LARREULE, France — Elections in my small village of Larreule, in southwestern France, are usually sociable, predictable affairs.

When the polls close, a handful of residents gather in the village hall to watch the transparent urn being emptied and the ballot papers recorded in triplicate before the totals are sent to the local prefecture in Tarbes.

The results were typically just as predictable. Historically, rural southwest France has always voted for left-wing candidates who are decisively in favor of the European Union. That all changed this year.

In May’s European Parliament election, a third of our 183-strong electorate voted for Euroskeptic parties, especially the far-right National Rally.

The results amounted to a doigt d’honneur to the political elites of Europe. The mood of frustration and anger that gave rise to the Yellow Jacket protests is alive and well here.

Away from the capital, many people feel that no one — whether that’s in Paris or in Brussels — is listening to them.

The election campaign — and the vote in Larreule — got me thinking about why that is.

Europe’s elites couldn’t listen to the people they serve even if they wanted to. There is no open channel of communication that can carry the voice of the average voter up to those in power — let alone the voice of those so disenfranchised they have given up on the ballot box.

In the weeks before the May election, I exchanged emails with Christian Wigand, a spokesperson for the European Commission. I suggested the EU is out of touch with ordinary Europeans — an idea he disputed, supplying facts and figures to disprove theory. A recent survey, he said triumphantly, had shown that a majority of European citizens agree with the statement “my voice counts in the EU.”

So why do so many people in rural France feel voiceless? Any fool can make a country or a pan-continental union appear democratic. What distinguishes a true democracy from a sham one is effective communication — and not from the top down, but the other way around.

The people — the real source of politicians’ authority after all — must be able to speak clearly and effectively to their appointed officials. Put more simply: An average European like me must be able to communicate to those making the big decisions that determine the course of European politics.

Wigand didn’t seem to like the idea there might be room for improvement. Things are all right as they were, he assured me.

So I decided to take his word for it and try out the channels that already exist. How can an individual EU citizen convey his or her thoughts — whether that’s approval, criticism or suggestions — to the EU executive?

Let’s start with the basics. You have overt democratic rights. The vote that really counts is for your national parliament: It appoints a government that sits in the European Council and sends a representative to the Commission on your behalf.

Even if you assume the electoral system is fair — which arguably isn’t always the case, as in the U.K.’s first-past-the-post system — your voice is still submerged in a cacophony of other electors and filtered through your country’s party system. It is quite possible that next to nothing of what you want by way of European policy will be communicated by the means of a general election.

You can also vote for an MEP every five years. But there are pitfalls there too. As a Brit living in France, I am part of a single national constituency of 47.3 million represented by 73 MEPs. Here too, your vote gets lost.

Click Here: New Zealand rugby store

Conveying a message from the roots of the tree to the preening cockatoo sitting on the uppermost branch is close to impossible. And ultimately, the Parliament doesn’t have as much power as the other institutions, playing a secondary, marginal role.

There are other options. The Commission makes an effort to go out and meet the people in public meetings called Citizen’s Dialogues, held in public halls in various EU countries. A noble idea, you might think, until you consider the practicalities.

Curious about these get-togethers, I looked up my nearest Citizens’ Dialogue. It turned out it was held last year and there was no other date on the horizon. It was also in Toulouse.

Attending would have required four hours of driving (burning fossil fuels) to attend, and a day’s lost earnings, as I am self-employed. The event would be even more difficult to reach for the disabled, the elderly or the poor. The inarticulate, the undereducated and the immigrant learning a new language probably wouldn’t dare walk through the door.

The Commission is proud that 175,000 citizens have participated in these events over the last two years. It’s an impressive sounding figure, but well below 1 percent of the population of Europe. If the village council in Larreule called a public meeting with the same success rate it would have an audience of 0.14 people — nowhere close to quorum.

Another way for the Commission to monitor its performance — and what people think of it — is by conducting consultations and surveys. In particular, the EU depends on Eurobarometer reports that it says return a detailed portrait of the views of the people inhabiting the bloc’s 28 countries.

But how accurate are these? These surveys are based on 1,000 face-to-face interviews in each country. A sample of 27,601 people is equivalent to 0.0055 percent of the EU’s population. Worse, if 1,000 people per country are consulted, that means almost 0.2 percent of the population of Luxembourg gets a voice while only 0.001 percent of Germans do. An individual voice is entirely lost in a thicket of impressive statistics.

Another spokesperson, Natasha Bertaud, was keen to tell me about the Commission’s new push to consult European citizens through the “Have your Say” facility of the EU’s official website, and pointed to the huge success in getting Europeans to share their view about scrapping summertime. Some 4.6 million people responded to the public consultation, with 80 percent in favor of ending daylight savings. Look a little closer though, and you see that a large majority of responses came from Germany. The results of 19 of the 28 countries weren’t even big enough the register in the statistics.

So, what does that leave you with, if you want to make yourself heard?

Write an email or a letter? Good luck with that. You will almost certainly get a defensive bureaucratic rebuff after a long delay.

If you feel strongly about something and can rally people to your cause, you can also create a petition — a “citizens’ initiative” in EU parlance — but there is no guarantee you will thereby effect a change in law.

All that is left after that is direct action: Take to the streets, wave banners, follow your closest demagogue, cut and paste lies on social media. This is what happens when feelings of frustration and powerlessness find no outlet. We’ve seen it happen across Europe in the past years, and it should make us worry for the state of our democracy.

If the European project is to survive, it needs to have a conversation with the people who believe in it and those who have lost faith in it. They have plenty to say and no way to say it.

Nick Inman is an author based in France and a regular contributor to France’s English-language newspaper, the Connexion.

In the 1960s, the slogan of German carmaker BMW was Freude am Fahren, or the joy of driving.

But new EU rules approved this week will make the experience of future drivers very different from the petrol-fueled adrenaline rush of decades ago. There are three main forces that will radically change the car of the future — the push to decarbonize driven by growing worries about climate change, efforts to end traffic deaths, and new technology.

One new law, approved Monday, updates carbon dioxide reduction targets for cars and vans up to 2030. That’s going to accelerate carmakers’ efforts to produce more battery-powered vehicles, which will likely be more expensive than those that run on internal combustion engines.

Click Here: cheap Cowboys jersey

A second passed the European Parliament on Tuesday with a thumping majority; it mandates a series of life-saving new technologies in vehicles. While the measure is aimed at slashing road deaths, it could upend the business model of performance automakers like BMW.

“The emission limits are too stringent, and of course a lot of the safety features that we support further limit the excitement for the sake of reducing casualties and fatal accidents,” said one German auto manager.

On Wednesday, MEPs voted on new technical standards for connected car communications. Their decision not to object to European Commission plans to proceed with Wi-Fi-based protocols brings self-driving systems a step closer to the real world.

Remaking the car

The spate of lawmaking at the end of the current mandate is part of the EU’s efforts to clean up the transport sector, which accounts for a quarter of Europe’s greenhouse gas emissions, and ramp up action to cut the thousands of avoidable deaths on Europe’s roads each year.

Preliminary figures from the Commission out this month say there were 25,100 road deaths across the bloc in 2018. While that figure is down a fifth on 2010, it was just 1 percent lower than the number of fatalities in 2017. The Commission’s original aim was to halve the 2010 figure by 2020, and it admits “we are off track to reach our target.”

Over 90 percent of road accidents are due to human error — which is why policymakers and lobby groups want cars to carry more technology. That ranges from intelligent speed assistance, which monitors maps and road signs to inform drivers if they’re breaking the speed limit, to emergency braking and lane-keeping systems, as well as ways of detecting drunk or drowsy drivers. The systems will be mandatory from 2022.

“This law is paving the way to save thousands of lives in the coming years,” said Róża Thun, a Polish MEP from the European People’s Party who steered the legislation through Parliament.

That’s forcing carmakers to revamp their sales pitches from speed to safety.

It’s a close fit with Volvo’s traditional reputation as a maker of safe vehicles, and the Swedish carmaker is jumping ahead of the EU by promising that by 2020 its cars will cause zero casualties, and will have a speed limit of 180 kilometers per hour built into new models.

“We want to start a conversation about whether carmakers have the right or maybe even an obligation to install technology in cars that changes their driver’s behavior, to tackle things like speeding, intoxication or distraction,” CEO Håkan Samuelsson said in March.

But other parts of the industry are worried that the experience of driving will be radically different in the future.

“A key concern of ours is that many drivers are simply not aware of these existing technologies — let alone the many new safety features that will be fitted in all new passenger cars in just a few years’ time,” said Erik Jonnaert, head of the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association, an industry lobby.

The industry was successful in killing an effort to mandate technology that prevents cars from speeding, which is why the rules will only ensure cars give warnings that can be overridden.

“We do not introduce a speed limiter, but an intelligent system that will make drivers fully aware when they are speeding,” Thun said.

A new approach

The changes inside the car mirror those happening on the road. Photo radars are ubiquitous in many countries, and speed limits are coming down; France recently dropped the limit on smaller roads to 80 kilometers an hour from 90 kph, and Germany is considering limits on its iconic Autobahns. Cities from Paris and London to Brussels and Munich are mulling ways to prevent older and more polluting cars from driving on their streets.

It’s all happening as car use undergoes a revolution. Apps like Uber aim to make owning a car optional, while many young people aren’t even bothering to get driver’s licenses. The Commission projects that by 2030 a quarter of the bloc’s drivers will be over 65.

While they may feel nostalgia for the free-spirited era of the 1960s, many others won’t.

“It’s all rational over emotion,” the German auto manager said of the policy shift.

Weber tells Orbán to end anti-Brussels campaign and apologize

‘All options are on the table,’ says senior German MEP.

Manfred Weber, the frontrunner to be next European Commission president, said Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán must end his anti-Brussels campaign and apologize for his actions.

His comments came a day after four national parties within the European People’s Party called for Orbán’s Fidesz to be expelled or suspended from the center-right bloc.

“All options are on the table. We’re talking about this now within the EPP,” Weber told Spiegel. “With his comments and his poster campaign, Viktor Orbán has seriously damaged the EPP. So I expect him to apologize and end the campaign.”

Last month, the Hungarian government unveiled a taxpayer-financed campaign attacking Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, along with the Hungarian-American billionaire George Soros, and accusing officials in Brussels of plotting to impose migration policies that go against Hungary’s interests.

“Viktor Orbán is moving in the wrong political direction,” said Weber, a German MEP. “When it comes to questions of proper behavior or fundamental questions of democratic order, he has many similarities to Matteo Salvini from [Italy’s] League or to the [Polish] PiS chair Jarosław Kaczyński. This is not my way, and neither is it the EPP’s way.”

Weber has been an ally of Orbán in the past, though in the fall Weber voted in favor of a European Parliament resolution to open disciplinary proceedings against Hungary for allegedly breaching core EU values. In initiating the so-called Article 7 proceedings, the Parliament cited concerns about judicial independence, corruption, freedom of expression, academic freedom, the rights of minorities and migrants, and other issues.

Three parties on Thursday signed a letter to EPP President Joseph Daul asking for Fidesz’s expulsion — the Flemish Christian Democrats (CD&V), the Walloon Humanist Democratic Center (cdH) and Luxembourg’s Christian Social People’s Party (CSV). A fourth party, Portugal’s CDS-People’s Party, said it wrote to the EPP presidency, calling for Fidesz to either be expelled or suspended.

Socialists nominate Frans Timmermans for European Commission president

Party leaders proclaim ‘spring is coming’ for the Continent’s progressives, but they continue to face their lowest-ever poll numbers.

MADRID — European Socialists kicked off their 2019 European Parliament election campaign on Saturday by officially nominating Frans Timmermans — currently second in command at the European Commission — for the top job, and framing their campaign for European Parliament seats around a “new social contract.”

Flanked by giant red billboards, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez and Timmermans wore jeans as they danced to “Bella Ciao” a favored song about the Italian World War II resistance, while other leading members of the center left payed homage to Timmermans, who ran unopposed after the withdrawal of his Commission colleague Maroš Šefčovič from the race in November.

The European election season is now set to move into high gear, with Manfred Weber, the European People’s Party candidate for Commission president to officially launch his campaign in early March.

While the Socialist campaign manifesto attacked the “dangerous delusions” of nationalists and promised a “change of leadership and policy direction, leaving behind the neoliberal and conservative models of the past,” the party faces an uphill battle in 2019.  

Timmermans has taken on many of the highest-profile files — including controversial approaches to migration and rule of law — handled by the current Commission, led by the center-right Jean-Claude Juncker, and may struggle to separate himself from that legacy.

In overall terms, the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats — the European Parliament group of the Party of European Socialists (PES) — is on course to win only 132 seats out of 705 in the next European Parliament, on the back of just 20 percent of the EU-wide vote. It has currently 186 seats out of 751 MEPs in the Parliament.

Poland’s new progressive sensation Robert Biedroń used an appearance to proclaim that “spring is coming” for progressive forces around the EU, but in countries like France, the Socialists are in particularly dire straits, polling at only around 5 percent, and would be wiped out altogether if they fail to clear the 5 percent threshold.

The party of European Socialists is also outnumbered by their rivals, conservative European People’s Party (EPP) and the liberal ALDE party, at EU summit tables.

In private, Socialist officials say they are hopeful they had can add to their summit caucus ranks by winning national elections in Finland in April and Denmark several weeks later.

“We all know that we are challenged, our values are challenged,” said Stefan Löfven, Sweden’s Socialist prime minister, in Madrid.

Click Here: Cheap France Rugby Jersey

Udo Bullmann, the European Parliament Socialist group leader urged “a social revolution to save our planet, to give our society a decent future.”

In his congress speech, Timmermans put a strong emphasis on traditional left-wing battles, pledging for a “strong alliance with Europe’s trade unions,” “decent pay for decent work,” a fair taxation system, a closer cooperation with Africa and the need to fight the “shortage of affordable housing in Europe.”

He also said one of his landmark projects as future Commission president would be a “ban on gender-based violence.”

President TrumpDonald John TrumpCensus Bureau spends millions on ad campaign to mitigate fears on excluded citizenship question Bloomberg campaign: Primary is two-way race with Sanders Democratic senator meets with Iranian foreign minister MORE on Tuesday commuted the sentence of a former Illinois governor and pardoned three high-profile white-collar criminals in a sweeping display of executive clemency affecting nearly a dozen cases. 

The White House portrayed it as an act of mercy for deserving candidates whose debts had been repaid. But the move also raised questions about Trump’s intervention in criminal cases, especially when handling individuals with powerful connections, and over how he might deal with two associates, Michael Flynn and Roger StoneRoger Jason StoneTrump says he has ‘total confidence’ in Barr Judge refuses to delay Stone sentencing In defense of William Barr MORE, who are facing imprisonment. 

The most prominent recipient of Trump’s clemency on Tuesday was former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D), who had served just over half of his 14-year prison sentence. Blagojevich was convicted a decade ago on a number of federal charges that included trying to sell the Senate seat Barack ObamaBarack Hussein ObamaScarborough: Media ‘parroting’ Trump economy when Obama’s ‘was much stronger’ Trump rejects Obama taking credit for strong economy On The Trail: Democrats plan to hammer Trump on Social Security, Medicare MORE vacated when he was elected president.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Yes, we commuted the sentence of Rod Blagojevich,” Trump told reporters before departing for a multiday trip west. “He served eight years in jail, a long time. He seems like a very nice person, don’t know him.”

In total, Trump pardoned or commuted the sentences of nearly a dozen people, many of whom had high-profile advocates urging the White House to intervene in their cases, including conservative media personalities and GOP lawmakers.

Three pardons drew particular notice: former San Francisco 49ers owner Edward DeBartolo Jr., who pleaded guilty in 1998 for failing to report that he was extorted by an ex-Louisiana governor; former New York City Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik, who was convicted of tax fraud and making false statements; and financier Michael Milken who pioneered high-yield “junk” bonds and pleaded guilty in 1990 to six felonies related to securities and tax fraud. 

It is unclear what role, if any, the Department of Justice’s Office of the Pardon Attorney had in Trump’s decisions. Neither the office nor the White House responded when asked.

An analysis by The Washington Post this month found that the majority of clemency grants issued under Trump have been bestowed on those with White House connections and bypassed the executive branch’s slate of pardon advisers.

A White House announcement of the clemency grants contained short biographies of the recipients, as well as a list of their backers, with an emphasis on celebrity athletes and Trump allies in conservative media and Congress. 

ADVERTISEMENT

In Blagojevich’s case, the White House noted, the former Illinois governor had received support from some Republicans and Democrats, including former President Obama’s Attorney General Eric HolderEric Himpton HolderThey forgot that under Trump, there are two sets of rules NAACP to honor John Lewis Trump is flooding the swamp that Obama drained MORE and the Rev. Jesse Jackson. 

Among those supporting Kerik’s pardon were Trump lawyer and former New York City Mayor Rudy GiulianiRudy GiulianiWe should listen to John Bolton The Hill’s Morning Report – Sanders on the rise as Nevada debate looms Democrats worried about Trump’s growing strength MORE, Fox News analyst and former judge Andrew NapolitanoAndrew Peter NapolitanoFox’s Napolitano: Roger Stone ‘absolutely entitled’ to new trial after juror’s tweets revealed Fox’s Napolitano calls Trump acquittal ‘legal assault’ on Constitution: ‘Somewhere, Nixon is smiling’ Napolitano says bringing up new charges would be ‘mistrial’ if impeachment were in criminal court MORE, Fox News personality Geraldo Rivera and Rep. Pete KingPeter (Pete) KingLawmakers introduce bill taxing e-cigarettes to pay for anti-vaping campaigns Democrat who opposed Trump, Clinton impeachment inquiries faces big test House GOP criticizes impeachment drive as distracting from national security issues MORE (R-N.Y.).

Many Illinois Democrats had previously criticized Blagojevich’s sentence, but the five-member Illinois Republican delegation blasted Trump’s move.

“Blagojevich is the face of public corruption in Illinois, and not once has he shown any remorse for his clear and documented record of egregious crimes that undermined the trust placed in him by voters,” the lawmakers said in a statement.

For more than a year, Trump has publicly weighed a commutation for Blagojevich, who had previously appeared as a contestant on “The Celebrity Apprentice.” 

Blagojevich was removed from office in 2009 and later convicted on a range of corruption charges, which in addition to trying to sell a U.S. Senate seat, also included the attempted extortion of a children’s hospital for campaign contributions.

He was infamously caught on tape speaking about the pay-for-play scheme involving Obama’s seat.

“I’ve got this thing, and it’s f—–g golden. I’m just not giving it up for f—–g nothing,” Blagojevich said in a recorded phone call.

The former governor has been incarcerated since 2012.

Trump’s decision to grant clemency for a range of corrupt behavior also raised questions about his motives, with some questioning if the president was seeking to soften public perception on such crimes.

“The President is making clear his increased willingness to exercise his discretionary powers to benefit those who engaged in the kind of white collar felonies the president tends to dismiss as ‘what everyone does,’ ” said Brad Moss, a national security lawyer.

“President Trump may be trying to groom the public to believe that corruption is not a serious crime,” said Barbara McQuade, a law professor at Michigan University and former federal prosecutor. “To the contrary, our laws exist to prevent powerful people from exploiting others.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) said the president’s move was not in keeping with the spirit of presidential clemency.

“There are people who deserve commutations but won’t get them from this president because he sees pardons as a way to undermine the rule of law, not to see justice done,” Beyer said in a tweet.

The question of presidential pardons now hovers over the criminal cases of two former Trump aides who face imprisonment.

Roger Stone, a 67-year-old right-wing provocateur, was found guilty in November of lying to Congress and witness tampering related to his efforts to provide the Trump campaign inside information about WikiLeaks in 2016. Stone is scheduled to be sentenced Thursday.

Sentencing for Michael Flynn, Trump’s former national security adviser, has been delayed multiple times after Flynn withdrew his guilty plea of lying to the FBI about his contacts with the Russian ambassador to the U.S. during the Trump transition period.

Trump has repeatedly declined to rule out future pardons, including for Stone. And in recent days he’s taken to Twitter to defend Stone, attacking the prosecutors who include members of former special counsel Robert MuellerRobert (Bob) Swan MuellerCNN’s Toobin warns McCabe is in ‘perilous condition’ with emboldened Trump CNN anchor rips Trump over Stone while evoking Clinton-Lynch tarmac meeting The Hill’s 12:30 Report: New Hampshire fallout MORE‘s team, and suggesting he might sue them.

ADVERTISEMENT

Trump has dismissed criticism, including from Attorney General William BarrWilliam Pelham BarrTrump says he has ‘total confidence’ in Barr In defense of William Barr Trump suggests he may sue over Mueller investigation MORE, over his tweets.

Brian Kalt, a law professor at Michigan State University, described the pardon power as “the closest thing a president has to a magic wand,” and said it’s a prerogative Trump seems eager to employ.

Click Here: Tonga Rugby Shop

“Unlike his other powers, he does not need to go through Congress to do this, and he does not need to rely on others to implement his wishes,” Kalt said. “He just declares it and it happens, and it’s a guaranteed headline.”

Brett Samuels contributed.

Democratic Sen. Chris MurphyChristopher (Chris) Scott MurphyDemocratic senator meets with Iranian foreign minister Lawmakers wary as US on cusp of initial deal with Taliban Democratic senators ask FDA to ban device used to shock disabled students MORE (D-Conn.) met with Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif on the sidelines of this weekend’s Munich Security Conference, the senator confirmed Tuesday.

In a post on Medium, Murphy said he wanted to discuss Iranian-backed forces in Iraq, the war in Yemen and U.S. prisoners being held in Iran.

“I have no delusions about Iran — they are our adversary, responsible for the killing of thousands of Americans and unacceptable levels of support for terrorist organizations throughout the Middle East,” Murphy wrote. “But I think it’s dangerous to not talk to your enemies. Discussions and negotiations are a way to ease tensions and reduce the chances for crisis.”

ADVERTISEMENT

The meeting was first reported by conservative outlet The Federalist and quickly criticized by right-wing circles.

Speaking to reporters at Joint Base Andrews, President TrumpDonald John TrumpCensus Bureau spends millions on ad campaign to mitigate fears on excluded citizenship question Bloomberg campaign: Primary is two-way race with Sanders Democratic senator meets with Iranian foreign minister MORE questioned whether Murphy violated the Logan Act, which bans private U.S. citizens from conducting unauthorized diplomacy with foreign governments.

Legal scholars generally agree the Logan Act does not apply to members of Congress, and there is lengthy precedent of lawmakers meeting with foreign government officials.

“Sen. Murphy met with the Iranians; is that a fact? I just saw that on the way over. Is there anything that I should know? Because that sounds like, to me, a violation of the Logan Act,” Trump said.

Asked about reporting on the meeting before Murphy’s post, Secretary of State Mike PompeoMichael (Mike) Richard PompeoDemocratic senator meets with Iranian foreign minister The Hill’s Morning Report – Sanders on the rise as Nevada debate looms Congress looks to strengthen hand in State Department following impeachment MORE highlighted U.S. sanctions against Zarif, as well as Iran’s recent shooting down of a Ukrainian commercial airliner.

“If they met, I don’t know what they said. I hope they were reinforcing America’s foreign policy, not their own,” Pompeo said during a news conference in Ethiopia.

ADVERTISEMENT

In his post, Murphy stressed that he does not conduct diplomacy on behalf of the U.S. government, but added that Congress is a co-equal branch of government that sets foreign policy.

“I cannot conduct diplomacy on behalf of the whole of the U.S. government, and I don’t pretend to be in a position to do so. But if Trump isn’t going to talk to Iran, then someone should,” he wrote.

The meeting comes after a military confrontation between the United States and Iran nearly escalated into war in January. A drone strike ordered by Trump killed Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani, and Iran retaliated with a missile strike on an Iraqi military base that gave more than 100 U.S. service members brain injuries.

Murphy said he wanted to meet with Zarif to “gauge whether he thinks the reprisals for the Soleimani assassination are over.”

“I want to make sure it is 100 percent clear to him that if any groups in Iraq that are affiliated with Iran attack the United States’ forces in Iraq, this will be perceived as an unacceptable escalation,” Murphy added.

The pair also discussed the civil war in Yemen, where Iran supports the Houthi rebels, Murphy said.

“I tell him that I know it is not a coincidence that the recent uptick in attacks from Iranian-aligned Houthis in Yemen started right after the Soleimani killing,” he wrote.

Murphy also said he raised the issue of a 2 percent tax the Houthis had planned to impose on humanitarian assistance, a plan the Houthis said Friday they dropped.

Finally, Murphy said he raised the issue of U.S. prisoners in Iran; he said he and Zarif spent “a few minutes discussing how the situation could be resolved.”

Acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad WolfChad WolfDHS chief: SWAT-like teams wouldn’t be needed if sanctuary cities would help ICE Trump to waive federal contracting laws to speed construction of border wall DHS gives New York the red light for state’s green light law MORE said on Tuesday that SWAT-like teams would not be needed to back up Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) efforts in so-called sanctuary cities if local officials there would help with immigration enforcement.

“What we found in these sanctuary jurisdictions is that local law enforcement does not work with the department,” Wolf told Fox News’s “Fox & Friends.”

“So what used to take one or two officers going into a jail setting and picking up an individual that’s on a final order of removal, we now have to go into communities with many, many officers.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) officers will support ICE  as “additional resources” for “law enforcement and immigration duties” in sanctuary cities, according to the acting secretary.

He clarified that the CBP officers will work independently from police, so local officers may not know where department officers plan to enforce immigration law. 

“Again, in these sanctuary cities, they provide no resources to help us do our mission,” he said. “Should they decide to honor detainers and help ICE, we would not have to call in these additional resources.”

Sanctuary cities have declared themselves safe havens for undocumented immigrants, meaning they will not be turned over to federal authorities. 

President TrumpDonald John TrumpCensus Bureau spends millions on ad campaign to mitigate fears on excluded citizenship question Bloomberg campaign: Primary is two-way race with Sanders Democratic senator meets with Iranian foreign minister MORE and administration officials condemned these cities, with Trump pledging in his State of the Union address to combat them. 

Updated at 10:52 a.m.

WOTUS LAWSUIT: A coalition of environmental groups informed the Trump administration Tuesday that it would sue over a major rollback of water protections designed to replace the Obama-era Waters of the U.S. (WOTUS) rule.

“Trump’s despicable giveaway to polluters will wipe out countless wetlands and streams and speed the extinction of endangered wildlife across the country,” Brett Hartl, government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity, said in a statement. “Even as we’re fighting this in court, the polluters will rush to fill in wetlands and turn our waterways into industrial toilets.”

The coming suit, which is spearheaded by the Center for Biological Diversity and includes a number of waterway protection groups, is the first of what may be many lawsuits against the rule.

ADVERTISEMENT

President TrumpDonald John TrumpCensus Bureau spends millions on ad campaign to mitigate fears on excluded citizenship question Bloomberg campaign: Primary is two-way race with Sanders Democratic senator meets with Iranian foreign minister MORE‘s Navigable Waters Protection Rule, finalized last month, dramatically limits the scope of protections for the nation’s waterways, excluding many smaller bodies of water, including seasonal ones, from federal oversight. 

Critics argue the rule ignores that all waterways are connected, with reduced protections increasing the risk that pollution and pesticides will flow downstream into bigger water bodies that serve as drinking water sources.

The coalition’s notice argues the rule did not comply with the Endangered Species Act (ESA) — another law rolled back by the Trump administration. 

The new water rule violates endangered species protections “by taking an action that ‘may affect’ ESA-listed species without having first engaged in mandatory consultation under the ESA,” the group wrote in its notice.

Trump promised during the 2016 campaign to repeal WOTUS, calling it “one of the most ridiculous regulations of all.”

The law had been particularly unpopular with farmers, who argued WOTUS was too far-reaching and required grand efforts to protect relatively small bodies of water that run through their property, ultimately subjecting large swaths of land to federal oversight. 

But experts say Trump’s new rule does much more than reverse the Obama-era plan, scaling back protections for waterways in place for as much as 50 years by limiting the Clean Water Act.

ADVERTISEMENT

Read more here.

 

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

 

 

INTRA-PARTY STRIFE: Republicans’ new climate plan was meant to show voters the party cares about climate change, but it’s also illustrating the difficult tightrope the GOP walks on green issues as it faces internal pushback. 

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthyKevin Owen McCarthySunday shows preview: 2020 Democrats jockey for top spot ahead of Nevada caucuses GOP climate plan faces pushback — from Republicans House GOP campaign arm mocks Democrats after stumbling upon internal info on races MORE (R-Calif.) rolled out the legislative package Wednesday, flanked by some of the party’s most active lawmakers on energy and environment issues.

“The Democrats have trained everybody to think that the only people who care about climate change are the ones who engage in hysterical alarmism or engage in real high-minded but ultimately false aspirations of ‘we’re going to decrease this much’… but they forget about the actual solutions,” said Rep. Dan CrenshawDaniel CrenshawGOP climate plan faces pushback — from Republicans Lawmakers trade insults over Trump budget cuts House Republicans propose carbon capture and sequestration legislation MORE (R-Texas), who is leading a bill on carbon capture research and development. 

But the bill was immediately condemned by the powerful Club for Growth PAC and elicited grumbles from a handful of lawmakers. 

“The next step needs to be the trash can for this stuff,” said Rep. Thomas MassieThomas Harold MassieGOP climate plan faces pushback — from Republicans Overnight Defense: House passes bills to rein in Trump on Iran | Pentagon seeks Iraq’s permission to deploy missile defenses | Roberts refuses to read Paul question on whistleblower during impeachment trial Here are the lawmakers who defected on Iran legislation MORE (R-Ky.), who has advocated for more carbon in the atmosphere, arguing it will spur plant growth. 

In the first of three eventual proposals, the package focuses on carbon capture, hoping to sequester pollution by planting trees and expanding tax credits for and boosting research on technology that helps remove carbon as energy is produced.  

The legislation hasn’t been embraced by environmental groups, who argue it’s not a serious solution to climate change. And it’s gotten a tepid response at best from Democrats who, despite their concerns about the approach, have scheduled a hearing for the tree legislation.

But the conservative Club for Growth has described it as a collection of “stifling liberal environmental taxes, regulations, and subsidies” while threatening to withhold support from any lawmaker who backs it.

Click Here: Italy Rugby Shop

“Besides hurting our economy, these measures will not make a single environmentalist vote for a Republican and only alienate conservatives across the country,” the group wrote in a statement.

ADVERTISEMENT

Massie is likewise concerned Republicans are falling into a trap, being pushed by Democrats to address issues that are unpopular within the GOP base. 

“Moderate Republicans are doing what they do when Democrats introduce a gun bill. They feel like they have to introduce their own gun bill even though constituents don’t want it and it won’t make them safe,” he said. 

Matt Gorman, a Republican strategist, said he sees little political downside for members who chose to support the legislation, even if it means losing some endorsements.

“Outside groups don’t get press off milquetoast statements, so when the rubber meets the road we’ll see if they follow through on their threat, but I think they hope they don’t have to. The idea is to try and scare members from it,” Gorman said.

McCarthy’s leadership on the effort gives Republicans easy cover, he added, and backing the legislation could be a good move for those in swing districts.

Concerns expressed by hesitant members include spending money on tax breaks as well as government involvement in an effort that could be led by citizens.

“I have no aversion to planting trees, I just don’t think the government needs to be in that business,” Massie said.

ADVERTISEMENT

Other members fear the ultimate package would raise the costs of energy or focus too heavily on renewables.

“Here’s the problem: It can’t be addressed this way,” said Rep. Paul GosarPaul Anthony GosarGOP climate plan faces pushback — from Republicans New Qatari prime minister means new opportunities Why Mitt Romney’s courageous vote to convict Trump matters MORE (R-Ariz.), adding that the country must rely on fossil fuels to ensure consistent electricity generation. “We’ve got to have an all-the-above type solution.”

House Energy and Commerce Ranking Member Greg WaldenGregory (Greg) Paul WaldenGOP climate plan faces pushback — from Republicans Coalition plan seeks to cut carbon emissions in half by 2035 Overnight Energy: Panel gives chairman power to subpoena Interior | House passes bill to protect wilderness | House Republicans propose carbon capture bill | Ocasio-Cortez introduces bill to ban fracking MORE (R-Ore.), who helped roll out the bills, was surprised by some of the resistance.

“Who’s against planting trees?” he asked.

Walden sees the legislation as fully in line with GOP values.

“They’re positive, they fit in a conservative mantle. They’re not regulatory, they’re not taxes. They’re good things we all ought to be able to embrace,” he said.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Read more about the disagreement here. 

 

ALL SMILES: Former Energy Secretary Rick PerryRick PerryRick Perry to rejoin dental insurance company as chief strategy officer Interior Secretary David Bernhardt is designated survivor for 2020 State of the Union Attorney tells McConnell that Parnas has records ‘directly relevant’ to impeachment MORE will rejoin a dental insurance company as the vice chairman of its board and as its chief strategy officer. 

MCNA Dental announced Monday that Perry, who previously served on its board of directors, would return to the company.

Perry will “play a leading role” in MCNA Dental’s government relations, a statement from the company said. He will also “provide strategic vision” for company’s expansion of its national platform and give insights on health care reform. 

“I am excited to rejoin the MCNA team and help to further its mission of providing high quality oral health care for the children of America,” Perry said in the statement. 

The company’s website says it offers public services for people on Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program and Medicare, as well as private plans. 

Perry left the Trump administration last year. President Trump announced Perry’s departure from his post as Energy secretary in October amid scrutiny over dealings with Ukraine.

Prior to joining the Trump administration, Perry served as the governor of Texas and ran unsuccessfully for president in 2012 and 2016.

MCNA Dental CEO Jeffrey Feingold said in the Monday statement that Perry’s “tremendous diplomatic expertise and his experience spearheading Medicaid reform in Texas will enhance the capabilities of our leadership team and help to introduce a new era of innovation and growth.” 

The story is here.

 

BANKROLLED: Amazon founder and CEO Jeff BezosJeffrey (Jeff) Preston BezosBezos launching initiative that commits billion to combat climate change Bottom line Hillicon Valley: Trump adviser presses House to make Bezos testify | GOP senator offers bill to restrict US sales to Huawei | Facebook to let campaigns use paid influencers MORE on Monday announced the launch of the Bezos Earth Fund, a new global initiative that will commit $10 billion to combating climate change.

Bezos, whose net worth is listed at $130 billion, said in an Instagram post that the fund would support scientists, activists, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and “any effort that offers a real possibility to help preserve and protect the natural world.”

While he did not offer details on what efforts he plans to prioritize, Bezos said he would begin issuing grants in connection to the fund this summer. 

“Climate change is the biggest threat to our planet,” he said. “I want to work alongside others both to amplify known ways and to explore new ways of fighting the devastating impact of climate change on this planet we all share.

Read more about the launch here.

 

SEEKING COMMENT: A decision by the Department of the Interior to open up comments on a scientific study looking at how polar bears are impacted by oil and gas activity is raising questions from observers who say the department may be looking to undermine any opposition to drilling in protected Alaskan wilderness.

The Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) posted the study to the Federal Register Tuesday, inviting comment on peer-reviewed research looking at how seismic activity from the oil and gas industry affects polar bear “denning” as they raise their young cubs.

But experts say it’s highly unusual for any branch of Interior to post one scientific study for comment rather than a body of peer-reviewed research that accompanies a policy decision.

“What it looks like to me is they’re giving industry the opportunity to negate the study,” said Andrew Rosenberg, director of the Center for Science and Democracy and the Union of Concerned Scientists.

The study comes as Interior is pushing to open drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), something the House has tried to block. 

“What is it you want the public to say about the peer-reviewed study — are they going to peer review it better than the peer reviewers? You don’t normally open up an avenue like this unless you’re waiting for special interest groups to jump in,” Rosenberg told The Hill. “This is a very directed way to undermine the science.”

The FWS said posting a study for comment is unusual but is part of a new effort to increase transparency. 

“This is not something we have typically done in the past that I am aware of, but we are always looking for new ways to be transparent and keep the public informed about the new and often innovative science taking place across the Service,” Gavin Shire, spokesman for the FWS, said in a statement to The Hill. “This notice is a way for us to make the public aware of the study and receive [its] feedback on how we might apply the model in the field.”

Read more here. 

 

ICYMI… PITCHING IN: Secretary of State Mike PompeoMichael (Mike) Richard PompeoDemocratic senator meets with Iranian foreign minister The Hill’s Morning Report – Sanders on the rise as Nevada debate looms Congress looks to strengthen hand in State Department following impeachment MORE on Saturday pledged that the U.S. would contribute $1 billion to help support the energy independence of European allies.

The support to the Three Seas Initiative, an effort that aims to promote dialogue among 12 member states in Central and Eastern Europe on a variety of policies, comes as President Trump continues to press European allies over their contributions to shared defense, trade and other issues.

“As a brand new statement today of our support for sovereignty, prosperity, and energy independence of our European friends, today I want to announce that through the International Development Finance Corporation, and with the support of our United States Congress, we intend to provide up to $1 billion in financing to Central and Eastern European countries of the Three Seas Initiative,” Pompeo announced at the Munich Security Conference. 

“Our aim is quite simple: It is to galvanize private sector investment in the energy sector to protect freedom and democracy around the world.” 

Trump and lawmakers in Washington have urged European countries to rely less on Russian natural gas and instead use energy exports from the U.S. and other countries.

Read more about his pledge here. 

 

GORE’S GET OUT THE VOTE: Former Vice President Al GoreAlbert (Al) Arnold GoreClarence Thomas breaks his silence in theaters nationwide New Hampshire only exacerbates Democratic Party agita What Trump got right MORE on Tuesday launched a new national voter registration campaign in partnership with the Climate Reality Action Fund, recruiting younger voters to prioritize climate when voting in 2020.

The former vice president will visit college campuses across the country to discuss the climate crisis, according to the “Vote Your Future: Vote Climate” campaign’s press release.

The campaign, which will be managed by the Climate Reality Action Fund, will begin at Texas Southern University Wednesday. Gore tweeted that Bob Bullard, the self-described “father of environmental justice,” will join him.

Read more about the campaign here.

 

A RECYCLING HITCH: A new report from Greenpeace has found that many plastic products are not actually recyclable because few, if any, U.S. facilities can process them. 

The report, published Tuesday, was based on a survey of all 367 operating material recovery facilities in the U.S. It found that only some types of plastic bottles and jugs “can be legitimately labeled as recyclable in the U.S. today.”

The organization found that only 14 percent of the facilities accept plastic clamshells, 11 percent accept plastic cups, 4 percent accept plastic bags and 1 percent accept plastic cutlery, straws and stirrers. 

Greenpeace, in the statement on the report, also threatened to file complaints with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) against several companies that it accused of using “misleading labels” if the companies do not change the labels on their plastics. 

Read more about the group’s findings here. 

 

OUTSIDE THE BELTWAY:

Behind the scenes, Pebble leaned on Alaska governor pleading for its survival, Alaska Public Media reports

Refinery fire extinguished in south Texas, no injuries, The Associated Press reports

Less logging means less money for schools in the northwest, Stateline reports.

 

ICYMI: Stories from Tuesday and the long weekend…

Climate change could wipe out coral reefs by 2100: scientists

Bezos launching initiative that commits $10 billion to combat climate change

With polar bear study open for comments, critics see effort to push drilling in ANWR

Green groups plan to sue over Trump rollback of Obama waterway protections

Pompeo pledges $1 billion in US support for European energy initiative

GOP climate plan faces pushback — from Republicans

UAE issues license for first nuclear plant in Arab world

Rick Perry to rejoin dental insurance company as chief strategy officer

Greenpeace says many plastics are not actually recyclable

Al Gore launches new voter registration effort with Climate Reality Action Fund

Fort Lauderdale mayor could seek federal assistance after 211M gallon sewage spill

President TrumpDonald John TrumpRussian sanctions will boomerang States, cities rethink tax incentives after Amazon HQ2 backlash A Presidents Day perspective on the nature of a free press MORE wanted the CIA to kill Osama bin Laden’s son Hamza bin Laden over other high-priority targets, NBC News reported Sunday. 

Intelligence officials reportedly briefed Trump on the top terrorist threats during the first two years of his presidency, including al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahri, who remains alive. But the president would ask about Hamza bin Laden. 

“He would say, ‘I’ve never heard of any of these people. What about Hamza bin Laden?'” one former official told NBC News, with another Pentagon official saying it was “the only name he knew.” 

ADVERTISEMENT

Osama bin Laden’s youngest son was not believed to be planning attacks or have a serious following but was killed in an airstrike in 2018, current and former officials familiar with the matter told the network. 

Former CIA official Douglas London said the president had an “obsession” with getting Hamza bin Laden, adding in a JustSecurity.com article that the agency did recognize the “value” in his “name recognition.” 

Click Here: Italy Rugby Shop

“Despite intelligence assessments showing the greater dangers posed by Zawahiri … and the unlikelihood Hamza was in the immediate line of succession, the president thought differently,” London wrote. “He regularly demanded updates on Hamza and insisted we accelerate our efforts to go after him.”

Experts almost unanimously agree that Hamza bin Laden was a lawful target for encouraging attacks on Americans and a potential future leader of al Qaeda. But they said he was not next in line or a top threat, London and other U.S. intelligence officials told NBC News. 

The president did authorize the killings of ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and Yemeni al Qaeda chief Qasim al-Rimi, announced in October and this month, respectively. Both leaders were considered top targets on every intelligence priority list.

But current and former intelligence officials presented potential concerns about the president’s decisionmaking for these high stake decisions, saying he doesn’t read intelligence assessments.

Trump also approved the strike that killed Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani, an attack which prompted Iran to promise retaliation and strike Iraqi bases housing U.S. troops, injuring dozens. 

“The President’s highest priority is keeping Americans safe,” a senior administration official told The Hill in a statement. “The Trump Administration has successfully targeted the most dangerous and deadly terrorists in the world in order to protect the American people, including Hamza bin Laden, al-Baghdadi, Qassem Soleimani, and Qasim al-Rimi. These and countless other measures that have removed dozens of high value targets exemplify this Administration’s resolve to defeat terrorism.”

The CIA did not immediately return request for comment.

Top House and Senate Republicans issued a rare joint statement on Tuesday supporting Attorney General William BarrWilliam Pelham BarrTrump says he has ‘total confidence’ in Barr In defense of William Barr Trump suggests he may sue over Mueller investigation MORE amid criticism over recent Justice Department decisions involving Trump associates.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellErnst endorses bipartisan Grassley-Wyden bill to lower drug prices Senate braces for fight over impeachment whistleblower testimony Trump declares war on hardworking Americans with new budget request MORE (R-Ky.), Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey GrahamLindsey Olin GrahamGraham warned Pentagon chief about consequences of Africa policy: report Senate braces for fight over impeachment whistleblower testimony US defense chief says Taliban deal ‘looks very promising’ but not without risk MORE (R-S.C.) and House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthyKevin Owen McCarthySunday shows preview: 2020 Democrats jockey for top spot ahead of Nevada caucuses GOP climate plan faces pushback — from Republicans House GOP campaign arm mocks Democrats after stumbling upon internal info on races MORE (Calif.) praised Barr as a “man of the highest character and unquestionable integrity.”

“Suggestions from outside groups that the Attorney General has fallen short of the responsibilities of his office are unfounded. The Attorney General has shown that he is committed without qualification to securing equal justice under law for all Americans,” they said.

They added that they expect “that, as always, efforts to intimidate the Attorney General will fall woefully short.”

Barr has faced mounting criticism about recent decisions made by the Department of Justice (DOJ). Last week, the department made the decision to override federal prosecutors and ask for a sentence of “far less” than the original seven to nine years recommended for Trump associate Roger StoneRoger Jason StoneTrump says he has ‘total confidence’ in Barr Judge refuses to delay Stone sentencing In defense of William Barr MORE.

Stone was found guilty on charges of lying to Congress and witness tampering. 

Trump praised Barr for “taking charge” of the case. The attorney general subsequently told ABC News that he had already planned to intervene in the sentencing recommendation before Trump tweeted his displeasure with the original DOJ recommendation.

Barr told ABC News that Trump’s tweets were “making it impossible” for him to do his job and suggested the president should stop tweeting about active Justice Department cases. 

ADVERTISEMENT

McConnell, during a Fox News interview last week, backed Barr, saying Trump “ought to listen to” the attorney general’s advice. 

But the Justice Department’s decision sparked widespread calls among Democrats for Barr to testify, as well as renewed public demands from some lawmakers that he resign. 

More than 2,000 former DOJ employees, in a letter shared by the nonprofit watchdog group Project Democracy, have also called for him to resign, accusing him of doing the president’s “personal bidding.”

But Barr’s remarks on Trump also put him back in the hot seat among some Republicans. Fox Business anchor Lou DobbsLouis (Lou) Carl DobbsBarr back on the hot seat Trump asks why Bolton didn’t complain earlier Trump allies throw jabs at Bolton over book’s claims MORE said late last week that he was “so disappointed in Bill Barr.” 

“It is a damn shame when he doesn’t get what this president has gone through and what the American people have gone through and what his charge is as attorney general,” he added. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Trump, however, stood up for Barr on Tuesday, saying he had “total confidence” in the attorney general.

“I think he is doing an excellent job,” he added.

Graham, McConnell and McCarthy added on Tuesday that Trump “chose … a strong and selfless public servant to lead the Department of Justice.”

The Justice Department’s decision on Stone came just before The New York Times reported late last week that Barr had taken the unusual step of asking outside prosecutors to review the criminal case against former Trump administration official Michael Flynn.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Attorney’s Office in D.C. informed former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabeAndrew George McCabeA tale of two lies: Stone, McCabe and the danger of a double standard for justice Democrats fear rule of law crumbling under Trump Barr back on the hot seat MORE’s counsel on Friday that they will no longer seek criminal charges against McCabe, closing a high-profile case against the former official whose conduct during the 2016 election was scrutinized.