Sen. Ron JohnsonRonald (Ron) Harold JohnsonGOP senator draws fire from all sides on Biden, Obama-era probes Graham says FBI chief ‘committed to being helpful’ after Trump criticism Trump hits FBI Director Wray: ‘I wish he was more forthcoming’ MORE (R-Wis.) is coming under fire from all sides for his investigations into the Obama administration and the Bidens.

Months into his probes, Johnson is facing increasing public pushback from Democrats, the Biden campaign and aligned outside groups who believe he is trying to undercut presumptive Democratic nominee Joe BidenJoe BidenOn The Money: Economists flabbergasted after Congress leaves with no deal | Markets rise as the economy struggles | Retail sales slow in July Congress exits with no deal, leaving economists flabbergasted Trump touts NYC police union endorsement: ‘Pro-cop all the way’ MORE and might inadvertently spread Russian disinformation in the process.

But he’s also taking criticism from high-profile conservatives who argue the probes are moving too slowly, while some fellow GOP senators appear worried about the appearance of the investigation just months before the election.

ADVERTISEMENT

Johnson is now pushing back on some of his critics, accusing them of spreading false information about his investigations.

“This is exactly the same playbook they ran against President TrumpDonald John TrumpUPS, FedEx shut down calls to handle mail-in ballots, warn of ‘significant’ problems: report Controversial GOP Georgia candidate attempts to distance from QAnon Trump orders TikTok parent company to sell US assets within 90 days MORE,” Johnson said during an interview with “Justice & Drew,” a Minnesota-based radio show. “They’re doing the exact same thing to me and Sen. Grassley.”

Johnson is using his Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee gavel to run two investigations, at times in coordination with Finance Committee Chairman Chuck GrassleyCharles (Chuck) Ernest GrassleyGOP senator draws fire from all sides on Biden, Obama-era probes Senate leaves until September without coronavirus relief deal COVID-19 relief talks look dead until September  MORE (R-Iowa).

Both probes are viewed as controversial but inherently distinct: One involves the Obama-era State Department, Obama-era Ukraine policy including work done by former Vice President Joe Biden, his son Hunter Biden and any contact between the Obama administration and his associates or Burisma Holdings, where Hunter Biden was on the board.

The second is wide-ranging and broadly covers the transition process between the Obama and Trump administrations, but delves into everything from the FBI’s investigation into the Trump campaign and Russian election meddling and its offshoots to leaks from the early days of Trump’s presidency.

The tensions surrounding the probes are increasingly spilling over into the national spotlight as November draws near and the window for GOP investigations potentially comes to a close. Control of the Senate is up for grabs and political handicappers view Democrats as having momentum to win back the majority.

ADVERTISEMENT

Conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt lacerated Johnson for not having subpoenaed former FBI Director James ComeyJames Brien ComeyGOP senator draws fire from all sides on Biden, Obama-era probes Trump hits FBI Director Wray: ‘I wish he was more forthcoming’ The Hill’s Morning Report – Presented by Facebook – Biden, Harris launch Trump offensive in first joint appearance MORE, former CIA Director John BrennanJohn Owen BrennanGOP senator draws fire from all sides on Biden, Obama-era probes The Hill’s Morning Report – Presented by Facebook – Biden, Harris launch Trump offensive in first joint appearance Ron Johnson signals some GOP senators concerned about his Obama-era probes MORE or former FBI agent Peter Stzrok — three of more than 30 individuals Johnson got the power to subpoena in June.

“Are you aware that in the eyes of someone like me … you’re failing? Do you understand that the committee and Sen. Graham’s committee on this issue are failing the American people? We don’t have the answers,” Hewitt said, referring to Sen. Lindsey GrahamLindsey Olin GrahamGOP senator draws fire from all sides on Biden, Obama-era probes Has Congress captured Russia policy? Graham on Harris: ‘No issue’ as to whether ‘she is an American citizen’ MORE (R-S.C.) who is running his own investigation as chairman of the Judiciary Committee.

“I don’t think, senator, you understand the depth to which people like me … are absolutely disappointed in our senators,” Hewitt continued. “We are going to lose this election if we lose it in the Senate, if we lose it in the Senate because you and Lindsey let them do this.”

But even as Johnson has faced scathing criticism for not moving fast enough, he tipped his hand to concerns from some of his GOP colleagues about the investigations.

“People have legitimate concerns. … They wanted me to do everything I could to obtain the testimony and documents on a voluntary basis,” Johnson told Fox News. His office later clarified that no Republicans were currently blocking subpoenas.

Both Sens. Mitt RomneyWillard (Mitt) Mitt RomneyRomney breaks with Trump’s criticism of mail-in voting GOP senator draws fire from all sides on Biden, Obama-era probes Why the US should rely more on strategy, not sanctions MORE (R-Utah) and Rob PortmanRobert (Rob) Jones PortmanGOP senator draws fire from all sides on Biden, Obama-era probes Ron Johnson signals some GOP senators concerned about his Obama-era probes Davis: The Hall of Shame for GOP senators who remain silent on Donald Trump MORE (R-Ohio) voiced concerns about the investigations in June, though they both granted Johnson broad subpoena authority as part of his probe of the transition between administrations and authorized a subpoena for Blue Star Strategies in the separate investigation involving Ukraine and the Bidens.

“I believe there are far more urgent priorities the committee should address,” Romney said at the time. “I continue to be concerned that this is politically motivated.”

If Johnson wants additional subpoena powers he’ll need buy-in from the other seven Republicans on his committee, otherwise the vote would fail. He previously indicated he was considering subpoenas for former Obama officials, including former Deputy Secretary of State Antony Blinken, as part of his investigation that touches on the Bidens. But the Senate left for its August recess without Johnson pressing the issue, and he hinted that it could be challenging to get additional authority.

“I had a devil of a time just getting the subpoena authority that I got,” Johnson told Hewitt.

The GOP tensions come after Johnson previously said his committee had been “sidelined” when Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellMcGrath reshuffles campaign in home stretch to Senate election GOP senator draws fire from all sides on Biden, Obama-era probes Chris Wallace rips both parties for coronavirus package impasse: ‘Pox on both their houses’ MORE (R-Ky.) tapped then-Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard BurrRichard Mauze BurrGOP senator draws fire from all sides on Biden, Obama-era probes Hillicon Valley: Facebook removed over 22 million posts for hate speech in second quarter | Republicans introduce bill to defend universities against hackers targeting COVID-19 research | Facebook’s Sandberg backs Harris as VP pick Republicans set sights on FBI chief as Russia probe investigations ramp up MORE (R-N.C.) to look into Russia’s 2016 election meddling. Johnson added this week that McConnell had indicated Graham would take the lead on some issues.

As Johnson fends off GOP criticism, he’s facing a growing onslaught of attacks from Democrats, who are increasingly going public with their concerns that Johnson’s actions could have the effect of meddling in the 2020 election and allow for Russian misinformation so close to Election Day. Johnson previously told The Hill he was planning to release an interim report on the Ukraine-Biden piece around mid-September.

Feeding Democratic concerns, William Evanina, director of the National Counterintelligence and Security Center, said in a public statement that Russia was interfering in the 2020 election with an aim to “denigrate” Biden. He pointed specifically to pro-Russia Ukrainian parliamentarian Andriy Derkach as someone working to undermine Biden.

ADVERTISEMENT

Americans “should know one other thing, that these hearings that Johnson and Graham are doing, some of it is now, now it’s public, is based on false Russian intelligence about Joe Biden,” said Senate Minority Leader Charles SchumerChuck SchumerIn the next relief package Congress must fund universal COVID testing Ocasio-Cortez’s 2nd grade teacher tells her ‘you’ve got this’ ahead of DNC speech New poll shows Markey with wide lead over Kennedy in Massachusetts MORE (D-N.Y.).

Derkach has publicly indicated that he’s shared information with Johnson. But the GOP senator has denied receiving anything and sought distance in a public letter.

“We have not taken, nor do we possess, the documents from Ukrainians that Democrats keep claiming,” Johnson wrote in an open 11-page letter explaining and defending his probes.

Johnson and Grassley have repeatedly said they did not set out to investigate the Bidens, that they began their probe before he announced his candidacy and that their actions are not driven by the fact the former vice president is now the presumptive Democratic nominee.

But Johnson has also increasingly gone public with his questions on Biden, including a 19-tweet thread on Friday with topics he believes the media should be raising with the former vice president.

Shortly before that, he helped fuel accusations that he’s using his gavel to help Trump when he said his investigation “would certainly” help the president’s reelection chances.

ADVERTISEMENT

“The more that we expose … the corruption of the transition process between Obama and Trump, the more we expose of the corruption within those agencies I would think would certainly help Donald Trump win reelection and certainly would be pretty good, I would say, evidence for not voting for Vice President Biden,” Johnson told “Justice & Drew.”

Biden’s campaign seized on Johnson’s comments, calling them the “definition of malfeasance,” and that it was “beyond time for him to end this embarrassing and deeply unethical charade once and for all.”

Multiple outside groups are asking for the Senate Ethics Committee to investigate whether Johnson is violating the chamber’s rules.

The group Democracy 21 is asking the Ethics Committee to determine if Russian disinformation is being laundered through the GOP investigation. Meanwhile, the Center for Media and Democracy and American Oversight sent a request asking the panel to look into whether Johnson is violating Senate rules, arguing he is using his committee perch to carry out campaign activity. A senior adviser for American Oversight used to work for Biden when he was a senator, though the group describes itself as nonpartisan.

“The Ethics Committee must investigate Senator Johnson’s ongoing effort to use his official Senate position to improperly engage in partisan political activity and to accept and legitimize foreign efforts to influence an American election,” the two groups wrote.

Johnson’s office dismissed the request for an investigation into his actions.

“These are baseless political allegations made by longtime Democrat operatives,” a spokesperson for Johnson said. “Reputable members of the media should understand that and ignore this baseless complaint.”

Amazon plans to add thousands of corporate jobs across six cities, including 2,000 in a building on New York’s Fifth Avenue that was once the flagship Lord & Taylor store.

The company will add 3,500 jobs in New York, Phoenix, San Diego, Denver, Detroit and Dallas, The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday. 

The new hires indicate the online retail giant is planning a return to in-person office work even as other tech firms, such as Facebook and Twitter, announce long-term remote work strategies due to the coronavirus pandemic. Amazon directed employees to begin working from home in March, before numerous other major employers.

ADVERTISEMENT

“The ability to connect with people, the ability for teams to work together in an ad hoc fashion — you can do it virtually, but it isn’t as spontaneous,” Amazon Vice President of Workforce Development Ardine Williams told the Journal. “We are looking forward to returning to the office.”

The company plans to add over 900,000 square feet of office space in the six locations, including 630,000 square feet in New York alone, according to the newspaper. The expansion is set to take place over the next two years, but numerous positions will be filled now, the company said.

Williams said all the positions being added, including engineering and product-management jobs, are new. They will also incorporate positions across various departments within Amazon including advertising, Amazon Fresh and Amazon Web Services.

The expansion is not tied to any local or state financial incentives, according to the Journal, which added that some of the incentives from Amazon’s deal with workspace company WeWork to buy the Lord & Taylor building will transfer over.

Amid the economic havoc wrought by the coronavirus pandemic on brick-and-mortar retailers, Amazon has added more than 175,000 warehouse workers and recorded an all-time high of $88.9 billion in sales for the second fiscal quarter.

The House Armed Services Committee’s top Democrat and Republican on Monday warned President TrumpDonald John TrumpThe Memo — Michelle Obama shines, scorching Trump Trump lashes out at Cuomo after his Democratic convention speech Biden seeks to win over progressives and Republicans on night one MORE against pardoning Edward Snowden, saying the former National Security Agency (NSA) contractor and whistleblower “did enormous harm” to U.S. national security.

“Edward Snowden did enormous harm to our national security and he must stand trial for his actions,” committee Chairman Rep. Adam SmithDavid (Adam) Adam SmithOVERNIGHT DEFENSE: Midshipmen have COVID-19 | Worries about reopenings | Snowden pardon gets bad reviews from key lawmakers | Eyes turn to Democratic convention Hillicon Valley: Trump administration cracks down further against Huawei chip production, affiliate groups | California ruling against Uber, Lyft threatens to upend gig economy Top House Armed Services lawmakers warn against Trump pardoning Snowden MORE (D-Wash.), and ranking member Rep. Mac ThornberryWilliam (Mac) McClellan ThornberryOVERNIGHT DEFENSE: Midshipmen have COVID-19 | Worries about reopenings | Snowden pardon gets bad reviews from key lawmakers | Eyes turn to Democratic convention Hillicon Valley: Trump administration cracks down further against Huawei chip production, affiliate groups | California ruling against Uber, Lyft threatens to upend gig economy Top House Armed Services lawmakers warn against Trump pardoning Snowden MORE (R-Texas) said in a joint statement. 

“President Trump and [Defense Secretary Mark EsperMark EsperTrump says he has rejected Pentagon proposal to slash military health care OVERNIGHT DEFENSE: Midshipmen have COVID-19 | Worries about reopenings | Snowden pardon gets bad reviews from key lawmakers | Eyes turn to Democratic convention Hillicon Valley: Trump administration cracks down further against Huawei chip production, affiliate groups | California ruling against Uber, Lyft threatens to upend gig economy MORE] have both decried harmful leaks from the Department of Defense and elsewhere in the federal government. To pardon Snowden now would completely undermine this Administration’s position and mock our national security workforce who take immense caution in their work to keep us safe,” they wrote.

ADVERTISEMENT

Trump at a Saturday press conference at his golf club in New Jersey said that he was looking at pardoning the former NSA contractor, who was charged with espionage in 2013 after he released a trove of classified documents on U.S. surveillance programs.

“I’m not that aware of the Snowden situation, but I’m going to start looking at it,” Trump said.

Trump also last week told the New York Post that he’s been thinking of allowing Snowden — who fled the U.S. and gained asylum in Russia — to return to the U.S. without facing jail time.

The recent remarks are an about-face from comments he made more than seven years ago, when he said in a 2013 interview that he thought Snowden was “a terrible threat” and “traitor.”

Since the president’s Saturday comments, House Armed Services Committee member Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) has also spoken out against such a move, calling the idea “unconscionable.”

Thornberry and Smith added that it would be “a serious mistake” to pardon anyone who is charged under the Espionage Act, as it would “send a dangerous message to others who are contemplating espionage and the adversaries who would support them.” 

But pardoning Snowden has also gained increasing support in the years since the leak. A number of lawmakers and civil liberties advocates voiced approval of Trump’s recent comments, arguing that Snowden exposed unconstitutional surveillance practices.

More than two-thirds of Americans do not believe the U.S. has achieved gender equality in the workplace, according to new polling from Gallup.

The survey found 69 percent of U.S. adults do not believe the U.S. has achieved equality for women in the workplace, while 66 percent said the country has not reached equality in politics.

Women are less likely to believe equality had been achieved, according to the poll. Seventy-nine percent said workplace equity has not been achieved, while 75 percent of women said equity in politics have not been achieved.

ADVERTISEMENT

Majorities of men also believe the U.S. falls short of gender equality, but by smaller margins than among women. Fifty-eight percent of men said the U.S. has not achieved workplace gender equality, while 57 percent said it has not reached political gender equality.

Among self-identified Republicans, majorities of men and women believe women have achieved equality in both areas, but women are still less likely to say so than men. Fifty-six percent of Republican women and 75 percent of Republican men believe men and women have workplace equality, while 63 percent of Republican women and 82 percent of Republican men believe men and women enjoy equality in politics.

More than 90 percent of both Democratic women and Democratic men believe women have not secured equality in either category, according to Gallup.

Only a small minority of U.S. adults believe either gap will vanish by the end of the decade, with 13 percent saying it will be bridged for the workplace and 12 percent for politics. Twenty percent believe it will take 10 to 19 years to achieve equality in the workplace, while 16 percent said the same for politics.

Gallup surveyed a random sample of 3,745 adults between July 13-19. It has a 3-point margin of error for individual samples.

Acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad WolfChad WolfHomeland Security labels ACLU call to dismantle a political stunt DHS rejects government watchdog finding that top officials were improperly appointed Travel restrictions with Mexico, Canada extended to mid-September MORE in an interview released on Tuesday denied any problems with systemic racism within U.S. law enforcement. 

Wolf said there is “absolutely not” an issue of systemic racism in law enforcement, arguing that issues over police brutality are instead due to individual officers abusing their authority. 

“Do we have individuals in the law enforcement community that probably abuse their authority? We saw that in George Floyd’s death. But we see that around the country, absolutely, and they should be held accountable,” he said in an interview with “Axios on HBO” released Tuesday. 

ADVERTISEMENT

“But this idea that we have systemic racism is not accurate in my view,” he added. 

Axios’s Mike Allen pressed Wolf, asking him if he thinks the current system is working. 

“Absolutely,” Wolf responded, calling Floyd’s death in Minneapolis police custody in May “a good example of that.” 

“Those individuals and officers that are responsible for that, that justice system has moved very quickly. Can we always improve and be better? Absolutely,” Wolf added. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Floyd died in May after a now-former white police officer, Dereck Chauvin, was seen kneeling on his neck during an arrest for more than eight minutes as Floyd said he could not breath. Chauvin and three other officers were fired and charged over Floyd’s death. 

The killing of Floyd sparked nationwide protests over racial inequality and police brutality. Many demonstrators drew parallels between Floyd’s death and other police killings of Black Americans, especially including Eric Garner’s death in 2014 in New York City. Garner, like Floyd, was seen on video saying he could not breath as police held him down.

“I’m not saying that there’s not racist tendencies in some law enforcement officers. I think I want to be clear about that,” Wolf said in the interview. “But again, what people mean by systematic racism is that we have designed an institution, a law enforcement institution to be racist from the get-go, and I just don’t subscribe to that. I don’t believe in that.”

In recent years, body camera footage and footage taken by cellphones have highlighted issues of police brutality with videos of incidents spreading across social media. Allen noted that while the videos are now coming out to show these incidents, they “clearly existed before.” 

“That’s systemic,” Allen said, pressing Wolf on his denial. 

“So again, all for calling out inappropriate behavior, inappropriate procedures. But the way to get at that is not to call for defunding the police,” Wolf responded. “The way to do that is not to cut their budget by half. It’s actually to increase the training, increase the oversight and find individuals that are willing to go in.” 

The business models for Uber, Lyft and dozens of other gig worker companies that have sprouted up over the last decade are up in the air after a California judge ruled that rideshare drivers must be classified as employees rather than contractors.

Uber and Lyft have until Thursday to appeal the decision. The end result will likely have repercussions well beyond California.

Failure to overturn the ruling would mean the two companies, which already fail to turn a profit, will be unable to operate under their current business structures in a state known for setting nationwide precedents.

ADVERTISEMENT

San Francisco Superior Court judge Ethan Schulman ruled Monday that Uber and Lyft must classify their drivers as full employees under Assembly Bill (AB) 5, a landmark law that establishes a test for determining whether workers can be classified as independent contractors.

Schulman sided with California Attorney General Xavier BecerraXavier BecerraAppeals court rejects California’s ban on high-capacity magazines Newsom says he has already received a number of pitches for Harris’s open Senate seat Uber CEO says app will temporarily shut down in California if new ruling upheld MORE (D), who brought the lawsuit after the two ridesharing giants resisted the law after it took effect in January, arguing their core business is technology rather than ride-hailing.

Both companies reacted aggressively to Monday’s court decision, threatening to shut down operations in California if they are forced to provide workers with basic protections like a minimum wage and the right to organize. Those threats have put drivers in a precarious position.

“As deplorable as that is, it’s not surprising, because now that the pandemic has pushed the vast majority of drivers into financial ruin, Uber and Lyft are ready to completely abandon them,” Erica Mighetto, a driver in the San Francisco area and member of Rideshare Drivers United, told The Hill.

After the ruling, both companies filed motions to extend a 10-day stay that Schulman placed on his decision to give Uber and Lyft time to file appeals. He denied their motions, meaning Thursday is still their deadline for appealing.

Legal experts say that while the companies are almost certain to appeal, they’re unlikely to make any new arguments when they do so.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Based on what I heard in the oral argument, I think they’re really going to go hard on this idea that this is going to cause irreparable harm both to the companies and to drivers,” said Veena Dubal, associate professor at the University of California’s Hastings College of the Law in San Francisco.

That argument was rejected in court by Schulman, who said the companies had plenty of time to figure out how to comply with the law.

The case will also likely hinge on rules for determining employment status. AB5 codified a test for determining whether workers can be considered independent contractors.

The first prong of the test says the worker must be free from control and direction of the hiring entity. Both Uber and Lyft have emphasized the flexibility that they provide drivers on their platforms, letting them select their own hours and rides.

However, researchers have raised questions about that independence, noting that drivers are tightly surveilled and have to follow strict policies. Additionally, nothing about being a full employee has a requirement for hours.

Uber has taken some steps to resolve that part of the codified test in California, such as letting drivers set their own surge rates and showing them whole trips before they pick up riders.

But those changes don’t “give drivers sufficient control to say that they control their own destiny, and that they control their own work,” Bryant Greening, an attorney at LegalRideshare, a law firm that specializes in rideshare cases, told The Hill.

The second prong of the state test, and the most important in this case, is that the task performed by workers must be outside of the usual course of the hiring entity’s business.

Uber and Lyft have long held that they are technology platforms, not ride hailing businesses. That argument has been increasingly harder to defend.

“It’s this simple,” Schulman wrote in his ruling, “Defendants’ drivers do not perform work that is ‘outside the usual course’ of their business. Defendants’ insistence that their businesses are ‘multi-sided platforms’ rather than transportation companies is flatly inconsistent with the statutory provisions that govern their businesses as transportation network companies, which are defined as companies that ‘engage in the transportation of persons by motor vehicle for compensation.’”

The third prong of the test requires that the worker participate in a type of task that has been established before as being independent.

If any one of the prongs is failed, the worker cannot be considered an independent contractor under state law.

Even though they’re expected to file appeals, Uber and Lyft have already begun charting next steps. 

In addition to threatening to leave the state — a tactic Uber used frequently while it expanded across the country — the two firms have joined forces with other gig companies to pour millions of dollars into a ballot measure Prop 22, that would exempt them from state labor laws that threaten their business models.

The ballot measure would entitle gig company workers to some protections including minimum earnings, vehicle insurance and health care subsidies, but would exempt the companies from having to give them full employee status.

Uber and Lyft asked Schulman to delay his decision until after the vote on Prop 22 to let voters decide, a plea that was swiftly rejected by the court.

Prop 22 would establish the kind of third employee classification type that Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi has long sought. Khosrowshahi sent a letter to the White House earlier this year asking President TrumpDonald John TrumpPresident Trump’s brother, Robert Trump, dies at 71 Trump to take part in each day at GOP convention: reports Trump breaks with CDC director on potential for ‘worst fall’ amid pandemic, flu season MORE to consider legislative action on a worker classification that could let Uber maintain the flexibility of having independent contractors while adding some basic worker protections. He made a similar push for new laws in a New York Times op-ed on Monday.

An Uber and Lyft driver in California named John, who asked that his last name not be used for fear of reprisal, said the companies’ threats to leave the state also have the effect of pressuring drivers to support Prop 22.

ADVERTISEMENT

“They’re shooting a salvo over the bow, they basically want to scare drivers, they want to scare them into voting yes,” he told The Hill.

The resolution of Uber and Lyft’s battles against California labor laws could have ripple effects nationwide for other companies that rely on gig work, like grocery or food delivery, that have grown immensely during the coronavirus pandemic.

Dubal called the decision “probably the most important one that has come out globally,” because “California is such a huge market for them, and… the judge made such clear legal statements about how this is not a technology company but a transportation company and they are clearly in violation of the law.”

For Mighetto, the San Francisco area driver, forcing Uber and Lyft to choose between offering worker protections or folding is long overdue.

“We’re really hopeful that we can put a stop to Prop 22, and that Uber and Lyft come to the reality that there’s no place for them anywhere unless they treat their workers fairly,” she said.

California on Monday finalized fuel efficiency agreements with five automakers in an attempt to undercut the Trump administration’s rollback of Obama-era standards.

As part of the deal, BMW, Ford, Honda, Volkswagen and Volvo agreed to annual fuel economy improvements that hew more closely to those required under the Obama administration compared with the less stringent ones just finalized.

The deal represents a blow to the Trump administration, which has revoked the waiver California relied on to set stricter auto emissions standards that were in turn adopted by more than a dozen other states. 

ADVERTISEMENT

“Instead of propelling our country toward the clean cars of the future, the Trump administration’s failure to lead on this issue has left American workers and automakers behind. While the administration created a void of leadership, vision and direction, the state of California and automakers came together in these voluntary agreements that provide a path forward to support the clean cars of the future,” Senate Environment and Public Works Committee ranking member Tom CarperThomas (Tom) Richard CarperCalifornia finalizes fuel efficiency deal with five automakers, undercutting Trump OVERNIGHT ENERGY: Trump administration finalizes plan to open up Alaska wildlife refuge to drilling | California finalizes fuel efficiency deal with five automakers, undercutting Trump | Democrats use vulnerable GOP senators to get rare win on environment Trump says he’ll sign USPS funding if Democrats make concessions MORE (D-Del.) said in a release, encouraging other automakers to follow suit. 

The Trump administration in March announced it would require automakers to produce a fleet averaging 40 mpg by 2026 instead of the previous requirement under the Obama administration to reach 55 mpg by 2025. 

The new agreements finalized by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) give automakers until 2026 to produce fleets averaging 51 mpg. 

Still, some environmental groups were hoping California would chart a more ambitious course. 

“While this deal is a positive interim step, we need bolder action to prevent us driving off the carbon cliff,” Katherine Hoff, a lawyer with the Center for Biological Diversity, said in a statement. 

ADVERTISEMENT

“To meet California’s own climate goals and to be the model the world needs, CARB must lead the way quickly in making 100 percent zero-emission vehicle sales the standard by 2030,” she added.

News of California’s effort to strike a more environmentally friendly deal with automakers first broke in July of last year, shortly after the Trump administration revoked the state’s waiver. 

California’s roughly 40 million residents give it large sway in the market, something the state has not been shy about using to promote its interests, including efforts to battle climate change.

The Obama administration estimated that its fuel efficiency standards would have reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 6 billion metric tons over the course of the program.

The Trump administration’s emissions standards fall below what automakers have said is possible for them to achieve. Its regulations require 1.5 percent year-over-year improvements, while automakers have said they could improve fuel economy by 2 percent each year.

Automakers that have not signed a deal with California have also signaled interest in fighting the Trump standards, filing a motion to intervene in a lawsuit from a conservative group that argued the regulations were too rigorous. 

Click Here: essendon bombers guernsey 2019

Is Wrestling Broken w/ Bill Apter

In this episode of ShiLounge, Shin-Blade sits down with legendary wrestling journalist Bill Apter after his one-man show, “Is Wrestling Fixed?: An Afternoon with Bill Apter” at the PhilaMOCA in Philadelphia and discuss such topics such as:
-His new book
-Showbiz Heroes
-WOW! Magazine
-Starting the Andy Kaufman/Jerry Lawler feud
-How he met Shin-Blade
-Championship Office Wrestling?
-Taking hits from ECW wrestlers
-Paul Heyman
-His rapping style
-Dusty Rhodes & Roddy Piper
-Giving wise words for business
-A special guest: Charlie Hartman of Gimmick Tree Promotions
and more…
Catch Bill Apter:
Website: 1wrestling.com
Twitter: @apter1wrestling

Follow Shin-Blade:
Facebook: facebook.com/shin.blade.808
Twitter: @shinsationalone
Instagram: @officialshinblade
Subscribe NOW to get the latest episodes whenever they are available!
Links are here:
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/shilounge/id1070435924…
SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/shin-…/bill-apter-is-wrestling-broken
Stitcher: https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/shilounge