Jusqu’alors Charles Aznavour était resté silencieux sur le conflit qui sévit actuellement au Moyen-Orient. Ce matin, il a publié une tribune dans Le Figaro où il propose que les communautés persécutées du Moyen-Orient s’installent dans les villages français « à l’abandon » avec pour obligation de les reconstruire, pour les faire revivre.

Depuis 1975 et sa chanson au titre sans détour Ils sont tombés, dans laquelle il dénonçait l’horreur du génocide de 1915 et ses centaines de milliers de morts arméniens, Charles Aznavour n’a de cesse de s’engager. Il a donc jugé bon de publier une tribune aujourd’hui dans les colonnes du Figaro.

«Dans la guerre de religions qui est en train d’embraser l’Irak et la Syrie, il est essentiel, certes, de se préoccuper du sort des chrétiens d’Orient, des Kurdes, des yazidis et des autres. Mais dans cette énumération, il ne faut pas oublier une communauté chère à mon cœur, les Arméniens. On n’en parle jamais, et pourtant, en Syrie, hier encore, ils étaient quelque deux cent mille. Je suis bouleversé par les drames qui se jouent là-bas au quotidien. Notre devoir n’est-il pas d’aider moralement, et concrètement, ces populations, le plus vite possible?» écrit le chanteur de 90 ans qui propose même une «idée simple» pour faire avancer le conflit. «Pourquoi ne pas confier ces « villages fantômes » à ces chrétiens, ces Kurdes, ces yazidis, ces Arméniens, explique l’interprète de La Bohème. Puisque celles et ceux qui devraient y vivre sont partis, pourquoi ne pas les remplacer par celles et ceux qui en ont besoin? Pourquoi ne pas confier ces «villages fantômes» à ces chrétiens, ces Kurdes, ces yazidis, ces Arméniens? Ils auraient pour obligation de les reconstruire, de les faire revivre, de labourer à nouveau des terres dont la fertilité ne fait aucun doute. Ils pourraient ainsi vivre en paix, quasiment en autarcie.Je réponds, en particulier, de mes compatriotes. Je sais qu’ils sont très travailleurs.»

L’icône des Arméniens termine sa tribune en réitérant qu’il compte s’investir pleinement dans son nouveau combat. «Je suis prêt à soutenir personnellement et physiquement,s’il le faut, une action qui se veut résolument apolitique, souligne-t-il. J’ai déjà chanté en Syrie. Je peux y retourner, mais, cette fois-ci, seulement pour parler. Pour aider toute forme de négociation avec les communautés. C’est ce que nous devons et allons faire. C’est cela, la véritable aide humanitaire.»

The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) gave the upcoming abortion movie Unplanned an R-rating Friday, citing “some disturbing, bloody images.” But the movie’s filmmakers fear the rating is motivated by politics.

“We made a pro-life movie in a pro-choice town” said Chuck Konzelman, who along with Cary Solomon wrote and directed Unplanned.

For Solomon, the R-rating smacks of hypocrisy. “The standard used to rate our movie is being applied inconsistently as it relates to bloody images on-screen,” he told me in a phone interview. “In fact, Happy Death Day 2U (a “slasher” film with several violent murder scenes) has far more blood and gore than our film and it received a PG-13 rating.”

Indeed, most R-rated films are labelled as such for featuring sexual scenes, profanity, nudity, or violence — all of which Unplanned has none. The filmmakers had hoped for a PG-13 rating.

The film tells the true-life story of former Planned Parenthood clinic director Abby Johnson, who left the abortion giant in 2009 to become a pro-life activist.

Mike Lindell, founder and CEO of My Pillow, invested $1 million to the movie’s production. “I’m pro-life and I’m happy to do it,” Lindell told the Hollywood Reporter.

The filmmakers told me their movie depicts scenes of Johnson, played by actress Ashley Bratcher, bleeding and vomiting on the floor after taking an abortion pill. The MPAA also objected to scenes showing a doctor looking at images of a fetus after an abortion.

The MPAA told Konzelman and Solomon to either cut the abortion scenes or edit them. “The blood is in no way gratuitous,” Konzelman told me. “For us to not include blood in these critical scenes would be to severely cheapen this true story.”

“We have three scenes in the film which directly address abortion, and the MPAA objected to all three,” Solomon said. “They specifically made mention of objection to grainy, black and white sonogram images that were part of one of the scenes. It was clear that any meaningful treatment of the issue was going to be objectionable.”

An MPAA spokesperson said that the film’s distributor, Pure Flix — the studio behind God’s Not Dead — didn’t respond to the organization’s appeals process in a timely manner. Pure Flix president Michael Scott fired back saying, “This story needs to be told and the message needed to be delivered.”

“It is our calling as Christians to tell the story about the moral implications of abortion that the mainstream media refuses to acknowledge,” Scott said.

Pure Flix is charging ahead and plan to release Unplanned with its R-rating.

“Most Americans believe Hollywood’s God is money. No. Their God is a liberal agenda that they serve without fail. And we are anathema to that,” Solomon said.

Unplanned opens in theaters everywhere on March 29.

Follow Jerome Hudson on Twitter @jeromeehudson

euro-press review

Borders, troops and campaigns

Also in Europe’s newspapers: Catalonia, glyphosate and Dieselgate.

France

Le Monde reported that the Italian government struck illicit deals with Libyan traffickers and militias to prevent migrants from arriving on Italian shores — a deal that seems to have succeeded, given a 20 percent dip in arrivals compared to last year. Le Figaro reported on the government’s decision to revamp a security program called Sentinel, in which troops patrol public spaces and tourist attractions such as the Eiffel Tower and the Louvre. Left-leaning Libération reported on a new study that found glyphosate, a herbicide, on more than half of 30 products tested, including cereals, pasta and lentils.

Germany

Chancellor Angela Merkel met with representatives of the auto industry on the campaign trail on Thursday. In the wake of the Dieselgate scandal, Frankfurter Allgemeine led with Merkel saying that the “automobile industry has to regain trust.” The Süddeutsche Zeitung reported that the European Commission had bowed to German, French and Austrian pressure in allowing an extension of internal border controls.

UK

The Telegraph reported that cuts to the military are hurting the British navy, making it “unable to send ships to sea.” The Mirror and the Guardian reported on the U.K. National Health Service employees’ demand for higher wages after the government signaled a willingness to end salary caps for police and prison officers.

Spain

Catalan President Carles Puigdemont gave a speech last night, which the Spanish media marked as the start of the campaign for the Catalan independence referendum scheduled on October 1. The national government still deems this illegal. “Separatism opens campaign without the government stopping it,” led El Mundo, in a not-so-subtle dig at the government for failing to do more. Pro-independence paper El Punt Avui led with European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker’s comments that he will “respect” an independence vote if it comes to pass.

Politicians are a petty lot. If good old-fashioned diplomacy (or war) doesn’t work, one tactic pretty much guaranteed to annoy a rival country is to rename the street on which their embassy sits in honor of someone they don’t like — then sit back and watch them send out official correspondence on letterheads bearing the offending name.

Such a spat is happening right now in the U.S.

Senior Chinese politicians are seemingly terrified that the street in front of the Chinese Embassy in Washington could be renamed “Liu Xiaobo Plaza,” in honor of the activist and Nobel Peace Prize laureate who died in July.

Beijing takes the threat so seriously that, according to the Washington Post, Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi raised the issue with Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. The former was even said to have called for a presidential veto if Congress approves the name change (because if you’re looking for diplomatic tact, Donald Trump’s clearly the go-to guy).

The bill that could lead to the name change was put forward by failed Republican presidential hopeful Ted Cruz, who said: “I’m glad to hear it’s got their attention. I’ll be even more glad when they change their conduct and stop being gross human-rights abusers.”

The response from Chinese citizens, according to the broadcaster Phoenix News, is to change the name of the street on which the U.S. Embassy in Beijing sits to “Snowden Street” after NSA whistleblower Edward, according to translation from Chinese by Quartz Media.

The issue of renaming streets isn’t confined to Embassy Row. Throughout Eastern Europe, street signs have been changed to rid them of connections to communism.

In Madrid, Plaza Margaret Thatcher has been controversial since the name was adopted in 2014. The decision to honor the former British prime minister was taken while Ana Botella was mayor of the Spanish capital. Botella is married to José María Aznar, former prime minister, and Plaza Margaret Thatcher is a short stroll from the headquarters of his conservative People’s Party.

The signs were vandalized repeatedly in the few first months, and when leftist Manuela Carmena took over from Botella as mayor in 2015, she promised to change the name.

That hasn’t happened. Carmena is instead focusing her attention on streets with connections to former dictator Francisco Franco.

A brief history of being petty

Proposing to rechristen diplomatic addresses isn’t just a joke (well, not always), and it dates back at least to the Cold War. In 1984, a bill was put forward to change the address of the then-Soviet Embassy on 16th Street in Washington to “1 Andrei Sakharov Plaza,” in honor of the Russian dissident and Nobel Peace Prize laureate who was then in internal exile.

The Americans are still at it. In 2015, legislation was introduced that would have changed the name of the stretch of Wisconsin Avenue in front of the Russian Embassy in Washington to “Boris Nemtsov Plaza” and change the embassy’s address to “1 Boris Nemtsov Plaza.”

“The creation of ‘Boris Nemtsov Plaza’ would permanently remind Putin’s regime and the Russian people that these dissidents’ voices live on, and that defenders of liberty will not be silenced,” Republican Senator Marco Rubio said at the time in a statement, according to the Washington Post. “Whether it is looking at a street sign or thousands of pieces of correspondence addressed ‘1 Boris Nemtsov Plaza,’ it will be abundantly clear to the Kremlin that the intimidation and murder of opposition figures does not go unnoticed.”

It cuts both ways, of course. In the late 1990s, a Manhattan street corner opposite Nigeria’s Mission to the United Nations was renamed as “Kudirat Abiola Corner” after the wife of Moshood Abiola, who appeared to have won the 1993 presidential election before being arrested by the dictator Sani Abacha. Two weeks later, the street in front of the U.S. Embassy in Lagos was renamed after Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan.

The Iranians are also fans of the tactic. They want to rename the Tehran thoroughfare on which the Saudi Arabian Embassy stands as “Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr Street,” after a Shia cleric executed by the Saudis.

And they’ve done it before: In 1981, Tehran changed the name of the street where its U.K. Embassy is based from Churchill Street to Bobby Sands Street, after the Irish Republican Army member who died while on hunger strike.

In a move straight out of the James Bond playbook, the British Embassy — to avoid the embarrassment of having an IRA figurehead on its letterhead — sealed off the old entrance and knocked down a wall to create an entrance on nearby Ferdowsi Avenue. Official documents could then list Ferdowsi Avenue as the embassy’s address, safe in the knowledge that the Iranians were highly unlikely to drop Ferdowsi (a poet who’s a national hero).

Road rage

As relations between the EU and U.K get frostier thanks to Brexit, perhaps a street name change could be the way forward (to boost diplomats’ morale if nothing else).

The British Embassy sits on Avenue d’Auderghem in Brussels’ EU quarter, a stone’s throw (and they’ve doubtless tested that theory) from the European Commission’s Berlaymont headquarters and the European Council’s shiny new Europa building.

In the spirit of the Brexit talks so far (i.e., mean-spirited and farcical), imagine the hilarity if Avenue d’Auderghem were renamed “€100 Billion Brexit Bill Boulevard,” “The French Only Work 35 Hours A Week Road” or, perhaps most hurtful of all, “Germans Always Win on Penalties Platz.”

Of course, if the EU were to pull a stunt like that, they could expect some British reaction.

The European Commission has its London base at 32 Smith Square in Westminster, a five-minute walk from the Houses of Parliament. Would anyone, aside from perhaps the Smith family, mind if local authorities changed its name to “Up Yours Delors Terrace,” or maybe even the Brexiteers’ choice, “Freedom Square — June 23 2016”?

The tactic doesn’t have to be confined to Brexit talks. As relations sour between Germany and Turkey, Berlin could rename the street containing the Turkish Embassy “Goat F–ker Straße,” to commemorate comedian Jan Böhmermann’s poem about Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.

The Germans are of course known for their sense of humor, so how about renaming the street housing the Greek Embassy “Wolfgang Schäuble Allee”? And while Franco-German relations are on a high since Emmanuel Macron’s election, if the fresh-faced president steps out of line — too much hanging about with that nasty Mr. Trump, say — Berlin could always strike a low blow by renaming the street outside the French Embassy “Marshall Pétain Street.”

The EU could also have some fun at the expense of Poland’s troublesome right-wing government. Forget threatening to activate Article 7. Instead why not change the name of the street of the Polish Embassy to “Donald Tusk Way.”

Paul Dallison is POLITICO‘s slot news editor. 

Comedian and former host of The Daily Show Jon Stewart praised the Trump administration and implored Congress to support 9/11 first responders while on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, on Monday.

“The Trump Justice Department is doing an excellent job administering this program,” Jon Stewart said while urging federal lawmakers to make the 9/11 Victims’ Compensation Fund permanent.

Click Here: new zealand rugby team jerseys

“I don’t know about anything else, I’m not going to comment on anything else,” he added. “But that’s why we’re in the problem we’re in if the program works exactly like it’s supposed to. Now it’s Congress’ job to fund it properly and let these people live in peace.”

Stewart added that “we can cut through the nonsense,” pointing out that 12 Senate Republicans would make the difference in the bill getting passed.

In an MSNBC interview with Andrea Mitchell earlier in the day, Stewart refrained from criticizing President Donald Trump and stressed that his cause was not partisan.

“This isn’t about the president,” he told Mitchell. “This isn’t about ideology, and it’s not about partisanship.”

The former Daily Show host urged lawmakers to pass permanent funding for 9/11 first responders on Monday because the current compensation fund will expire in 2020.

The bill Stewart advocated for, known as the Never Forget the Heroes Act, would provide permanent funding to the Victims’ Compensation Fund if it passes Congress.

Hundreds of protesters were seen descending on London on Saturday to pressure the U.K. government to decline to extradite WikiLeaks founder Julian AssangeJulian Paul AssangeProsecutor defends initial DOJ recommendation at Stone sentencing Lawyers to seek asylum for Assange in France: report Rohrabacher tells Yahoo he discussed pardon with Assange for proof Russia didn’t hack DNC email MORE to face spying charges in the United States.

The protest featured famous Assange backers such as the band Pink Floyd’s Roger Waters, Pretenders singer Chrissie Hynde and fashion designer Vivienne Westwood, who echoed calls for U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson to push back on the U.S. extradition request and cancel an upcoming hearing on Monday.

“I call upon our prime minister, Boris Johnson, to declare his colors. … Be the British bulldog that you would have us all believe you are. Stand up to the bluster of American hegemony,” said Waters. “Julian Assange is an innocent man.” 

ADVERTISEMENT

Assange, who had spent seven years in Ecuador’s London embassy in exile, is currently imprisoned in London’s high-security Belmarsh Prison. He faces espionage charges in the U.S. over his website’s alleged publication of hundreds of thousands of confidential government documents.

The secret-spilling website’s founder has claimed his work qualifies as journalism and thus deserves First Amendment protections. 

Assange could be sentenced to up to 175 years in prison if he is found guilty on all counts.

National security officials have said the actions Assange and Wikileaks are accused of puts the U.S. at risk, though civil rights advocacy groups say punishing the alleged disclosures would set a dark precedent for the press. 

Assange’s fate will be determined next week at a full extradition hearing that can last several days.

Click Here: United Kingdom Rugby Jerseys

The humanitarian catastrophe that engulfed Europe in the summer of 2015, when hundreds of thousands fled war in Syria and conflicts in the Middle East and Northern Africa is now under control — in large part thanks to Turkey’s solidarity.

The European Union and Turkey both still face considerable pressure. The Syrian conflict alone displaced nearly 5 million people. In Europe, the crisis overwhelmed its southernmost countries and threatened one of its key principles: the freedom of movement.

Media reports have covered the hardships of Syrians who sought refuge in neighboring countries including Turkey — and rightly so. But the sheer scale of the burden Turkey is shouldering on Europe’s southern flank must not go unnoticed either.

Turkey has kept its borders open to people fleeing bloodshed and turmoil. It has accepted 3.2 million Syrians and 300,000 Iraqis and Afghans, with no discrimination based on their religion, sect, gender or ethnicity, making it one of the largest refugee-hosting countries in the world.

Turkey has so far spent approximately $30 billion — 3.5 percent of its GDP — to support refugees living inside its borders and help them to integrate socially and economically. Most of the 3.5 million people under temporary protection in Turkey live outside its temporary protection centers and live peacefully alongside the Turkish population.

Turkey’s humanitarian temporary protection policy toward Syrians includes language courses, and education and vocational training. It also ensures they receive access to the Turkish labor market and grants them free health services.

Since January 2016, the Turkish government has issued work permits to 22,600 Syrians. Among the approximately 835,000 school-aged Syrian children living in Turkey, some 508,000 are currently enrolled in primary and secondary education.

It is fair to say that, compared to Turkey’s vast efforts, the international community has been more reluctant to share the burden.

The contribution of the international community — minus the EU — to the Syrians in Turkey since the beginning of the Syrian conflict stands at $526 million. The EU, meanwhile, so far has only spent €838 million of the €3 billion it initially pledged to Turkey. The amount represents a mere 0.02 percent of the EU28’s total GDP.

What’s more, this money is granted not to the Turkish government, but directly to Syrians in need, in large part under the auspices of European NGOs and aid agencies.

In March, the EU and Turkey reaffirmed their commitment to cooperate on managing the migration crisis. It has been one of the main targets in our bilateral relations. And, as President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has said, Turkey is determined to honor its obligations.

EU-Turkey cooperation has been effective: As European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker noted in his State of the Union address, the number of new arrivals coming to Europe via Turkey dropped by 97 percent over the past year.

Had it not been for Turkey, the EU would have seen the arrival of approximately 1.5 million migrants this year. The model has proven to be so efficient that the bloc is discussing how to replicate it with other countries to curb irregular migration flows in the Central Mediterranean.

But the relationship cannot be a one-way street. Turkey expects the EU to fulfill its end of the bargain as well.

We expect the EU to accelerate both the allocation and spending of the remaining amount pledged as part of the initial €3 billion package. The EU also must not forget its commitment to creating a voluntary humanitarian admission scheme to give Syrian refugees a legal, dignified path to Europe and allow the bloc to better manage migration.

Turkey has undertaken vast efforts to help Europe manage migration flows, despite the fact that last year’s attempted coup partly disrupted the functioning of our state machinery. The bloc cannot remain indifferent to the costs Turkey has undergone.

Turkey is committed to its humanitarian approach to the Syrian crisis. Our willingness to share in the heavy burden is proof that we, as an EU candidate country, truly espouse universal values that make us European.

By helping to stem migration flows, Turkey has proven itself to be a reliable partner in times of crisis in Europe. The EU must also uphold its side of the agreement.

Faruk Kaymakcı is the ambassador at the Permanent Delegation of Turkey to the European Union.

Roger StoneRoger Jason StoneRoger Stone moves to disqualify judge Roger Stone deserves a new trial Hillicon Valley: Facebook, Twitter split on Bloomberg video | Sanders briefed on Russian efforts to help campaign | Barr to meet with Republicans ahead of surveillance fight MORE, a convicted former campaign adviser to President TrumpDonald John TrumpWhere do we go from here? Conservation can show the way Gov. Ron DeSantis more popular in Florida than Trump Sotomayor accuses Supreme Court of bias in favor of Trump administration MORE, moved Friday to disqualify the judge in his case after being sentenced to more than three years in prison.

In an effort to score a new trial, Stone’s lawyers are saying that Judge Amy Berman Jackson’s assertion that the jurors served with integrity is untrue and that the jury’s foreperson was biased against Stone.

“Stone’s Motion for New Trial is directly related to the integrity of a juror,” the motion reads. “It is alleged that a juror misled the Court regarding her ability to be unbiased and fair and the juror attempted to cover up evidence that would directly contradict her false claims of impartiality.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Jackson made the remarks during the trial in a heated exchange between Stone’s legal team.

“Sure, the defense is free to say, ‘So what? Who cares?’ But I’ll say this: Congress cared,” Jackson said. “The United States Department of Justice and the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia that prosecuted the case and is still prosecuting the case cared. The jurors who served with integrity under difficult circumstances cared. The American people cared. And I care.”

Stone was convicted in November of seven counts of obstructing and lying to Congress and witness tampering related to his efforts to provide the Trump campaign with inside information about WikiLeaks in 2016. 

Last week, all four prosecutors on the Stone case quit after the Department of Justice asked for a lighter sentence than what the prosecutors recommended. Stone’s roughly three-year sentence is less than half of what prosecutors recommended based on the penal code — seven to nine years. 

Stone was sentenced on Thursday by Jackson, who said Stone’s sentence will be delayed from going into effect until after she rules on his motion for a new trial.

Advocates for housing programs are bashing President TrumpDonald John TrumpWhere do we go from here? Conservation can show the way Gov. Ron DeSantis more popular in Florida than Trump Sotomayor accuses Supreme Court of bias in favor of Trump administration MORE‘s proposal to slash funds and accessibility to housing assistance.

Trump proposed cutting a slew of federal programs to the bone in his fiscal 2021 budget released this month, but he took a particularly hard swing at housing aid.

In addition to calling for reduced funding at the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the White House also called for changes to mandatory programs designed to provide housing assistance for low-income residents.

ADVERTISEMENT

“We’re in the midst of an affordable housing crisis in this country,” said Jesse Van Tol, CEO of the National Community Reinvestment Coalition, an anti-poverty group. “It’s disappointing that they would propose such a budget that scales back so many supports for federal housing.”

Overall, Trump’s budget would cut housing $8.6 billion from housing programs, a 15 percent reduction. Deeper cuts, to the tune of 43 percent, would hit public housing funds while also eliminating programs like the National Housing Trust Fund, Home Investment Partnerships, Community Development Block Grant and Choice Neighborhoods.

The administration’s proposal would require some low-income program participants to pay a higher percentage of their income toward rent, while also calling for work requirements and other restrictions for certain housing assistance.

The White House has defended the proposed cuts as fiscally prudent steps to reining in the deficit, which has soared to nearly $1 trillion since Trump came took office.

“This is becoming almost a mandatory program in how much it’s escalating,” acting White House budget chief Russ Vought said this past week.

He argued the new requirements would “ensure that we are helping to lift able-bodied adults off of a cycle of dependency and onto a ladder of economic opportunity.”

ADVERTISEMENT

The changes, he noted, would still allow current recipients to stay on the programs.

But housing advocates say the poorest would take a serious hit if the proposals were to take effect.

“There’s little to no evidence that work requirements themselves significantly improve employment or earnings outcomes,” said Doug Rice, a senior policy analyst at the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. “The kinds of cuts that are proposed in the administration’s budget, the funding level would eliminate vouchers for 160,000 households next year.”

According to Rice, housing programs are already meager, and can only help about a quarter of the population in dire need of assistance due to lack of funding. Most of those recipients, he said, are seniors, people with disabilities or working families with kids.

The 11 million households that spend more than half their paychecks on housing and utilities are stuck making tough choices for food and medical needs. Over half of those households bring in less than $15,000 a year, which is equivalent to a full-time minimum wage job.

Some advocates said they found the administration’s proposal particularly surprising given the amount of criticism Trump has leveled against cities like San Francisco and Los Angeles for their homelessness problems. Trump at one point characterized San Francisco as “worse than a slum” because of its homeless population.

“There’s been a lot of bold, public talk in the administration about addressing this problem of homelessness, and yet what we see in his budget request is really the opposite of what you need to make progress,” Rice said.

The proposals in Trump’s budget have little chance of becoming law. Congress has dismissed similar suggestions for draconian cuts in federal spending following each of his three previous budget requests, and is poised to do so again as appropriators begin writing spending bills for the next fiscal year, which begins Oct. 1.

“The president’s budget not only fails to reverse decades of under-investment in housing, but it also would exacerbate this underlying problem,” said Rep. David PriceDavid Eugene PriceA disaster for diplomacy and the Zionist dream The Hill’s Morning Report – Sanders surge triggers Dem angst House passes supplemental disaster relief for Puerto Rico MORE (D-N.C.), who chairs the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development. “Without working to build new affordable housing units and preserve current ones, the housing crisis will only grow.”

One of the main problems driving the crisis is that incomes have not kept pace with rising housing costs, particularly in large cities.

Joel Griffith, a research fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation, said the problems stem from too much government intervention, such as providing government backing to mortgages, which he says inflates housing prices.

He also argued that federal housing programs are rife with abuse.

“We believe that a lot of those funds go to favored housing funds, and special interests,” he said. “These don’t resolve the underlying problem of poverty. They try to stick a band-aid on it.”

Griffith acknowledged that Trump’s budget proposal does not incorporate any of the large-scale federal reforms he says would address soaring housing costs, and said many of the problems should be handled at the state and local level.

Click Here: NRL Telstra Premiership

AN UNDERFUNDED SUPERFUND? A proposal from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would absolve the nation’s manufacturers of cancer-linked “forever chemicals” from broad financial responsibility for cleaning up their product as it leaches into the water supply across the country. 

The class of chemicals known as PFAS, which are noted for their persistence in both the environment and the human body, are used in a variety of nonstick products.

As PFAS contamination spreads into city water supplies in every state but Hawaii, there has been growing pressure from lawmakers to have manufacturers help fund cleanup efforts.

ADVERTISEMENT

A notice of the EPA’s proposed rule posted to the Federal Register Friday would exclude manufacturers of PFAS from providing financial assurances under the Superfund law, which directs the cleanup of hazardous waste sites. Companies would not be required to prove they have the financial backing to clean up any contamination.

The move comes as data shows the Trump administration has the highest number of unfunded construction projects at Superfund sites of the last 15 years.

 

Why does it matter?

Melanie Benesh, an attorney with the Environmental Working Group, which tracks PFAS contamination, said the move is part of an unfortunate trend in which the government seeks funds only after there is a problem.

“If you don’t require these companies that are the most likely to be contributing to Superfund contamination, if you’re not asking them to provide financial assurances, EPA may not be able to recover money to clean up that site, and there may not be enough in appropriated funds to clean up that site,” she said. 

“This is a relatively small burden on companies. They’re not asking them to pay anything at this point; they’re asking them to show they have the money — that if you dump a bunch of chemicals in people’s air or drinking water that you at least have the money to clean it up, which seems like the bare minimum that we should be expecting.”

ADVERTISEMENT

EPA argues that current management practices at PFAS facilities do not pose a financial risk to taxpayers, who would otherwise foot the bill for a cleanup.

“The degree and duration of risk associated with the modern production, transportation, treatment, storage or disposal of hazardous substances by the chemical manufacturing industry does not present a level of risk of taxpayer funded response actions that warrant imposition of financial responsibility requirements for this sector,” the EPA wrote.

If finalized, the EPA would still retain the power to impose Superfund responsibilities at individual contaminated sites. 

Read more about the proposal here. 

 

TGIF! Welcome to Overnight Energy, The Hill’s roundup of the latest energy and environment news. Please send tips and comments to Rebecca Besitsch at rbeitsch@thehill.com. Follow her on Twitter: @rebeccabeitsch. Reach Rachel Frazin at rfrazin@thehill.com or follow her on Twitter: @RachelFrazin.

 

WELL THEY DIDN’T WASTE A MINUTE: The state of California sued the White House late Thursday after President TrumpDonald John TrumpComey responds to Trump with Mariah Carey gif: ‘Why are you so obsessed with me?’ Congress to get election security briefing next month amid Intel drama New York man accused of making death threats against Schumer, Schiff MORE ordered the state to reconfigure its water plan, funneling more water from the north to a thirsty agriculture industry and growing population further south.

California Attorney General Xavier BecerraXavier BecerraCalifornia delivers swift suit after Trump orders water diversion States sue Trump administration at record pace California has a privacy law, but will companies comply? MORE (D) argued the administration violated the law by failing to consider a number of environmental impacts or giving an opportunity for the public to comment. 

“As we face the unprecedented threat of a climate emergency, now is the time to strengthen our planet’s biodiversity, not destroy it,” Becerra said in a statement. “California won’t silently spectate as the Trump Administration adopts scientifically-challenged biological opinions that push species to extinction and harm our natural resources and waterways.” 

The suit was filed a little more than 24 hours after Trump signed the order in front of a crowd in Bakersfield, Calif., flanked by House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthyKevin Owen McCarthyBarr to attend Senate GOP lunch on Tuesday California delivers swift suit after Trump orders water diversion Twitter experimenting with new tool to label lies and misinformation MORE (R-Calif.) and Rep. Devin NunesDevin Gerald NunesOvernight Energy: Trump signs order to divert water to California farmers | EPA proposes new rollback to Obama coal ash rules | Green group ranks Bloomberg, Klobuchar last in climate plans Trump signs order diverting water to California farmers against state wishes California newspaper says it was excluded from event with Nunes, Bernhardt MORE (R-Calif.).

The move was made possible after Trump ordered the Department of the Interior to redo biological assessments that for decades had blocked water diversion, finding that lower flows would hurt various types of fish.

Critics fear the new plan, which would allow large quantities of water to be diverted from the San Francisco Bay Delta to the Central Valley in order to irrigate farmland, would ultimately harm chinook salmon and the delta smelt, a finger-sized fish that for three decades has stood in the way of the diversion.

On Wednesday, Trump said the changes to the “outdated scientific research and biological opinions” would now help direct “as much water as possible, which will be a magnificent amount, a massive amount of water for the use of California farmers and ranchers.”

ADVERTISEMENT

“A major obstacle to providing water for the region’s farmers has now been totally eliminated by the federal government,” he said.

Becerra listed off a host of reasons the new biological opinions from Interior don’t meet legal requirements, including that they ignore “the requirement that a biological opinion must consider not only the continued survival of listed species, but also their recovery.”

Read more on the suit here.

 

A MAN WITH AN EXPANDED PLAN: Democratic presidential candidate Pete ButtigiegPeter (Pete) Paul ButtigiegPoll: Bloomberg stalls after Vegas debate Bloomberg campaign: Vandalism at Tennessee office ‘echoes language from the Sanders campaign and its supporters’ Buttigieg to join striking South Carolina McDonald’s workers next week MORE on Friday released new climate proposals as part of his environmental agenda.

The former South Bend, Ind., mayor wants to conserve 30 percent of U.S. lands and oceans by 2030, double clean electricity generation by 2025 and make the U.S. more resilient to the effects of climate change. 

“America’s public lands power local economies, preserve sensitive habitats and cultural heritage, and protect our clean air and water,” Buttigieg said in a statement. 

ADVERTISEMENT

“My administration will protect our public lands for posterity while ensuring that they are a key part of the solution to tackling the climate crisis,” he added.

Recent rankings of Buttigieg’s plans by environmentalists have placed him among the middle of the pack.

Buttigieg this week was given a 4 out of 10 on the Center for Biological Diversity Action Fund’s scorecard, placing him third out of the six candidates it evaluated.

He has been given a B-plus by Greenpeace, coming fourth out of 10 candidates, including the eight Democrats running for the White House as well as President Trump and his Republican challenger, former Massachusetts Gov. Bill WeldWilliam (Bill) WeldButtigieg expands on climate plan with new proposals GOP governor endorses Weld in Vermont primary Trump wins New Hampshire Republican primary MORE. 

The White House hopeful’s new proposal calls for building a zero-emission clean electricity system by 2035 and achieving net-zero emissions from public lands by 2030.

He also targets environmental rollbacks eyed by the Trump administration, saying he would “restore the integrity” of bedrock conservation laws such the National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

If any of this sounds familiar…

Buttigieg’s aim to conserve 30 percent of lands and oceans follows a similar proposal from former presidential candidate Sen. Michael BennetMichael Farrand BennetButtigieg expands on climate plan with new proposals 2020 race goes national in sprint to Super Tuesday Toward ‘Super Tuesday’ — momentum, money and delegates MORE (D-Colo.). 

Bennet and Sen. Tom UdallThomas (Tom) Stewart UdallButtigieg expands on climate plan with new proposals Climate change a rising concern for Western voters, poll finds Greenpeace says many plastics are not actually recyclable MORE (D-N.M.) have introduced a resolution that would require such conservation.

Read more on the Buttigieg plan here. 

 

SAGE GROUSE IN THE HOUSE: The Trump administration on Friday released draft supplemental environmental impact statements on its attempts to weaken protections for the sage grouse bird after a judge ruled last year that its past statements likely did not meet legal requirements. 

The new documents do not change the conclusions of past statements, but do highlight steps taken during the planning process.

The draft released Friday was criticized by environmental groups as an attempt to “paper over deficiencies” in the administration’s past documents following a court order that temporarily prevented the rule change. 

Read more on the environmental impact statements here.

 

ON TAP NEXT WEEK:

On Monday, the Supreme Court will hear a case challenging the Atlantic Coast Pipeline.

On Tuesday, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee will review the Forest Service budget. 

The White House Council on Environmental Quality will hold a hearing on its proposed changes to the National Environmental Policy Act.

Also on Tuesday evening, Democrats will hold their third (!!!) debate this month.

On Wednesday, the House Natural Resources Committee will hold a hearing on one portion of the Republican climate plan, a bill that would commit the U.S. to the UN’s One Trillion Trees Initiative. 

The House Agriculture Committee will hold a hearing on innovative wood products and promoting healthy forests. 

The House Committee on Education and Labor will review mismanagement of the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund. 

On Thursday, the House Appropriations Committee will review the Forest Service budget and the Department of Energy budget, with Energy Secretary Dan Brouillette testifying. 

Meanwhile, EPA Administrator Andrew WheelerAndrew WheelerOvernight Energy: EPA to regulate ‘forever chemicals’ in drinking water | Trump budget calls for slashing funds for climate science centers | House Dems urge banks not to fund drilling in Arctic refuge EPA will regulate ‘forever chemicals’ in drinking water Overnight Energy: Trump signs order to divert water to California farmers | EPA proposes new rollback to Obama coal ash rules | Green group ranks Bloomberg, Klobuchar last in climate plans MORE will sit down with the House Energy and Commerce Committee as they review his budget.

And the House Natural Resources Committee will hold a hearing on sexual harassment at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

 

OUTSIDE THE BELTWAY:

3M to pay $55M in Michigan PFAS settlement, Michigan Live reports.

Hawaii bill would mandate testing kids for lead poisoning, Honolulu Civil Beat reports.

Washington lawmakers want to fund solutions for healthier soil — and less gassy cows, Crosscut reports. 

 

ICYMI: Stories from Friday…

California delivers swift suit after Trump orders water diversion

Buttigieg expands on climate plan with new proposals

EPA moves to limit financial pressure on ‘forever chemical’ manufacturers under cleanup law

Trump administration releases supplemental information on sage grouse rollback

Click Here: NRL Telstra Premiership