land returned to nature . But since that ’ s not going to happen , the pandemic is a great opportunity to finally bring our work expectations in line with how and where people actually live .\nDespite technological advances that would look like magic to Alexander Graham Bell , we ’ ve remained tied to an Industrial Revolution idea of workers showing up to the giant widget place so an overseer can motivate them to produce profits . Many nonservice industries have had the technology to exist without a centralized office for 30 years , and over the past 20 , the Internet could have made a central office nearly obsolete . But until 10 weeks ago , most people were trudging in to work every day . Current Issue View our current issue\nThat ’ s maddening because , while the technology is there to allow many people to work from home , the infrastructure is not there to support the overwhelming and ever-increasing number of commuters . Our infrastructure hasn ’ t kept up with our suburban expansion ( or any expansion , really ) . Our bridges and tunnels are crumbling . Our trains and buses are so inefficient that Europeans wonder why we don ’ t set them aflame in riots . Our roads and highways are poisonous parking lots warming the planet one traffic jam at a time .\nThe negative environmental impact of commuting is undeniable . Studies show that the average drive to work adds 4.3 metric tons of carbon to the atmosphere a year—per car . If everyone in the US drove just 10 percent less , it would have the equivalent environmental effect of taking 28 coal-fueled power plants off-line for a year . And let ’ s not forget : Commuting is unhealthy . People with longer commutes tend to be less physically active and have higher rates of obesity and high blood pressure . Every commuter has been told to take the stairs as a way to build in some daily exercise , but “ don ’ t spend three hours a day sitting on a train ” is also solid physical fitness advice .\nAnd that ’ s where we were before Covid-19 made us more aware that our public transportation systems are petri dishes for communicable diseases . One of the most mind-blowing moments in the whole pandemic was when New York City announced , triumphantly , that it would start bleaching its subway cars every night . I did not know until that moment that I had spent most of my life riding around in yesterday ’ s filth , not just today ’ s . I ’ m going to need a hazmat suit before I get on the subway again .\nI simply can not fathom a world in which the pandemic is declared over and everybody starts commuting to work again . I do not think that we can go back to expecting people to fork over hours and hours a day sitting in traffic or trapped on a disease tube simply because they have a meeting . Zoom or Skype or Google Hangouts might not be the ideal way to conduct face-to-face business , but the lockdown has shown that any number of daily , mind-numbing check-in meetings can be handled remotely . More from Mystal Bill de Blasio Has Failed the Test of This Moment Elie Mystal\nThere will be resistance to allowing people to work from home after the pandemic has passed . What ’ s the point of having a sweet corner office if nobody ’ s there to cower outside it ? Working from home robs many bosses and brownnosers of some of their favorite methods for doling out favors and establishing loyalty . When everybody is working remotely , the work kind of has to stand for itself . But that ’ s a bad paradigm if you ’ re a talentless man who has your job only because your dad and the boss are golfing buddies . There are a lot of people whose only professional skill is laughing at their boss ’ s jokes at happy hour , and those people can ’ t wait to get back to the office .\nBut the raw efficiency of working from home will , with any luck , cause most offices to embrace working remotely . Now that people have had this taste of managing their own time like the adults they ’ ve always been , dragging them back into a daily routine of inefficiency and health risks will be hard . Telecommuting was one of the big ideas to emerge in the late 20th century . In the post-pandemic 21st century , it might finally become a reality .


John O. Brennan , President Obama ’ s pick to lead the CIA , defended the administration ’ s drone execution program before Congress on Thursday , saying that in war the commander in chief has the right to order a targeted killing — but agreeing that Congress should be more involved in knowing what is happening .\nMr. Brennan , who is Mr. Obama ’ s homeland security adviser and is considered one of the key architects of the war on terrorism in recent years , also said he is not sure whether interrogation techniques such as waterboarding produced any valuable information from suspected terrorist detainees .\nIn a hearing interrupted repeatedly by anti-war protesters , Mr. Brennan denied he had leaked classified information to reporters and told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that he will try to work with Capitol Hill so that lawmakers are aware of the administration ’ s operations in the war on terrorism .\nSenators homed in on targeted killings by armed unmanned aerial vehicles , begun under President George W. Bush and dramatically expanded by Mr. Obama . The drone program has come under scrutiny after the Obama administration used it to kill an American citizen living in Yemen .\n“ I understand you can ’ t have co-commanders in chief , but having the executive being the prosecutor , the judge , the jury and the executioner all in one is very contrary to the traditions and the laws of this country , ” said Sen. Angus S. King Jr. , Maine independent .\nMr. Brennan replied that this was not a judicial proceeding .\n“ The actions that we take on the counterterrorism front , again , are to take actions against individuals where we believe that the intelligence base is so strong and the nature of the threat is so grave and serious , as well as imminent , that we have no recourse except to take this action that may involve a lethal strike , ” he said .\nWith some senators threatening to delay Mr. Brennan ’ s nomination to be CIA director until more information is disclosed , the White House late Wednesday said it would provide to the committee legal memos detailing advice about the drone program .\nNBC News this week obtained and released a 16-page Justice Department memo laying out the legal justification for the program .\nThree Americans are known to have been killed by the program — all of them in Yemen and all by missile strikes from drones .\nThe three are radical Islamic preacher Anwar al-Awlaki , a senior leader in al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula ( AQAP ) ; his 16-year-old son , Abdulrahman al-Awlaki ; and AQAP propagandist Samir Khan .\nU.S. officials have said that al-Awlaki was targeted directly only because he had an “ operational role ” in recruiting and training suicide terrorists including the Nigerian would-be “ underwear bomber ” Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab . The other two were killed in strikes targeting other AQAP leaders .\nSeveral Republicans closely questioned Mr. Brennan about leaks to the news media regarding Obama administration national security successes . Mr. Brennan denied that he was the source of any of them .\n“ I never provided classified information to reporters , ” Mr. Brennan said . He added that his contacts with the news media were arranged by the White House press office and aimed at explaining administration policy .\nSen. Ron Wyden , Oregon Democrat , told the hearing that Congress , and eventually the American public , needed to see the documents outlining the legal basis for the targeted-killing program .\n“ We ’ ve got to see any and all opinions before the vote ” on the nomination , Mr. Wyden said .\nHe also called for the legal opinions to be made public so that Americans could judge for themselves the exact extent of the authority President Obama asserts to kill U.S. citizens without charge or trial if they are senior al Qaeda leaders who can not be captured .\n“ What it really goes to is the issue of checks and balances , ” he said .\nMr. King asked Mr. Brennan to allow the judicial branch to oversee targeted killings of U.S. citizens , as it authorized intelligence surveillance against Americans , through the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act ( FISA ) court — a secret tribunal that grants warrants for the electronic and physical surveillance of Americans suspected of espionage or terrorism .\n“ I would like to suggest to you that you consider a FISA court-type process , where an American citizen is going to be targeted for a lethal strike , ” Mr. King told Mr. Brennan .\n“ At least that would be some check , ” Mr. King said . “ I have great confidence in you . I have great confidence in President Obama . But all the lessons of history are , it shouldn ’ t matter who ’ s in charge , because we should have procedures and processes in place that will protect us . ”\nSome Republicans asked Mr. Brennan whether the administration ’ s expanded use of the lethal strikes by remotely piloted drone aircraft grew from its decision to abjure the capture , detention and harsh interrogation techniques employed by the Bush administration .\n“ Is your testimony today that the huge increase in the number of lethal strikes has no connection to the change in the Obama administration ’ s detention policy ? ” said Sen. Susan M. Collins , Maine Republican . “ Because obviously , if we ’ re capturing a terrorist , we have the opportunity to interrogate that individual and perhaps learn of ongoing plots . But if the strike is done , that opportunity is lost . ”\n“ There ’ s never been occasion that I ’ m aware of where we had the opportunity to capture a terrorist and we didn ’ t and we decided to take a lethal strike , ” replied Mr. Brennan . “ So certainly there is no correlation there . ”\nHe added that the expanding use of drones was in part a result of “ the maturation of capabilities and insights into [ al Qaeda ] plots as a result of the investment that was made in the previous administration . ”\nOther Republicans focused on questioning Mr. Brennan about administration leaks to the media .\n“ I engaged in discussions with reporters about classified issues that they might have had access to because of unfortunate leaks of classified information , and I frequently work with reporters , if not editors of newspapers , to keep out of the public domain some of this country ’ s most important secrets , ” Mr. Brennan said .\n“ Whenever I deal with reporters , I do so at the request of the White House press office and they set the ground rules , ” he said .\nHe said that he voluntary cooperated with the Department of Justice investigation into the leak of information about a double agent inside al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula ( AQAP ) who helped U.S. and allied agencies foil an underwear bomb plot .\nMr. Brennan said he had “ been interviewed on it ” and his office turned over “ all relevant materials , ” including any notes of the conference call .\nHe denied that a statement he made in a conference call with former officials last year about the plot had compromised intelligence sources and methods .\nThe call had been arranged because the former officials were all going on news programs to discuss the foiling of the plot , which targeted U.S. aviation .\nMr. Brennan said , in a statement later repeated publicly by several of the former officials , that the United States had “ inside control ” of the plot and that the underwear bomb was never a threat to American aviation .\nLater that day , news agencies broke the story that an a U.S. allied agency had an agent inside the AQAP cell planning the bombing .\nMr. Brennan said he needed to explain that the U.S. had “ inside control , ” because during the time of the plot — around the first anniversary of the Navy SEAL raid on Osama bin Laden ’ s compound in Pakistan — he and other officials had reassured that there was no specific actionable intelligence about threats or plots .\n“ We had said publicly that there was no active plot at the time of the bin Laden anniversary , ” he said .\nMr. Brennan is a 25-year career intelligence officer who served in the Bush administration as the first head of the National Counterterrorism Center . In 2008 , he was a close adviser to Mr. Obama in the Senate .


In his first major policy speech Wednesday , Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel signaled he will be taking a hard look at the way the Pentagon spends its money and at whether the US military needs quite so many officers .\nHe also said that while the US military “ remains an essential tool of American power , ” it is also “ one that must be used judiciously , with a keen appreciation of its limits . ”\nSpeaking at the National Defense University in Washington , Secretary Hagel invoked the memory of President Dwight Eisenhower , who came up as a young officer in the wake of the Great Depression . He noted that the World War II general spoke at the same university 50 years ago .\n“ The wise and prudent administration of the vast resources required by defense calls for extraordinary skill in meshing the military , political , economic , and social machinery of our modern life , ” Hagel said , quoting Eisenhower . “ So the greatest effective use is made of resources with a minimum of waste and misapplication . ”\nNow that the “ gusher ” of war-time military spending is turned off , Hagel said , top Pentagon officials will be taking a hard look at some key spending areas .\nThis speech signaled precisely what those areas will be : acquisitions , personnel costs , and overhead .\n“ Left unchecked , spiraling costs to sustain existing structures and institutions , provide benefits to personnel , and develop replacements for aging weapons platforms will eventually crowd out spending on procurement , operations , and readiness – the budget categories that enable the military to be and stay prepared , ” Hagel warned .\nThis will mean taking a hard look at Pentagon employees , including “ how many people we have – military and civilian – how many we need , what these people do , and how we compensate them for their work , service , and loyalty with pay , benefits and health care . ”\nThis will in turn prompt “ tough questions , ” Hagel concedes , including `` what is the right mix of civilians and military , and whether the force has the right balance of officers and enlisted . ”\nMuch of the DOD ’ s organizational chart dates back “ to the early days of the Cold War , ” Hagel said , noting that the last major defense reorganization was drafted during the height of the Reagan defense buildup .\nWhile the military “ is not , and never should be , run like a corporation , ” Hagel noted , there is a danger that the DOD could go from “ an agency protecting the nation to an agency administering benefit programs , capable of buying only limited quantities of irrelevant and overpriced equipment . ”\nGet the Monitor Stories you care about delivered to your inbox . By signing up , you agree to our Privacy Policy\nThat ’ s because too often the weapons systems that Pentagon officials buy “ are vastly more expensive and technologically risky than what was promised or budgeted for. ” And the hard truth is that the most pressing problems the world faces “ do not necessarily lend themselves to being resolved by conventional military strength , ” he said .\n“ Indeed the most destructive and horrific attack ever on the United States came not from fleets of ships , bombers , and armored divisions , but from 19 fanatical men wielding box cutters and one-way plane tickets . ''


Obama said he 's not like Cheney during a closed-door Senate Democratic conference . | AP Photos Obama on drones : I 'm not Cheney\nPresident Barack Obama ’ s defense to Democratic senators complaining about how little his administration has told Congress about the legal justifications for his drone policy : Dick Cheney was worse .\nThat ’ s part of what two senators in the room recounted of Obama ’ s response when , near the outset of his closed-door session with the Senate Democratic conference on Tuesday , Sen. Jay Rockefeller ( D-W.Va. ) confronted the president over the administration ’ s refusal for two years to show congressional intelligence committees Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel memos justifying the use of lethal force against American terror suspects abroad .\nObama recently allowed members of those panels to see the memos , but only after senators in both parties threatened to hold up the confirmation of John Brennan as Central Intelligence Agency director . Brennan was confirmed last week , but lawmakers not on one of the intelligence panels are still being denied access to the memos and several are steamed over being frozen out .\nIn response to Rockefeller ’ s critique , Obama said he ’ s not involved in drafting such memos , the senators told ███ . He also tried to assure his former colleagues that his administration is more open to oversight than that of President George W. Bush , whom many Democratic senators attacked for secrecy and for expanding executive power in the national security realm .\n“ This is not Dick Cheney we ’ re talking about here , ” he said , according to Democratic senators who asked not to be named discussing the private meeting .\nTwo Obama administration officials , who asked not to be named , confirmed Rockefeller raised the drone oversight issue with the president at the session . The White House had no comment on Obama ’ s alleged reference to the former vice president .\nWhile Obama defended his handling of the issue , he told his former Senate colleagues he understood their concerns about being left out of the loop on such sensitive decisions , senators said . The president noted that he would have “ probably objected ” over the White House ’ s handling of this issue if he were still a senator , they said . But , according to the sources , he noted his viewpoint changed now that he occupies the Oval Office — not a room in a Senate office building .