Tennessee Becomes Latest Republican-Led State to Send National Guard to D.C.
Gov. Bill Lee of Tennessee is sending around 160 National Guard troops to Washington, Capt. Kealy Moriarty, the public affairs director of the Tennessee National Guard, said on Tuesday. They were expected to arrive by the end of this week.
The Republican governors of Mississippi, Louisiana, Ohio, West Virginia and South Carolina have also pledged troops. Mr. Trump has sought to take control of law enforcement in Washington to combat what he sees as escalating crime in the capital. He has also challenged the accuracy of the city's crime statistics showing that Washington has actually become safer in the past two years.
Democrats are navigating a difficult balancing act, trying to push back on the federal incursion into the nation's capital without ceding ground to Mr. Trump on issues of public safety.
But on Tuesday, Gov. Laura Kelly of Kansas, the chair of the Democratic Governors Association, urged Republican governors to 'reject the temptation to use their soldiers to reinforce a dangerous, politically motivated agenda.'
Deploying members of the National Guard from their states to Washington without the request and consent of local authorities, she said in a statement, 'undermines the mission of the National Guard, wastes resources needed for real emergencies and, perhaps worst of all, adds to the divisiveness that already threatens our United States.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
a minute ago
- The Hill
Repealing EPA's endangerment finding will cause a public health nightmare
As America faces increasing health threats from wildfire smoke, summer heat waves and rising cases of asthma and other respiratory illnesses, the last thing we need is to reverse laws that protect U.S. air quality. Yet, that's precisely what the Trump administration intends to do by proposing a repeal of a central scientific finding that serves as the basis for the Clean Air Act — legislation that has saved millions of American lives and been responsible for monumental advancements both to our environment and public health. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin announced last month the agency plans to end a long-held 'endangerment finding' that asserts carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases present a risk to human health. If that happens, it will neutralize the federal government's ability to combat climate change and enforce laws intended to protect America's wellbeing. One of those laws is the Clean Air Act. Enacted in 1970, it has been one of the most successful public health policies in U.S. history. It's credited with reducing six of the most common air pollutants in the U.S. by nearly 80 percent while saving over 230,000 early deaths and avoiding over 120,000 emergency room visits every year. It has reduced chronic bronchitis, infant mortality and prevented millions of cases of asthma exacerbation as well. These statistics aren't conjecture: They're sourced directly from the EPA's own website, the same agency now leading the charge to turn the clock back on these remarkable achievements. Zeldin's announcement claims that the reversal of the endangerment finding will 'undo the underpinning of $1 trillion in costly regulations.' But the positive U.S. economic impact from the Clean Air Act alone far exceeds this figure. By reducing hospital visits, sick days and treatment of costly respiratory-related disease, the EPA estimates the Clean Air Act has created $2 trillion in U.S. economic benefit as of 2020 — twice the amount Zeldin asserts the endangerment finding's repeal would create. Further, clean energy has proven itself to be a source of strong job creation. The Department of Energy found that jobs in renewable energy grew more than twice as fast as the vibrant 2023 U.S labor market. And the science couldn't be clearer: Clean air is critical to public health. 'Decades of research have shown that air pollutants such as ozone and particulate matter increase the amount and seriousness of lung and heart disease and other health problems,' the EPA states. Worse, those pollutants are disproportionately burdened by communities of color. A 2024 Milken Institute of Public Health study found that marginalized communities have eight times the number of pediatric asthma cases and a 30 percent higher chance of dying early from pollution exposure. That same study attributed this inequality to the close proximity many minority communities share with industrial manufacturing facilities. Imagine what those numbers would be if the endangerment finding is reversed and the U.S. can no longer enforce Clean Air Act provisions. Zeldin referred to the EPA action as 'driving a dagger into the heart of the climate change religion,' and that it would be 'the largest deregulatory action in the history of America.' But doing so will only cause greater sickness in America and inundate an already stressed U.S. health care system. Increased exposure to air pollution will result in higher numbers of emergency room visits, increased rates of chronic illness and heightened health care costs. The medical and environmental advocacy community agree greater exposure to carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas is a bad idea. Groups such as the American Lung Association, American Public Health Association, American Thoracic Society, World Wildlife Fund, along with nursing organizations and medical societies all stand in strong opposition to the EPA's proposed action. Zeldin's proposal follows another questionable deregulatory move by the EPA in recent weeks to reintroduce dicamba, a weed killer used on soybeans and cotton. Use of the pesticide was halted by a federal court last year. A 2020 study in the International Journal of Epidemiology found that exposure to dicamba was reportedly 'linked to some cancers, including liver cancer and a type of leukemia affecting the blood and bone marrow.' But the EPA has argued it 'has not identified any human health or dietary risks of concern.' The U.S. government's job is to protect America's citizens. The Clean Air Act has saved millions of lives, safeguarded our skies and proven that environmental laws and economic progress can peacefully coexist. Repealing the endangerment finding will set America on a dangerous path and put the health and welfare of every American at risk.
Gizmodo
a minute ago
- Gizmodo
John Deere Hit With Layoffs Amidst Trump's Idiotic Tariffs
Donald Trump's tariff policies are generating billions of dollars for the federal government by sucking it out of American businesses via import duties. Some companies seem to be feeling downstream impacts from the government's unconventional new policies, and it may even be resulting in job losses for the sort of companies that sell to Trump's base. John Deere, the tractor seller, recently announced a raft of layoffs, but right before doing that, it held an unfortunate earnings call during which executives revealed that the company had seen a downturn in profits. Some of that downturn, the call seemed to suggest, could be credited to the climate of uncertainty created by the administration's tariff regime. The Des Moines Register reports: In its earnings report, the company noted that President Donald Trump's tariffs have added to the woes of farm-equipment makers who already were grappling with slow demand. Farmers are opting to rent machinery instead of buying. 'Tariff uncertainty and deflated commodity prices have made farmers increasingly cautious in spending decisions and more hesitant to accept higher machinery prices,' said CFRA Research analyst Jonathan Sakraida. The New Republic reports that, during the company's recent earnings call, Cory Reed, president of John Deere's Worldwide Agriculture and Turf Division, noted that the tariffs were a factor in buying decisions. 'If you have customers that are concerned about what their end markets are going to look like in a tariff environment, they're waiting to see the outcomes of what these trade deals look like,' Reed said. In other words, once again, demographics that Trump claimed he would help (factory workers and farmers) seem to be getting shafted by his policies. The layoffs at John Deere, which were announced on Aug. 18th, will impact 71 workers at its foundry in Iowa and another 167 workers at various locations in Illinois, the Register writes. While the side effects of Trump's tariff regime haven't been quite as apocalyptic as some analysts initially imagined, the economy isn't doing great, and small business owners are clearly feeling the pain from the new economic order. Indeed, recent lawsuits filed by small businesses against the Trump administration have thrown into question the very legal basis of his policies. As we pointed out earlier this month, if the tariffs are deemed illegal in a court of law, it's likely that the government will have to pay back all of that tariff revenue to the businesses it came from. This would be a terrible humiliation for the White House, a logistical nightmare, and a financial disaster for the federal government. Somehow, it's still sorta funny to imagine it happening.
3 minutes ago
Trump thinks owning a piece of Intel would be a good deal for the US
SAN FRANCISCO -- President Donald Trump wants the U.S. government to own a piece of Intel, less than two weeks after demanding the Silicon Valley pioneer dump the CEO that was hired to turn around the slumping chipmaker. If the goal is realized, the investment would deepen the Trump administration's involvement in the computer industry as the president ramps up the pressure for more U.S. companies to manufacture products domestically instead of relying on overseas suppliers. The Trump administration is in talks to secure a 10% stake in Intel in exchange for converting government grants that were pledged to Intel under President Joe Biden. If the deal is completed, the U.S. government would become one of Intel's largest shareholders and blur the traditional lines separating the public sector and private sector in a country that remains the world's largest economy. In his second term, Trump has been leveraging his power to reprogram the operations of major computer chip companies. The administration is requiring Nvidia and Advanced Micro Devices, two companies whose chips are helping to power the craze around artificial intelligence, to pay a 15% commission on their sales of chips in China in exchange for export licenses. Trump's interest in Intel is also being driven by his desire to boost chip production in the U.S., which has been a focal point of the trade war that he has been waging throughout the world. By lessening the country's dependence on chips manufactured overseas, the president believes the U.S. will be better positioned to maintain its technological lead on China in the race to create artificial intelligence. That's what the president said August 7 in an unequivocal post calling for Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan to resign less than five months after the Santa Clara, California, company hired him. The demand was triggered by reports raising national security concerns about Tan's past investments in Chinese tech companies while he was a venture capitalist. But Trump backed off after Tan professed his allegiance to the U.S. in a public letter to Intel employees and went to the White House to meet with the president, who applauded the Intel CEO for having an 'amazing story.' The company isn't commenting about the possibility of the U.S. government becoming a major shareholder, but Intel may have little choice because it is currently dealing from a position of weakness. After enjoying decades of growth while its processors powered the personal computer boom, the company fell into a slump after missing the shift to the mobile computing era unleashed by the iPhone's 2007 debut. Intel has fallen even farther behind in recent years during an artificial intelligence craze that has been a boon for Nvidia and AMD. The company lost nearly $19 billion last year and another $3.7 billion in the first six months of this year, prompting Tan to undertake a cost-cutting spree. By the end of this year, Tan expects Intel to have about 75,000 workers, a 25% reduction from the end of last year. Although rare, it's not unprecedented for the U.S. government to become a significant shareholder in a prominent company. One of the most notable instances occurred during the Great Recession in 2008 when the government injected nearly $50 billion into General Motors in return for a roughly 60% stake in the automaker at a time it was on the verge of bankruptcy. The government ended up with a roughly $10 billion loss after it sold its stock in GM. U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told CNBC during a Tuesday interview that the government has no intention of meddling in Intel's business, and will have its hands tied by holding non-voting shares in the company. But some analysts wonder if the Trump administration's financial ties to Intel might prod more companies looking to curry favor with the president to increase their orders for the company's chips. Intel was among the biggest beneficiaries of the Biden administration's CHIPS and Science Act, but it hasn't been able to revive its fortunes while falling behind on construction projects spawned by the program. The company has received about $2.2 billion of the $7.8 billion pledged under the incentives program — money that Lutnick derided as a 'giveaway' that would better serve U.S. taxpayers if it's turned into Intel stock. 'We think America should get the benefit of the bargain,' Lutnick told CNBC. 'It's obvious that it's the right move to make.'
