Delta Air Lines announced Friday that it will invest $1 billion over the next decade in an effort to become the world’s first carbon neutral airline.

The company said it will invest in technology that removes carbon emissions from the atmosphere, as well as wetland restoration and grassland conservation.

Click Here: cheap penrith panthers jersey

“The time is now to accelerate our investments and establish an ambitious commitment that the entire Delta team will deliver,” Ed Bastian, Delta’s CEO said.

ADVERTISEMENT

The overwhelming majority of Delta’s carbon emissions come from its aircraft, so part of the company’s plan is to decrease its use of jet fuel while increasing the efficiency of flights through an “improved flight operations, weight reduction, and increased development and use of sustainable aviation fuels.”

Delta did not say when it hopes to achieve carbon neutrality. The Hill has reached out to Delta for comment.

The airline’s announcement comes two days after oil giant BP announced its goal of being carbon neutral by 2050.

Progressive lawmakers in the U.S., however, have argued that action is needed much sooner to combat the effects of climate change. The Green New Deal, a proposal introduced by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-CortezAlexandria Ocasio-CortezDelta commits to becoming world’s first carbon neutral airline Ocasio-Cortez blasts Trump as ‘corrupt’ for blocking Global Entry for New Yorkers New York AG calls out Trump for telling Cuomo to stop lawsuits: ‘I file lawsuits, not the governor’ MORE (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Ed MarkeyEdward (Ed) John MarkeySenate Dems blast Barr for ‘clear violation’ of duty in Stone case, urge him to resign Delta commits to becoming world’s first carbon neutral airline Harris, Castro introduce resolution condemning Trump aide Stephen Miller MORE (D-Mass.), aims to achieve across-the-board carbon neutrality in the U.S. by 2030.

Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.) on Thursday said that he has written a letter to California Gov. Gavin NewsomGavin Christopher NewsomGOP lawmaker accuses California public pension fund of investing in blacklisted Chinese companies Newsom: ‘Trump is scared of California,’ the ‘most un-Trump state in America’ DOJ dropping antitrust probe of four major automakers MORE (D) to voice concerns over the state’s public pension fund chief and his connections with China.

The Indiana congressman is calling out the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS), the largest state pension fund in the U.S., for allegedly investing in numerous select blacklisted Chinese companies that manufacture military products.

The California-based fund invested $3.1 billion into 172 different Chinese companies, Banks said in an appearance on Fox Business Network. He said that some of the companies invested in have been blacklisted by the U.S. government.

ADVERTISEMENT

Banks said that he wrote in the letter to Newsom that Yu Ben Meng, the chief investment officer of CalPERS, should at least be investigated.

“Governor Newsom, if it were up to me, I would fire Mr. Meng immediately,” Banks wrote in the letter. “At the least, I think a thorough investigation of Mr. Meng’s relationship to the Chinese Communist Party and a comparison of CalPERS investments in Chinese companies before and after Mr. Meng’s 2008 hiring are both warranted.”

Meng is a U.S. citizen born in China and has worked for CalPERS two times, once starting in 2008 and then beginning in January 2019 when he was appointed to CIO managing $400 billion in investments, according to Reuters.

In the Fox Business interview, Banks said some of the equipment these Chinese companies are responsible for include technology such as Hikvision, which the Chinese use for surveillance on Uighur Muslim populations that the Chinese government has been accused of abusing.

CalPERS CEO Marcie Frost backed Meng in a statement.

“This is a reprehensible attack on a U.S. citizen. We fully stand behind our Chief Investment Officer who came to CalPERS with a stellar international reputation,” she said.

A CalPERS spokeswoman declined to provide contact information for Meng, saying they had no further comment, according to Reuters.

Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee boycotted a subcommittee hearing Wednesday, in a sign that the panel’s partisan clashes during the impeachment inquiry are festering even after that chapter has come to a close.

In a letter explaining their decision to skip the hearing, Republicans blasted Democrats for not examining the issue of surveillance abuse after Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz released a report detailing significant abuses of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act by intelligence community officials. The abuses were related to wiretap applications for former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.

“Despite the seriousness of these issues and our clear jurisdiction, you have failed to hold a single briefing or hearing on this matter,” the Republicans wrote. 

ADVERTISEMENT

The letter was signed by Rep. Devin NunesDevin Gerald NunesHouse Republicans boycott public Intelligence panel hearing Sunday shows preview: Top tier 2020 Democrats make their case before New Hampshire primary CPAC says Romney ‘not invited’ this year after vote at Trump trial MORE (R-Calif.), the ranking member of the full panel, and other GOP members.

“Until the Committee prioritizes oversight activities related to urgent and critical concerns, Republican Members cannot support distractions from our core responsibilities,” it stated.

Rep. Jim HimesJames (Jim) Andres HimesHouse Republicans boycott public Intelligence panel hearing Democrats criticize Medal of Freedom for Limbaugh as ‘slap in the face’ Twitter users invoke Merrick Garland after McConnell, Graham comments on impeachment trial MORE (D-Conn.) announced the GOP boycott in his opening remarks, criticizing it in the process.

He said the subcommittee’s ranking member, Rep. Chris StewartChristopher (Chris) Douglas StewartHouse Republicans boycott public Intelligence panel hearing Trump considering Utah GOP lawmaker for top intelligence post: report  GOP lawmaker offering bill protecting LGBTQ rights with religious exemptions MORE (R-Utah), and other Republicans had sent him their letter earlier Wednesday describing the decision. 

Himes also said that while the letter protested the subcommittee hearing’s focus on the intelligence community’s use of emerging technologies, he had previously been told the boycott was about prior grievances.

“I received a letter this morning explaining the Republican absence from this hearing, which is as wrongheaded as it is mendacious,” said Himes, the chairman of the Intelligence Subcommittee on Strategic Technologies and Advanced Research.

ADVERTISEMENT

Click Here: cheap parramatta eels jersey

“It basically says that the Republicans disagree with the priorities of this subcommittee.” 

Himes said he had asked Stewart last week what was going on with Republicans ahead of the hearing.

He said Stewart told him that Nunes felt strongly that the GOP committee members should not engage in committee work “because of some perceived grievance with the impeachment investigation.”

Himes also described the boycott as a publicity stunt and an example of trolling.  

Tensions on the Intelligence panel were sky-high during the impeachment proceedings.

Republicans have accused Democrats on the Intelligence panel of crossing the line by targeting their staff during the impeachment inquiry, including by publishing a staffer’s phone records in their investigative report. Republicans have also accused Democrats of selectively leaking information. 

Democrats say their staffers have also been targets, with Republicans claiming and publicly naming staffers who had contacts with the whistleblower who first brought forward the complaint that President TrumpDonald John TrumpBiden assures supporters the primary is still ‘wide open’ in lengthy phone call: report Warren: We are watching a descent into authoritarianism Collins: Trump ‘angered by impeachment’ MORE sought to pressure Ukraine to open two politically motivated investigations to benefit his 2020 reelection chances. 

Himes acknowledged the boycott marks a new phase in the partisan divide of the panel.

“This is a sad and dangerous moment even as this committee was the epicenter of the polarizing impeachment debate. The committee has always succeeded in compartmentalizing the emotions and arguments of impeachment and the critical work we do on behalf of the American people,” Himes said.

“Today that Rubicon has been crossed.”

Sen. Bernie SandersBernie SandersYang: NYC should implement universal basic income Overnight Health Care: Nevada union won’t endorse before caucuses after ‘Medicaid for All’ scrap | McConnell tees up votes on two abortion bills | CDC confirms 15th US coronavirus case Trump reveals he would vote for a gay presidential candidate MORE‘s support for his signature “Medicare for All” proposal has created an unexpected divide between the White House hopeful and his usually reliable labor union base.

Sanders faces scrutiny from the powerful Nevada Culinary Workers Union, which is warning that his goal of overhauling the nation’s health care system would put an end to private plans for union members.

But the labor group stopped short of endorsing one of Sanders’s Democratic rivals. On Thursday, the union declined to back a candidate, leaving the field wide open for the remaining contenders heading into the states Feb. 22 caucuses.

ADVERTISEMENT

Union secretary-treasurer Geoconda Argüello-Kline did not directly attack Sanders when pressed repeatedly at a press conference, saying only that the union believes people have the right to make their own health care choices.

The union is a key force in elections in the state, and is a highly sought-after endorsement on the road to the White House. The labor group for hospitality workers has a reputation for funding a massive turnout effort and can be a game changer, especially for a candidate seeking support from Latino voters.

On the flip side, any negative messaging from the group could pose a setback for a campaign.

The union endorsed then-Sen. Barack ObamaBarack Hussein ObamaDemocrats: The road to kumbaya Sanders calls James Carville ‘a political hack’ New Hampshire Democratic primary did what it was supposed to do MORE ahead of the state’s 2008 caucuses, but did not endorse a candidate in 2016. Former Secretary of State Hillary ClintonHillary Diane Rodham ClintonDemocrats: The road to kumbaya New Hampshire Democratic primary did what it was supposed to do Fox’s Napolitano: Roger Stone ‘absolutely entitled’ to new trial after juror’s tweets revealed MORE won the caucuses in 2016, with Sanders a close second at 47 percent.

While the union has once again decided against endorsing a candidate, Sanders nonetheless took a hit.

Earlier this week, the Culinary Union distributed a flyer to its 60,000 members that said his health care plan would “End Culinary Healthcare.” Under Medicare for All, private health insurance would be replaced across the board with a government-run plan.

The Culinary Union drew swift backlash online from Sanders supporters, so much so that the group issued a statement on Wednesday denouncing the candidate’s backers for “viciously” attacking the union.

ADVERTISEMENT

That, in turn, prompted many of Sanders’s opponents to seize momentum on the public feud.

“I stand with the working men and women of @Culinary226 because supporting labor means supporting our unions,” tweeted former Vice President Joe BidenJoe BidenYang: NYC should implement universal basic income Majority of voters say Hunter Biden’s job at Burisma was ‘inappropriate’: poll Impeachment demonstrates dire need for term limits MORE, an opponent of Medicare for All.

Fellow moderates Sen. Amy KlobucharAmy Jean KlobucharYang: NYC should implement universal basic income While Klobuchar surges, Warren flounders The Hill’s Campaign Report: Rising Klobuchar, Buttigieg face test in diverse states MORE (D-Minn.) and former South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete ButtigiegPeter (Pete) Paul ButtigiegYang: NYC should implement universal basic income Trump reveals he would vote for a gay presidential candidate While Klobuchar surges, Warren flounders MORE, fresh off strong showings in the New Hampshire primary, also jumped to the union’s defense.

“I stand with @Culinary226 and let’s be clear: attacks on the union are unacceptable. I come from a family of proud union members and I know when unions are strong, America is strong,” Klobuchar tweeted.

Buttigieg, meanwhile, took the opportunity to appeal to unions and promote his own health plan.

“There are 14 million union workers in America who have fought hard for strong, employer-provided health benefits,” Buttigieg tweeted. “Medicare for All Who Want It protects their plans and union members’ freedom to choose the coverage that’s best for them.”

Even Tom SteyerTom Fahr SteyerYang: NYC should implement universal basic income The Hill’s Campaign Report: Rising Klobuchar, Buttigieg face test in diverse states The state of the Democratic primary: Heading to a brokered convention?   MORE joined the fray on Thursday, releasing a statement calling on Sanders to disclose the price tag of Medicare for All. Steyer said his own proposal would “protect the the health plans that unions have fought hard to secure for their members, especially here in Nevada.”

Sanders has been trying to smooth over some of the tensions between the union and his supporters ever since news of the union’s flyer was first reported by the Nevada Independent.

Sanders’s campaign initially responded to the flyer by saying it was incorrect, and that Medicare for All coverage would be as good or better than what unions currency receive.

Sanders has noted his Medicare for All bill includes a provision that would enable companies to push savings they obtain from Medicare for All to workers in the form of either higher wages or other benefits. But some unions have been skeptical.

In an interview with MSNBC’s Chris Hayes on Wednesday, Sanders touted his labor bonafides.

“I have a lot more union support than Pete Buttigieg has or I think ever will have,” Sanders said, adding that “many many unions in this county…absolutely understand that we have to move to Medicare for All.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Click Here: cheap parramatta eels jersey

Sanders said in a statement the following day that he agreed with the Nevada union’s key goals. 

“As someone who has the strongest lifetime pro-labor record of anyone in Congress, I would never do anything to diminish the health care that unions and workers have fought for,” he said.

Sander also addressed the online harassment from some of his supporters. 

“Harassment of all forms is unacceptable to me, and we urge supporters of all campaigns not to engage in bullying or ugly personal attacks,” he said. “We can certainly disagree on issues, but we must do it in a respectful manner.

Sanders enjoys the most labor support of all the 2020 Democratic candidates, with over 15 endorsements, including National Nurses United and the Postal Workers Union, as well as a handful of local chapters of Unite Here, the national organization of Nevada’s Culinary Union.

The National Nurses Union cited Medicare for All plan as one of the reasons for its endorsement.

ADVERTISEMENT

Yet while some unions have supported the ambitious health care overhaul, others are not on board. 

The Culinary Union plays a unique role in its members’ health care, and there are concerns about the role it would play under a Medicare for All system.

Union members receive insurance through a nonprofit trust, funded mainly by the employers under contract with Unite Here unions — like casinos and hotels. It offers coverage for over 130,000 members and their dependents.

At Thursday’s press conference, Argüello-Kline held back on further criticisms of Sanders and instead referred back to the flier describing the candidates’ positions.

“We will endorse our goals, we’re not going to endorse a political candidate,” Argüello-Kline said. “We respect every single political candidate right now.”

National Economic Council Director Larry KudlowLawrence (Larry) Alan KudlowMORE on Friday said that the White House hopes to introduce new middle-class tax cuts by the fall.

“It’ll probably come out sometime in September,” Kudlow told Fox Business’s Maria BartiromoMaria Sara BartiromoKudlow: New tax cuts will ‘probably come out sometime in September’ Bannon says Democrats won’t stop effort to impeach Trump Trump asks ‘what the hell has happened’ to Fox News after interview with Democratic senator MORE.

Kudlow added that the September goal was set by President TrumpDonald John TrumpTrump declares war on hardworking Americans with new budget request Avenatti found guilty in Nike extortion trial First, we’ll neuter all the judges MORE in a recent Oval Office meeting, ahead of November’s presidential election.

In addition to the new 10 percent tax cuts for the middle class, Kudlow said that Trump wants to strengthen and solidify “some of the other tax cuts.”

Many of the tax cuts that the administration introduced in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 expire in 2025.

Click Here: cheap parramatta eels jersey

Eight Democratic senators asked the FDA in a signed letter to ban the use of a device, available exclusively in Massachusetts, used to administer electric shocks to disabled students.

The letter, dated Monday, called on the agency to finalize a rule banning the devices after issuing a proposed rule nearly four years ago in April 2016.

The FDA announced in 2018 that it intended to issue a final rule by December 2019, with then-Commissioner Scott Gottlieb saying “we believe these products present an unreasonable and substantial risk to public health that cannot be corrected or eliminated through changes to the labeling.” However, the agency missed the deadline, which the senators called “unacceptable.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Click Here: cheap south sydney rabbitohs jersey

Signers of the letter include Sens. Patty MurrayPatricia (Patty) Lynn MurrayDemocratic senators ask FDA to ban device used to shock disabled students Lawmakers with first-hand experience using food stamps call on Trump not to cut program Bipartisan Ways and Means leaders unveil measure to stop surprise medical bills MORE (D-Wash.), Bernie SandersBernie SandersYang: NYC should implement universal basic income Overnight Health Care: Nevada union won’t endorse before caucuses after ‘Medicaid for All’ scrap | McConnell tees up votes on two abortion bills | CDC confirms 15th US coronavirus case Trump reveals he would vote for a gay presidential candidate MORE (I-Vt.), Chris MurphyChristopher (Chris) Scott MurphyDemocratic senators ask FDA to ban device used to shock disabled students Senators to meet with Zelensky after impeachment trial Barr ensnared in Roger Stone firestorm MORE (D-Conn.), Bob CaseyRobert (Bob) Patrick CaseyDemocratic senators ask FDA to ban device used to shock disabled students Trump under pressure to renew last nuke treaty with Russia Celebrating and expanding upon five years of the ABLE  Act MORE Jr. (D-Pa.), Tim KaineTimothy (Tim) Michael KaineOvernight Defense: Senate votes to rein in Trump war powers on Iran | Pentagon shifting .8B to border wall | US, Taliban negotiate seven-day ‘reduction in violence’ Democratic senators ask FDA to ban device used to shock disabled students Senate votes to rein in Trump’s power to attack Iran MORE (D-Va.), Maggie HassanMargaret (Maggie) HassanDemocratic senators ask FDA to ban device used to shock disabled students State officials press Congress for more resources to fight cyberattacks Sanders says NH Democratic senators were wrong to back Trump’s USMCA MORE (D-N.H.), Tina SmithTina Flint SmithDemocratic senators ask FDA to ban device used to shock disabled students Trump pick for Fed seat takes bipartisan fire Biden leads 2020 pack in congressional endorsements MORE (D-Minn.) and Doug Jones (D-Ala.).

“That ESDs [electric shock devices] continue to be used on children and adults with disabilities as punishment is unacceptable. In one case, brought to light in an expose, a young man was shocked 31 times, ending up in a hospital due to the trauma and physical effects,” the senators assert.

“This practice must be stopped without delay. We urge you to finalize the proposed rule and take immediate action to ban the electric shock of people with disabilities.”

Murray also commented on the practice of using the device independently. 

“It is unconscionable that in 2020, it is still legal to shock children and adults with disabilities as a method to control behavior. We have an obligation to protect children and adults with disabilities from archaic and inhumane forms of punishment — no more excuses, the FDA needs to finalize this rule immediately,” Murray said in a statement.  

The device in question is used in the Judge Rotenberg Education Center in Canton, Mass.

Officials have argued the devices are necessary to prevent self-injuring behavior, and Marie Washington, president of the Judge Rotenberg Center Family Association, accused critics of practice of putting students “in danger of losing the only safe and effective treatment available to them,” according to WGBH.

Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabeAndrew George McCabeBarr has tapped outside prosecutor to review case against Flynn: NYT The Hill’s 12:30 Report: Trump insists he can tweet about cases in rare break with Barr DOJ won’t charge former FBI Deputy Director McCabe MORE said Friday that he doesn’t think he will “ever be free of” President TrumpDonald John TrumpTrump declares war on hardworking Americans with new budget request Avenatti found guilty in Nike extortion trial First, we’ll neuter all the judges MORE and “his maniacal rage,” despite the Justice Department announcing it will no longer pursue criminal charges against him. 

“I don’t expect to ever be free of the mantle of investigation that clearly has been reinitiated to some degree today,” McCabe said on CNN’s “The Situation Room”.

“I don’t think I’ll ever be free of this President and his maniacal rage that he’s directed towards me and my wife since October of 2016 for absolutely no reason whatsoever,” he said.

ADVERTISEMENT

His comments came hours after the Justice Department said it would not pursue charges based on an Inspector General’s recommendation that was made before McCabe was fired from the FBI by then-Attorney General Jeff SessionsJefferson (Jeff) Beauregard SessionsDOJ won’t charge former FBI Deputy Director McCabe CNN’s Toobin warns McCabe is in ‘perilous condition’ with emboldened Trump They forgot that under Trump, there are two sets of rules MORE. The Inspector General had alleged that McCabe was not forthcoming during interviews with federal investigators and claimed he “lacked candor — including under oath — on multiple occasions.”

Trump has long considered McCabe a political enemy, and some have questioned whether the decision Friday to drop possible charges is an attempt to quell controversy surrounding the Justice Department’s recommended sentencing for longtime Trump aide Roger StoneRoger Jason StoneBarr has tapped outside prosecutor to review case against Flynn: NYT Senate Dems blast Barr for ‘clear violation’ of duty in Stone case, urge him to resign The Hill’s 12:30 Report: Trump insists he can tweet about cases in rare break with Barr MORE, which was reduced after complaints by the president.  

ADVERTISEMENT

In his interview with CNN, McCabe went on to say he thinks the president will take action against political enemies, especially those who were in favor of or testified during his impeachment.

“He’s made it pretty clear in the way he’s conducted himself over the last week that he’s high and mighty on the tour of retaliation against everyone who had anything to do with his impeachment inquiry,” he said.

Shortly after Trump was acquitted in his Senate impeachment trial, the administration announced it was ousting two of the officials who testified as witnesses: Ambassador to the European Union Gordon SondlandGordon SondlandMenendez calls for ‘Marie Yovanovitch bill’ to protect foreign service employees Collins: Trump ‘angered by impeachment’ Sherrod Brown: Senate GOP let Trump run ‘personal vengeance operation’ MORE and Lt. Col. Alexander VindmanAlexander VindmanThe Hill’s Morning Report — AG Barr, GOP senators try to rein Trump in John Bolton defends John Kelly after Trump criticism Ocasio-Cortez blasts Trump as ‘corrupt’ for blocking Global Entry for New Yorkers MORE.

The Pentagon is moving $3.8 billion from various weapons programs such as the F-35 fighter jet to pay for President TrumpDonald John TrumpHillicon Valley: US hits Huawei with new charges | Judge orders Pentagon to halt ‘war cloud’ work amid Amazon challenge | IRS removes guidance on Fortnite game currency NASA astronaut reunites with dog after breaking record for longest space mission by a woman Trump says his ‘life would’ve been a lot easier’ if he picked Barr over Sessions MORE’s southern border wall, according to a notice sent to Congress on Thursday.

The notice sent to Congress said the money is going toward the “support of higher priority items” and is “required to provide support for counter-drug activities of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).”

“DHS has identified areas along the southern border of the United States that are being used by individuals, groups, and transnational criminal organizations as drug smuggling corridors, and determined that the construction of additional physical barriers and roads in the vicinity of the United States border is necessary in order to impede and deny drug smuggling activities,” the notice says.

ADVERTISEMENT

In a statement later Thursday afternoon, Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Chris Mitchell said the money will build about 177 miles of border fencing, following DHS’s January request for assistance. 

Click Here: cheap south sydney rabbitohs jersey

“The Department of Defense is committed to supporting the Department of Homeland Security’s efforts to secure the southern border by constructing fences and roads and installing lighting to block drug smuggling corridors,” he said. “We will continue to support DHS and other agencies as needed to keep our homeland is secure.”

Democrats immediately slammed the move as a raid on military resources for what they called a “vanity project.”

But they put some of the blame on congressional Republicans, who refused to include provisions blocking Trump’s transfer authority in 2020 spending legislation that passed in December.

“While some of our Republican colleagues will lament the President’s decision, they enabled this theft by blocking our efforts to stop the President from raiding defense accounts,” House Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Nita LoweyNita Sue LoweyOvernight Defense: Senate votes to rein in Trump war powers on Iran | Pentagon shifting .8B to border wall | US, Taliban negotiate seven-day ‘reduction in violence’ Pentagon transferring .8 billion to border wall Democrats should firmly commit to not bring back earmarks MORE (D-N.Y.) said in a joint statement with Appropriations Defense Subcommittee Chairman Pete Visclosky (D-Ind.).

“Until they stand up to President Trump, our national security will continue to be threatened and our Constitutional system of government will continue to be undermined,” they added.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sen. Patrick LeahyPatrick Joseph LeahyOvernight Defense: Senate votes to rein in Trump war powers on Iran | Pentagon shifting .8B to border wall | US, Taliban negotiate seven-day ‘reduction in violence’ Pentagon transferring .8 billion to border wall ‘Birds of Prey’ movie reveals Harley Quinn voted for Sanders MORE (D-Vt.), the top Senate appropriator, said that Trump “has stolen from the men and women of our military, their families, and the American taxpayers all to pay for a failed campaign promise and endanger our national security.”

The top Republican on the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Mac ThornberryWilliam (Mac) McClellan ThornberryOvernight Defense: Senate votes to rein in Trump war powers on Iran | Pentagon shifting .8B to border wall | US, Taliban negotiate seven-day ‘reduction in violence’ Trump extends emergency declaration at border Top Armed Services Republican: Pentagon using .8B on border wall ‘requires Congress to take action’ MORE (Texas), called for Congress to take action over the latest funding transfer.

“The re-programming announced today is contrary to Congress’s constitutional authority, and I believe that it requires Congress to take action,” Thornberry, who is retiring at the end of his term, said in a statement. “I will be working with my colleagues to determine the appropriate steps to take.

“To be clear, I continue to believe that the situation on our southern border represents a national security challenge for our country– one that has been exacerbated by partisan politics in Washington,” he continued. “The wall should be funded, but the funding must come through the Department of Homeland Security rather than diverting critical military resources that are needed and in law.”

Congress twice voted to overturn Trump’s emergency declaration, which allowed him to reprogram defense funds for the wall, but were unable to override his vetoes.

The money being reprogrammed Thursday is being taken under a different executive authority that allows counter-drug funds to be used on the wall.

The notice says that $2.2 billion from the Pentagon’s base fiscal 2020 budget and $1.6 billion from a war fund known as the Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) account will be transferred to the Pentagon’s counter-drug fund, which will then be used on the wall.

Among the big-ticket items taking a hit is the Air Force’s F-35 program, which will lose $156 million for procurement. The funding “is excess to current programmatic need,” the notice says, adding that “it was based on a higher number of aircraft than” was requested in the fiscal 2021 budget.

In all, aircraft funding will lose $1.4 billion, according to the notice.

Shipbuilding will also take a hit, with the landing helicopter assault replacement program losing $650 million and the expeditionary fast transport program losing $261 million. Money for both programs is “early to current programmatic need,” according to the notice.

Equipment for the National Guard and reserves makes up the bulk of the money being taken from the OCO account at $1.3 billion. Those funds are also “available because they are early to current programmatic need,” the notice says.

In his 2021 budget request, Trump only asked for $2 billion for the wall, a departure from the $5 billion or more he’s requested in previous years and closer to the $1.4 billion Congress has typically handed over for barriers. The White House said it needed fewer appropriated funds because it had managed to reprogram billions through other means.

Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Richard ShelbyRichard Craig ShelbyOn The Money: Republicans expect Trump to pull controversial Fed nominee | Inside Judy Shelton’s confirmation hearing | Trump extends emergency declaration at border Republicans expect Trump to withdraw controversial Fed nominee Pentagon transferring .8 billion to border wall MORE (R-Ala.) expressed regret that money is being taken from the Pentagon for the wall even as he voiced support for Trump.

“I like the wall, I support the president, I wish they’d find the money somewhere else,” Shelby said. “I wish we could fund it through the regular process.”

Dipping into Pentagon funding for the wall, he added, has not “threatened national security yet, but if we keep taking and taking it could affect it down the road.”

In a letter to Defense Secretary Mark EsperMark EsperOvernight Defense: Senate votes to rein in Trump war powers on Iran | Pentagon shifting .8B to border wall | US, Taliban negotiate seven-day ‘reduction in violence’ Judge orders Pentagon to halt cloud-computing work amid Amazon challenge Pentagon transferring .8 billion to border wall MORE, Democratic appropriators in the Senate expressed “strong opposition” to the move, and pointed in particular to the $1.3 billion National Guard and Reserve Equipment (NGRE) account.

“The NGRE account has been the lifeline of modernization for the National Guard and Reserves, both for warfighting missions and domestic contingencies.  The same can be said of many of the other programs targeted,” they wrote. 

Trump didn’t request any funding for that account in his 2020 budget request, but Congress funded it anyway out of conviction for its importance.

“The raid on this funding is quite simply an attack on the efforts to ensure our citizen-soldiers are prepared to respond to disasters, both overseas and in nearly every community in all fifty states and four territories,” they added.

Updated at 4:46 p.m.

Treasury Secretary Steven MnuchinSteven Terner MnuchinOn The Money: Deficit spikes 25 percent through January | Mnuchin declines to say why Trump pulled Treasury nominee who oversaw Roger Stone case | Lawmakers trade insults over Trump budget cuts Mnuchin defends Treasury regulations on GOP tax law Mnuchin declines to say why Trump pulled Treasury nominee who oversaw Roger Stone case MORE on Wednesday defended his department’s regulations implementing provisions of President TrumpDonald John TrumpBiden assures supporters the primary is still ‘wide open’ in lengthy phone call: report Warren: We are watching a descent into authoritarianism Collins: Trump ‘angered by impeachment’ MORE‘s tax cut law, which Democrats argue have been overly beneficial for corporations.

“Our job is to implement the legislation, not to make the legislation,” Mnuchin said at a Senate Finance Committee hearing.

Democrats and Republicans have long been fighting over Trump’s 2017 law, which received no Democratic votes. In recent weeks, a key issue in the messaging battle over the law has been over regulations implementing the measure’s international provisions, following a New York Times article about corporate lobbying on the rules.

ADVERTISEMENT

Democrats argue that Treasury guidance has been too generous for corporations following businesses’ lobbying efforts, and may have exceeded the Treasury Department’s legal authority.

Sens. Ron WydenRonald (Ron) Lee WydenOn The Money: Deficit spikes 25 percent through January | Mnuchin declines to say why Trump pulled Treasury nominee who oversaw Roger Stone case | Lawmakers trade insults over Trump budget cuts Mnuchin defends Treasury regulations on GOP tax law Wyden, Mnuchin clash over Trump tax returns, Hunter Biden probe MORE (Ore.) and Sherrod BrownSherrod Campbell BrownOn The Money: Deficit spikes 25 percent through January | Mnuchin declines to say why Trump pulled Treasury nominee who oversaw Roger Stone case | Lawmakers trade insults over Trump budget cuts Mnuchin defends Treasury regulations on GOP tax law Mnuchin declines to say why Trump pulled Treasury nominee who oversaw Roger Stone case MORE (Ohio) — the top Democrats on the Senate Finance and Banking committees, respectively — introduced legislation on Wednesday to block a regulatory proposal relating to one of the tax law’s international provisions. Wyden described the proposal in a news release as a “proposed giveaway that essentially allows corporations to choose the lowest available tax rate.”

But Mnuchin said that Treasury’s decisions about tax law regulations have been based on legislative intent rather than corporate lobbyists.

“On a regular basis, we meet with lots of people to take in input. We’ve reached out to the committee and its staff,” he said.

GOP senators also defended the Treasury’s regulations on the tax law.

ADVERTISEMENT

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck GrassleyCharles (Chuck) Ernest GrassleyMnuchin defends Treasury regulations on GOP tax law Wyden, Mnuchin clash over Trump tax returns, Hunter Biden probe The Hill’s Morning Report – Sanders repeats with NH primary win, but with narrower victory MORE (R-Iowa) said that it’s part of the regulatory process under the Administrative Procedure Act for the agency to seek comment from stakeholders.

“I don’t see how you can do your job of implementing new law that is so far-reaching without listening to stakeholders,” he said.

Grassley added that “the business community certainly doesn’t seem to think that they’ve received everything for which they’ve asked.”

Sen. Rob PortmanRobert (Rob) Jones PortmanMnuchin defends Treasury regulations on GOP tax law Bipartisan lawmakers introduce bill to combat cyberattacks on state and local governments McConnell displays mastery of Senate with impeachment victory MORE (R-Ohio) said that if anything, Treasury’s approach has been “very conservative” with respect to the rule Brown and Wyden are targeting in their bill.

“Our job has been to implement that part of the tax code consistent with the intent and as prescribed by the law and that’s what we’ve done,” Mnuchin said in response to a question from Portman.

A U.S. Chamber of Commerce official said in a statement Wednesday that the group opposes Wyden and Brown’s bill because it seeks to remove Treasury’s authority to implement a regulation that ensures that the tax law works as Congress intended.

Wyden said Democrats’ feedback wasn’t sought on the tax “loopholes” they find problematic.

“I would have been fighting them every step of the way,” he said.

Click Here: cheap south sydney rabbitohs jersey