What's going on with the Executive Departments

[GreyhoundFan]

Argh: "Shrink at least 4 national monuments and modify a half-dozen others, Zinke tells Trump"

Spoiler

Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke has recommended that President Trump modify 10 national monuments created by his immediate predecessors, including shrinking the boundaries of at least four western sites, according to a copy of the report obtained by The Washington Post.

The memorandum, which the White House has refused to release since Zinke submitted it late last month, does not specify exact reductions for the four protected areas Zinke would have Trump narrow — Utah’s Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante, Nevada’s Gold Butte, and Oregon’s Cascade-Siskiyou — or the two marine national monuments — the Pacific Remote Islands and Rose Atoll — for which he raised the same prospect. The two Utah sites encompass a total of more than 3.2 million acres, part of the reason they have aroused such intense emotions since their designation.

The secretary’s set of recommendations also would change the way all 10 targeted monuments are managed. It emphasizes the need to adjust the proclamations to address concerns of local officials or affected industries, saying the administration should permit “traditional uses” now restricted within the monuments’ boundaries, such as grazing, logging, coal mining and commercial fishing.

If enacted, the changes could test the legal boundaries of what powers a president holds under the 1906 Antiquities Act. Although Congress can alter national monuments easily through legislation, presidents have reduced their boundaries only on rare occasions.

The memorandum, labeled “Final Report Summarizing Findings of the Review of Designations Under the Antiquities Act,” shows Zinke concluded after a nearly four-month review that both Republican and Democratic presidents went too far in recent decades in limiting commercial activities in protected areas. The act, signed into law by President Theodore Roosevelt, gives the president wide latitude to protect public lands and waters that face an imminent threat.

“It appears that certain monuments were designated to prevent economic activity such as grazing, mining and timber production rather than to protect specific objects,” the report reads, adding that while grazing is rarely banned “outright,” subsequent management decisions “can have the indirect result of hindering livestock-grazing uses.”

...

To correct this overreach, Zinke says, Trump should use his authority under the Antiquities Act to change each of the 10 sites’ proclamations to permit activities that are now restricted. These include “active timber management” in Maine’s Katahdin Woods and Waters; a broader set of activities in New Mexico’s Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks and Rio Grande del Norte; and commercial fishing in the two Pacific Ocean marine monuments, as well as in one off the New England coast, Northeast Canyons and Seamounts.

In most of his recommendations, Zinke suggests Trump amend the existing proclamations “to protect objects and prioritize public access; infrastructure upgrades, repair and maintenance; traditional use; tribal cultural use; and hunting and fishing rights.”

The White House is reviewing the recommendations and has not reached a final decision on them. At several points, the memo bears the marker “Draft Deliberative — Not for Distribution.”

In an email Sunday, White House spokeswoman Kelly Love said she would not discuss in detail a review that is still underway: “The Trump Administration does not comment on leaked documents, especially internal drafts which are still under review by the President and relevant agencies.”

The majority of the monuments listed in the report were established by either President Bill Clinton or President Barack Obama, but the two Pacific Ocean sites were created by President George W. Bush and later expanded by Obama.

“No other administration has gone this far,” Kristen Brengel, vice president of government affairs for the National Parks Conservation Association, said of the Trump White House in an interview. “This law was intended to protect places from development, not promote damaging natural and cultural resources.”

The secretary urges Trump to request congressional authority “to enable tribal co-management of designated cultural resources” in three ancestral sites: Bears Ears, Rio Grande del Norte and Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks.

At the same time, he proposes not only shrinking the boundaries of Bears Ears but requesting that Congress make less-restrictive designations within it, “such as national recreation areas or national conservation areas.” The monument, which contains tens of thousands of cultural artifacts, has become the most prominent symbol of the issues surrounding the Antiquities Act.

Yet Zinke also suggests the administration explore the possibility of establishing three new national monuments that would recognize either African American or Native American history. These include Kentucky’s Camp Nelson, an 1863 Union Army outpost where African American regiments trained; the home of murdered civil rights hero Medgar Evers in Jackson, Miss.; and the 130,000-acre Badger-Two Medicine area in Zinke’s home state of Montana, which is consider sacred by the Blackfeet Nation.

“This process should include clear criteria for designations and methodology for meeting conservation and protection goals,” he writes of these potential designations, adding that this course should be “fully transparent” to allow for public input.

Trump signed an executive order in April directing Zinke to examine any national monument created since Jan. 1, 1996, and spanning at least 100,000 acres. The secretary ultimately included 27 of them, including Katahdin, which is roughly 87,500 acres.

Before submitting Zinke’s report to the White House in August, Interior had already announced that six of the monuments under scrutiny would remain unchanged. Zinke’s memorandum is silent on the fate of the remaining 11 monuments, including Papahanaumokuakea, which Bush created but Obama expanded to more than 582,578 square miles of land and sea in the northwestern Hawaiian Islands.

Conservative Republicans, including House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Rep. Rob Bishop of Utah, have long been critical of how presidents have used the Antiquities Act. Speaking to reporters last month, Bishop said that the law was not intended “to appoint the president as a dictator” and that federal officials needed to be more respectful of what state lawmakers and local residents thought of protecting areas near their communities.

Ethan Lane, who directs the Public Lands Council at the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, said in an interview that what administration officials are doing is “going back in to look at these designations and ensuring that groups that are significantly impacted are heard. . . . They’re going back and fixing what is wrong with a pretty hurried and nontransparent process.”

Grand Staircase-Escalante, which Clinton designated in 1996, later led to a land exchange between Utah and the federal government that was ratified by Congress and incorporated a $14 million buyout of 17 leases held by Andalex Resources Inc. within the monument’s boundaries.

Zinke’s report notes that the site contains “an estimated several billion tons of coal and large oil deposits” and that the limits of motorized vehicle use there “has created conflict with Kane and Garfield Counties’ transportation network.”

In the case of the Pacific Remote Islands, the memo notes that before Bush protected it in 2009 “there were Hawaiian and American Samoan longliners and purse seiners vessels operating.”

National Geographic explorer in residence Enric Sala, who has conducted scientific surveys in the Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monument, said in an email that any effort to restart commercial fishing within its boundaries “would not only harm the ecosystem the monument is supposed to protect, but also its ability to help replenish tuna fisheries around it.”

While concerns about ranching are raised more frequently than any other objection in the report, Zinke also writes that “border security is a concern resulting from the designation” of Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks near New Mexico’s border with Mexico. Both the Homeland Security Department and the Pentagon should assess risks associated with the monument, he suggests, given the proximity of nearby military installations.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection issued a letter in January 2014, before the site was designated, saying it would not impede security and would “significantly enhance the flexibility” of agents patrolling a five-mile strip along the border that was then an official wilderness study area.

Changing the way these monuments are managed, as well as their size, is likely to spur a range of legal challenges. Both Trump’s executive order and the report highlight the importance of protecting sites though “the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects to be protected.”

“Throughout the review, the Secretary has seen examples of objects not clearly defined in the proclamation,” the report reads. “Examples of such objects are geographic areas, ‘viewsheds,’ and ‘ecosystems.’”

And in Katahdin, which is managed by the National Park Service, the secretary proposes amending its proclamation “to promote a healthy forest through active timber management.”

Lucas St. Clair, whose family’s foundation donated the land to the federal government last year to create the monument, said he did not understand why the administration would be seeking changes since the Park Service already has the right to cut trees to maintain the property and protect visitors.

“We need to look through the lens of protecting the conservation and recreational values of the monument. I’m not sure if timber management does that,” he said.

How soon until we have the "Goldman Sachs Mount Rushmore" or the "Exxon Yellowstone"?

[GreyhoundFan]

Isn't this just lovely? "At EPA, guarding the chief pulls agents from pursuing environmental crimes"

Spoiler

Scott Pruitt’s round-the-clock personal security detail, which demands triple the manpower of his predecessors at the Environmental Protection Agency, has prompted officials to rotate in special agents from around the country who otherwise would be investigating environmental crimes.

The EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance has summoned agents from various cities to serve two-week stints helping guard Pruitt in recent months. And while hiring in many departments is frozen, the agency has sought an exception to hire additional full-time staff to protect Pruitt.

Shortly after the former Oklahoma attorney general assumed his post in February, aides requested 24/7 federal protection.

“This never happened with prior administrators,” said Michael Hubbard, a former special agent who led the EPA’s Criminal Investigation Division office in Boston.

Hubbard, along with other former and current employees who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal security issues, said agency investigators in Boston, Denver and other regional offices have been tapped for stints as part of Pruitt’s security detail.

The practice has rankled some employees and outside critics, who note that the EPA’s criminal enforcement efforts already are understaffed and that the Trump administration has proposed further cuts to the division.

“These guys signed on to work on complex environmental cases, not to be an executive protection detail,” Hubbard said. “It’s not only not what they want to do, it’s not what they were trained and paid to do.”

Pruitt has developed a particularly high profile, as well as a divisive one. His aggressiveness in trying to reverse a long list of Obama-era policies and his repeated questioning of how much human activity contributes to climate change has drawn a steady stream of public vitriol. This outpouring has included a slew of explicit messages on social media, where #PollutingPruitt is a popular hashtag.

While the agency’s Office of Inspector General does not discuss the actual number of threats against Pruitt or others at the EPA, it did say investigators have opened more cases this fiscal year than in fiscal 2016. Thirty-two percent were aimed at Pruitt — including “some very personal, ugly threats,” said Patrick Sullivan, the EPA assistant inspector general for investigations — compared with 9 percent directed at his predecessor Gina McCarthy in fiscal 2016.

McCarthy and Lisa Jackson, each of whom led the EPA under President Barack Obama and were controversial figures in their own right, had security teams composed of about a half-dozen individuals. That number could fluctuate when they traveled, and sometimes agents at regional offices would be asked to help with security when an administrator visited.

By contrast, Pruitt’s security detail has swelled to about 18 people to cover the round-the-clock needs and the administrator’s frequent travel schedule, according to individuals briefed on the arrangement who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss security matters.

Agency spokeswoman Liz Bowman said in an email that the “EPA does not comment on the specifics of the agency’s Protection Services Detail, so as not to disclose law enforcement information that could ultimately endanger safety.”

Commenting more broadly on the agency’s hiring, Bowman said, “EPA continues to evaluate its workforce to ensure we have the right number of employees with the right skills in the right parts of the agency, and conducts limited hiring, accordingly.”

Sullivan said his office has already closed a number of cases directed against Pruitt, “and we also have a number of pending cases.” None has yet resulted in a prosecution.

“A lot of correspondence we have reflects that people are unhappy with his perceived unenforcement of environmental laws,” he said. “When Ms. McCarthy was the administrator, some of the threats involved people being upset because they were enforcing them too much.”

“The EPA is a lightning rod for people. It engenders a lot of emotion,” he added.

Pruitt’s protective detail is the rare area of the EPA that is growing even as the Trump administration seeks a 31 percent cut to the agency’s budget. Documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by E&E News showed that the detail’s cost during his first quarter in office was nearly double that of his predecessors. Overall, they showed, the EPA spent $832,735.40 on Pruitt’s protection detail for the three-month period.

A memo this spring detailing how the agency planned to spend its “carry-over funds” — essentially, money rolled over after not being spent in the previous fiscal year — said $800,000 would be allocated for the security detail’s travel expenses.

The acting assistant administrator for the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, Lawrence E. Starfield, recently informed the agency’s acting deputy administrator, Michael P. Flynn, that he needed to hire more agents to meet the needs of the expanded security coverage.

His June 17 memo, first obtained through the Freedom of Information Act by Bloomberg BNA, redacted the specific number of agents to be hired.

“Because of the critical needs to fill positions on the [protective security detail], we are asking for an exception to the external hiring freeze and permission to allow exemption to hire up [redacted] … because we are unable to provide the level of support described above,” Starfield wrote. Continuing to rely on criminal investigators to backstop Pruitt’s security contingent “is pulling them away from their core mission of investigating environmental crimes in furtherance of the Agency’s mission to protect public health and the environment,” he added.

In a later email to other officials, Starfield defended the practice of temporarily borrowing environmental crime agents to fill in on security duty. “We made the appropriate use of available resources initially, and the hiring memo is the more long-term solution,” he wrote.

Even before Pruitt’s security team expanded, the number of special agents inside the Criminal Investigation Division was declining. According to documents obtained by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility under the Freedom of Information Act, their ranks have fallen 28 percent since 2003. The division now boasts 147 agents, fewer than the 200-agent minimum mandated by the 1990 Pollution Prosecution Act.

New criminal cases opened by the division have also dropped, according to the documents, sliding by 48 percent between fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2016. The current fiscal year is on pace to open just 120 new cases, records indicate, down sharply from the 170 initiated last year.

“This evaporation of criminal enforcement is snowballing in that fewer agents generate fewer cases leading to ever-fewer convictions down the road,” Jeff Ruch, executive director of the employees group, said in a statement.

The EPA head has traditionally had one of the smallest security details among Cabinet members. On occasion, a secretary’s chief of staff will adjust the level of protective staffing based on threat assessments or particular circumstances.

Then-Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz, who had a 10- to 12-person security detail during most of his tenure in the Obama administration, switched to constant protection after he helped broker the Iran nuclear deal in July 2015. At that point, according to one of his former aides, the department reallocated funds within its budget to fund the additional agents needed.

Secretaries at the State, Defense, Treasury and Homeland Security departments have long received 24/7 personal protection. But the Trump era has brought with it unprecedented security requests.

Education Secretary Betsy DeVos came under scrutiny earlier this year when The Post reported that her agency was spending an average of nearly $1 million per month to reimburse the U.S. Marshals Service for her personal security.

 

[GreyhoundFan]

""The Trump administration’s private plane problem"

Spoiler

President Trump has repeatedly promised to drain the swamp in Washington. He might want to check in on that effort at the capital area's airports.

For the third time in a few weeks, a member of his administration is facing questions about his use of non-commercial flights. First, it was Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin using a government plane to fly to Fort Knox, where he viewed the eclipse with his wife, Louise Linton (Mnuchin denies that was the purpose of the trip, but an inspector general is reviewing it). Then reports surfaced about Mnuchin's request to use a government plane for the couple's European honeymoon (they didn't wind up using one). Now it's Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price's use of charters for five flights between Washington and the Northeast last week.

Politico's Dan Diamond and Rachana Pradhan did some great sleuthing on Price's trips, which have previously been pretty secretive. They found that last week he used charters to travel to Maine, then from Maine to New Hampshire, then back to Washington, and then round trip to Philadelphia. The trips took place over a span of three days and likely cost at least $60,000, they estimated based on conversations with the charter companies.

There are two main problems with this. The first is that these trips — and especially the Philadelphia one — were so close to Washington that it's difficult to understand why charters would be necessary.

The stated policy of the government is to use charters only when commercial travel isn't feasible, and Price's use of charters seems to break with how the Obama administration's HHS secretaries used them. While the Obama officials did use charters, their aides told Politico it was when they were going to places that weren't accessible, like remote areas of Alaska.

Philadelphia is reachable via a very short commercial flight that runs regularly out of Washington — including, Politico found, at almost the exact same time Price's charter departed. And then there is the preferred method for many: A two-hour train ride on Amtrak (or an hour and a half on the faster Acela trains). It would seem really difficult to justify the use of a charter for that less-than-140-mile trip — and Price's spokesmen aren't even attempting to, declining to comment to Politico.

The second problem is the H-word: Hypocrisy. Price is opening himself up to that charge given his past commentary and emphasis on fiscal conservatism.

Price, who was among the leading fiscal conservatives in the House and chaired both the Budget Committee and the conservative Republican Study Committee before joining Trump's Cabinet, in 2009 tweeted his appearance on CNBC in which he decried the overuse of — you guessed it — private planes.

... < tweet from price >

“This is just another example of fiscal responsibility run amok in Congress right now," Price said of an effort to buy private planes to transport government officials, military and members of Congress.

Context is key here. Price wasn't talking about charters, but rather about actually purchasing new government airplanes, at a cost of tens of millions of dollars — not tens of thousands. He was also taking issue with the need to have private planes for members of Congress, and not necessarily Cabinet officials. And this conversation was taking place in the immediate aftermath of the financial crisis, when the idea of the government spending huge money on new planes seemed even more tone-deaf and ill-timed.

So it's not apples-to-apples. But Price is a man who has decried “Washington's reckless spending culture," and his nomination at HHS was especially cheered by those who seek to fight against “government waste."

Against that backdrop, it might behoove him to at least explain why he needed a charter flight to travel 140 miles. And when you add in Mnuchin's own plane problems and Trump's pledge to “drain the swamp," the administration might want to take a hard look at its own plane policies.

H for hypocrisy.

[GrumpyGran]

16 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

""The Trump administration’s private plane problem"

  Reveal hidden contents

President Trump has repeatedly promised to drain the swamp in Washington. He might want to check in on that effort at the capital area's airports.

For the third time in a few weeks, a member of his administration is facing questions about his use of non-commercial flights. First, it was Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin using a government plane to fly to Fort Knox, where he viewed the eclipse with his wife, Louise Linton (Mnuchin denies that was the purpose of the trip, but an inspector general is reviewing it). Then reports surfaced about Mnuchin's request to use a government plane for the couple's European honeymoon (they didn't wind up using one). Now it's Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price's use of charters for five flights between Washington and the Northeast last week.

Politico's Dan Diamond and Rachana Pradhan did some great sleuthing on Price's trips, which have previously been pretty secretive. They found that last week he used charters to travel to Maine, then from Maine to New Hampshire, then back to Washington, and then round trip to Philadelphia. The trips took place over a span of three days and likely cost at least $60,000, they estimated based on conversations with the charter companies.

There are two main problems with this. The first is that these trips — and especially the Philadelphia one — were so close to Washington that it's difficult to understand why charters would be necessary.

The stated policy of the government is to use charters only when commercial travel isn't feasible, and Price's use of charters seems to break with how the Obama administration's HHS secretaries used them. While the Obama officials did use charters, their aides told Politico it was when they were going to places that weren't accessible, like remote areas of Alaska.

Philadelphia is reachable via a very short commercial flight that runs regularly out of Washington — including, Politico found, at almost the exact same time Price's charter departed. And then there is the preferred method for many: A two-hour train ride on Amtrak (or an hour and a half on the faster Acela trains). It would seem really difficult to justify the use of a charter for that less-than-140-mile trip — and Price's spokesmen aren't even attempting to, declining to comment to Politico.

The second problem is the H-word: Hypocrisy. Price is opening himself up to that charge given his past commentary and emphasis on fiscal conservatism.

Price, who was among the leading fiscal conservatives in the House and chaired both the Budget Committee and the conservative Republican Study Committee before joining Trump's Cabinet, in 2009 tweeted his appearance on CNBC in which he decried the overuse of — you guessed it — private planes.

... < tweet from price >

“This is just another example of fiscal responsibility run amok in Congress right now," Price said of an effort to buy private planes to transport government officials, military and members of Congress.

Context is key here. Price wasn't talking about charters, but rather about actually purchasing new government airplanes, at a cost of tens of millions of dollars — not tens of thousands. He was also taking issue with the need to have private planes for members of Congress, and not necessarily Cabinet officials. And this conversation was taking place in the immediate aftermath of the financial crisis, when the idea of the government spending huge money on new planes seemed even more tone-deaf and ill-timed.

So it's not apples-to-apples. But Price is a man who has decried “Washington's reckless spending culture," and his nomination at HHS was especially cheered by those who seek to fight against “government waste."

Against that backdrop, it might behoove him to at least explain why he needed a charter flight to travel 140 miles. And when you add in Mnuchin's own plane problems and Trump's pledge to “drain the swamp," the administration might want to take a hard look at its own plane policies.

H for hypocrisy.

Remember when we had a vice-president who commuted to work on Amtrak? Like normal people? How will our country survive the Trump administration financially?

[GreyhoundFan]

Surprise, surprise: "Trump hires campaign workers instead of farm experts at USDA"

Spoiler

President Donald Trump’s appointees to jobs at Agriculture Department headquarters include a long-haul truck driver, a country club cabana attendant and the owner of a scented-candle company.

A POLITICO review of dozens of résumés from political appointees to USDA shows the agency has been stocked with Trump campaign staff and volunteers who in many cases demonstrated little to no experience with federal policy, let alone deep roots in agriculture. But of the 42 résumés POLITICO reviewed, 22 cited Trump campaign experience. And based on their résumés, some of those appointees appear to lack credentials, such as a college degree, required to qualify for higher government salaries.

It’s typical for presidents to reward loyalists with jobs once a campaign is over. But what’s different under Trump, sources familiar with the department's inner workings say, is the number of campaign staffers who have gotten positions and the jobs and salaries they have been hired for, despite not having solid agricultural credentials in certain cases. An inexperienced staff can lead to mistakes and sidetrack a president’s agenda, the sources say.

“There is a clear prioritization of one attribute, and that is loyalty,” said Austin Evers, American Oversight's executive director, who provided the documents after his organization received them in response to a Freedom of Information Act request. He said the group sought résumés for Trump administration political appointees from across the federal government and found an abundance of former campaign workers in positions that did not appear to match their qualifications. “The theme that emerges is pretty clear: What do you have to do to get an administration job? Work on the campaign,” he added.

USDA in a statement defended the hires: “All of the appointees have skills that are applicable to the roles they fill at USDA.”

The truck driver, Nick Brusky, was hired this year at USDA’s Foreign Agricultural Service — an agency tasked with developing overseas markets for U.S. agricultural trade goods — at one of the highest levels on the federal government’s pay scale, a GS-12, earning $79,720 annually. Though that pay grade requires a master’s degree or equivalent experience, it’s not clear from Brusky’s résumé whether he’s a college graduate. The document lists coursework in business management and political science at three universities from 2000 to 2013, but does not specify a graduation date.

Brusky served as a field representative for Trump’s campaign in the battleground state of Ohio, beginning in November 2016, while driving for a trucking company in Hilliard, where he also was a county commissioner. Brusky’s résumé shows he has no experience in cultivating international markets for trade goods, though he notes he has experience “hauling and shipping agricultural commodities.” It says he was twice elected to local office and was a legislative aide to an Ohio state representative from January 2009 until June 2012.

Another example: Christopher O’Hagan, an appointee as a confidential assistant at the Agricultural Marketing Service, which helps producers of food, fiber and specialty crop growers market their goods. O'Hagan graduated in 2016 from the University of Scranton with a major in history and a minor in economics. But his résumé lists only one example of work experience prior to joining the Trump campaign in January 2016 — employment as a cabana attendant at the Westchester Country Club in Rye, New York, while in school.

Similarly, Trump campaign alum Tim Page, a 2016 graduate of Appalachian State University, is now at the Natural Resources Conservation Service, an agency that helps farmers, ranchers and forest managers employ conservation practices. Page's résumé indicates that he owns Cutting Edge LLC, a landscaping service in Connelly Springs, North Carolina.

“Much in the same way previous administrations have done, the USDA worked with the Presidential Personnel Office to place Schedule C appointees where they could be most helpful to the mission of the department,” the department said in an email to POLITICO. “All of the appointees have skills that are applicable to the roles they fill at USDA.“

O’Hagan, Page and Brusky did not respond to emails requesting comment and the USDA declined to make them available for this story.

Brusky, O'Hagan and Page are three of 10 confidential assistants whose résumés were among those obtained by American Oversight, along with the résumés of some career staff who are acting in leadership roles. All but one of the 10 touted their work to get the president elected, and most do not have agricultural experience. All of the appointees with this title are ranked as GS-11, GS-12 or GS-13, positions with annual salaries ranging from $60,210 to $85,816 at Step 1 of each grade. Two of the 10 didn't list college degrees on their résumés, despite guidelines that call for anyone at GS-7 or higher to have completed a four-year degree.

Further, none of the confidential assistants indicated they had earned a master’s. Employees at the GS-9 level or higher are required by Office of Personnel Management guidelines to have obtained that level of education or equivalent experience.

The USDA said duties of a confidential assistant include “conducting research; preparing documents for special projects; overseeing correspondence control … receiving a wide variety of telephone inquiries from executives within and outside the USDA and from other agencies."

O'Hagan and Page were hired at the GS-12 level and assigned to the secretary's office, with a salary of $79,720. They were then transferred to their current roles, both of which are at the GS- 11 level and come with an annual salary of $66,510. Four other political appointees had their salaries reduced after they started.

“By the time these people are serving in confidential assistant roles, they are sitting on a very thin layer in government bureaucracy,” a former USDA official who arrived at the department at the beginning of the Obama administration, noting that the confidential assistant positions can be involved with technical decisions on policy matters. “If you just have someone with no higher education and no experience and no background in policymaking as the arbiter on these questions, that’s pretty unusual."

Also in the ranks of USDA political appointees are the scented-candle company owner; a clerk at AT&T; a Republican National Committee intern; a part-time executive assistant and rental property manager; and a former Washington state senator who mentioned on his résumé that he was the first elected official in his state to back Trump's candidacy.

The list of 42 appointees also includes seven special assistants, who command higher salaries than confidential assistants and generally have experience in policy and government. All of the special assistants are either GS-14 or GS-15, which start at $101,402 and 119,285, respectively. Three of the seven special assistants mentioned work on the campaign on their résumés.

In the early days of the Obama USDA, more experienced people coming off the campaign were given posts as confidential assistants, the former USDA official explained. They were tasked with assisting Senate-confirmed officials, taking notes during meetings and coordinating efforts with career staff.

Special assistants, by contrast, performed jobs for officials who did not require Senate confirmation, such as chiefs of staff, administrators and other leadership posts. There were some young staffers with ties to the campaign trail, sources conceded. The Obama team also pulled heavily from Capitol Hill staff to fill key roles, but only a handful of the appointees at USDA as of late last month have made a similar jump.

For the most part, the administration’s selections for leadership positions at USDA have been well received by industry and Capitol Hill. Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue, a two-term governor of Georgia who also is a veterinarian and ran a host of agriculture-related businesses, got the endorsement of former Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, the only Trump Cabinet official to be backed by his predecessor.

Perdue also has brought on board about a half-dozen policy advisers and high-level political staff who have backgrounds at influential agricultural policy groups or as staffers on relevant congressional committees or who served under Perdue during his time as Georgia governor. None of these hires listed campaign experience among their qualifications.

Meanwhile, even with the campaign loyalists who are now on the USDA staff, the administration is still behind schedule in hiring for the agency’s more than 200 political positions that span from Washington, D.C., to rural communities across all 50 states.

The combination of a thin political staff and a lack of appropriate expertise among the appointees could spell trouble for Perdue as he pushes forward with his reorganization plan and other policy objectives, said a former USDA official who arrived at the department at the beginning of the Obama administration.

“If you don’t have talented people, experienced people, people who know how policymaking works, there are a number of ways you can get your agenda sidetracked,” said the former staffer, who was granted anonymity to discuss staffing freely. Policymaking is filled with landmines — from congressional oversight to complicated rules related to acceptance of gifts, the source noted, adding: “What you can get is both the failure to take advantage of opportunities ... and mistakes that will eat up time and energy.”

 

[GrumpyGran]

2 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

Surprise, surprise: "Trump hires campaign workers instead of farm experts at USDA"

  Hide contents

President Donald Trump’s appointees to jobs at Agriculture Department headquarters include a long-haul truck driver, a country club cabana attendant and the owner of a scented-candle company.

A POLITICO review of dozens of résumés from political appointees to USDA shows the agency has been stocked with Trump campaign staff and volunteers who in many cases demonstrated little to no experience with federal policy, let alone deep roots in agriculture. But of the 42 résumés POLITICO reviewed, 22 cited Trump campaign experience. And based on their résumés, some of those appointees appear to lack credentials, such as a college degree, required to qualify for higher government salaries.

It’s typical for presidents to reward loyalists with jobs once a campaign is over. But what’s different under Trump, sources familiar with the department's inner workings say, is the number of campaign staffers who have gotten positions and the jobs and salaries they have been hired for, despite not having solid agricultural credentials in certain cases. An inexperienced staff can lead to mistakes and sidetrack a president’s agenda, the sources say.

“There is a clear prioritization of one attribute, and that is loyalty,” said Austin Evers, American Oversight's executive director, who provided the documents after his organization received them in response to a Freedom of Information Act request. He said the group sought résumés for Trump administration political appointees from across the federal government and found an abundance of former campaign workers in positions that did not appear to match their qualifications. “The theme that emerges is pretty clear: What do you have to do to get an administration job? Work on the campaign,” he added.

USDA in a statement defended the hires: “All of the appointees have skills that are applicable to the roles they fill at USDA.”

The truck driver, Nick Brusky, was hired this year at USDA’s Foreign Agricultural Service — an agency tasked with developing overseas markets for U.S. agricultural trade goods — at one of the highest levels on the federal government’s pay scale, a GS-12, earning $79,720 annually. Though that pay grade requires a master’s degree or equivalent experience, it’s not clear from Brusky’s résumé whether he’s a college graduate. The document lists coursework in business management and political science at three universities from 2000 to 2013, but does not specify a graduation date.

Brusky served as a field representative for Trump’s campaign in the battleground state of Ohio, beginning in November 2016, while driving for a trucking company in Hilliard, where he also was a county commissioner. Brusky’s résumé shows he has no experience in cultivating international markets for trade goods, though he notes he has experience “hauling and shipping agricultural commodities.” It says he was twice elected to local office and was a legislative aide to an Ohio state representative from January 2009 until June 2012.

Another example: Christopher O’Hagan, an appointee as a confidential assistant at the Agricultural Marketing Service, which helps producers of food, fiber and specialty crop growers market their goods. O'Hagan graduated in 2016 from the University of Scranton with a major in history and a minor in economics. But his résumé lists only one example of work experience prior to joining the Trump campaign in January 2016 — employment as a cabana attendant at the Westchester Country Club in Rye, New York, while in school.

Similarly, Trump campaign alum Tim Page, a 2016 graduate of Appalachian State University, is now at the Natural Resources Conservation Service, an agency that helps farmers, ranchers and forest managers employ conservation practices. Page's résumé indicates that he owns Cutting Edge LLC, a landscaping service in Connelly Springs, North Carolina.

“Much in the same way previous administrations have done, the USDA worked with the Presidential Personnel Office to place Schedule C appointees where they could be most helpful to the mission of the department,” the department said in an email to POLITICO. “All of the appointees have skills that are applicable to the roles they fill at USDA.“

O’Hagan, Page and Brusky did not respond to emails requesting comment and the USDA declined to make them available for this story.

Brusky, O'Hagan and Page are three of 10 confidential assistants whose résumés were among those obtained by American Oversight, along with the résumés of some career staff who are acting in leadership roles. All but one of the 10 touted their work to get the president elected, and most do not have agricultural experience. All of the appointees with this title are ranked as GS-11, GS-12 or GS-13, positions with annual salaries ranging from $60,210 to $85,816 at Step 1 of each grade. Two of the 10 didn't list college degrees on their résumés, despite guidelines that call for anyone at GS-7 or higher to have completed a four-year degree.

Further, none of the confidential assistants indicated they had earned a master’s. Employees at the GS-9 level or higher are required by Office of Personnel Management guidelines to have obtained that level of education or equivalent experience.

The USDA said duties of a confidential assistant include “conducting research; preparing documents for special projects; overseeing correspondence control … receiving a wide variety of telephone inquiries from executives within and outside the USDA and from other agencies."

O'Hagan and Page were hired at the GS-12 level and assigned to the secretary's office, with a salary of $79,720. They were then transferred to their current roles, both of which are at the GS- 11 level and come with an annual salary of $66,510. Four other political appointees had their salaries reduced after they started.

“By the time these people are serving in confidential assistant roles, they are sitting on a very thin layer in government bureaucracy,” a former USDA official who arrived at the department at the beginning of the Obama administration, noting that the confidential assistant positions can be involved with technical decisions on policy matters. “If you just have someone with no higher education and no experience and no background in policymaking as the arbiter on these questions, that’s pretty unusual."

Also in the ranks of USDA political appointees are the scented-candle company owner; a clerk at AT&T; a Republican National Committee intern; a part-time executive assistant and rental property manager; and a former Washington state senator who mentioned on his résumé that he was the first elected official in his state to back Trump's candidacy.

The list of 42 appointees also includes seven special assistants, who command higher salaries than confidential assistants and generally have experience in policy and government. All of the special assistants are either GS-14 or GS-15, which start at $101,402 and 119,285, respectively. Three of the seven special assistants mentioned work on the campaign on their résumés.

In the early days of the Obama USDA, more experienced people coming off the campaign were given posts as confidential assistants, the former USDA official explained. They were tasked with assisting Senate-confirmed officials, taking notes during meetings and coordinating efforts with career staff.

Special assistants, by contrast, performed jobs for officials who did not require Senate confirmation, such as chiefs of staff, administrators and other leadership posts. There were some young staffers with ties to the campaign trail, sources conceded. The Obama team also pulled heavily from Capitol Hill staff to fill key roles, but only a handful of the appointees at USDA as of late last month have made a similar jump.

For the most part, the administration’s selections for leadership positions at USDA have been well received by industry and Capitol Hill. Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue, a two-term governor of Georgia who also is a veterinarian and ran a host of agriculture-related businesses, got the endorsement of former Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, the only Trump Cabinet official to be backed by his predecessor.

Perdue also has brought on board about a half-dozen policy advisers and high-level political staff who have backgrounds at influential agricultural policy groups or as staffers on relevant congressional committees or who served under Perdue during his time as Georgia governor. None of these hires listed campaign experience among their qualifications.

Meanwhile, even with the campaign loyalists who are now on the USDA staff, the administration is still behind schedule in hiring for the agency’s more than 200 political positions that span from Washington, D.C., to rural communities across all 50 states.

The combination of a thin political staff and a lack of appropriate expertise among the appointees could spell trouble for Perdue as he pushes forward with his reorganization plan and other policy objectives, said a former USDA official who arrived at the department at the beginning of the Obama administration.

“If you don’t have talented people, experienced people, people who know how policymaking works, there are a number of ways you can get your agenda sidetracked,” said the former staffer, who was granted anonymity to discuss staffing freely. Policymaking is filled with landmines — from congressional oversight to complicated rules related to acceptance of gifts, the source noted, adding: “What you can get is both the failure to take advantage of opportunities ... and mistakes that will eat up time and energy.”

 

I think if word of this spreads in Government Services, there will be political backlash. If I had busted my ass working to get up to a GS-11 by putting in the time and getting the education, then some pool boy showed up and immediately got what I'd been working for for 15 years, I'd be pissed.

[Howl]

On 9/18/2017 at 11:47 AM, GreyhoundFan said:

Argh: "Shrink at least 4 national monuments and modify a half-dozen others, Zinke tells Trump"

  Reveal hidden contents

Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke has recommended that President Trump modify 10 national monuments created by his immediate predecessors, including shrinking the boundaries of at least four western sites, according to a copy of the report obtained by The Washington Post.

The memorandum, which the White House has refused to release since Zinke submitted it late last month, does not specify exact reductions for the four protected areas Zinke would have Trump narrow — Utah’s Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante, Nevada’s Gold Butte, and Oregon’s Cascade-Siskiyou — or the two marine national monuments — the Pacific Remote Islands and Rose Atoll — for which he raised the same prospect. The two Utah sites encompass a total of more than 3.2 million acres, part of the reason they have aroused such intense emotions since their designation.

The secretary’s set of recommendations also would change the way all 10 targeted monuments are managed. It emphasizes the need to adjust the proclamations to address concerns of local officials or affected industries, saying the administration should permit “traditional uses” now restricted within the monuments’ boundaries, such as grazing, logging, coal mining and commercial fishing.

If enacted, the changes could test the legal boundaries of what powers a president holds under the 1906 Antiquities Act. Although Congress can alter national monuments easily through legislation, presidents have reduced their boundaries only on rare occasions.

The memorandum, labeled “Final Report Summarizing Findings of the Review of Designations Under the Antiquities Act,” shows Zinke concluded after a nearly four-month review that both Republican and Democratic presidents went too far in recent decades in limiting commercial activities in protected areas. The act, signed into law by President Theodore Roosevelt, gives the president wide latitude to protect public lands and waters that face an imminent threat.

“It appears that certain monuments were designated to prevent economic activity such as grazing, mining and timber production rather than to protect specific objects,” the report reads, adding that while grazing is rarely banned “outright,” subsequent management decisions “can have the indirect result of hindering livestock-grazing uses.”

...

To correct this overreach, Zinke says, Trump should use his authority under the Antiquities Act to change each of the 10 sites’ proclamations to permit activities that are now restricted. These include “active timber management” in Maine’s Katahdin Woods and Waters; a broader set of activities in New Mexico’s Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks and Rio Grande del Norte; and commercial fishing in the two Pacific Ocean marine monuments, as well as in one off the New England coast, Northeast Canyons and Seamounts.

In most of his recommendations, Zinke suggests Trump amend the existing proclamations “to protect objects and prioritize public access; infrastructure upgrades, repair and maintenance; traditional use; tribal cultural use; and hunting and fishing rights.”

The White House is reviewing the recommendations and has not reached a final decision on them. At several points, the memo bears the marker “Draft Deliberative — Not for Distribution.”

In an email Sunday, White House spokeswoman Kelly Love said she would not discuss in detail a review that is still underway: “The Trump Administration does not comment on leaked documents, especially internal drafts which are still under review by the President and relevant agencies.”

The majority of the monuments listed in the report were established by either President Bill Clinton or President Barack Obama, but the two Pacific Ocean sites were created by President George W. Bush and later expanded by Obama.

“No other administration has gone this far,” Kristen Brengel, vice president of government affairs for the National Parks Conservation Association, said of the Trump White House in an interview. “This law was intended to protect places from development, not promote damaging natural and cultural resources.”

The secretary urges Trump to request congressional authority “to enable tribal co-management of designated cultural resources” in three ancestral sites: Bears Ears, Rio Grande del Norte and Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks.

At the same time, he proposes not only shrinking the boundaries of Bears Ears but requesting that Congress make less-restrictive designations within it, “such as national recreation areas or national conservation areas.” The monument, which contains tens of thousands of cultural artifacts, has become the most prominent symbol of the issues surrounding the Antiquities Act.

Yet Zinke also suggests the administration explore the possibility of establishing three new national monuments that would recognize either African American or Native American history. These include Kentucky’s Camp Nelson, an 1863 Union Army outpost where African American regiments trained; the home of murdered civil rights hero Medgar Evers in Jackson, Miss.; and the 130,000-acre Badger-Two Medicine area in Zinke’s home state of Montana, which is consider sacred by the Blackfeet Nation.

“This process should include clear criteria for designations and methodology for meeting conservation and protection goals,” he writes of these potential designations, adding that this course should be “fully transparent” to allow for public input.

Trump signed an executive order in April directing Zinke to examine any national monument created since Jan. 1, 1996, and spanning at least 100,000 acres. The secretary ultimately included 27 of them, including Katahdin, which is roughly 87,500 acres.

Before submitting Zinke’s report to the White House in August, Interior had already announced that six of the monuments under scrutiny would remain unchanged. Zinke’s memorandum is silent on the fate of the remaining 11 monuments, including Papahanaumokuakea, which Bush created but Obama expanded to more than 582,578 square miles of land and sea in the northwestern Hawaiian Islands.

Conservative Republicans, including House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Rep. Rob Bishop of Utah, have long been critical of how presidents have used the Antiquities Act. Speaking to reporters last month, Bishop said that the law was not intended “to appoint the president as a dictator” and that federal officials needed to be more respectful of what state lawmakers and local residents thought of protecting areas near their communities.

Ethan Lane, who directs the Public Lands Council at the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, said in an interview that what administration officials are doing is “going back in to look at these designations and ensuring that groups that are significantly impacted are heard. . . . They’re going back and fixing what is wrong with a pretty hurried and nontransparent process.”

Grand Staircase-Escalante, which Clinton designated in 1996, later led to a land exchange between Utah and the federal government that was ratified by Congress and incorporated a $14 million buyout of 17 leases held by Andalex Resources Inc. within the monument’s boundaries.

Zinke’s report notes that the site contains “an estimated several billion tons of coal and large oil deposits” and that the limits of motorized vehicle use there “has created conflict with Kane and Garfield Counties’ transportation network.”

In the case of the Pacific Remote Islands, the memo notes that before Bush protected it in 2009 “there were Hawaiian and American Samoan longliners and purse seiners vessels operating.”

National Geographic explorer in residence Enric Sala, who has conducted scientific surveys in the Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monument, said in an email that any effort to restart commercial fishing within its boundaries “would not only harm the ecosystem the monument is supposed to protect, but also its ability to help replenish tuna fisheries around it.”

While concerns about ranching are raised more frequently than any other objection in the report, Zinke also writes that “border security is a concern resulting from the designation” of Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks near New Mexico’s border with Mexico. Both the Homeland Security Department and the Pentagon should assess risks associated with the monument, he suggests, given the proximity of nearby military installations.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection issued a letter in January 2014, before the site was designated, saying it would not impede security and would “significantly enhance the flexibility” of agents patrolling a five-mile strip along the border that was then an official wilderness study area.

Changing the way these monuments are managed, as well as their size, is likely to spur a range of legal challenges. Both Trump’s executive order and the report highlight the importance of protecting sites though “the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects to be protected.”

“Throughout the review, the Secretary has seen examples of objects not clearly defined in the proclamation,” the report reads. “Examples of such objects are geographic areas, ‘viewsheds,’ and ‘ecosystems.’”

And in Katahdin, which is managed by the National Park Service, the secretary proposes amending its proclamation “to promote a healthy forest through active timber management.”

Lucas St. Clair, whose family’s foundation donated the land to the federal government last year to create the monument, said he did not understand why the administration would be seeking changes since the Park Service already has the right to cut trees to maintain the property and protect visitors.

“We need to look through the lens of protecting the conservation and recreational values of the monument. I’m not sure if timber management does that,” he said.

How soon until we have the "Goldman Sachs Mount Rushmore" or the "Exxon Yellowstone"?

F**k Zinke.  We're travelling in the general part of the country (Utah!) that contains the new Bears Ears National National Monument and Grand Staircase Escalante National Monument.   The economies around both of these national monuments are heavily reliant on tourism.  It's heavily Mormon.  Rural Mormons (for the most part) HATE the Feds, although the Feds (National Park Service, BLM, and Forest Service) provide the best jobs in (just for example) Monticello,  Utah and the towns closest to Grand Staircase Escalante.  

This is purely a political move that is a sop to a certain subset of the Sagebrush Rebellion far right types (think Cliven Bundy).  Which reminds me, I wonder, if Cliven is convicted for the Bundy Ranch standoff, if Trump will pardon him.  I believe it's a Federal case. 

[GreyhoundFan]

More about Price's penchant for private planes (sorry, couldn't resist): "Price traveled by private plane at least 24 times"

Spoiler

Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price has taken at least 24 flights on private charter planes at taxpayers’ expense since early May, according to people with knowledge of his travel plans and a review of HHS documents.

The frequency of the trips underscores how private travel has become the norm — rather than the exception — for the Georgia Republican during his tenure atop the federal health agency, which began in February. The cost of the trips identified by POLITICO exceeds $300,000, according to a review of federal contracts and similar trip itineraries.

Price’s use of private jets represents a sharp departure from his two immediate predecessors, Sylvia Mathews Burwell and Kathleen Sebelius, who flew commercially in the continental United States. HHS officials have said Price uses private jets only when commercial travel is not feasible.

But many of the flights are between large cities with frequent, low-cost airline traffic, such as a trip from Washington to Nashville that the secretary took on June 6 to make a morning event at a medication distributor and an afternoon speech. There are four regular nonstop flights that leave Washington-area airports between 6:59 a.m. and 8:50 a.m. and arrive in Nashville by 9:46 a.m. CT. Sample round-trip fares for those flights were as low as $202, when booked in advance on Orbitz.com. Price’s charter, according to HHS’ contract with Classic Air Charter, cost $17,760.

HHS spokespeople did not respond to questions about specific aspects of Price’s travels, including how many charter trips he has taken. Charmaine Yoest, the agency’s top spokesperson, said Price’s travel for official business "comes from the HHS budget.”

In a statement, Yoest said, "The Secretary has taken commercial flights for official business after his confirmation. He has used charter aircraft for official business in order to accommodate his demanding schedule. The week of September 13 was one of those times, as the Secretary was directing the recovery effort for Irma, which had just devastated Florida, while simultaneously directing the ongoing recovery for Hurricane Harvey . . . Some believe the HHS Secretary should be Washington-focused. Dr. Price is focused on hearing from Americans across the country.”

Nonetheless, POLITICO identified at least 17 charter flights that took place before the first storm — Hurricane Harvey — hit in late August, and included flights that did not appear to be for urgent HHS public health priorities.

For example, Price took a Learjet-60 from San Diego to the Aspen Ideas Festival — a glamorous conference at the Colorado resort town — that arrived at 3:33 p.m. on Saturday afternoon, June 24, nearly 19 hours before his scheduled panel. That flight likely cost more than $7,100, according to one charter jet agency estimate.

“If you’re going to a conference, you have some [advance] flexibility to book travel” and shouldn’t need last-minute charters, said Walter Shaub, who was the Barack Obama-appointed director of the United States Office of Government Ethics until July. “This shows a complete disregard for the expense to the taxpayer.”

Since being confirmed in early February, Price has developed a reputation inside the agency for flying on private charters rather than taking other means of transportation, people inside and outside the Trump administration said.

After a POLITICO investigation identified five private flights that Price took up and down the East Coast last week, Price took a charter jet to Oklahoma on Tuesday of this week, Sept. 19, where he met with Native American tribes and toured health care facilities by car — although HHS initially explored flying him by charter around the state, two people with knowledge of Price’s travels said. “There was a push from political [staff] at HHS to fly him and not drive him to these small communities,” said one of the people.

Price’s staff cut short his news conference in Oklahoma on Wednesday when reporters raised questions about his use of taxpayer funds, an attendee said.

Price’s frequent trips around the country have rankled staff inside the White House, with a senior official saying many trips aren’t related to priorities like Obamacare repeal and other items on the president’s agenda. While Price has flown to Maine, New Hampshire, Oklahoma and Pennsylvania since last Wednesday, President Donald Trump and Senate Republicans have been frantically rallying support to pass an Obamacare repeal bill by Sept. 30. After that date, the GOP will need 60 Senate votes, not 50, to overturn the 2010 health law.

"No one is quite sure what [Price] is doing,” a senior White House official said. “You look at this week, we're doing a last final push trying to get this over the finish line, and he's nowhere to be found."

Many of Price’s trips have centered on making announcements related to the use of opioids and holding listening sessions about the epidemic, which Trump labeled a national emergency and continues contribute to rising death rates from drug abuse. Price has labeled fighting the opioid epidemic one of his top priorities.

But rather than fly commercially to these events, which are scheduled well in advance, Price tends to rent corporate-style jets. Sometimes, he ferries big-name guests along with him. In May, Price and Kellyanne Conway — the White House counselor and former Trump campaign manager who traveled with Price to Philadelphia last week to tour an addiction treatment center — made stops in four different states in the span of two days.

The pair traveled to Lansing, Michigan, and Charleston, West Virginia, for opioid-related meetings in the morning and early afternoon on May 9. That happened to be the same day Trump abruptly fired FBI Director James Comey. On May 10, Conway and Price were in Augusta, Maine, and Concord, New Hampshire, for more opioid-related events.

On July 6, Price again made an opioid-related visit to Chattanooga, Tennessee, where he took a private plane, according to two sources with knowledge of the situation. According to records, HHS signed a $14,570 charter plane contract for Washington to Tennessee travel with a July 6 effective date.

In June, Price spoke at a physicians association conference in San Diego, where he vowed to wring out wasteful spending in the government’s health care programs. Getting “value” for spending “is incredibly important,” he said.

Price took a private plane to get to the meeting, which was one stop on a five-state sprint of charter travel that cost $50,420.

If the situations were reversed and a Dem was doing this, Price would have been helping to hoist the crucifix on Pennsylvania Avenue.

[GrumpyGran]

13 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

In May, Price and Kellyanne Conway — the White House counselor and former Trump campaign manager who traveled with Price to Philadelphia last week to tour an addiction treatment center — made stops in four different states in the span of two days.

The pair traveled to Lansing, Michigan, and Charleston, West Virginia, for opioid-related meetings in the morning and early afternoon on May 9. That happened to be the same day Trump abruptly fired FBI Director James Comey. On May 10, Conway and Price were in Augusta, Maine, and Concord, New Hampshire, for more opioid-related events.

Wait, what? Why is she going along on these trips with him? How is she remotely qualified to deal with this issue? Price probably isn't either but at least he is doing his job, sort of. Why are we paying for a hotel room for her too?

I guess The Price Is Not Right thinks he's too good to travel with the common people. These people are beyond belief with their hubris. Let's throw him to Mueller, too, once Mueller done with the long list of others he needs to investigate.

[GreyhoundFan]

2 hours ago, GrumpyGran said:

Let's throw him to Mueller, too, once Mueller done with the long list of others he needs to investigate.

I agree, but Mueller has WAY bigger fish to fry...or to outfit said fish in the latest in prison-wear.

[onekidanddone]

Ben Carson breaks with Trump, endorses Roy Moore in Alabama Senate nomination race

Quote

MORRISTOWN, N.J. — Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson issued a statement Friday supporting Roy Moore’s candidacy for the Republican Senate nomination in Alabama, breaking with President Trump's endorsement of the establishment-backed incumbent Sen. Luther Strange.

The extraordinary endorsement in Tuesday's primary runoff election came just hours before Trump was set to arrive in Alabama to campaign for Strange.

It highlights what appears to be a growing rift between the outsider president and his grass roots supporters, many of whom have vocally backed Moore’s candidacy.

“Judge Moore is a fine man of proven character and integrity, who I have come to respect over the years,” Carson said. “He is truly someone who reflects the Judeo-Christian values that were so important to the establishment of our country."

“It is these values that we must return to make America great again,” the statement continued. “ I wish him well and hope everyone will make sure they vote on Tuesday.’

Moore, a former chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, is a controversial figure in the state. He was removed from his post in 2003 for failing to follow federal orders to take down a monument to the Ten Commandments that he had installed at the Alabama Judicial Building. In his second stint as chief justice, after being elected in 2013, he resigned in April.

Despite support for Moore from some of Trump’s most ardent supporters, including two former White House officials, Stephen K. Bannon and Sebastian Gorka, the president has endorsed Strange in the race. Vice President Pence also plans to campaign for Strange ahead of the runoff vote.

In a tweet Friday, Trump praised Strange and predicted that the race would be close. Some recent polls had shown Moore leading, though the contest was getting more competitive.

“Will be in Alabama tonight. Luther Strange has gained mightily since my endorsement, but will be very close. He loves Alabama, and so do I!” Trump wrote.

Okay so, Trump claims he is an anti establishment and drain the swamp kind of guy, yet he is endorsing the 'establishment-backed' Strange. Moore is supported by many  of Trumps's people including Bannon and Carson. I'd figure Pence would be for Moore as well being the Bible above Constitution kind of guy, but he has to go along with Trump.  Waiting for he back stabbing of Carson in a tweet storm.

Trump, now in Alabama stumping for Strange is being his usual can't stay on topic and makes it all about himself rant. The WoPo had tidbits from the tonight's rally on its banner.  TT jumped from McCain to NK to the NFL players who won't stand for the Anthem. So much for helping Strange.  

[fraurosena]

The irony...

Welp. I tried looking... I lasted for about 3 minutes. What utter tripe this is. Oooooohhhh the dangers in this day and age, like wannacry and, and... but no mention whatsoever of Russian hacking.

[onekidanddone]

30 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

Welp. I tried looking... I lasted for about 3 minutes. What utter tripe this is. Oooooohhhh the dangers in this day and age, like wannacry and, and... but no mention whatsoever of Russian hacking.

That sound you here is me banging my head into the wall. @fraurosena you are my hero, as I only lasted 22 seconds.  I just could't deal.

[fraurosena]

46 minutes ago, onekidanddone said:

That sound you here is me banging my head into the wall. @fraurosena you are my hero, as I only lasted 22 seconds.  I just could't deal.

Oh my gosh, you missed the really, really, atrociously, really, really baaaaaaad acting! Maybe you coud ff and take a peak a little further along, just for laughs. Those poor, poor HHS staffers who had to sit through this 'training'...

[GreyhoundFan]

Because there are no scheduled commercial flights between NYC and DC... (end sarcasm)... "Mnuchin flew on government jet to Washington following appearance at Trump Tower"

Spoiler

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin flew on a government jet from New York City to Washington following a news conference with President Trump last month at Trump Tower, according to a Treasury investigator now reviewing the trip.

The flight, first reported by ABC, joins a series of expensive taxpayer-funded trips taken by Trump’s Cabinet secretaries, which critics have slammed as a waste of public funds.

Mnuchin flew to Washington aboard a C-37 piloted and maintained by the U.S. Air Force after Trump’s Aug. 15 news conference, during which the president blamed “both sides” for brutal violence days earlier during a clash of neo-Nazis and protesters in Charlottesville, Va.

Mnuchin, a former banker and hedge-fund manager who was joined at the brief event by Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao, stood behind Trump and offered no comments during the event. The news conference was called to discuss the administration’s infrastructure plans.

Federal agencies who request government jets are required to reimburse the military for travel expenses. The C-37, a military-outfitted version of the Gulfstream V executive jet, has a reimbursable rate of up to $10,000 an hour, Pentagon documents show.

The 200-mile path between New York and Washington is one of the most well-connected travel routes in the country, and millions have maneuvered it via one-hour commercial flights and three-hour trips aboard passenger trains such as Amtrak’s Acela Express.

Defense Department policy calls government air transportation “a premium mode of travel involving high costs and limited resources” and says “every effort shall be made to minimize travel cost.”

Officials told ABC that Chao also took the government jet for at least one leg of the Trump Tower appearance. Agency officials did not respond to requests for comment.

A Department of Defense spokesperson referred questions to the Air Force, which did not immediately respond.

The Trump Tower flight was less than a week before Mnuchin and his wife, Louise Linton, flew to Louisville, Ky., on a government jet to attend a luncheon and visit the nation’s gold vault at Fort Knox, where Mnuchin also viewed the solar eclipse.

Mnuchin’s office also requested a government jet fly him and Linton on a honeymoon trip to Europe this summer. Treasury officials said the request was made to guarantee access to secure communications during the trip and was withdrawn before any flight.

An official in the Treasury Department’s Office of Inspector General said both Mnuchin’s Trump Tower and Fort Knox flights are currently under review.

The official declined to offer further details until officials are “able to perform a complete analysis of how these trip requests and authorizations were staffed and reviewed.”

In a statement, a Treasury spokesperson told The Washington Post, “We welcome the OIG’s review and are ensuring the office has everything needed for a full evaluation of our travel procedures.”

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) last month requested a “detailed explanation” of how Mnuchin justified taking the military plane to Fort Knox. A Treasury official wrote back this week saying the agency “considered a number of travel options” before requesting the government jet.

The Mnuchin case marks at least the third open review by an inspector general into travel expenses for Cabinet secretaries, who have traditionally flown on cheaper commercial airlines for domestic flights.

The Health and Human Services inspector general is investigating reports that Secretary Tom Price flew aboard expensive chartered planes for at least two dozen taxpayer-funded flights, a spokeswoman said Friday. An official in Price’s office defended the flights as “Secretary Price, getting outside of D.C., making sure he is connected with the real American people.”

The Environmental Protection Agency’s inspector general also announced last month that it had begun investigating Administrator Scott Pruitt’s frequent travel to his home state of Oklahoma.

Rep. Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.), the ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, said in a statement Friday that “too many Trump Administration officials have an entitled, millionaire mindset when it comes to squandering taxpayer money.”

 

[GrumpyGran]

3 hours ago, onekidanddone said:

as I only lasted 22 seconds.

Because he wasn't making sense? These people are the worst communicators ever!

[GreyhoundFan]

"EPA chief Pruitt met with many corporate execs. Then he made decisions in their favor."

Spoiler

Environmental Protection Agency chief Scott Pruitt has met regularly with corporate executives from the automobile, mining and fossil fuel industries — in several instances shortly before making decisions favorable to those interest groups, according to a copy of his schedule obtained by The Washington Post.

There were, by comparison, only two environmental groups and one public health group on the schedule, which covers the months of April through early September.

It is the first time Pruitt’s schedule has been made public and it adds to understanding about how he makes decisions.

On the morning of May 1, Pruitt met at EPA headquarters with the Pebble Limited Partnership, a Canadian firm that had been blocked by the agency in 2014 from building a massive gold, copper and molybdenum mine in Alaska’s Bristol Bay watershed.

That afternoon, he met with Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), who also opposed the Obama administration’s decision to invoke a provision of the Clean Water Act to block the mine, on the grounds that contamination could jeopardize the region’s valuable sockeye salmon run.

A week and a half after the meetings, the two sides struck a legal settlement that cleared the way for the firm to apply for federal permits for the operation.

In a statement at the time, Pruitt said that the agreement “will not guarantee or prejudge a particular outcome, but will provide Pebble a fair process for their permit application and help steer EPA away from costly and time-consuming litigation.”

A week after the administrator met with Pebble Limited Partnership, he met at EPA headquarters with Fitzgerald Truck Sales, the nation’s largest manufacturer of commercial truck “gliders,” which are truck bodies without an engine or transmission.

On Aug. 17, a little more than two months after meeting with Fitzgerald, Pruitt announced that he would revisit an October 2016 decision to apply greenhouse gas emissions standards for heavy-duty trucks to gliders and trailers,  saying he was making the decision following “the significant issues” raised by those in the industry.

Frank O’Donnell, president of Clean Air Watch, said that the manufacturers of gliders have been using their products’ lack of engines to evade stricter air pollution standards, which is why EPA issued its 2016 rule in the first place. “It is a classic special-interest loophole- one that would mean dirtier air and public health damage,” he said.

Pruitt had indicated in March that he might relax the fuel-efficiency standards for cars and light trucks that President Barack Obama had approved. During this period, he met with representatives of General Motors on April 26; the Auto Alliance, the industry’s lobbying arm, on April 27; and Ford Motor Co. on May 23. The industry has been pressing for a rollback in the efficiency targets. In August, the EPA formally reopened the rules.

“As EPA has been the poster child for regulatory overreach, the Agency is now meeting with those ignored by the Obama Administration,” EPA spokeswoman Liz Bowman said in an email Friday. “As we return EPA to its core mission, Administrator Pruitt is leading the Agency through process, the rule of law and cooperative federalism.”

On April 24, Pruitt met with the executive committee of the National Mining Association, and the next day with representatives of rural cooperatives, whose rural and suburban customers rely largely on aging coal plants. He met with oil industry companies and associations, including Phillips 66, the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers board; the American Petroleum Institute directors; and Magellan Midstream Partners, a petroleum pipeline and storage firm.

Earlier this month, Pruitt granted an industry coalition’s request to revisit a 2015 EPA rule to tighten federal requirements for how companies contain coal ash, the toxic waste produced from burning coal in power plants. A range of the groups he met with this spring, including  the American Gas Association and several of the nation’s largest coal-fired utilities, had sought the regulatory change.

Pruitt met April 6 with FirstEnergy, an Ohio-based utility that has been looking for financial or regulatory relief to keep its aging coal plants from being shut down. The plants have been hard-pressed to meet mercury limits required under the Clean Air Act, and to compete with cheap natural gas and renewable energy.

He also met with a number of agriculture business groups, Boeing, General Electric and CIA Director Mike Pompeo.

GE and Boeing were urging Pruitt to advance fuel efficiency and emissions standards for aircraft engines, said a source familiar with the meeting. GE makes efficient aircraft engines and Boeing is one of its biggest customers.

While most of Pruitt’s meetings were at EPA headquarters, he has traveled around D.C. and the country to address industry boards and their broader membership behind closed doors. On April 24, he addressed the NMA’s board of directors meeting in Naples, Fla. In May he spoke to the Portland Cement Association, the Large Public Power Council, American Iron and Steel, the American Exploration & Production Council and the board of directors and executive committee of the U.S. Oil & Gas Association in several locations around Washington.

The next month he addressed the board of the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity and the National Turkey Federation in different spots in D.C., and on Aug. 10 he met with the Dallas chapter of the National Association of Homebuilders in Plano, Tex. He also addressed a group of social conservatives, the Council for National Policy, in McLean. Va, on May 19.

During the period covered by the schedule, from early April to mid-September, Pruitt consulted repeatedly with state and federal officials by phone or in person. Of the 19 governors he contacted, all but five were Republican.

One, West Virginia’s Jim Justice was a Democrat at the time, but subsequently switched parties. Another, Puerto Rico’s Ricardo Rosselló, who heads the island’s New Progressive Party, which espouses statehood, was contacted after the commonwealth had been hit by Hurricane Irma.

While the administrator has devoted much of his time to meeting with industry representatives, he did meet with three environmental and public-health advocates in late May.

On May 24, he saw officials from the American Academy of Pediatrics, which backs stricter air-pollution standards; the next day, he met with Trout Unlimited.

On May 25, Pruitt met with Bob Perciasepe, who served as deputy administrator of the EPA for four and-a-half years under Obama and now heads the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions.

Just another scummy member of this crooked administration.

[GrumpyGran]

9 minutes ago, GreyhoundFan said:

the agency “considered a number of travel options” before requesting the government jet.

That's right, we thought about letting him take Air Force One but Trump needed it. Then we thought about renting Trump's plane from him to take Steve. We also considered renting a 42-foot RV at a cost of $3000 a day plus mileage and gas. Oh and possibly a limo for the trip. We just thought the government jet would be more appropriate since he's in the government.

You just know these people are terrified of being recognized on a commercial airliner.

[GreyhoundFan]

Another member of this administration who should just keep his mouth shut: "Mnuchin: NFL players 'can do free speech on their own time'"

Spoiler

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin backed President Donald Trump's days of attacks on NFL players, saying athletes "can do free speech on their own time."

Beginning at a Friday rally in Alabama, Trump has suggested players who have knelt during the national anthem in order to protest racism and police brutality should be kicked out of the league. Most players who have participated in the protests are black.

"I think what the president is saying is that the owners should have a rule that players should have to stand in respect for the national anthem," Mnuchin said Sunday on ABC's "This Week." "This isn't about Democrats, it's not about Republicans, it's not about race, it's not about free speech. They can do free speech on their own time. That this is about respect for the military and first responders in the country."

Mnuchin made similar remarks Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union."

Trump's comments on Friday night and in subsequent tweets were expected to set off a new wave of protests on Sunday.

"Wouldn't you love to see one of these NFL owners, when somebody disrespects our flag, to say, 'Get that son of a b---- off the field right now,'" Trump said during his Friday night rally, ostensibly held to help GOP Sen. Luther Strange win reelection.

NFL players and owners have been unanimous in their denunciation of Trump's comments, with even Patriots owner Robert Kraft, a personal friend of Trump's, condemning the remarks. A number of Jacksonville Jaguars and Baltimore Ravens players knelt during the national anthem before a game in London on Sunday morning.

 

[GreyhoundFan]

I love Ted Lieu:

[GreyhoundFan]

Another good one from Jennifer Rubin (it's about Mnuchin and the TT): "Trump’s promises on taxes are never to be believed"

Spoiler

When both Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and President Trump said eons ago (okay, earlier this month) that they would not cut taxes for the rich, we were, let’s say, skeptical. Every single tax plan we have seen from Trump — be it the campaign-season plan or more recent outlines — and House Republicans has included large, disproportionate tax cuts for the rich. Now Mnuchin hints they didn’t mean to promise no tax cuts for the rich when they said there would be no tax cuts for the rich.

TAPPER: Let’s turn to the president’s tax agenda. The president expected to roll out a tax plan on Wednesday. “Axios” is reporting that the plan would cut the tax rate paid by wealth Americans from almost 40 percent to about 35 percent as well as making dramatic reductions on taxes to big businesses and small businesses.

When you were selected as treasury secretary, you made a very specific promise and it was quickly dubbed the “Mnuchin rule.” Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MNUCHIN: Any reductions we have in upper income taxes will be offset by less deductions, so that there will be no tax — absolute tax cut for the upper class.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Can you reaffirm that pledge, that there will be — quote — “No absolute tax cut for the upper class”? Is the Mnuchin rule still in effect?

MNUCHIN: I did say that.

I just want to clarify. It was never a promise. It was never a pledge.

Oh, well that clears that up. Of course, it was Trump himself who said, “The rich will not be gaining at all with this plan.” Now, Mnuchin calls that an “objective.” He hints that, in fact, with a reduced rate of 35 percent, the rich will come out ahead. Mnuchin said that “as it relates to the high end, you know, there’s lots of changes. We’re getting rid of lots of deductions. We’re trying to get rid of state and locally deductions to get the federal government out of subsidizing it.” He adds, “And yes, I can tell you the current plan for many, many people, it will not reduce taxes on the high end.” But some will get big cuts, and the president did not tell the truth when he said that the rich won’t gain “at all.”

Tax reform doesn’t have to work this way. The plan could leave the top bracket exactly where it is at 39.6 percent. By Trump’s own bragging, we know the economy is not in recession and is creating jobs. There simply is no economic justification — other than hackneyed supply-side dogma that doesn’t translate to the 21st century — as to why people at this level should get wealthier and wealthier. Moreover, the reported plan that “pass-through” businesses will pay 25 percent would be a bonanza for the rich, who can easily incorporate. Again, it’s entirely unnecessary to give, say, a lawyer with a limited liability partnership and $2 million in income, a tax break on the grounds that a local business that employs people, pays a business tax and puts capital at risk should get a tax break. You can keep the lawyer at 39.6 percent and cut the business tax to a uniform rate (e.g., 25 percent).

Republicans remain entirely oblivious to the popular rancor they have stirred up. Do they imagine no one will notice that Trump and his ilk will wind up with big tax breaks, which exacerbate income inequality and drive up the debt? The mentality that brought us multiple health-care plans that cut Medicaid spending and cut taxes for the very, very rich persists.

That’s the same mentality that infuses the overweening sense of entitlement in Trump’s Cabinet. (Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price chalked up more than $300,000 in charter plane costs. Mnuchin requested a government plane for his honeymoon and separately spent $25,000 on a trip from Manhattan to the capital; Mnuchin is now under investigation.) The rich get richer and get more toys because, in their rarefied world, they deserve it. Absent is a sense of public service and responsibility to those less well off (practically everyone). Convinced that their excess somehow is good for the country, they resort to peddling tax cuts that in fact have a poor track record of creating long-term growth and a perfect record of creating debt. Rather than devote revenue to infrastructure (rebuilding mainland cities and Puerto Rico, to begin with), worker training, research and national defense, this crowd wants to allow the Mnuchins and Trumps to stuff more cash in their pockets, sending the bill to future generations to pay for the widening debt, and explaining we cannot “afford” the infrastructure, worker training, research and defense we need. This is not conservatism; it’s greed.

I hadn't planned to believe either the TT or Mnuchin on anything.

[GreyhoundFan]

Isn't this just lovely? (note sarcasm)  "Zinke says a third of Interior’s staff is disloyal to Trump and promises ‘huge’ changes"

Spoiler

In a speech to the oil industry, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke claimed that nearly a third of his staff is disloyal to President Trump, saying that workers in Washington are reluctant to relax regulations to permit increased mining for coal and drilling for natural gas and oil on public land.

Zinke promised a “huge” change by restructuring staff positions and possibly shifting decision-making positions in the Bureau of Land Management and the Bureau of Reclamation from Washington to points out West in the speech Monday to the National Petroleum Council of oil and gas executives, first reported by the Associated Press.

“I got 30 percent of the crew that’s not loyal to the flag,” the news agency reported the secretary as saying. Zinke, a former Navy SEAL, fell back on military jargon to show how he intended to bring them in line, saying it’s necessary to “push the generals where the fight is.”

The speech was Zinke’s latest effort to instill fear in his staff. He told a Senate panel in June that he wanted to strip 4,000 employees from the Interior Department — about 8 percent of the full-time staff — as part of meeting Trump’s proposed budget cuts. Attrition, reassignments and buyouts would be employed to achieve his goal, Zinke said.

If that didn’t work, he said, layoffs could follow. That same month, Zinke ordered the reassignments of 50 Senior Executive Service employees, forcing many into jobs for which they had little experience and that were in different locations. At least one executive, a U.S. Fish and Wildlife director stationed in Atlanta, quit.

Interior’s Office of Inspector General is evaluating the reassignments to determine whether they violated the U.S. code, which instructs an agency’s leadership to notify affected personnel well in advance of the reassignment and give them a chance to choose a job option. Several executives said their reassignment notices arrived out of the blue with no prior discussion.

In an unrelated missive to Interior staff, Deputy Secretary David Bernhardt took the unusual step of sharing the names of executives who were dismissed after an inspector general report determined that they had engaged in poor behavior.

“I am troubled that there is not a universal sense in … Interior that those few employees who have failed to uphold … standards are appropriately being held accountable,” Bernhardt wrote in a memo Monday. “Please be assured, that I am committed to ensuring that leaders at all levels of the department are, themselves, ensuring that legally sound, measured, and decisive action is being taken.”

He went on to name a BLM supervisor and National Park Service ranger who were fired for “misuse of his position for personal gain” in the first case and “misuse of government equipment” in the second. “I share these examples because you need to know that your leadership is listening,” the deputy wrote. “We will hold people accountable when we are informed that they have failed in their duties and obligations.”

Zinke said in his speech that the changes to bring his staff in line to support Trump’s goals to widen mineral extraction on taxpayer-owned land are “going to be huge,” the AP reported. “I really can’t change the culture without changing the structure.”

Permits to drill, dig and log are protected by regulations that delay the application process. “The president wants it yesterday,” Zinke said. “We have to do it by the law.”

I know some folks think Zinke isn't too bad, especially relative to Pruitt, DeVos, and Carson, but he's a nasty piece of work.

[onekidanddone]

2 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

Isn't this just lovely? (note sarcasm)  "Zinke says a third of Interior’s staff is disloyal to Trump and promises ‘huge’ changes"

I know some folks think Zinke isn't too bad, especially relative to Pruitt, DeVos, and Carson, but he's a nasty piece of work.

Did somebody dig up Joseph McCarthy and bring him back to  life?

[hoipolloi]

1 hour ago, onekidanddone said:

Did somebody dig up Joseph McCarthy and bring him back to  life?

Sure looks like it. Get a load of this shite:

Quote

 

Federal officials are planning to collect social media information on all immigrants, including permanent residents and naturalized citizens, a move that has alarmed lawyers and privacy groups worried about how the information will be used.

The Department of Homeland Security published the new rule in the Federal Register last week, saying it wants to include "social media handles, aliases, associated identifiable information, and search results" as part of people's immigration file. The new requirement takes effect Oct. 18.

 

This vacuum cleaner will also collect data on born-and-raised US citizens who communicate with anyone in the target populations.

[onekidanddone]

18 minutes ago, hoipolloi said:

This vacuum cleaner will also collect data on born-and-raised US citizens who communicate with anyone in the target populations.

Meaning everybody here.