Retired Air Force Brig. Gen. pilot Chuck Yeager, who was the first to break the sound barrier and later inspired “The Right Stuff” book and movie adaptation, died Monday evening.

Aged 97, his wife Victoria Yeager announced his passing on Twitter.

ADVERTISEMENT

“It is w/ profound sorrow, I must tell you that my life love General Chuck Yeager passed just before 9pm ET. An incredible life well lived, America’s greatest Pilot, & a legacy of strength, adventure, & patriotism will be remembered forever,” the late Yeager’s spouse posted using his official Twitter account.

Yeager is known for his achievement of being the first to break the sound barrier in 1947 when he flew the Bell X-1 rocket 700 mph at 43,000 feet, marking an extraordinary accomplishment in aviation.

His achievements were written about in Tom Wolfe’s book “The Right Stuff,” and later inspired the 1983 film.

NASA Administrator Jim BridenstineJames (Jim) Frederick BridenstineFirst to break the sound barrier, Chuck Yeager dies at 97 The Hill’s Morning Report – Presented by Facebook – Congress faces end-of-year crunch; Biden selects his Defense secretary What should Biden do with NASA and the Artemis Program? MORE released a statement, calling Yeager’s death “a tremendous loss to our nation.”

“Gen. Yeager’s pioneering and innovative spirit advanced America’s abilities in the sky and set our nation’s dreams soaring into the jet age and the space age. He said, ‘You don’t concentrate on risks. You concentrate on results. No risk is too great to prevent the necessary job from getting done,'” Bridenstine said in his statement.

ADVERTISEMENT

A pilot with more than 60 years of aviation experience, Yeager is regarded as one of America’s best airmen over his accomplished record-breaking feats.

After serving the nation in World War II, Yeager went on to break his own record. In December 1953, he traveled at Mach 2.44 just days before the 50th anniversary of the Wright brothers’ first powered flight, according to NASA.

Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiBiden backs 0B compromise coronavirus stimulus bill US records over 14 million coronavirus cases On The Money: COVID-19 relief picks up steam as McConnell, Pelosi hold talks | Slowing job growth raises fears of double-dip recession | Biden officially announces Brian Deese as top economic adviser MORE (D-Calif.) expressed optimism Friday that the parties will come together to secure a coronavirus relief package before Congress leaves Washington for the winter holidays.

Addressing reporters in the Capitol, the Speaker said party negotiators still have a number of disagreements to iron out to win such an agreement, but indicated the sides are making steady progress and all but guaranteed that a bipartisan deal will be sealed in the coming days.

“We’ll take the time we need and we must get it done,” Pelosi said. “We cannot leave without it.”

Pelosi had spoken Thursday with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellBiden backs 0B compromise coronavirus stimulus bill US records over 14 million coronavirus cases On The Money: COVID-19 relief picks up steam as McConnell, Pelosi hold talks | Slowing job growth raises fears of double-dip recession | Biden officially announces Brian Deese as top economic adviser MORE (R-Ky.) seeking a strategy for passing both an emergency COVID-19 bill and legislation to fund the government and prevent a shutdown. Both sides emerged from that discussion in agreement that the two bills should be lumped together for the sake of expediency — a message Pelosi amplified on Friday.

“We want to have it on the omnibus, … and we’re hoping that that will accelerate the discussions on the omnibus,” she said, referring to legislation combining all 12 appropriations bills together in one package. “We are going to keep government open — we are not going to have a continuing resolution — but we need to take the time to do that.”

The comments arrive as the nation is experiencing yet another surge in coronavirus cases, hospitalizations and deaths, forcing some state and local leaders to implement new rounds of lockdowns and intensifying the pressure on congressional leaders to secure another coronavirus-relief package before year’s end.

For months leading up to last month’s elections, Pelosi and White House negotiators had failed to reach an agreement on another round of emergency aid, which was then in the range of $2 trillion.

In a major breakthrough, Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Charles SchumerChuck SchumerPelosi, Schumer endorse 8 billion plan as basis for stimulus talks Funding bill hits snag as shutdown deadline looms Trump supporters could hand Senate control to Democrats MORE (D-N.Y.) announced this week that they’re prepared to lower their funding demand dramatically, agreeing to use a recently released bipartisan framework — in the range of $900 billion — as the baseline of the talks.

Pelosi defended that change of position on Friday, saying it reflected two dramatic shifts in the post-election landscape: Joe BidenJoe BidenBiden says GOP senators have called to congratulate him Biden: Trump attending inauguration is ‘of consequence’ to the country Biden says family will avoid business conflicts MORE‘s presidential victory, and the emergence of several promising vaccines.

“That is a total game-charger: a new president and a vaccine,” she said, noting that Biden has vowed to enact more COVID-19 relief next year as needs arise. That new dynamic, she added, has freed Democratic leaders to accept a smaller level of funding this month, knowing more may be on the way.

“It’s for a shorter period of time, but that’s OK now, because we have a new president,” she said.

Indeed, shortly after Pelosi spoke Friday morning, Biden issued a statement vowing to move quickly next year to secure more emergency funding, citing Friday’s disappointing new jobs report as evidence of its necessity.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Any package passed in the lame duck session is not enough,” Biden said. “It’s just the start.”

It’s unclear how quickly — or even if — the sides can come together to win a bipartisan deal.

The leading appropriators in each chamber — Sen. Richard ShelbyRichard Craig ShelbyHouse Democrats pick DeLauro to lead Appropriations panel The Hill’s Morning Report – Presented by Mastercard – Dem leaders back smaller COVID-19 relief bill as pandemic escalates Congress faces late-year logjam MORE (R-Ala.) and Rep. Nita LoweyNita Sue LoweyOvernight Defense: Lawmakers release compromise defense bill in defiance of Trump veto threat | Senate voting next week on blocking UAE arms sale | Report faults lack of training, ‘chronic fatigue’ in military plane crashes Rep. David Scott wins House Agriculture Committee gavel House Democrats pick DeLauro to lead Appropriations panel MORE (D-N.Y.) — have been in frequent talks in recent weeks on the issue of government funding, but there remain disagreements on provisions affected veterans health care, Trump’s signature border wall and funding for detention beds overseen byImmigration and Customs Enforcement.

Without an agreement, the government is scheduled to shut down on Dec. 12, and Shelby had suggested earlier in the week that a short-term spending bill might be needed to keep the lights on.

On Friday, however, Pelosi said the talks were bearing fruit, suggesting a stop-gap — known as a continuing resolution, or CR — won’t be necessary.

“They’ve made great progress, [but] more needs to be done,” Pelosi said.

There are also a number of outstanding sticking points preventing an agreement on coronavirus relief. McConnell, for instance, has insisted that any new aid package must include language shielding schools and businesses from lawsuits brought by workers and students who develop COVID-19 — a provision roundly rejected by Pelosi and the Democrats.  

Still leaders in both parties are facing increasing pressure from rank-and-file lawmakers to bridge their differences and win a deal this month. And President TrumpDonald John TrumpBiden says GOP senators have called to congratulate him Biden: Trump attending inauguration is ‘of consequence’ to the country Biden says family will avoid business conflicts MORE has said he’ll sign the legislation if it reaches his desk.

With the clock ticking down, Pelosi emphasized that there’s no time for partisan messaging bills, like those Democrats had passed through the House in May and again in October.

“I told members, I’m not bringing any more bills that are not bipartisan,” she said.

Economists are warning that a COVID-19 relief bill without aid for state and local governments would mean passing up an opportunity to include a proven stimulus provision.

Congressional leaders are at odds over not only the price tag of a new relief measure, but what should be in it. The various proposals on Capitol Hill range from tens of billions of dollars in government aid for states, cities, tribes and territories to no funds at all.

“The most effective form of relief and stimulus for the overall economy is flexible money that states can use depending on need,” said Tracy Gordon, senior fellow with the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, which is led by a former Obama administration official.

ADVERTISEMENT

State and local government budgets have been hit hard by the pandemic, losing revenue from sales taxes and business taxes as local purchases dried up and stores shuttered. Other fees and revenue sources are dwindling as residents draw back on most day-to-day activities.

Though shortfalls today are well below some of the estimates made in the early days of the coronavirus downturn, states are still expected to slash spending anywhere from 5 percent to 20 percent to keep their budgets balanced, according to data compiled by the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Cutbacks at the state and municipal level have contributed to 1.3 million layoffs, over a tenth of the net jobs lost in the U.S. since the pandemic began. The vast majority — about a million — are in the education sector.

Democrats have prioritized state and local government funds, initially pushing nearly $1 trillion in aid in the $3.4 trillion HEROES Act passed by House Democrats in May. As negotiations have dragged on over the months, both figures have dropped significantly.

The latest proposal from a bipartisan group of moderates included $160 billion for states, local governments, tribes and other territories. But it is one of two areas, along with liability protection, that lacks specifics or legal language for implementation.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellMembers of Congress should force leadership to hold a COVID-19 relief bill vote On The Money: Momentum stalls for COVID-19 relief bill | Congress barrels toward ‘COVID cliff’ | House passes stopgap bill to avoid government shutdown Senate rejects attempt to block Trump’s UAE arms sale MORE (R-Ky.) on Tuesday suggested stripping out both the government aid and the liability protections to push the bill ahead.

“Democrats continue to oppose common sense legal protections that university presidents having begging for, and Republicans see no need to send huge sums of money to state and local governments whose tax revenues have actually gone up,” McConnell said.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Negotiating 101 suggests we set those two controversial pieces aside and plow ahead with a huge pile of things that we agree on.”

Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiInspector general told prosecutors VA Secretary Wilkie may have engaged in criminal conduct: report Members of Congress should force leadership to hold a COVID-19 relief bill vote On The Money: Momentum stalls for COVID-19 relief bill | Congress barrels toward ‘COVID cliff’ | House passes stopgap bill to avoid government shutdown MORE (D-Calif.) swiftly rejected McConnell’s offer, calling it “appalling.”

“Our health care workers, our first responders and other front-line workers have risked their lives to save lives. Now, Leader McConnell wants them to lose their jobs and our constituents to lose the essential services they provide,” she said.

Gordon is among those arguing that time is of the essence when it comes to aid for state and local governments.

“When the crisis hit, they had to find solutions quickly, and that’s why you saw job losses start right away. They did the easy things first,” she said, pointing to policies such as deferring expenses, canceling program expansions and relying on the first round of federal funding.

“Those options are now done.”

State legislatures, which are required by law to balance their budgets, will have to consider further cuts and tax increases in January to get out of the red before the fiscal year ends on June 30.

The Federal Reserve has also taken a strong position on the need for fiscal stimulus, but without specifying a dollar amount for governments below the federal level.

Fed Chairman Jerome Powell is one of dozens of high-profile economists who’ve urged Congress to approve another boost to jobless benefits, aid state and local governments to prevent widespread layoffs and extend housing protections.

An analysis by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office in September found that state and local aid offered the highest bang for the buck when it comes to relief spending. Whereas the Paycheck Protection Program to help small businesses stay afloat added 36 cents to the economy for every dollar spent, every dollar spent on shoring up state and local governments boosted the economy by 88 cents to the dollar.

The National Governors Association has pointed to data showing that lack of aid for state governments prolonged the Great Recession and slowed the subsequent recovery.

“Every major economist, regardless of party or ideological bent, came to the same conclusion after the 2007-09 financial crisis: The lack of support for state and local governments slowed the nation’s economic growth for more than a decade,” New York Gov. Andrew CuomoAndrew CuomoCuomo says Staten Island accounts for a fourth of all NYC virus deaths Court fines California church ,000 for repeatedly defying health orders States push back on CDC demand for personal data of COVID-19 vaccine recipients MORE (D) and Arkansas Gov. Asa HutchinsonAsa HutchinsonBipartisan governors call on Congress to pass coronavirus relief package Smearing presidential election will turn off young voters and undermine democracy The Hill’s Morning Report – Presented by Mastercard – Coast-to-coast fears about post-holiday COVID-19 spread MORE (R), the group’s chair and vice chair, said in a joint statement.

“Ultimately, we hope for a relief package that will support the needs of the American people, including health care workers, firefighters, police officers and teachers,” they added.

But disagreements remain about how much state and local governments need, and when.

ADVERTISEMENT

Mike Leachman, vice president for state fiscal policy at the left-leaning Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, estimates states will face a shortfall of between $275 billion and $415 billion through fiscal 2022.

“What’s at stake is, without additional aid, states will lay off more teachers, health care workers, and other public employees. That’ll just make the pandemic recession even worse. They’ll cut services that businesses need right now,” he said.

Leachman acknowledged that not all of the layoffs are due to a funding shortage. Some of the million education workers who have lost their jobs were laid off due to other aspects of the pandemic.

“Those numbers include teachers, but also bus drivers, security personnel, cafeteria workers and janitors, who in a remote environment are not immediately needed,” he said.

Stan Veuger, a scholar at the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute, said the discussion of state and local funding doesn’t properly account for all the expenditures and costs associated with the pandemic.

“I think in the aggregate for the current fiscal year, there’s not a ton of funding needed,” he said, adding that some harder-hit states still need help.


In his accounting, states face a $300 billion shortfall through June, but a combination of $110 billion in rainy day funds, the $150 billion Congress approved in the early rounds of COVID-19 relief, and funds set aside for transportation, Medicaid reimbursement, hospitals and universities covered some of those shortfalls.

ADVERTISEMENT

Still, he said, state and local aid is a good idea, and remains among the best forms of stimulus and relief the government can provide.

Gordon noted that concerns about providing too much aid to governments could be addressed through guardrails to keep the money flowing if states need it, and turn it off when they no longer do.

“If the aid is tied to economic conditions like unemployment, the aid would be directed to the places that need it the most, and also turn off when it needs to turn off,” she said.

A member of President-elect Joe BidenJoe BidenPennsylvania GOP leader on breaking with Trump on election: ‘I’d get my house bombed tonight’ GOP Texas senator questions ‘legal theory’ behind Trump’s lawsuit to challenge state’s election results Nearly 30 staffers, members of Michigan legislature tested positive for COVID-19 this year MORE’s COVID-19 advisory board is urging Americans to avoid large Christmas parties this year as health officials worry of a sharp spike in cases following the December holidays.

Speaking on CNN early Thursday, Michael Osterholm said people should only hold gatherings with people they’ve been quarantining with, or those with whom they’ve “podded.”

“At this point, no gatherings outside your immediate family that are in a sense podded together. What I mean by that is that the people who you have been with who haven’t had outside exposures. So if your son and daughter are coming home from college, they’re not part of your pod. Either they quarantine for 10-14 days, or they’re not part of what happens in the holidays,” he said.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Don’t get together with neighbors. No Christmas parties,” he added. “There is not a safe Christmas party in this country right now unless everybody for the previous 10-14 days were podded.”

Osterholm’s warning comes amid an alarming surge in COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations and deaths across the country that officials fear will worsen in the coming months as people travel for the holidays and gather indoor, where the virus can more easily spread.

ADVERTISEMENT

“We have to say the next three to six weeks at minimum, longer, are our COVID weeks. We just have to get through this. Please, save a life, particularly the ones you love. And don’t get together for these holiday parties, holiday events. That’s the very best thing you can do to love someone today,” Osterholm said, saying the nation could see “a surge upon a surge upon a surge” during the holiday season.

The remarks reflect the stark differences in strategy by aides for Biden and President TrumpDonald TrumpTrump calls on Georgia AG not to have other Republicans oppose election lawsuit: report Pennsylvania GOP leader on breaking with Trump on election: ‘I’d get my house bombed tonight’ Lawmakers call for lowering health care costs to address disparities in pandemic MORE. While officials with the Biden transition and members of his incoming administration have urged Americans to wear masks and avoid gatherings, White House officials, including Trump, have been more lax and more reluctant to press people to avoid meeting with friends and family.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released guidance last week urging Americans not to travel for Christmas. They CDC recommends that if people do travel, they should get tested one to three days before a trip and three to five days afterward. People who do not get tested should cut down on nonessential activities for 10 days after travel, it added.

Osterholm on Thursday panned the guidance as being too lenient, saying instead there should have been a blanket policy of urging people not to travel. 

“I think we just really have to tell the American public in hard language what’s happening here. And far too often I think we’ve tried to, you might say, split the middle,” he said.

“I have a real problem with the CDC’s recommendation with what to do over the holiday period. It’s nuanced, it’s basically saying, ‘Don’t get together, but if you are going to get together do these things.’ That’s like telling somebody, ‘Don’t drive drunk, but if you do drive drunk, these are the best ways to do it.’ We have to be really hard. I don’t care if I’m accused of being the Grinch that stole Christmas. But you know what? I want you to be around for the next Christmas and the next Christmas after that.”

Public health experts say state and local governments are underfunded and unprepared for what is expected to be the largest vaccination campaign in U.S. history.

While the Trump administration has spent more than $10 billion supporting the development of COVID-19 vaccines, just $340 million has been allocated to agencies below the federal level to help with distribution efforts that will cost anywhere from $6 billion to $13.3 billion, according to various estimates.

Health care workers, nursing home residents and other priority groups could be vaccinated as soon as this month, according to estimates by Trump officials. But the administration has not planned for the subsequent vaccination of hundreds of millions of Americans in the general population next year, or how to pay for it.

ADVERTISEMENT

“We knew vaccines would be in development, so it’s not a surprise we would need to build up the deployment system. Now we could be weeks away from the first doses going out and we really haven’t invested in any of that work,” said Adriane Casalotti, chief of government and public affairs at National Association of County and City Health Officials.

“Things could have been done earlier without having to reach this level of emergency,” she added. “To not have put a single dime toward deployment of it is a real disservice.”

The administration’s Operation Warp Speed plans to ship out 6.4 million doses of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine within 24 hours of receiving authorization from the Food and Drug Administration. Federal officials estimate shipments will begin in mid-December, with each state receiving a certain proportion based on its population.

Health workers and nursing home residents are likely to be first in line, followed by other essential workers, as well as teachers, the elderly and people with underlying health conditions.

Members of the general public could begin receiving vaccinations by March when monthly production is projected to reach as much as 150 million doses.

Vaccinating the vast majority of Americans requires at least $8.4 billion in funding for state and local governments, according to estimates from NACCHO, the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials and the Association of Immunization Managers. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Robert Redfield previously told Congress about $6 billion would be needed.

ADVERTISEMENT

Both Democrats and Republicans in Congress say they recognize the need for vaccine distribution funding, but negotiations over another COVID-19 relief bill have yet to lead to a deal despite months of sporadic talks.

“I’m not getting a sense from Congress that there’s tremendous urgency on this,” said Topher Spiro, vice president for health policy at the left-leaning Center for American Progress (CAP).

“This effort is going to be on par, or should be on par, with landing a man on the moon. It should be one of the largest efforts ever undertaken by governments and it’s really important to get it right to restore faith in the government and I don’t understand why Congress would nickel and dime this funding. There’s a huge risk of underfunding vaccine distribution, which would be catastrophic.”

Spiro said he is concerned states won’t be able to plan appropriately and won’t have as much capacity to vaccinate people as they otherwise would if they knew they were receiving “robust” federal funding.

“If the production of the vaccine is there, we want to have the capacity to vaccinate and not stretch out over many months. We want to try to vaccinate as many people as quickly as possible in the spring… obviously, the goal here is to achieve herd immunity as rapidly as possible.”

CAP and Richard Serino, former deputy administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, estimated that $13.3 billion will be needed for a mass vaccination effort in the U.S. 

Talks between Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiOn The Money: Unemployment gains lower than expected | Jobs report lights fire under coronavirus relief talks Hillicon Valley: Senate Intelligence Committee leaders warn of Chinese threats to national security | Biden says China must play by ‘international norms’ | House Democrats use Markup app for leadership contest voting Bipartisan governors call on Congress to pass coronavirus relief package MORE (D-Calif.) and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellOn The Money: Unemployment gains lower than expected | Jobs report lights fire under coronavirus relief talks GOP senators back Christian school’s push for COVID-19 carve-out Bipartisan governors call on Congress to pass coronavirus relief package MORE (R-Ky.) appear to have progressed somewhat on a new COVID-19 relief deal, with both sides agreeing that aid should be included in the year-end government funding bill for the sake of expediency.

Pelosi came down from her previous $2.2 trillion starting point to support a framework based off a recently introduced bipartisan, bicameral measure totaling $900 billion that includes $16 billion for vaccine development, distribution, testing and contact tracing.

McConnell, however, distanced himself from that framework and has instead stuck to his early $500 billion proposal. It’s not clear how much of that would go to vaccine distribution efforts, but a previous bill from the GOP leader allocated $6 billion for those efforts.

It’s unclear if the two sides can reach an agreement by the Dec. 11 government funding deadline, but experts say it’s imperative that they do so.

“It’s needed immediately. It was needed six months ago,” said Claire Hannan, executive director of Association of Immunization Managers.

Hannan said she’s less worried about the first phase, when health care workers and nursing home residents will likely be vaccinated, but more concerned about being prepared for when larger groups of people will need to be vaccinated.

Health departments are already strained from running contact tracing and testing programs, while receiving very little money from the CDC to prepare for a vaccine rollout.

Implementation will require more employees to train providers, staff vaccination clinics and hire and train workers who will be tasked with launching outreach programs, purchasing more supplies and engaging with hard-to-reach populations that are traditionally more distrustful of public health campaigns.

“This is all moving at a very slow place right now,” Hannan said.

While a vaccine may not be available to the general public until the spring, planning needs to take place several months before then in order for it to run smoothly, she said.

“You can’t expect states to wait a couple of months to get funding, then in 24 hours begin vaccinating with it. It takes time,” she said.

The Supreme Court on Monday declined to take up a challenge by Oregon parents to public school policies allowing transgender students to use bathrooms that match their gender identity.

By declining to hear the case, the justices preserved a federal appeals court’s decision to permit transgender students to use the bathrooms and locker rooms associated with their gender identity instead of their sex assigned at birth.

Parents brought the case against the Dallas School District in Oregon in 2017 after a transgender student was permitted to use the boys’ bathrooms and locker room at the high school.

ADVERTISEMENT

The parents alleged that the district’s policy violated the privacy and constitutional rights of other students.

A lower court initially refused to strike down the school district’s policy, prompting the parents to appeal to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which affirmed the lower court ruling.

“The District’s directive interferes with parents’ rights to direct the upbringing of their children, schoolchildren’s rights to bodily privacy, parents’ and children’s free exercise of religion, and children’s rights to be free from hostile educational environments under Title IX,” the parents said in their petition for appeal.

The Dallas School District said in court documents that the parents’ appeal had “innumerable shortcomings” and their argument was “moot since the transgender boy graduated long ago.” 

The Supreme Court’s denial of review on Monday means the Oregon parents’ petition for appeal failed to gain support from at least four justices.

The American Civil Liberties Union applauded the high court’s decision, with Chase Strangio, the deputy director for trans justice with the ACLU’s LGBT & HIV Project, saying justices determined “that transgender youth are not a threat to other students.”

ADVERTISEMENT

“As we look towards state legislative sessions that will likely continue the attacks on trans youth, the decision not to take this case is an important and powerful message to trans and non-binary youth that they deserve to share space with and enjoy the benefits of school alongside their non-transgender peers,” Strangio said in a statement.

The Supreme Court’s move on Monday comes after President TrumpDonald TrumpTrump taps Conway, Chao to government posts in waning days of administration Pelosi, Schumer hit Trump but cite ‘progress’ in COVID relief talks House GOP leader trolls Democrats over reduced majority MORE’s Education Department rejected Obama-era informal guidance for schools to allow transgender students to use bathrooms associated with their gender identity.

Updated at 10:51 a.m.

House lawmakers on Wednesday vowed to further investigate the findings of a damning report highlighting a climate of widespread sexual harassment and violence at the Fort Hood Army base in Texas.

Rep. Jackie SpeierKaren (Jackie) Lorraine Jacqueline SpeierCongress vows to further investigate Fort Hood violence, sexual harassment House chairman endorses Michele Flournoy for Biden’s Pentagon chief Battle for Pentagon post in Biden Cabinet heats up MORE (D-Calif.), the chairwoman of the House Armed Services military personnel subpanel, called the report “a damning indictment of Fort Hood and its leadership.”

Speier, who in September led a congressional delegation to the base, said she met with junior enlisted women who described a culture of sexual harassment. Squad and platoon leaders saw the abuse but “seemed either unwilling or unsure how to help them,” she said. 

ADVERTISEMENT

“No one was held accountable. And not one leader stepped forward,” Speier said in her opening remarks at a hearing featuring the five experts who made up the Fort Hood Independent Review Committee, which produced the report.

Acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller on Wednesday backed the findings of the report, voicing his support for the firings that followed in its wake.

In a statement, Miller said he had for several months “been closely following” the case pf Pfc. Vanessa Guillen, the 20-year-old whose death sparked an independent review of the command and climate at the troubled base. 

Guillen went missing in April. Her sister said she had revealed that she was victim of sexual harassment but never reported it out of fear of retaliation. Guillen’s body was discovered in late June, likely bludgeoned to death, but her suspected attacker took his own life while police attempted to arrest him.

“While my heart is heavy with the tragedy of her death, my commitment to addressing the issues of sexual assault and sexual harassment is resolved.  As a department we must do better, and we will do better,” Miller said.

“I support Army Secretary Ryan McCarthyRyan McCarthyCongress vows to further investigate Fort Hood violence, sexual harassment The Hill’s Morning Report – Presented by Facebook – House bucks veto threat to approve defense bill as virus relief in limbo Overnight Defense: Biden taps Austin for Pentagon chief | Army announces Ft Hood firings, suspensions | House approves defense bill despite Trump veto MORE’s decision to hold leaders at multiple levels accountable and will be closely reviewing the results of the Fort Hood Report and the People First Task Force,” he added, referring to the group that is tasked with to map implementing the document’s recommendations. 

ADVERTISEMENT

McCarthy on Tuesday announced the firing and suspension of a combined 14 officers and enlisted soldiers at Fort Hood after an independent, five member panel found a there was a “permissive environment for sexual assault and sexual harassment” at the base.

On Wednesday, the panel echoed their findings, saying changes need to come from the top down at the military installation. 

“At Fort Hood there was a clearly identified high risk of serious harm: sexual assault involving female Soldiers in the enlisted ranks, which could have been addressed decisively and in proactive ways to mitigate the risk,” the report states. “Unfortunately, a ‘business as usual’ approach was taken by Fort Hood leadership causing female Soldiers, particularly, in the combat Brigades, to slip into survival mode, vulnerable and preyed upon, but fearful to report and be ostracized and re-victimized.” 

Among the major failings was the Army’s Sexual Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention (SHARP) program, established 15 years ago to eliminate sexual assaults and sexual harassment in the ranks.

But the review found that the program had faltered as it was “structurally weak and under-resourced” and there was a “pervasive lack of confidence” in it. 

“The SHARP Program was chronically under-resourced, due to understaffing, lack of training, lack of credentialed SHARP professionals, and lack of funding. Most of all, it lacked command emphasis where it was needed the most: the enlisted ranks,” the review board found. 

At the hearing, panel members said many soldiers did not know much about nor had confidence in the program.

Another issue was a significant underreporting of sexual harassment and sexual assault, as “victims feared the inevitable consequences of reporting: ostracism, shunning and shaming, harsh treatment, and indelible damage to their career,” according to the report. 

Further compounding problems was the Fort Hood Army Criminal Investigation Division (CID), which had a workforce that “was unstable, under-experienced, over-assigned and underresourced leading to inefficiencies that had an adverse impact on investigations, especially complex cases involving sex crimes and Soldier deaths.”

Chris Swecker — a lawyer and former assistant director of the FBI’s CID who led the panel — said the division only had three or four members that had more than three years of experience.

He said that more civilian agents with more experience should be moved to the unit.

Fort Hood, where roughly 36,500 soldiers are assigned, has become known as one of the most violent military installations in the last decade. At least 29 soldiers have died this year alone at the post.

ADVERTISEMENT

An average of 129 felonies were committed annually at the base between 2014 and 2019, including cases of homicide, sexual assault, kidnapping, robbery and aggravated assault, according to Army data. 

In September, Speier’s subpanel along with the House Oversight and Reform national security subcommittee announced a joint Congressional investigation into Fort Hood. 

“While the Army has directed an independent review of Fort Hood, Congressional oversight is necessary to determine whether base leadership—by omission or commission— has allowed or enabled a culture to exist that undermines the values and traditions of the U.S. Army,” they wrote. 

Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon MuskElon Reeve MuskHillicon Valley: Major cybersecurity firm hacked in sophisticated nation-state attack | Senate confirms Trump FCC nominee amid Democratic pushback | Pornhub bans unverified uploads, ability to download content Elon Musk confirms he relocated to Texas from California FCC announces billions in subsidies to provide broadband access in rural areas MORE said Tuesday he has personally relocated to Texas, citing repeated complaints with California’s regulations over technology companies as well as what he called innovation complacency throughout Silicon Valley. 

“If a team has been winning for too long, they do tend to get a little complacent, a little entitled, and then they don’t win the championship anymore. California has been winning for too long,” Musk said at The Wall Street Journal’s CEO Council summit Tuesday during an interview with Editor-in-Chief Matt Murray.

When asked if he had moved from California, Musk first emphasized the presence his companies still have in the nation’s largest state. 

ADVERTISEMENT

“First of all, Tesla and SpaceX obviously have massive operations in California,” the South Africa native said, according to CNBC. “In fact, it’s worth noting that Tesla is the last car company still manufacturing cars in California. SpaceX is the last aerospace company still doing significant manufacturing in California.” 

“There used to be over a dozen car plants in California, and California used to be the center of aerospace manufacturing,” he continued. “My companies are the last two left. … That’s a very important point to make.”

“For myself, yes, I have moved to Texas.”

Musk added that he believes Silicon Valley and the San Francisco Bay Area have “too much influence on the world” but that it likely will be reduced as a result of the pandemic, the Journal reported. 

Musk is just the latest in a series of startup executives and employees who have moved from the San Francisco Bay Area to cheaper locations since the pandemic forced many to begin working remotely. 

Last week, Hewlett Packard Enterprise announced that it planned to move its headquarters to Texas, and earlier this year, Palantir Technologies Inc., founded in the Bay Area in 2003, moved its base of operations to Denver.

ADVERTISEMENT

In August, Palantir CEO Alex Karp accused Silicon Valley of being out of touch with the principles and societal needs of everyday Americans. 

“Our society has effectively outsourced the building of software that makes our world possible to a small group of engineers in an isolated corner of the country,” Karp wrote in a letter to investors. “The engineering elite of Silicon Valley may know more than most about building software. But they do not know more about how society should be organized or what justice requires.”

During his remarks Tuesday, Musk also condemned government regulations and bureaucracy that he says have limited new startup creation by favoring monopolies and duopolies. 

“You have a forest of redwoods, and the little trees can’t grow,” Musk said, adding that the government should “just get out of the way” of innovators. 

In May, Musk threatened to move Tesla out of California when a countywide stay-at-home order prevented his U.S. car factory from reopening, which Musk claimed was “fascist,” likening the restrictions to “forcibly imprisoning people in their homes.”

Musk eventually announced his intentions to reopen the factory in defiance of the health order, which the Alameda County Public Health Department responded to within days by saying it would allow the Tesla factory to reopen under specific safety conditions. 

In July, Musk announced that Tesla would be building a $1 billion assembly plant near Austin, Texas, its second in the U.S. and first outside Silicon Valley. Musk’s SpaceX also has operations in Texas.

President-elect Joe BidenJoe BidenPennsylvania GOP leader on breaking with Trump on election: ‘I’d get my house bombed tonight’ GOP Texas senator questions ‘legal theory’ behind Trump’s lawsuit to challenge state’s election results Nearly 30 staffers, members of Michigan legislature tested positive for COVID-19 this year MORE formally introduced retired Gen. Lloyd AustinLloyd AustinBiden defends Austin as choice for Pentagon chief amid bipartisan skepticism Colin Powell praises Biden’s pick for Pentagon chief: ‘Superb choice’ Watch Live: Biden introduces Defense secretary nominee MORE on Wednesday as his nominee to lead the Pentagon, defending the choice in the face of bipartisan skepticism of another recently retired military officer taking the civilian job.

“I believe in the importance of civilian control of the military,” Biden said. “So does Secretary-designate Austin. He’ll be bolstered by a strong and empowered civilian sector and senior officers, senior officials I should say, working to shape DOD’s policies and ensure that our defense policies are accountable to the American people.”

If confirmed, Austin would be the nation’s first Black secretary of Defense, the latest first in a trailblazing 40-year Army career. Nodding to those achievements, Biden said Wednesday that Austin is “going to do it again.”

ADVERTISEMENT

“More than 40 percent of our active-duty forces are people of color. It’s long past time that the department’s leadership reflects that diversity,” Biden said.

Wednesday’s event comes a day after Biden announced he picked Austin as his Defense secretary nominee. Austin, who was once seen as a long shot for the job, beat out other leading contenders, including former under secretary of Defense for policy Michèle Flournoy and former Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson.

“This is not a post he sought, but I sought him,” Biden said of Austin, who thanked Biden for his “trust” and “confidence.”

Austin retired from the military in 2016, after serving as the commander of U.S. Central Command since 2013.

His military career also includes time as the commanding U.S. general in Iraq and as the vice chief of staff of the Army.

The biggest hurdle emerging to Austin’s confirmation so far is that he is a recently retired military officer.

ADVERTISEMENT

A law aimed at preserving civilian control of the military requires a Defense secretary to be out of uniform for at least seven years.

Congress could approve a waiver for Austin like it did to allow retired Gen. James MattisJames Norman MattisOvernight Defense: Biden defends picking retired general for Pentagon head | House passes weeklong stopgap spending bill | Senate rejects effort to block Trump’s UAE arms sale Biden defends Austin as choice for Pentagon chief amid bipartisan skepticism Colin Powell praises Biden’s pick for Pentagon chief: ‘Superb choice’ MORE to be Defense secretary four years ago.

But several lawmakers in both parties expressed unease Tuesday at the thought of waiving the law so soon after Mattis, wary of setting a precedent of recently retired generals taking a job meant for civilians. Prior to Mattis, Congress had approved a waiver just once before, in 1950 for George Marshall.

On Wednesday, Biden pushed back, saying he “would not be asking for this exception if I did not believe this moment in our history didn’t call for it.”

“There’s a good reason for this law that I fully understand and respect,” Biden said. “The civilian-military dynamic, that dynamic itself has been under great stress the past four years, and I know that Secretary-designate Austin is going to work tirelessly to get it back on track.”

Citing Austin’s work drawing down in Iraq in 2010 and later helping build an international coalition to fight ISIS, Biden also framed Austin as a “statesman” in another apparent rebuttal of criticism that a retired general would militarize U.S. policy.

“If you don’t think that required some diplomatic skill putting that group together, then you don’t understand what was going on,” Biden said of building the anti-ISIS coalition. “He did a heck of a job.”

For his part, Austin pledged to come to the job from the perspective of a civilian.

“Four years ago, I hung up my uniform for the last time and went from being Gen. Lloyd Austin to Lloyd Austin,” he said. “It is an important distinction, and one that I make with utmost seriousness and sincerity. And so, I come to this role this new role as a civilian leader, with military experience to be sure, but also with a deep appreciation and reverence for the prevailing wisdom of civilian control of our military.”

He also vowed to surround himself with “experienced, capable” civilian appointees and career civil servants.

Biden and his team are also leaning on Austin’s logistics experience in the military, saying such a background will be vital as the nation rolls out the COVID-19 vaccine with Pentagon support.

Vice President-elect Kamala HarrisKamala HarrisMegan Thee Stallion shares letter from Maxine Waters thanking her for bringing attention to ‘plight of Black women’ Trump moves to intervene in Texas election lawsuit Obama: I don’t keep a checklist, but I monitored Trump rolling back my work MORE, who will be the first female, Black and Asian American vice president, called Austin the “right person to lead the Department of Defense at this critical moment.”

ADVERTISEMENT

“We need a proven leader to help address this pandemic, someone with the experience to help make sure safe and effective vaccines are distributed equitably to all,” Harris said.

Biden was under immense pressure to pick a Black nominee for the Pentagon, with Black leaders saying he was falling short of his pledge for a diverse Cabinet.

But in picking Austin, Biden also turned to someone he formed a bond with during the Obama administration.

The two grew particularly close when Biden’s late son Beau served on Austin’s staff in Iraq in 2008 and 2009. Biden’s transition team has highlighted that Austin and the younger Biden often sat next to each other at Sunday mass and kept in touch after returning from his deployment.

On Wednesday, the president-elect recalled his son telling him about advice imparted on him by Austin: “If you focus on your people, take care of them, get out in front and lead them, they’ll refuse to let you fail.”

“That’s why he’s inspired so many young people who work for him, and give their very best to live up to his example of leadership including for time a young lawyer serving a year in Iraq as a captain with his Delaware National Guard unit,” Biden said.

“I know how proud Beau was to serve on the general’s staff,” Biden said Wednesday. “And I know that under your leadership, general, the Department of Defense will advance the security of the American people in ways that always, always, always honor our highest values and ideals.”