Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin NetanyahuBenjamin (Bibi) NetanyahuMORE welcomed the convicted spy Jonathan Pollard to Israel on Wednesday, bringing to an end a decades-long lobbying campaign by Jerusalem to have him brought to Israel.

Pollard, now 66, was a civilian intelligence analyst who was convicted of selling military secrets to Israel in the 1980s. He was first arrested in 1985 when he tried to gain asylum to Israel at its embassy in Washington and then sentenced to life behind bars in 1987. He was released in 2015 on parole. 

Israel had pressed the U.S. for decades to hand Pollard over and allow him to live in Israel, but its efforts were unsuccessful until November when the Justice Department announced that it would not renew the five-year travel ban that was part of Pollard’s parole.

ADVERTISEMENT

The decision was seen as a boost of Netanyahu by the Trump administration and could be a key talking point for the prime minister as he faces his fourth election in two years amid parliamentary disputes. 

Netanyahu welcomed Pollard and his wife on the tarmac Wednesday morning, offering a blessing to them both with a prayer of thanksgiving and granting the couple Israeli identity cards after they knelt down to kiss the ground.

“We are ecstatic to be home at last after 35 years and we thank the people and the Prime Minister of Israel for bringing us home. No one could be prouder of this country or this leader than we are,” Netanyahu’s office quoted Pollard as saying. 

ADVERTISEMENT

“We hope to become productive citizens as soon and as quickly as possible and to get on with our lives here. This is a wonderful country. It has a tremendous future. It is the future of the Jewish people and we’re not going anywhere.”

Pollard’s arrival was swiftly celebrated by politicians in Israel, with Israeli President Reuven Rivlin touting their trip “home.”

″There is no Israeli who didn’t feel excited this morning to see Pollard’s landing in Israel and the moment he kissed the country’s earth, which he had dreamed of for 35 years,” Israeli Transportation Minister Miri Regev, a close ally of Netanyahu, added on Twitter.

Not all Israelis praised Pollard’s arrival in Israel, with Israel Waismel-Manor, a political science lecturer at the University of Haifa dismissing claims Pollard is a “Zionist hero” and saying he was “driven by ego and money.”

“It would have been better if he had stayed in the US,” he wrote.

ADVERTISEMENT

Besides acceding to Jerusalem’s longstanding request for Pollard’s freedom, Washington’s decision to release the spy could be a key boost to Netanyahu as he faces criticism on an array of issues heading into what are expected to be contentious elections.

Israel is heading into its fourth snap election in two years after the country’s parliament missed a Tuesday deadline to pass a budget.

Netanyahu will remain in office at least until a new government is formed after the March election but he will face intense scrutiny over an ongoing corruption trial against him and his response to the coronavirus pandemic, which sent Israel into another lockdown this month.

The prime minister is already expected to heavily campaign on recent deals establishing formal diplomatic relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Sudan and Morocco. The pacts were brokered in part by the Trump administration and marked Israel’s first agreements with any Arab nation in decades.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on Tuesday finalized one of its most controversial rules, limiting the types of studies the agency can weigh when crafting its policies.

The rule has been one of the top concerns for public health advocates and environmentalists who say it will restrict EPA’s ability to consider landmark public health research and other studies that do not make their underlying data public.

Dubbed by former EPA Administrator Scott PruittEdward (Scott) Scott PruittWhite House appears to conclude review of EPA ‘secret science’ rule Reversing rollbacks in the post Trump-era is not enough OVERNIGHT ENERGY: EPA proposes reapproving uses of pesticide linked to brain damage in children | Hispanic caucus unhappy with transition team treatment of Lujan Grisham | Schwarzenegger backs Nichols to lead EPA MORE as a way to battle “secret science,” the agency has billed the rule as a transparency measure.

ADVERTISEMENT

But critics say it’s unnecessary for the agency to review spreadsheets full of sensitive personal health data or proprietary business information rather than evaluating the scientific underpinnings of the research itself.

“Too often Congress shirks its responsibility and defers important decisions to regulatory agencies. These regulators then invoke science to justify their actions, often without letting the public study the underlying data. Part of transparency is making sure the public knows what the agency bases its decisions on,” EPA Administrator Andrew WheelerAndrew WheelerWhite House appears to conclude review of EPA ‘secret science’ rule OVERNIGHT ENERGY: EPA declines to tighten air quality standard for smog | Green groups sue over Trump bid to open Alaska’s Tongass forest to logging EPA declines to tighten air quality standard for smog MORE wrote in an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal late Monday before the rule was unveiled.

The first version of the 2018 rule sparked major pushback — the 600,000 comments it elicited made it one of EPA’s most-commented on regulations ever. Its merits were even questioned by the agency’s independent science board, who said the agency had not resolved how to protect sensitive data.

Tuesday’s rule is the third iteration, a slightly narrower take than earlier versions by focusing only on dose-response studies that show how increasing levels of exposure to pollution, chemicals and other substances impact human health and the environment rather than all studies. It would allow the administrator to make an exception for any study they deem important.

But rather than apply to just the agency’s rulemakings to all influential scientific information, a broad term that could exclude public health research as the agency issues guidance or takes other actions. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Critics argue the rule takes a page from the book of the tobacco industry, which sought to undermine science linking its products to cancer.

In the case of its latest rule, the EPA could block consideration of Harvard’s 1993 six cities study, which linked air pollution to premature death. It’s conclusions have formed the basis for many of EPA’s air pollution rules.

“Over my career, I’ve reviewed hundreds of studies and papers. You don’t review the raw data, you review the basic methods and statistics and results and see if the results support any conclusions that were drawn,” Andrew Rosenberg, director at the Center for Science and Democracy at the Union of Concerned Scientists previously told The Hill. 

“They are basically going to say the studies where the data is publicly available are better than studies where the data isn’t publicly available, irrespective of how good and important the science and the evidence is.”

Wheeler is set to formally unveil the rule, dubbed the Strengthening Transparency in Pivotal Science Underlying Significant Regulatory Actions and Influential Scientific Information rule, at an event with the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), a conservative think tank. It’s the second recent rule unveiling Wheeler has held at a conservative think tank, rolling out a December rule limiting how incoming administrations evaluate their air regulations at the Heritage Foundation.

A high-profile joint venture from three of the country’s biggest-name companies aimed at lowering health care costs is disbanding after three years, a sign of how complex and difficult to disrupt the U.S. health care system is. 

The company, called Haven, was a joint venture of Amazon, JP Morgan Chase and Berkshire Hathaway and was announced with much fanfare at the beginning of 2018. 

But after three years without any major announcements or apparent breakthroughs in lowering health care costs and improving outcomes, the company said Monday it is disbanding. 

ADVERTISEMENT

“In the past three years, Haven explored a wide range of healthcare solutions, as well as piloted new ways to make primary care easier to access, insurance benefits simpler to understand and easier to use, and prescription drugs more affordable,” the company said in a statement posted on its website. 

“Moving forward, Amazon, Berkshire Hathaway, and JPMorgan Chase & Co. will leverage these insights and continue to collaborate informally to design programs tailored to address the specific needs of their own employee populations. Haven will end its independent operations at the end of February 2021,” the statement added. 

The venture had announced Atul Gawande, a doctor and leading writer and thinker on health care, as its CEO, but he departed in May 2020, a move that raised questions about the direction of the company at the time. 

The heads of the three companies involved had acknowledged how thorny the problems in the U.S. health care system are at the time they launched the venture. 

“The ballooning costs of health care act as a hungry tapeworm on the American economy,” Warren Buffett, the chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway, said in a press release in January 2018. “Our group does not come to this problem with answers. But we also do not accept it as inevitable. Rather, we share the belief that putting our collective resources behind the country’s best talent can, in time, check the rise in health costs while concurrently enhancing patient satisfaction and outcomes.”

The Trump administration is once again pushing ahead with grazing permits for two men pardoned by President TrumpDonald TrumpAttorney says census count to determine congressional seats won’t be done until February Trump’s final push for Georgia runoff dominated by personal grievances Trump at Georgia rally says he hopes Pence ‘comes through for us’  MORE whose arson conviction in part spurred the armed takeover of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon.

A new year’s eve proposal from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) would allow Hammond Ranches to graze on lands in southeast Oregon. The ranch is operated by father-son duo Dwight and Steven Hammond who were convicted of setting fire to public lands in 2012.

The BLM subsequently revoked their grazing privileges in 2014 — a move that caught the eye of Ammon Bundy, escalating to a 2016 takeover of the refuge’s headquarters. 

ADVERTISEMENT

The notice from the BLM would give the Hammonds a permit “due to their extensive historic use of these allotments,” and gives the public 15 days to protest the decision.

Trump pardoned the Hammonds in 2018 and then-Interior Secretary Ryan ZinkeRyan Keith ZinkeOvernight Energy: Interior finalizes plan to open 80 percent of Alaska petroleum reserve to drilling | Justice Department lawyers acknowledge presidential transition in court filing | Trump admin pushes for permits for men who inspired Bundy standoff Trump administration pushes for grazing permits for men who inspired Bundy standoff Interior secretary tests positive for COVID-19 after two days of meetings with officials: report MORE then sought to reinstate grazing permits for the ranchers.

But a judge revoked the permits in 2019, arguing it an “abuse of discretion” and that Interior didn’t undertake sufficient analysis to determine Hammond Ranches had a “satisfactory record of performance.”

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Monday responded to suggestions that coronavirus vaccine doses could be altered to speed up the distribution process, saying that these actions would be “premature” and “not rooted solidly in the available evidence.” 

During an appearance on CBS’s “Face the Nation” on Sunday, Moncef Slaoui, the chief science adviser for Operation Warp Speed, said there is evidence that giving people between the ages of 18 and 55 two half-doses instead of the two full ones now required would lead to “identical immune response” to the normal dosage. 

However, FDA Commissioner Stephen HahnStephen HahnFDA investigating allergic reactions to Pfizer vaccine reported in multiple states The Hill’s Morning Report – Presented by Mastercard – COVID-19 relief, omnibus talks go down to the wire The Hill’s Morning Report – Presented by Mastercard – Congress slogs toward COVID-19 relief, omnibus deal MORE and Peter Marks, director of the agency’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, wrote in a statement Monday that “the available data continue to support the use of two specified doses of each authorized vaccine at specified intervals.” 

ADVERTISEMENT

“At this time, suggesting changes to the FDA-authorized dosing or schedules of these vaccines is premature and not rooted solidly in the available evidence,” their statement continued. “Without appropriate data supporting such changes in vaccine administration, we run a significant risk of placing public health at risk, undermining the historic vaccination efforts to protect the population from COVID-19.”

Of the coronavirus vaccines authorized for emergency use, the Pfizer-BioNTech inoculation requires two doses administered 21 days apart, while there must be 28 days between the first and second dose of the Moderna vaccine. 

Final trial data on both vaccines showed them to have a roughly 95 percent efficacy rate at preventing COVID-19, although Moderna’s vaccine has an 86 percent efficacy rate for those over the age of 65.

As of Monday, approximately 15.4 million doses of the coronavirus vaccine had been distributed across the U.S., with more than 4.5 million people receiving their first dose, according to tracking data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). 

The Trump administration did not come close to its goal of vaccinating 20 million people by the end of 2020, with much of the efforts to distribute vaccines falling on local health departments. 

Anthony FauciAnthony FauciHoward Stern rips Trump over Georgia call: ‘This is criminal. It’s gangster’ TSA screens more than 3 million travelers over New Year’s weekend The Hill’s Morning Report – Presented by Facebook – Trump’s new phone call controversy, Georgia runoffs headline big week MORE, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, on Monday  challenged notions that the second vaccine dose could be delayed to speed up the number of those inoculated. 

“We don’t have any idea what the level of protection is and what the durability of protection is,” Fauci said, according to The Washington Post. “It’s fraught with some danger when you’re making a decision about the regimen you’re going to use when you don’t really have a considerable amount of data.”

Security experts are hopeful that former Secretary of State John KerryJohn KerryBiden should retain these Trump policies to keep America great in 2021 Overnight Energy: Spending bill aims to reduce emissions, spur energy development | Biden assembles team to enact ambitious climate agenda | CDC questioned EPA rule declining to impose tougher soot regulations Next steps for foreign policy MORE will use his special envoy role on the National Security Council (NSC) to focus not just on emissions reductions but the broader risks posed by climate change.

The first-of-its-kind position at the NSC has been branded as a sort of international climate czar who will be responsible for shepherding the U.S. through negotiations after President-elect Joe BidenJoe BidenAttorney says census count to determine congressional seats won’t be done until February Trump’s final push for Georgia runoff dominated by personal grievances Trump at Georgia rally says he hopes Pence ‘comes through for us’  MORE rejoins the Paris climate agreement on Jan. 20.

But beyond the diplomatic realm, Kerry’s seat at the NSC table presents an opportunity to push for more robust planning around the national security impact of climate change.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Some people see climate change as a long term threat and not an immediate issue we need to deal with,” said Erin Sikorsky, deputy director for the Center for Climate and Security, who joined the organization last month after serving for three years in the Trump administration as a deputy director on the National Intelligence Council.

“We need strategies for dealing with the current climate security risks that are already happening that the national security landscape in the U.S. will be dealing with in the next year to four years,” she added.

U.S. military facilities are already seeing the effects of climate change with sea level rise, hurricanes and wildfires. In 2018, storms racked up $9 billion in damages at just three stateside bases.

But far worse consequences could be yet to come.

Climate change is expected to disrupt agriculture and water supplies while increasing global tensions.

Security experts say the federal government needs to be planning for those international conflicts, both within and between nations, as well as the potential for climate refugees.

ADVERTISEMENT

“The truth is there is no international system for dealing with the refugee climate crisis. These people do not get afforded the legally protected status of refugees,” said Andrew Holland, chief operating officer at the American Security Project, a Washington-based think tank.

That kind of disruption — whether it’s terrorist groups using climate-related economic insecurity and food shortages as a recruitment tool or countries fighting over water rights — “is a world in which the U.S. military is not powerful enough to keep the lid on all the global crises that are happening,” Holland said.

At the tail end of the Obama administration, the Pentagon and other agencies were asked to assess how climate change would impact national security. Since then, Democratic lawmakers have fumed that the Defense Department has done only a cursory review of climate risk during the Trump administration, failing to even mention the base damage from the 2018 storm season.

“Until President TrumpDonald TrumpAttorney says census count to determine congressional seats won’t be done until February Trump’s final push for Georgia runoff dominated by personal grievances Trump at Georgia rally says he hopes Pence ‘comes through for us’  MORE put his heavy hand on the scales, there was quite a bit of work being done by various security apparatuses,” said former Rep. Denny HeckDennis (Denny) Lynn HeckExclusive: Guccifer 2.0 hacked memos expand on Pennsylvania House races Heck enjoys second political wind Incoming lawmaker feeling a bit overwhelmed MORE (D-Wash.), who, before retiring this year, sponsored a bill calling for a Climate Security Intelligence Center within the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

The Biden administration could get the ball rolling again, and there’s hope Kerry could help integrate climate change into existing analyses, evaluating how it intersects and exacerbates other security risks.

Sikorsky gave the example of Russia, where the melting Arctic is expected to open new shipping passageways. Moscow is already reinforcing its military presence in the north as a way of protecting what they see as a domestic transport route.

Sikorsky, along with Heck, is among those who have called for additional climate-related offices within the NSC, a move she says could put a permanent focus on the issue and ensure climate is considered in a range of decisions across presidential administrations.

“With functional issues across the national security apparatus, you need senior champions in NSC and other places to make sure they’re paid attention to and focused on or otherwise they get shunted to the side,” she said.

Kerry could help facilitate that role, she said, much like cybersecurity and terrorism are focal points across regions and programs in the federal government.

Still, it’s not entirely clear what authority Kerry will have at the NSC or if he will have enough staff embedded in the agency to carry out significant change on the climate front.

Kerry will likely have an office within the State Department, but a transition official said the logistics are still being worked out.

It’s a telling detail, Holland said, since a lack of Kerry staffers at the NSC could mean Biden views his former Senate colleague’s role as more of a “climate negotiator on steroids” than an integral piece of the security community.

ADVERTISEMENT

“The bureaucracy is still unclear to me and others on where they are going to sit. Are they going to be State Department employees or White House employees? It’s not clear,” Holland said.

Heck pushed for more resources within the NSC to address climate change, something he said would “highlight yet another extraordinary expense with failing to act on climate change.”

Though his legislative efforts to create a permanent office were unsuccessful, he managed to secure a Climate Security Advisory Council at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

“We need to be making sure that they all are sharing the information about the impacts that climate change is having so we can be best prepared. It’s about gathering and sharing intelligence,” Heck said.

“This includes droughts creating food shortages, creating mass migration, creating friction in countries where this is occurring. Everything on that end to sea rise where the Navy has ports all over the world. Where are we going to dock our ships and are those docks going to be rendered useless without massive investments? Are we on top of assessing what our vulnerabilities are?” he continued.

Democrats have had difficulty engaging Republicans on climate issues.

ADVERTISEMENT

“It should be a central national security or foreign policy issue. It’s … something that many Cold War warriors and old-school types like too many in the GOP just dismiss as the soft stuff,” said David Donniger, a senior strategic director at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

But Sikorsky is hopeful that the security ramifications of climate change are an area where the Biden administration may find a more helpful Congress, even as other climate change legislation has failed to advance.

“It’s a good opportunity for the administration to continue to focus on climate issues through that lens because they are going to get support perhaps through places you wouldn’t expect it,” she said.

– Immediately following his match on Raw last night, WWE Intercontinental Champion Kofi Kingston left Dayton, Ohio, for Grand Rapids, Michigan to prepare for media appearances promoting tonight’s television tapings at Van Andel Arena.

– WWE Hall of Famer Howard Finkel lent his vocal talents to the Strike 3 Foundation’s First Pitch Gala, serving as emcee at the fundraiser for pediatric cancer research. The official WWE website has posted photos from the event.

– “Backstage Fallout” for Monday’s Raw is now online. Here is the synopsis: “Aksana tells the WWE Universe why she went after Kaitlyn at Night of Champions and later at Survivor Series. Plus, see how The Prime Time Players are recovering after being double-teamed. Check out these interviews only in the Raw edition of “Backstage Fallout.”

Photos of AJ Lee and former boyfriend on vacation ->