Bipartisan proposal would make looting a felony during disasters
The Law On Offender Transgressions during Emergencies and Recovery (LOOTER) Act — drafted by Rep. Jimmy Panetta (D-Calif.) — would make petty larceny during a natural disaster punishable by up to one year in prison, while grand larceny would be punishable by up to five years.
The bill, details of which were shared first with The Hill, seeks to 'safeguard residents from criminal exploitation,' which has become increasingly common in the aftermaths of disasters across the country, according to Panetta's office.
'As a former prosecutor, I've seen firsthand how looting during emergencies only deepens the suffering of disaster victims,' Panetta said in a statement, noting his district has experienced devastation related to wildfires and floods.
'The LOOTER Act would ensure that those who prey on communities during times of crisis face serious consequences under federal law.'
'Our bipartisan legislation is critical to better protecting disaster-stricken communities, supporting our local law enforcement partners, and sending a clear message that if you loot during a disaster, you will be held accountable,' he added.
Panetta is leading the effort with Reps. Aaron Bean (R-Fla.), Tom Suozzi (D-N.Y.) and Troy Nehls (R-Texas).
Nehls, a former county sheriff, said in a statement that his district is 'prone to natural disasters' and has seen its fair share of devastation.
'When Hurricane Harvey hit, I served as Sheriff of Fort Bend County, Texas, and know all too well how natural disasters leave people and their property vulnerable, especially to crime,' Nehls said.
'This bill ensures accountability for those who take advantage of disaster and ensures justice for those who might fall victim to these low-life crimes,' he added.
The bill's introduction comes ahead of what federal forecasters recently predicted will be an unusually heavy hurricane season. Atlantic hurricane season officially runs from June 1 to Nov. 30, and forecasters expect three to five major hurricanes this season.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Trump to patrol DC streets with police and military
President Trump said he plans to go out on patrol with the Metropolitan Police Department and National Guard troops around Washington, D.C., on Thursday night amid a federal crackdown on crime. 'I'm going to be going out tonight, I think, with the police and with the military, of course. So we're going to do a job,' Trump told conservative radio host Todd Starnes on his show. 'The National Guard is great. They've done a fantastic job.' A White House official told The Hill that details of what Trump would be doing were forthcoming. The Trump administration earlier this month began surging federal law enforcement across parts of the District to crack down on what the White House said was an unacceptable level of crime, despite statistics showing violent crime has declined in the city. Last week, Trump took federal control of the Metropolitan Police Department and deployed hundreds of National Guard troops across the city to further the crack down on crime. White House officials said earlier Thursday that there had been more than 600 total arrests made since federal officers were deployed around the city on Aug. 7. Of those, 251 were arrests of immigrants in the country illegally, the White House said. Critics of Trump's aggressive crackdown across D.C. have pointed to statistics that show the city's violent crime rate fell in 2024 and is down again 2025. And some local residents have expressed their disapproval, protesting federal officers stationed in their neighborhoods. A Washington Post-Schar School poll of 604 D.C. residents published Wednesday found 65 percent do not think Trump's actions will make the city safer. Roughly 80 percent of residents said they opposed Trump's executive order to federalize the city's police department. But White House officials have been adamant that statistics do not accurately capture the state of crime and decay in the nation's capital. Vice President Vance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller met with National Guard troops at Union Station on Wednesday to thank them for their work. The officials were greeted with protests at the transportation hub, which Miller mocked. 'We're going to ignore these stupid white hippies that all need to go home and take a nap because they're all over 90 years old,' he said. 'And we're going to get back to the business of protecting the American people and the citizens of Washington, D.C.'
WIRED
an hour ago
- WIRED
Trump Is Betting Big on Intel. Will the Chips Fall His Way?
Aug 21, 2025 1:04 PM The Trump administration is aiming to take an equity stake in Intel, according to US commerce secretary Howard Lutnick. Experts say the unconventional deal could backfire. Photograph: Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/Getty Images The US government is aiming to take an equity stake in Intel in exchange for grants the company was already committed to receive under the Biden era CHIPS Act, according to comments US commerce secretary Howard Lutnick made in an interview with CNBC. The move is part of the government's efforts to boost US chip manufacturing. 'We should get an equity stake for our money, so we'll deliver the money which was already committed under the Biden administration,' Lutnick said. 'We'll get equity in return for it.' Previously, the government was discussing taking a 10 percent stake in Intel, according to the New York Times . The deal could help the venerable chipmaker fund its US-based semiconductor fabrication plants, or fabs, which have required billions of dollars to construct and maintain, even as demand for Intel chips has waned in recent years. Some chip industry experts and members of the Trump administration say that keeping Intel afloat is essential to US national security, because it lessens the country's reliance on chipmakers overseas. But analysts and one notable economist say a potential tie-up between Intel and the US government could present a conflict of interest, and may not result in the kind of domestic chip-making industry the administration is angling for. 'It's not the right policy to have the US government own things, to have privatization in reverse,' says Stephen Moore, a visiting fellow at The Heritage Foundation and a former senior economic advisor to Trump's 2016 campaign. 'That's similar to Europe's industrial model, and we haven't done that often here in the US because a lot of it ends up failing.' Government Intervention The US government has some history of investing in the private sector. Moore cites a 1980s program called the Synthetic Fuels Corporation, a federally-directed multibillion dollar investment in companies producing liquid fuels from coal, oil shale, and tar sands. It was hailed by President Jimmy Carter as 'the cornerstone of our energy policy,' and had fallen apart by 1986. Then, in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, the US government stepped in with multibillion dollar bailouts to stop US automakers and some banks from going under. Those funds were issued either through the Troubled Asset Relief Program, in which the US Treasury Department bought up or guaranteed toxic assets, or in the form of bridge loans. Many were eventually repaid. More recently, the Department of Defense agreed to fund a US-based rare earth magnet company, MP Materials, via equity and loans, in order to expand production and decrease the country's reliance on China. The deal would in theory give MP Materials the capital to increase its manufacturing capacity from 3,000 to 10,000 metric tons. Moore says the ideal scenario is that these arrangements between the government and private industry have an endpoint. 'It should be an agreement to own a short-term stake, and then divest,' he says. But the current Trump administration has been taking some of these public-private business dealings a step further: In June, the administration approved a partnership between Japanese steel company Nippon Steel and Pittsburgh-based US Steel, dependent on a national security agreement and a so-called 'golden share' provision. The government insisted that it have a say in US Steel's company decisions, including board appointees and future relocation plans. (This deal was also designed to help the US compete with China on steel production.) Lutnick told CNBC that, in the case of Intel, the Trump administration would not get a voting stake or a say in the company's operations. 'Intel is deeply committed to supporting President Trump's efforts to strengthen US technology and manufacturing leadership,' Intel spokesperson Cory Pforzheimer said in a statement to WIRED. 'We look forward to continuing our work with the Trump Administration to advance these shared priorities, but we are not going to comment on rumors or speculation.' The US Department of Commerce did not respond to questions from WIRED prior to publication. Political Theater Patrick Moorhead, a longtime semiconductor industry analyst and CEO of the research firm Moor Insights & Strategy, says the deal could benefit Intel in the short term. 'It means Intel gets its cash without a bunch of strings attached,' he says. So far, the company has received $2.2 billion of up to the $7.86 billion it was granted through the 2022 CHIPS Act— $1.1 billion in the first quarter of 2024 and another $1.1 billion in January 2025. But these grants are tied to milestones around fabrication construction and output; if Intel doesn't reach its goals, it doesn't receive CHIPS Act funding. The company has also far outspent the $2.2 billion of grant payments in fab construction and research and development over the same time period. Intel is currently valued at $101 billion, a steep decline from its heyday in the early 2000s. Earlier this week, Softbank announced it's buying roughly $2 billion worth of Intel shares, which briefly boosted the chip firm's stock price. Intel went through a major shakeup in executive leadership this year. In December 2024, Intel announced the retirement of CEO Pat Gelsinger, a chip industry veteran, after he struggled to turn around the company's fortunes. Lip-Bu Tan, the longtime previous CEO of the electronics design firm Cadence Design Systems, succeeded Gelsinger as chief executive. Insiders describe Gelsinger's tenure as an expensive one, in which the company invested heavily in building cutting edge technology and fabs. Over the last five years, Intel invested $107.5 billion in capital expenditures and $78.8 billion in R&D expenditures, the vast majority of which were dedicated to expanding its US manufacturing capacity. Tan, in contrast, is more measured, and has told employees that Intel's investment in its newest chip node will be based on 'confirmed customer commitments,' adding that 'there are no more blank checks.' Since he took over, Intel announced it was cancelling plans for chip-making plants in Germany and Poland and slowing down construction of an Ohio fab. Intel also plans to lay off 15 percent of its workforce this year. Tan got caught in the crosshairs of the Trump administration earlier this month: In reaction to a letter from Arkansas senator Tom Cotton flagging Tan's ties to investments that reportedly have links to the Chinese People's Liberation Army, Trump called on the CEO to resign from Intel. Less than a week later Trump met with Tan and began praising the CEO. Moorhead believes that it's essential for the US to support Intel so that the country has a thriving domestic chipmaker with research and development teams in close proximity to its fabs. He points out that even as TSMC builds out its US fab in Arizona, its research and development efforts still happen in Taiwan, and its top manufacturing engineers are kept close to home. For this reason and others, Moorhead says, even if the US government begins funneling money into US semiconductors, it might lag behind in staffing domestic fabs with top talent. Many questions remain: whether the deal with Intel will actually go through, if the administration plans to convert existing CHIPS Act grants to Intel into an equity investment or invest some other way, and whether the US government might try to coerce tech companies into buying more Intel chips. Money from Softbank and the US government might help Intel's balance sheet in the short term, but the company still needs to secure big customers. Until some of those questions are answered, Moorhead says, this proposed investment doesn't accomplish much. 'It's more political theater than anything else,' he explains. 'I think what it accomplishes is it gives the Trump administration the ability to say, 'What Biden did was a giveaway, and I'm making deals,'' he adds.
Los Angeles Times
3 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
The U.S. and EU release a bare-bones account of their trade deal, but it's a work in progress
American and European Union officials released a bare-bones account Thursday of their trade deal that imposes a 15% import tax on 70% of European goods exported to the United States, but they left blank key areas such as wine and spirits, as well as steel and indicated that talks would continue on those and a slew of other important sectors. The two sides said the document was only 'a first step in a process that can be further expanded to cover additional areas.' They are dealing with the vast range of goods traded between the two economies in what is the largest bilateral trading relationship in the world, involving $2 trillion in annual trans-Atlantic business. The 3 1/2-page text represents a political commitment and is not legally binding. It contrasts with the typical format for trade agreements, which can be hundreds of pages long and carry legal force. The key provisions are the 15% tariff on most EU goods, a zero rate on U.S. cars and other industrial goods exported to the 27-member EU, and a range of exceptions to the 15% rate for aircraft and aircraft parts, generic pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients, with other sectors to be added for goods crucial to each other's economies. Those goods would face lower tariffs from before President Donald Trump's tariff onslaught. 'The EU has agreed to open its $20 Trillion market,' Trump's commerce secretary, Howard Lutnick, said on X. 'The second largest in the world behind the great USA.' He said the deal was 'a major win for American workers, US industries, and our national security. Tariffs should be one of America's favorite words.' European officials have had to defend the deal against dismay from businesses and member governments at the higher tariffs and criticism that the EU gave away too much. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen sold the deal as granting quick relief from the even higher U.S. tariff on EU cars of 27.5% and as opening the way for further negotiations that could exclude more goods from the 15% tariffs. The deal provides that the lower tariff on cars would apply retroactively from Aug. 1 if the EU can introduce legislation to implement its part of the deal by then, which EU officials say they will do. 'Faced with a challenging situation, we have delivered for our member states and industry and restored clarity and coherence to transatlantic trade,' von der Leyen said. 'This is not the end of the process.' The chief EU trade negotiator, Maros Sefcovic, echoed those sentiments. 'The alternative was a trade war with sky high tariffs ... it builds confidence. It brings stability,' he said. Economists say higher tariffs slow economic growth and will be reflected in higher consumer prices. One category of goods not excluded from tariffs on EU goods was wine and spirits, which had enjoyed zero tariffs on both ends since a 1997 trade deal. Sefcovic, said EU officials had not won an exemption 'yet' but hoped to in future talks and that 'doors are not closed forever' on that issue. That means American distillers face zero tariffs in Europe the short term, but also the possibility of EU retaliation down the line, said Chris Swonger, president and CEO of the Distilled Spirits Council of the United States. 'Without a permanent return to zero-for-zero tariffs on spirits, American distillers do not have the certainty to plan for future export and job growth without the fear of retaliatory tariffs returning,' Swonger said in a statement. The EU has suspended retaliatory tariffs on US goods, including wine and spirits, until Feb. 5, 2026. Proposals to exempt a certain amount of EU steel imports, known as a tariff rate quota, have been left unresolved pending more talks. The 15% tariff is much higher than tariff levels on both sides from before Trump began imposing his tariffs, when they averaged in the low single digits. The tariffs are paid on the U.S. end, either absorbed by American businesses importing the goods, lowering their profits, or passed on to U.S. consumers in the form of higher prices at the cash register. The deal also includes nonbinding EU commitments to purchase $750 billion in U.S. energy and for EU companies to invest $600 billion in the U.S. In both cases, the money would come from private companies and is based on an assessment by the European Commission on what companies were planning to spend. McNeil, McHugh and Hussein write for the Associated Press.
