Sanders rips Biden for praising drug companies at fundraiser

Sen. Bernie SandersBernie SandersGun control: Campaigning vs. legislating Booker defends middle-ground health care approach: ‘We’re going to fight to get there’ Sunday shows preview: Democratic candidates make the rounds after debate MORE (I-Vt.) criticized fellow Democratic presidential candidate Joe BidenJoe BidenBiden bemoans white supremacy in remarks at civil rights movement site Gun control: Campaigning vs. legislating Sunday shows – Guns dominate after Democratic debate MORE for praising drug companies at a fundraiser. 

Sanders asserted that he disagreed with Biden, saying the companies are “greedy, corrupt and engaged in price fixing,” in a statement obtained by The Hill.

Click Here: kenzo online españa

“At a time when their behavior is literally killing people every day, America needs a president who isn’t going to appease and compliment drug companies — we need a president who will take on the pharmaceutical industry – whether they like it or not. When we defeat Donald TrumpDonald John TrumpHarris bashes Kavanaugh’s ‘sham’ nomination process, calls for his impeachment after sexual misconduct allegation Celebrating ‘Hispanic Heritage Month’ in the Age of Trump Let’s not play Charlie Brown to Iran’s Lucy MORE, that’s exactly what we are going to do,” the statement said.

The former vice president commended pharmaceutical drug companies in a fundraiser on Saturday, Bloomberg reported. 

“By the way, great drug companies out there — except a couple of opioid outfits,” Biden said at the event. 

Biden and Sanders went head-to-head, along with Sen. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth Ann WarrenGun control: Campaigning vs. legislating Booker defends middle-ground health care approach: ‘We’re going to fight to get there’ Democrats spar over electoral appeal of ‘Medicare for All’ MORE (D-Mass.), during the Democratic debate Thursday when discussing their plans for health care. 

The former vice president has criticized Sanders’ “Medicare for All” plan for costing too much, while Sanders defended the plan saying it aligned with other health systems in other countries. Biden instead wants to reform the Affordable Care Act.

Sanders has advocated to decrease the power of drug companies with an aim at bringing down costs for patients.

On The Money: Democratic candidates lay into Trump on trade | China exempts US soybeans, pork from tariff hikes | Congress set to ignore Trump's wall request in stopgap measure

Happy Friday and welcome back to On The Money. I’m Sylvan Lane, and here’s your nightly guide to everything affecting your bills, bank account and bottom line.

See something I missed? Let me know at slane@thehill.com or tweet me @SylvanLane. And if you like your newsletter, you can subscribe to it here: http://bit.ly/1NxxW2N.

Write us with tips, suggestions and news: slane@thehill.comnjagoda@thehill.com and nelis@thehill.com. Follow us on Twitter: @SylvanLane, @NJagoda and @NivElis.

 

THE BIG DEAL—Democratic candidates lay into Trump on trade: 2020 Democratic hopefuls laid into President TrumpDonald John TrumpHarris bashes Kavanaugh’s ‘sham’ nomination process, calls for his impeachment after sexual misconduct allegation Celebrating ‘Hispanic Heritage Month’ in the Age of Trump Let’s not play Charlie Brown to Iran’s Lucy MORE’s trade policy at Thursday night’s debate, characterizing it as an erratic approach that has hurt America’s economy.

  • “We’ve got a guy in the White House who is erratic on trade policy. He conducts trade policy by tweet, frankly, borne out of his fragile ego,” Sen. Kamala HarrisKamala Devi HarrisHarris bashes Kavanaugh’s ‘sham’ nomination process, calls for his impeachment after sexual misconduct allegation Gun control: Campaigning vs. legislating Booker defends middle-ground health care approach: ‘We’re going to fight to get there’ MORE (D-Calif.) said. “He reminds me of that guy in ‘The Wizard of Oz’ — when you pull back the curtain, it’s a really small dude,” she said, drawing laughter from the audience.
  • “He has put us in the middle of his trade war, and he is treating our farmers and our workers like poker chips in one of his bankrupt casinos,” said Sen. Amy KlobucharAmy Jean KlobucharSunday shows – Guns dominate after Democratic debate Klobuchar: Investigation into Kavanaugh ‘a sham’ Sunday shows preview: Democratic candidates make the rounds after debate MORE (D-Minn.), blasting Trump for frequently changing his position in the negotiations.
  • South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete ButtigiegPeter (Pete) Paul ButtigiegO’Rourke responds to Buttigieg’s gun criticism: ‘That calculation and fear is what got us here in the first place’ Buttigieg: Biden gave ‘bad’ debate answer on slavery’s legacy O’Rourke’s debate moment reignites gun debate on Sunday shows MORE accused Trump of lacking a strategy, noting how long the trade war has dragged on and intensified instead of being easily won, as Trump had promised.

But while the candidates argued that they would have approached China more strategically and shied away from tariffs, none said they would repeal them immediately, and many argued for the kind of negotiated settlement Trump is seeking.

  • “I would not repeal the tariffs on Day 1,” said entrepreneur Andrew YangAndrew YangSunday shows – Guns dominate after Democratic debate Yang defends ,000 giveaway contest’s legality 2020 Democrats raise alarm about China’s intellectual property theft MORE. “I would let the Chinese know that we need to hammer out a deal, because right now the tariffs are pummeling producers and farmers in Iowa who have obviously nothing to do with the imbalances that we have with China.”
  • Sen. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth Ann WarrenGun control: Campaigning vs. legislating Booker defends middle-ground health care approach: ‘We’re going to fight to get there’ Democrats spar over electoral appeal of ‘Medicare for All’ MORE (D-Mass.) argued that the approach to striking trade deals needed to be reworked altogether, allowing unions, environmentalists, farmers and human rights activists to be part of trade negotiations.

 

LEADING THE DAY

China exempts US soybeans, pork from tariff hikes: Chinese officials on Friday said that some U.S. farm goods including soybeans and pork will be exempted from a pending round of tariff increases, according to the Associated Press

The announcement is the latest goodwill offering between the U.S. and China as both nations attempt to revive trade negotiations with another round of talks in October. The U.S. exports more soybeans and pork to China than nearly any other product, and Beijing has hindered American sales of those goods in China with retaliatory tariffs.

Trump said Wednesday he would delay a pending 5-percentage point increase to 25-percent tariffs on $250 billion in Chinese goods from Oct. 1 to Oct. 15 after Beijing announced it would exempt 16 U.S. products from its own planned tariff increase.

Congress set to ignore Trump’s wall request in stopgap measure: Lawmakers are preparing to ignore President Trump’s request to loosen restrictions on border wall funding as part of a short-term spending deal.

The ask, included in the Trump administration’s 21-page wish list for a continuing resolution (CR), comes amid renewed tensions over the border ahead of a Sept. 30 deadline to avoid another government shutdown. The administration also announced recently it was moving forward with shifting $3.6 billion from military projects to wall construction.

Congressional Republicans have stressed that they support the CR funding request, which would let the administration use money to build border barriers outside the Rio Grande Valley Sector. But now they’re sending early warning signals that they don’t expect the CR to include language granting the White House request. The Hill’s Jordain Carney explains here.

 

ON TAP NEXT WEEK

Monday:

  • The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) will hold a meeting to discuss three final rules, including revisions to the Volcker Rule,” 9 a.m.
  • The U.S. Chamber of Commerce hosts an event entitled “Financial Transaction Taxes: A Tax on Investors, Taxpayers, and Consumers,” 2 p.m. 

Tuesday:

  • The Federal Reserve’s Federal Open Markets Committee (FOMC) begins its September meeting in Washington, D.C.
  • The Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government will hold a markup of its fiscal 2020 spending bill, 2:15 p.m.
  • A Senate Judiciary subcommittee will hold a hearing on the enforcement of federal antitrust laws, 2:30 p.m. 

Wednesday:

  • The House Financial Services Committee holds a markup to consider pending legislation, 10 a.m.
  • The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) holds a meeting to discuss revisions to the Volcker Rule, 10 a.m.
  • The FOMC announces its September interest rate decision at 2 p.m., followed by a press conference with Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell at 2:30 p.m. 

Thursday:

  • The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) hosts a symposium on behavioral economics, 9 a.m.
  • The Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee holds a confirmation hearing to consider Eugene Scalia’s nomination to be Secretary of Labor, 9 a.m.
  • The House Budget Committee holds a hearing entitled “Solutions to Rising Economic Inequality,” 10 a.m.
  • A House Ways and Means subcommittee holds a hearing entitled “How the Tax Code Subsidizes Hate,” 10 a.m.
  • The Senate Appropriations Committee holds a markup of the fiscal 2020 spending bills for Financial Services-General Government, Agriculture, and Transportation-Housing and Urban Development (HUD), 10:30 a.m.

 

GOOD TO KNOW

  • President Trump said Thursday that he planned to push for a “substantial” middle class tax cut in the next year.
  • Officials with the London Stock Exchange (LSE) on Friday reportedly rejected a $36.6 billion takeover bid from the owners of Hong Kong’s stock exchange.
  • House lawmakers are escalating their antitrust investigation of Silicon Valley, issuing expansive requests for internal documents to four of the nation’s largest technology companies.
  • The Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) announced sanctions on Friday against three North Korean cyber groups for targeting critical infrastructure.
  • A federal appeals court in New York on Friday ruled that a lawsuit accusing President Trump of violating the Emoluments Clause can proceed after a lower court had thrown out the case.

Click Here: mochila fjallraven

Harris, O'Rourke lament lack of abortion questions at Houston debate

Within minutes of stepping off the primary debate stage in Houston, 2020 Democrats were criticizing the lack of questions about abortion or reproductive rights.

“Three hours, not one question on abortion—with women’s rights under attack across our country,” tweeted former Texas Rep. Beto O’Rourke.

Sen. Kamala HarrisKamala Devi HarrisThe Hill’s 12:30 Report: House panel approves impeachment powers Sanders spokeswoman: A lot of candidates will have to answer for their past Burden in tonight’s debate is on Democratic realists MORE (D-Calif.) issued a similar rebuke:

Click Here: gws giants guernsey 2019

Ten Democratic White House hopefuls took the stage Thursday night, with questions mostly revolving around subjects including health care coverage, gun violence, trade and foreign policy.

ADVERTISEMENT

Aside from abortion and reproductive rights, LGBTQ rights was also among the topics that ABC News and Univision moderators failed to bring up.

Reproductive rights were also missing from the Democrats’ second round of debates in July.

Cruz to oppose Trump appeals court pick

Sen. Ted CruzRafael (Ted) Edward CruzCruz: Texas will be ‘hotly contested’ in 2020 Facebook removes fact check from anti-abortion video after criticism Cruz warns corporate CEOs to stay out of ‘divisive’ gun control debate MORE (R-Texas) is opposing President TrumpDonald John TrumpMexico says it disagrees with ‘astonishing’ Supreme Court decision allowing Trump asylum rule The Afghan negotiations — echoes from the past Democrats grill Army, Air Force nominees on military funding for border wall MORE‘s pick for the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, raising new questions about the nominee’s prospects. 

 

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey GrahamLindsey Olin GrahamSenators pressure Trump to help end humanitarian crisis in Kashmir Tim Ryan debuts ‘album’ on Spotify to pitch 2020 platform Senators say Trump open to expanding background checks MORE (R-S.C.) “is aware” of Cruz’s decision to oppose Judge Halil Suleyman Ozerden’s nomination, a spokesperson for Graham confirmed.

 

Cruz has long been viewed as a likely no vote by court watchers after he grilled Ozerden during a July hearing. He told The Hill at the time that he had “serious concerns … and those concerns were not satisfied at the hearing.”

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Cruz said on Thursday that he didn’t believe Ozerden, who is a district judge in Mississippi, had a “strong, demonstrated record as a constitutionalist.” 

 

“I have significant concerns that Judge Ozerden’s judicial record does not indicate that he meets that standard. For that reason, I do not believe he should be on the court of appeals, and I will oppose his nomination,” Cruz said in a statement for this story,” Cruz said in a statement to Politico, which first reported Cruz’s opposition. 

 

Ozerden has faced skepticism by GOP senators, and outright criticism from some outside groups, who question his conservative credentials and his dismissal of a case involving ObamaCare’s birth control mandate. 

 

But Cruz is the first senator to say he will oppose his nomination. Other Republican members of the Judiciary Committee, including Sens. Josh HawleyJoshua (Josh) David HawleyFacebook removes fact check from anti-abortion video after criticism The Trump downturn: Trouble ahead for the US economy The Hill’s Morning Report – Can Trump save GOP in North Carolina special election? MORE (Mo.) and John KennedyJohn Neely KennedyMORE (La.), have yet to say how they will vote. 

 

Kelly Shackelford, the president of the First Liberty Institute, said the group is “grateful” for Cruz’s opposition. 

 

“Elevating Judge Ozerden to a lifetime appointment on an influential federal appeals court would be a mistake. … There are many highly qualified candidates for the Fifth Circuit. Judge Ozerden is not one of them,” Shackelford said.

 

Graham, who has said he supports Ozerden, hasn’t yet scheduled a vote on the nomination. A spokesperson for Graham said on Thursday that they didn’t have any announcements about a potential vote.

 

A spokesperson for the White House didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. 

 

Republicans have put a premium on confirming Trump’s judicial nominees, which they view as a unifier for the party. They’ve also set a record for their pace of confirming influential appeals. 

 

But Cruz isn’t the first GOP senator to come out against one of Trump’s picks. 

Sen. Tim ScottTimothy (Tim) Eugene ScottThe Hill’s Morning Report — The wall problem confronting Dems and the latest on Dorian It’s time to empower military families with education freedom GOP Sen. Tim Scott says if he runs in 2022 it will be his last race MORE (R-S.C.) drew fire from conservatives last year for helping spike two nominations — Ryan Bounds to be a circuit judge and Thomas Farr to be a district judge — because of their writings related to race.

And Michigan attorney Michael Bogren withdrew his district court nomination earlier this year after pushback from conservatives, including Hawley. 

Click Here: gws giants guernsey 2019

US attorney recommends moving forward with charges against McCabe after DOJ rejects his appeal

A U.S. attorney has recommended moving forward with charges against former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabeAndrew George McCabeIn three years of Trump’s presidency, who has branded whom? Trump knocks news of CNN hiring ex-FBI official McCabe Conservatives lash out at CNN for hiring Andrew McCabe MORE, according to a source close to his legal team.

Click Here: gold coast suns 2019 guernsey

The move comes after the Department of Justice (DOJ) rejected McCabe’s appeal of a decision made by Jessie Liu, the U.S. attorney for Washington D.C. He had appealed in the hopes of avoiding criminal charges after an internal DOJ watchdog concluded that he “lacked candor” with federal investigators. 

ADVERTISEMENT

“The Department rejected your appeal of the United States Attorney’s Office’s decision in this matter. Any further inquiries should be directed to the United States Attorney’s Office,” reads an email sent from the DOJ to the legal team, according to the source.

Fox News first reported the charges recommendation.

McCabe was fired in March by then-Attorney General Jeff SessionsJefferson (Jeff) Beauregard SessionsSen. Doug Jones launches reelection bid in Alabama Advocates doubt Trump DEA will ease rules on marijuana research Nadler tees up post-recess showdown with Trump MORE, after DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz provided a recommendation to an internal FBI office that McCabe was not forthcoming during interviews with federal investigators and that he “lacked candor — including under oath — on multiple occasions.”

In particular, Sessions said at the time that the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility and Office of Inspector General had found McCabe made an unauthorized disclosure to the news media in 2016 by allowing FBI officials to speak with reporters about an investigation into the Clinton Foundation.

McCabe’s ouster last year came just days before the No. 2 official was scheduled to retire, stripping him of the pension he expected to receive after more than 20 years at the bureau.

Last month, McCabe sought to challenge the basis of his firing, alleging in a lawsuit against the FBI and DOJ that his termination from the bureau was a “politically motivated” move that stemmed from President TrumpDonald John TrumpMexico says it disagrees with ‘astonishing’ Supreme Court decision allowing Trump asylum rule The Afghan negotiations — echoes from the past Democrats grill Army, Air Force nominees on military funding for border wall MORE‘s attacks against him and other DOJ officials.

In the court documents, McCabe alleges Trump was behind his firing, claiming that he forced the hands of other officials at the DOJ including Sessions, Horowitz and Deputy Attorney General Rod RosensteinRod RosensteinTrump allies call on Cummings to schedule hearing over Comey report Five takeaways from Justice IG report on Comey James Comey wants an apology? This is myth becoming madness MORE to remove him. And as a result, McCabe says this caused harm to his “reputation, professional standing, and dramatically reduced his retirement benefits” after “two decades of unblemished and non-partisan public service.”

House Republicans and other White House allies have long alleged misconduct among the top brass of the FBI and urged disciplinary action against officials such as McCabe, former counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok and former FBI Director James ComeyJames Brien ComeyPoliticon announces lineup including Comey, Hannity, Priebus Graham calls on Barr to declassify files on DOJ watchdog’s Russia probe Trump ramps up Twitter offensive as Dorian approaches Florida MORE.

And GOP attacks against him were refueled last month after CNN announced that they had hired him as a commentator.

Republicans have recently argued that McCabe should be punished for lying to investigators, noting that other Trump officials such as George PapadopoulosGeorge Demetrios Papadopoulos10 declassified Russia collusion revelations that could rock Washington this fall Flynn, Papadopoulos to speak at event preparing ‘social media warriors’ for ‘digital civil war’ Judge dismisses DNC lawsuit against Trump campaign, Russia over election interference MORE and Michael Flynn were charged for lying to investigators on special counsel Robert MuellerRobert (Bob) Swan MuellerFox’s Cavuto roasts Trump over criticism of network Mueller report fades from political conversation Trump calls for probe of Obama book deal MORE’s team.

“I don’t know how you can’t indict him when he is engaged in the same conduct that other people have recently been charged for at the Department of Justice, particularly when your own watchdog says that those lies were done intentionally and knowingly and done repeatedly,” Rep. John RatcliffeJohn Lee RatcliffeHillicon Valley: Google to pay 0M to settle child privacy charges against YouTube | Tech giants huddle with intel officials on election security | Top IT official names China main cyber threat Lawmakers offer bill to shore up federal cybersecurity Trump’s roller coaster August: a timeline MORE (R-Texas), a House Judiciary Committee member, said during a Sunday interview on Fox News’s “Sunday Morning Futures.”

“I think the Department of Justice is going to have to indict Andy McCabe simply because to do otherwise would be to admit that there are separate standards for people doing the same thing for the same conduct,” he said.

Hotel industry mounts attack on Airbnb with House bill

Airbnb and other short-term rental companies are worried that new legislation in Congress would require them to police their own rental platform and crack down on users.

The fight between the hotel lobby and rental platforms like Airbnb is entering a new phase as lawmakers on Capitol Hill weigh legislation that threatens companies that advertise short-term rentals.

The powerful American Hotel and Lodging Association (AHLA) and tech companies have been facing off in cities and states across the country in recent years, but that battle is now heating up in Washington as lawmakers and regulators weigh a host of measures to address home-sharing services.

ADVERTISEMENT

In the House, a recently introduced bill would strip online rental websites like Airbnb, HomeAway and Flipkey of federal protections that for years have given internet platforms legal immunity over content posted by third parties.

The Protecting Local Authority and Neighborhoods Act, introduced by Rep. Ed CaseEdward (Ed) CaseMORE (D-Hawaii) on Friday, would make internet platforms liable when they host advertising for short-term rentals that violate state and city laws.

The measure is a top priority for the AHLA, which has spent more than $1.6 million on lobbying this year and has four firms on retainer, including Fierce Government Relations and Peck Madigan Jones.

Association members also pressed lawmakers to back the legislation during the group’s annual fly-in on Wednesday.

“For far too long, these Big Tech short-term rental platforms have been hiding behind this antiquated law in order to bully and threaten legal action against local elected officials who are simply trying to protect their residents from illegal rentals that are destroying neighborhoods and access to affordable housing,” AHLA President and CEO Chip Rogers said in a statement.

The group has a strong ally in Case, who was senior vice president and chief legal officer at Outrigger Hotels Hawaii from 2013 to 2018 and previously served on the AHLA’s board.

In a statement, Case criticized the short-term rental industry, saying it is responsible for “the loss of affordable housing as residential units are converted to transient accommodations for tourists.”

“Many of the owners and operators of these units are failing to comply with basic consumer safety, public accommodations and tax requirements that the legal lodging industry has had to follow in order to conduct its business,” he added.

ADVERTISEMENT

Case said that he resigned from the AHLA board in 2017 and has had “no further personal or professional engagements with the visitor industry (other than for representing a district where tourism is the top economic generator and private employer).”

His bill already has bipartisan support. Republican Reps. Pete KingPeter (Pete) Thomas KingObama’s tan suit controversy hits 5-year anniversary First House Republican backs bill banning assault weapons The 9 House Republicans who support background checks MORE (N.Y.) and Ralph NormanRalph Warren NormanGOP lawmakers call for provisions barring DOD funds for border wall to be dropped Conservatives call on Pelosi to cancel August recess Conservatives ask Barr to lay out Trump’s rationale for census question MORE (S.C.) are co-sponsors, as is Democratic Rep. Raja KrishnamoorthiSubramanian (Raja) Raja KrishnamoorthiOvernight Health Care — Presented by PCMA — FDA says Juul illegally marketed e-cigarettes | AMA warns against vaping after deaths | Two Planned Parenthood clinics to close in Ohio FDA says Juul illegally marketed e-cigarettes Overnight Health Care: Push on ‘surprise’ medical bills hits new roadblocks | Dem asks FDA to investigate Juul’s advertising claims | CDC chief expects drop in opioid deaths this year MORE (Ill.).

The measure now awaits action from the House Energy and Commerce Committee, where Chairman Frank Pallone Jr.Frank Joseph PallonePush on ‘surprise’ medical bills hits new roadblocks Overnight Health Care: Insurance lobby chief calls Biden, Sanders health plans ‘similarly bad’ | Trump officials appeal drug price disclosure ruling | Study finds 1 in 7 people ration diabetes medicine due to cost House Democratic chairman launches probe of e-cigarette makers MORE (D-N.J.) and ranking member Greg WaldenGregory (Greg) Paul WaldenWave of GOP retirements threatens 2020 comeback Push on ‘surprise’ medical bills hits new roadblocks Innovation for the climate through innovative policy MORE (R-Ore.) sent a joint letter last month to U.S. Trade Representative Robert LighthizerRobert (Bob) Emmet LighthizerOn The Money: Economy adds 164K jobs in July | Trump signs two-year budget deal, but border showdown looms | US, EU strike deal on beef exports Chinese, US negotiators fine-tuning details of trade agreement: report The Trump economy keeps roaring ahead MORE urging him to avoid including language in trade agreements that’s similar to the federal third-party protections for internet platforms known as Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA).

“Sec 230 is meant to enable platforms to take down harmful content. It should not be a shield for inaction,” Pallone tweeted in May in response to news of Facebook addressing political disinformation.

The hotel-rental fight over Section 230 comes as the tech industry is facing increased scrutiny in Washington on a number of fronts; lawmakers in both parties have called for revisiting web companies’ internet protections.

President TrumpDonald John TrumpOnly Congress can end the China trade war quagmire Trump blasts Bolton: ‘He made some very big mistakes’ Trump seeks ban on flavored e-cigarettes MORE signed a bill last year that limits the immunity of Section 230 on platforms that knowingly host content that promotes or assists human trafficking and prostitution. The White House is also reportedly working on an executive order to address anti-conservative bias on the internet that could affect Section 230. 

The short-term rental lobby is gearing up for a fight against the bill, pushing back on multiple aspects of its provisions. One of their arguments is that the battle should be at the local level.

The Travel Technology Association, the trade group that represents Expedia, Airbnb, VRBO, Booking.com, Priceline and Trip Advisor, argues that Section 230 is the wrong way to address the issue.

“Amending the CDA for every special interest, such as the hotel lobby, is a flawed approach,” Steve Shur, president of the association, told The Hill. “In the context of the broader conversation around Section 230 and legitimate societal challenges, to associate vacation rentals in the same conversation with extremism, illegal gun sales and the opioid crisis is outrageous in its assertion and downright ludicrous to even suggest.”

The group said its first step is to educate lawmakers about the legislation.

“The motivations behind this bill are clear — to serve the special interests of the hotel lobby — and Congress shouldn’t take the bait,” Shur said.

The bill is the latest battle in a long-running fight between the hotel industry and the short-term rental platforms, with hoteliers lobbying for tougher restrictions on businesses like Airbnb in cities and states across the country.

In Washington, the D.C. Council gave preliminary approval to a bill in October that would regulate Airbnb and other short-term rental companies but delayed passage because the measure, introduced by Democratic Councilman Kenyan McDuffie, was predicted to cost the city $104 million over four years. It would impose strict limits on property owners from short-term rentals on second homes, spare bedrooms or basements.

Companies that deal in short-term rentals argue they are working with local governments to address concerns.

“Expedia Group believes in sensible regulation for all segments of the travel ecosystem—including short-term rentals. We are working closely with cities and states on fair and effective policies that address community concerns, encourage compliance, and support local vacation rental homeowners and managers,” Philip Minardi, Expedia Group’s director of policy communications, said in a statement.

Expedia owns Hotels.com, Hotwire, Trivago, Orbitz and Travelocity, among other brands, and has spent $560,000 this year on lobbying.

Minardi noted that cities like Seattle and Louisville are implementing policies that work well for both short-term rental companies and the hotel industry.

“Unfortunately, the policy introduced today would jeopardize the important collaboration that’s taking place at the state and local level,” he said of the Case bill.

In the weeks ahead, Minardi said, Expedia will reach out to policymakers so they “understand the proactive work that is being done to craft fair and effective policies across the nation and the impact that this proposal would have on those efforts.”

 Shur, of the Travel Technology Association, called the Case bill a “hotel-backed proposal by a former hotel lobbyist turned member of Congress” and a “blatant attempt to do the hotel industry’s bidding … with the hopes of stifling competition from the innovative companies that have helped make short-term rentals and home-sharing popular.”

He added that the CDA “maintains a reasonable standard for e-commerce.” 

Tech companies have long praised Section 230 protections as clearing the way for the growth of the internet.

Steve DelBianco, president of e-commerce trade group NetChoice, which promotes free speech on the internet, called Section 230 “the greatest internet law that no one’s ever heard of.”

He said issues with short-term rentals should be addressed at the local level.

“Congress should not get involved with how the city of Austin, Texas, enforces its lodging and local zoning laws against property owners,” DelBianco said. “But Congress is being pulled into this competitive conflict because Section 230 is a federal law and bars local governments from imposing liability on a platform for commerce and communication that came from users.”

Carl Szabo, NetChoice’s general counsel, argued that Case’s bill would encourage platforms to be less responsive to take down content of bad actors, which is a component of Section 230 and could lead to platforms not doing any moderation at all, similar to how 8chan operates.

“This bill would create disincentives for short term rental platforms to engage in active, aggressive, monitoring of homeowners,” he said.

Like others in the short-term rental lobby, DelBianco said NetChoice plans to educate lawmakers “on the general hazards of punching holes in Section 230.”

Click Here: essendon bombers guernsey 2019

Defense Department says "forever chemical" cleanup costs will dwarf earlier estimates

Military leaders said Thursday that “forever chemical” contamination costs are likely to surpass their original $2 billion estimate as Congress works to push the Department of Defense (DOD) to clean up contaminated water across the country.

The class of chemicals abbreviated as PFAS is used in a variety of products ranging from nonstick cookware to raincoats. It’s also used in the firefighting foam that has been heavily relied on by the military. As PFAS leaches into the water supply it’s dubbed a “forever chemical” due to its persistent presence in the environment and the human body. 

ADVERTISEMENT

The House and Senate are preparing for a conference committee on the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) this month, and both versions of the bill push for greater military response to clean up PFAS that has spread from military instillations to nearby communities.

Sitting down with reporters for the first time since DOD created a PFAS task force, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Sustainment Bob McMahon said the department has taken measures to ensure that service members are not drinking water laced with the chemical that has been tied with cancer and other health issues.

DOD has identified at least 425 military sites where water has been contaminated by PFAS, and their first efforts have been to offer bottled water at the 24 sites where contamination was beyond the 70 parts-per-trillion level recommended by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

“We are committed to ensuring that we have a safe place for our people and their families to live, work, play and pray,” McMahon said of the task force, which Defense Secretary Mark EsperMark EsperOvernight Defense: Trump marks 9/11 anniversary with Taliban warning | President rips into Bolton as ‘Mr. Tough Guy’ | More turmoil trips up government funding George W. Bush lays wreath at 9/11 Pentagon Memorial Trump commemorates 9/11 with warning to Taliban MORE created in his first day on the job.

But there are still 401 other military installations where lower levels of PFAS remain in the water.

Also of concern to lawmakers is how DOD will take responsibility for nearby communities whose water supply has been tainted at least in part by the military’s use of products containing PFAS.

Sen. Tom UdallThomas (Tom) Stewart UdallSenators from both parties offer resolution to nix Trump emergency declaration to build wall Federal watchdog: Trump admin broke law by pulling from park entrance fees during shutdown Top Trump Interior official joins oil company in Alaska after resignation MORE (D-N.M.) has pushed to add a provision to the NDAA that would require the military to help farmers clean up their water supply after cows at a New Mexico dairy farm had to be slaughtered once their milk became tainted with PFAS. 

Another provision pushes the DOD to enter into cooperative agreements with states, an effort by lawmakers to force the military to tackle water issues without outside intervention from the EPA.

McMahon said when contamination clearly extends from a base, it becomes a military responsibility. 

But some communities have been frustrated by efforts to get DOD to take financial responsibility for cleaning the water.

“In some cases, there are multiple sources out there feeding a well system for a community. So the challenges become delineating responsibility in those installations,” McMahon said.

DOD officials weren’t able to fully explain how they make that assessment.

Click Here: COLLINGWOOD MAGPIES 2019

“I would admit these are very complicated questions, but we need to make sure that we fully understand how the water is flowing and how the chemicals are moving in the water so that we make the right decision up front,” said Maureen Sullivan, deputy assistant secretary of defense for environment.

Increased responsibilities would mean an increased price tag for DOD. Sullivan said DOD will have to factor in new technology and the cleanup required to get a sense of how much beyond the $2 billion originally projected for cleanup will cost DOD.

“Do I think it’s going to be bigger than that? The answer is yes,” she said.

The two also weighed in on various portions of the NDAA that lawmakers will continue to debate this month. 

McMahon said it may be tough for DOD to find a PFAS-free firefighting foam by the 2025 deadline floated in the bills.

“Don’t give me a date I can’t live with if the science doesn’t support it,” McMahon said, adding he’s eager to find a replacement, but risks damage from fire if forced to use “something that is less successful, less viable as a product.”

They also said the DOD would designate the two main forms of PFAS as a hazardous substance under the Superfund law, so long as that determination was made by the EPA.

“This is a national issue. And we’ve got to deal with it in a national way,” McMahon said. “That’s not to undermine the responsibilities that we have in the Department of Defense. But it’s simply to say we have to take a holistic look at what it is that we’re doing.” 

Facebook penalizes Netanyahu page for hate speech violation

A chatbot function on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin NetanyahuBenjamin (Bibi) NetanyahuMORE’s Facebook page has been temporarily suspended after it sent out a message to visitors that violated the company’s policies on hate speech, The Guardian reported Tuesday.

According to the British newspaper, upon arrival to Netanyahu’s official Facebook page, visitors were recently greeted with a message sent out by an automated chat that said the prime minister would bring “a rightwing policy of a Jewish state, security, and a strong Israel.”

ADVERTISEMENT

The message then went on to warn visitors of “a secular leftwing weak government that relies on Arabs who want to destroy us all — women, children and men.”

The chatbot is reportedly run by the Likud Party, the right-wing political party to which Netanyahu belongs.

The action from Facebook comes as the prime minister continues to campaign ahead of the country’s snap legislative elections next Tuesday.

Click Here: COLLINGWOOD MAGPIES 2019

“After careful review of the Likud campaign’s bot activities, we found a violation of our hate speech policy,” the company said in a statement. “We also found that the bot was misusing the platform by contacting people outside the time period allowed. As a result, we temporarily suspended the bot for 24 hours. Should there be any additional violations, we will continue to take appropriate action.”

Netanyahu denied having any involvement with the message while speaking to local press, saying he thinks a campaign staffer “mistakenly” posted the message, according to Bloomberg News.

Netanyahu came under fire earlier this year for calling Israel “the national state, not of all its citizens, but only of the Jewish people.” His comments in March drew a wave of backlash online from many in defense of the country’s Arab citizens, who reportedly make up a fifth of the population.

—Updated at 3:37 p.m.

Judiciary approves new investigative powers with eyes on impeachment

The House Judiciary Committee voted along party lines Thursday to broaden the panel’s powers to investigate President TrumpDonald John TrumpMexico says it disagrees with ‘astonishing’ Supreme Court decision allowing Trump asylum rule The Afghan negotiations — echoes from the past Democrats grill Army, Air Force nominees on military funding for border wall MORE as Democrats seek to build their case for impeachment — and clean up their oversight message amid a month of mixed signals.

The move does not launch a formal impeachment process, but marks the first time a Democratic panel has voted on language that explicitly lays out how the party’s ongoing investigations into alleged presidential misconduct could lead to drafting — and eventual votes on — impeachment articles.

ADVERTISEMENT

The partisan 24-17 vote followed more than two hours of feisty debate, as Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold NadlerJerrold (Jerry) Lewis NadlerTop House Democrat walks back remarks contradicting Judiciary on impeachment inquiry This week: Congress returns for first time since mass shootings Judiciary panel preparing to vote on procedures for impeachment probe: report MORE (D-N.Y.) made Democrats’ case for securing disputed information from an uncooperative administration, and Republicans rushed to Trump’s defense with accusations that Democrats are pretending to pursue impeachment without actually doing so. 

That debate over the status of the Judiciary investigation — is there an impeachment inquiry or is there not? — has dogged Democrats throughout the week, as even top leaders have sent mixed signals about the nature of the probe, muddling the party’s oversight message just as the process is heating up.

Nadler on Thursday both acknowledged the confusion and sought to eliminate it.

“This committee is engaged in an investigation that will allow us to determine whether to recommend articles of impeachment with respect to President Trump,” he said. “Some call this process an impeachment inquiry. Some call it an impeachment investigation. There is no legal difference between these terms, and I no longer care to argue about the nomenclature.”

Republicans pounced on what they called a mixed message coming from across the aisle, saying Democrats are attempting “a charade,” by invoking impeachment to satisfy the party’s liberal base but without voting to launch a formal inquiry, which could hurt vulnerable centrist Democrats at the polls in 2020.

“They know that most Democrats hate this president, and they’ve decided that he’s guilty regardless of what the facts say,” said Rep. Steve ChabotSteven (Steve) Joseph ChabotJudiciary approves new investigative powers with eyes on impeachment Republicans pour cold water on Trump’s term limit idea Wave of GOP retirements threatens 2020 comeback MORE (R-Ohio). “So instead the committee Democrats feel no choice but to investigate, and investigate, and investigate — until they find something that looks like a crime.”

Yet Republicans also appeared to oscillate between claims that Democrats have launched a “faux impeachment” effort and arguments that the procedures vote is an impeachment vote.

“Democrats followed the yellow brick road, and now they’re fully lost in impeachment Oz,” Rep. Doug CollinsDouglas (Doug) Allen CollinsThe Hill’s 12:30 Report: House panel approves impeachment powers GOP lawmaker: ‘The Judiciary Committee has become a giant Instagram filter’ Judiciary approves new investigative powers with eyes on impeachment MORE (R-Ga.), the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, said. “Try as they might, they can’t find their way out of the mess they’ve made because they think ‘words don’t matter.’ ”

The procedures adopted in Thursday’s vote are designed to expedite the Democrats’ probes into the White House by lending investigators more tools to secure documents and witness testimony. One provision empowers committee staff to question witnesses; another allows Nadler to designate any future hearing to be a part of the broader investigation.

Nadler said the new powers constitute “the necessary next step in our investigation of corruption, obstruction, and abuse of power.”

And while Republicans sought to challenge Democrats’ procedure resolution by introducing three separate amendments, Democrats swatted them all down during party-line votes.

Still, Democrats remained largely quiet as Republicans monopolized the two hours bashing Democrats’ procedures resolution and oversight investigation, with some sources indicating that this was a way to speed up the markup so that members could leave town for the weekend ahead of the third Democratic debate in Houston, Texas. And by doing so, some suggested it also prevented members from further jumbling Democrats’ message on impeachment.

Updated at 11:03 a.m.

Click Here: collingwood magpies 2019 training guernsey

New Zealand introduces new gun control bills six months after Christchurch massacre

Lawmakers in New Zealand have introduced legislation to create a registry of all firearms in the country after a deadly shooting in Christchurch earlier this year targeting Muslim worshipers left more than 50 people dead.

The Associated Press reported that the bill introduced Friday in parliament would also double the frequency with which gun owners must renew their licenses and create restrictions for doctors allowing them to indicate whether a patient should not own a firearm.

ADVERTISEMENT

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern told reporters at a press conference that firearm ownership was a “privilege, not a right,” and added that she was focused on preventing a similar attack to the March shooting that killed 51 people.

“We absolutely recognize there is a legitimate need in our communities to be able to access guns, particularly our rural community,” she said. “But what these changes do is recognize that actually there’s a real responsibility that comes with gun ownership.”

Lawmakers reportedly believe the legislation could pass before the end of the year. March’s shooting at two mosques in the city was the deadliest incident the country has faced in more than two decades.

A buyback plan previously launched by the country in March has also forced residents to turn in assault weapons after the country banned such devices following the Christchurch attack.

Click Here: brisbane lions guernsey 2019