Latest news with #Capito
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump talk of joining Iran-Israel conflict unnerves lawmakers in both parties
Senators in both parties are growing increasingly nervous about the possibility that President Trump could insert the United States directly in the Israel-Iran war with a decision to bomb Iran to prevent it from obtaining a nuclear weapon. It's not clear whether Trump has made a decision himself on an issue that divides his own party and the MAGA movement. On Wednesday, he said, 'I may do it, I may not do it. I mean, nobody knows what I'm going to do.' The Wall Street Journal later in the day reported that Trump had told senior aides he approved of an attack plan for Iran but was holding off on giving a final order to see if the country abandons its nuclear program. On Capitol Hill, there is broad support in both parties for Israel, but there is also fear about getting drawn into a larger war in the Middle East. 'I'm uncomfortable,' said Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), who noted that Trump campaigned on keeping the U.S. out of foreign conflicts. Since taking office, Trump has so far unsuccessfully sought to get peace deals in the Russia-Ukraine war and in the Middle East. 'These decisions are always a function of assessing risk accurately and your reward,' Hickenlooper said. 'What do we get out of it? And I'm not sure what's in it for the American people. That's the argument the president ran on.' 'We run the risk of getting dragged into a much more serious conflict,' he continued, while noting he's '100 percent' on the Israeli side. 'But I'm not sure this is necessary to their survival for us to do something like this.' Lawmakers are also worried about what their constituents back home are thinking. Sen. Shelley Moore Capito ( said U.S. officials 'need to be contemplative and look at all the ramifications.' 'I'd imagine every American's like, 'Hoo, this situation's spiraling,'' she said. While Capito expressed concern, she also said she believes Trump will only strike Tehran if he feels fully compelled to do so beyond a reasonable doubt. 'I don't really worry with this president because he doesn't pay as much attention to the rhetoric, when the Ayatollah says, 'Ohhh we'll ruin you,'' Capito said, referring to Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. 'I just think … slow it down if you can, make sure you're making the right decision. I trust the president to make the right decision, but it's tough.' According to one Senate GOP aide, the GOP conference has a 'healthy mix' on the question of getting more involved. At one end is Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), a close ally of Trump but also a hawkish member who is pushing for regime change. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) represents another end of the spectrum and has called for the U.S. to stay out of the situation entirely. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) told reporters Wednesday that he was wary of the U.S. getting increasingly ingrained in yet another conflict in the Middle East. 'I don't want us fighting a war. I don't want another Mideast war,' he told CNN. 'I'm a little concerned about our sudden military buildup in the region.' Hawley said he spoke to Trump on Tuesday night. 'I think Trump's message to them is if you don't [give up nukes], you're on your own with Israel,' Hawley said of the Iranians. 'I think all that's fine. It's a very different thing though for us to then say, but we are going to offensively … go strike Iran or insert ourselves into the conflict,' he continued, adding that a U.S. offensive is something he'd 'be real concerned about.' 'I don't think there's a need for the United States to affirmatively insert ourselves,' he said. Democrats are pressing for more information. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) told reporters Wednesday that he requested an all-senators classified briefing that is set for early next week. Sen. Mark Warner (Va.), the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, separately expressed frustration about being kept in the dark. 'I'm a member, as you said, of the gang of eight, and we're supposed to know. I have no foggy idea what this administration's plans are or what the foreign policy is vis-a-vis Iran,' he said Wednesday afternoon on CNN. The surprise for some Republicans is that it is clear Trump is seriously considering joining the assault on Iran. This is a shift given Trump's aversion to foreign wars. The president has been a harsh critic of the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts. Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio) posted a meme on social platform X exemplifying the MAGA coalition's lack of enthusiasm for a more intense role in Iran. Democrats, meanwhile, are divided on the possibility of asserting Congress's authority over war powers amid talk of a U.S. strike on Tehran. Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) started a push to curb the president's ability to launch a unilateral strike earlier in the week by rolling out his measure to require congressional authorization or a formal declaration of war before action can be taken. However, only a few of his colleagues have backed his effort publicly, with leadership keeping options open. 'Senate Democrats, if necessary, will not hesitate to assert our prerogatives and our ability on this bill,' Schumer said. Republicans broadly believe that Trump has the authority to order a strike on Iran if he so chooses. The line they do not want to see crossed is putting troops on the ground in the region, and some of them do not see Trump taking that kind of step. 'We're not talking about American boots on the ground,' Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said. 'That would be something different.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
4 days ago
- Politics
- The Hill
Trump talk of joining Iran-Israel conflict unnerves lawmakers in both parties
Senators in both parties are growing increasingly nervous about the possibility that President Trump could insert the United States directly in the Israel-Iran war with a decision to bomb Iran to prevent it from obtaining a nuclear weapon. It's not clear whether Trump has made a decision himself on an issue that divides his own party and the MAGA movement. On Wednesday, he said, 'I may do it, I may not do it. I mean, nobody knows what I'm going to do.' The Wall Street Journal later in the day reported that Trump had told senior aides he had approved of an attack plan for Iran but was holding off on giving a final order to see if that country abandons its nuclear program. On Capitol Hill, there is broad support in both parties for Israel, but there is also fear about getting drawn into a larger war in the Middle East. 'I'm uncomfortable,' said Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), who noted that Trump campaign on keeping the U.S. out of foreign conflicts. Since taking office, Trump has so far unsuccessfully sought to get peace deals in the Russia-Ukraine war and in the Middle East. 'These decisions are always a function of assessing risk accurately and your reward,' said Hickenlooper. 'What do we get out of it? And I'm not sure what's in it for the American people. That's the argument the president ran on.' 'We run the risk of getting dragged into a much more serious conflict,' he continued, while noting he's '100 percent' on the Israeli side. 'But I'm not sure this is necessary to their survival for us to do something like this.' Lawmakers are also worried about what their constituents back home are thinking. Sen. Shelley Moore Capito ( said U.S. officials 'need to be contemplative and look at all the ramifications.' 'I'd imagine every American's like, 'hoo, this situation's spiraling,'' she said. While Capito expressed concern, she also said she believes Trump will only strike Tehran if he feels fully compelled to do so beyond a reasonable doubt. 'I don't really worry with this president because he doesn't pay as much attention to the rhetoric, when the Ayatollah says, 'ohhh we'll ruin you,'' Capito said. 'I just think … slow it down if you can, make sure you're making the right decision. I trust the president to make the right decision, but it's tough.' According to one Senate GOP aide, the GOP conference has a 'healthy mix' on the question of getting more involved. At one end is Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), a close ally of Trump but also a hawkish member who is pushing for regime change. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) represents another end of the spectrum, and has called for the U.S. to stay out of the situation entirely. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) told reporters Wednesday that he was wary of the U.S. getting increasingly ingrained in yet another conflict in the Middle East. 'I don't want us fighting a war. I don't want another Mideast war,' he told CNN. 'I'm a little concerned about our sudden military buildup in the region.' Hawley said he had spoke to Trump on Tuesday night. 'I think Trump's message to them is if you don't [give up nukes], you're on your own with Israel,' Hawley said of the Iranians. 'I think all that's fine. It's a very different thing though for us to then say, but we are going to offensively … go strike Iran or insert ourselves into the conflict,' he continued, adding that a U.S. offensive is something 'I'd be real concerned about.' 'I don't think there's a need for the United States to affirmatively insert ourselves,' he said. Democrats are pressing for more information. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) on Wednesday told reporters that he requested an all-senators classified briefing that is set for early next week. Sen. Mark Warner (Va.), the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, separately expressed frustration about being kept in the dark. 'I'm a member, as you said, of the gang of eight and we're supposed to know. I have no foggy idea what this administration's plans are or what the foreign policy is vis-a-vis Iran,' he said on CNN on Wednesday afternoon. The surprise for some Republicans is that it is clear Trump is seriously considering joining the assault on Iran. This is a shift given Trump's aversion to foreign wars. The president has been a harsh critic of the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts. Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio) posted a meme on X exemplifying the MAGA coalition's lack of enthusiasm for a more intense role in Iran. Democrats, meanwhile, are divided on the possibility of asserting Congress's authority over war powers amid talk of a U.S. strike on Tehran. Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) launched a push to curb the president's ability to launch a unilateral strike earlier in the week by rolling out his measure to require congressional authorization or a formal declaration of war before action can be taken. However, only a few of his colleagues have backed his effort publicly, with leadership keeping their options open. 'Senate Democrats, if necessary, will not hesitate to assert our prerogatives and our ability on this bill,' Schumer said. Republicans broadly believe that Trump has the authority to order a strike on Iran if he so chooses. The line they do not want to see crossed is the putting of troops on the ground in the region, and some of them do not see Trump taking that kind of step. 'We're not talking about American boots on the ground,' said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas). 'That would be something different.'
Yahoo
11-06-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Coal miners are fighting Trump's safety cuts — and winning
When the Trump administration took the first steps toward shutting down two major programs aimed at protecting the nation's miners, the grassroots response was immediate, and vehement. And, it turns out, successful. In March, the administration moved to shutter over 30 field offices of the Mine Safety and Health Administration, or MSHA, throughout coal country. Weeks later, it proposed cutting 90 percent of the staff at the National Institute for Occupational Health. That would have killed its efforts to screen miners for black lung and treat that progressive fatal disease, which is caused by chronic exposure to silica dust. Miners and their advocates swiftly demanded that Trump, who has never shied away from celebrating coal miners as 'real people,' change course. The United Mine Workers of America, the Black Lung Association, and environmental groups like Appalachian Voices came together to protest the cuts and tell lawmakers to back their calls to undo them. Two miners sued the administration, arguing the government is not meeting its obligations to protect those who produce a resource Trump deemed a 'critical mineral' in an April 8 executive order vowing to restore the coal industry. The administration seems to have heard them, at least in part. Late last month, MSHA offices were quietly removed from the list of government buildings slated for closure and sale. The administration also has reinstated hundreds of occupational health workers, including some of those in the Coal Worker Health Surveillance Program. Bipartisan support for miner safety came from Virginia Democratic senators Tim Warner and Tim Kaine and West Virginia Republican Shelly Moore Capito. Capito did not respond to a request for comment, but in a letter she sent to Trump in April the lawmaker expressed concern that eliminating NIOSH would hurt her state. She also said it would cost taxpayer dollars, by forcing the expensive decommissioning of specialized research labs where NIOSH scientists studied the effects of silica, coal dust and mold on the human respiratory system. 'As the President recognizes the importance of coal, we must also recognize the health of our miners,' Capito wrote in the letter, dated April 22. 'I encourage you to bring back the NIOSH coal programs and researchers that will help ensure the President's vision to unleash American energy can be done safely.' Erin Bates, director of communications for United Mine Workers of America, credited Capito for her role in reversing the field office closures. She said the union's president, Cecil Roberts met with Robert Kennedy, the secretary of health and human services, to lobby for saving NIOSH. The union has longstanding relationships with Democrats over worker safety issues, Bates said, but also has maintained good relationships with Republicans, given that much of coal country leans that way. Democrats have pushed the administration on some of the remaining cuts to MSHA. During a House hearing on Thursday, Representative Bobby Scott urged Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer to hire more people. Scott drew attention to the revocation of job offers for dozens of mine inspectors. They will be urgently needed as the nation's demand for critical minerals increases in the years ahead, Scott said. 'We must invest in MSHA's pipeline of talent so that qualified inspectors will be there to ensure safety in these dangerous jobs,' Scott, a Democrat from Virginia, said. 'We know that the process takes years.' Miners and their advocates applauded the victories, but said there is still much work to do. 'I feel like we've won some,' said Vonda Robinson, vice president of the Black Lung Association. 'But I don't think that we've got enough yet.' Robinson remains concerned about the fate of the so-called silica rule, which tightens the acceptable level of exposure to that toxin. The rule, for the first time, brings the standard in line with what workers in other sectors have worked with for decades. But the rule has been placed in limbo since the cuts to NIOSH were announced, effectively eliminating the possibility of enforcement. Even with some job restorations, staffing shortages at the agency also make it difficult for various government departments to work together to safeguard worker health, Bates said. 'We're in a major push to prevent an operations lag while most of the workers are out,' she said. The president's proposed federal budget also cuts funding from the Mine Safety Health Administration by 10 percent, down to $348.2 million from $387.8 million. 'That is going to affect the offices that are still open and the inspectors that are working there,' Bates said. About $14 million of these cuts come from Mine Safety and Health Enforcement, and the agency would lose 47 salaried positions. In a statement, the Department of Health and Human Services told Grist it remains committed to protecting the health and safety of coal miners. The Labor Department did not respond to requests for comment. For now, miners and their advocates remain focused on determining just how many federal workers have been reinstated, whether any field offices remain closed, and securing further guarantees that the government will not step back from its critical safety work. 'Our push is trying to get answers now and no more waiting and worrying,' Bates said. This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Coal miners are fighting Trump's safety cuts — and winning on Jun 11, 2025.
Yahoo
03-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Mountaineers Indivisible members turn out at town hall without Sen. Capito or Rep. Moore
MORGANTOWN — Four months after forming, the voices against West Virginia's national elected leaders are getting louder. "We went from about 25 people in a smaller church basement," Mindy Holcomb, an organizer at West Virginia Citizen Action Group, said. "We now have, I think, close to 1,800 people on our membership rolls." Mountaineers Indivisible Citizen Action held a town hall Saturday in Morgantown where more than 100 attendees criticized Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, and Rep. Riley Moore, An effigy of Baby Dog presided over cardboard cutouts of Capito and Moore, acknowledging the canine's greater visibility over that of its owner, Sen. Jim Justice, Although event organizers invited Capito and Moore to meet with constituents at the town hall, neither appeared. Instead, attendees aired their grievances toward a pair of empty chairs, which had cutouts of the politicians secured to the seat backs. Mountaineers Indivisible announced they would start weekly actions, alternating between Capito and Moore's offices every Thursday. Moore in particular has earned a lot criticism from the organization. Holcomb said that while Capito herself hasn't talked to Holcomb or her group yet, at least members of Capito's office up to her chief of staff have made themselves available. The office of her nephew, however, is a different story. "They just tried to get rid of us as quickly as possible," Holcomb said of Moore's office in Washington D.C. Holcomb said Moore even went as far as avoiding eye contact with them as he walked past. While Holcomb has been able to sit down with member's of Moore's staff at his Morgantown office, it's not the same as being able to speak with Moore directly. "Here's the thing," Holcomb said. "When people have stories like you heard today, when they're suffering, having someone write down notes about what they're saying and conveying that, in theory, to the congressman or then senator, that's not answering questions. That's not hearing the pain that they are going through and realizing, 'hey, my vote has impact.'" In March, Moore declined to say if he would meet with his constituents at a town hall format, instead saying his office has an open door policy and that his constituents are welcome to prescheduled events, who's existence are only disseminated by press release to members of the media. Mountaineers Indivisible and their supporters are adamant about meeting face to face with Capito and Moore because the stakes are high for Medicaid. Currently, House Resolution 1, a spending bill also known as the "Big, Beautiful Bill," defunds essential services like Medicaid to pay for a major tax cut on the rich. The current version of the bill adds work requirements, which the GOP is selling as common sense. However, reporting from ProPublica on Georgia, which instituted a work requirement scheme for its Medicaid program, contradicts current GOP wisdom. Not only did the cost of the program increase, it also resulted in 75% fewer enrollments 18 months into the program than initial estimates had for the program's first year. "Make no mistake, this package is about gutting the Affordable Care Act," West Virginia Center for Budget and Policy Executive Director Kelly Allen said. "We know what it does is going to result in up to between 50,000 and 110,000 plus West Virginians losing their Medicaid over the years when it's implemented." Allen added the bill increases red tape on SNAP, which would increase grocery costs for up to 277,000 West Virginians, including children. About 150,000 West Virginia school children stand to lose free school meals. "All we've been hearing about is how we need to get rid of bureaucracy, deregulate, but it's OK to ramp up red tape on our low income people, I guess," she said. Moore voted to pass H.R. 1 last month. The bill is now the responsibility of the Senate where Capito supports the bill. 'I'm excited about what I see," Capito said in a weekly media briefing last month. "Is it precisely what I would write? No, but I think that's why we bring it to the Senate and we work it through our processes.'
Yahoo
29-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Tax credit cuts could spoil an even more important clean energy goal
As budget negotiations grip the US Congress, some lawmakers are already looking ahead to the next big energy fight, one with even higher stakes for clean energy and the AI power race: Permitting reform. Bipartisan discussions 'are being seeded now' on the scope of a bill that could speed up approvals for new grid lines and pipelines, and restrict the use of litigation to block such projects, Rep. Scott Peters (D-Calif.) told Semafor, and could lead to draft legislation 'pretty quickly' once the budget talks conclude. But the appetite for compromise on permitting will depend on the outcome of the budget: Democrats may feel burned by tax credit cuts, and Republicans may be able to score some permitting wins without a separate compromise bill. So far, preliminary hearings on the subject this year have shown 'the consensus around developing bipartisan permitting reform legislation,' Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.V.), who chairs the upper chamber's Environment and Public Works Committee, told Semafor. 'I continue to work with my colleagues across both chambers to make our permitting and environmental review processes more efficient, predictable, and transparent, so that we can complete projects of all types.' As much as clean energy companies would like to keep their current tax benefits, slow permitting bureaucracy and legal entanglements are still the biggest bottlenecks for the industry and its fossil fuel competitors: The existence of hypothetical tax credits is no use if projects can't get built to tap them. The budget reconciliation bill that passed the House of Representatives last week included provisions for fossil projects to pay a fee to jump ahead of the permitting queue, but stricter rules in the Senate about what exactly can be included in a budget bill mean those provisions are likely to get dropped, analysts say. Budget reconciliation was never going to be an effective forum for permitting reform; a bipartisan bill is still the only way to make the necessary changes, and make them stick. 'Everything the Trump administration can do or has done on permitting is prone to reversal,' said Xan Fishman, senior managing director of the energy program at the Bipartisan Policy Center think tank. 'After reconciliation, everyone will look around and say, 'We still need permitting reform'.' Conditions are favorable for a deal that builds on the one advanced last year by Sens. Joe Manchin (now retired) and John Barrasso (R-Wyo.). Key committee leaders, including Reps. Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.) and Bruce Westerman (R-Ark.) in the House and Sens. Capito and Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) in the Senate, have expressed interest in prioritizing a permitting deal. The center of gravity has shifted from the Senate's Energy and Natural Resources committee, where Manchin sat, to Capito's Environment and Public Works committee, where issues around environmental impact statements and judicial rules can be more readily addressed. While some Republicans are pushing to break off chunks of permitting in smaller bills, such as a 'permit-by-rule' bill passed by the House Oversight committee last week, a spokesperson for Peters said that the goal is still 'a bigger more comprehensive product' that can address the full laundry list of permitting issues. Even if the permitting measures that Democrats oppose are struck from the budget bill, later negotiations could still get dragged down by the tax credit cuts. Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) told Politico that the Inflation Reduction Act and permitting reform were always meant to be linked, and that it's a 'fantasy' to suppose one could proceed without the other. 'If all the IRA tax credits are gutted,' Fishman said, 'there's a risk Democrats will question why they should work on permitting at all, if this stuff isn't going to get built anyway.' Meanwhile, he said, the fact that components of permitting reform remain spread across the jurisdictions of numerous committees is 'the major structural challenge for a deal.' The fate of IRA tax credits now hangs with a few key senators. Ones to watch, Heatmap reported, include Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and John Curtis (R-Utah).
