logo
Kristi Noem is living free of charge in Coast Guard commandant's home

Kristi Noem is living free of charge in Coast Guard commandant's home

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi L. Noem is living for free in a military home typically reserved for the U.S. Coast Guard's top admiral, officials familiar with the matter said. The highly unusual arrangement has raised concern within the agency and from some Democrats, who describe it as a waste of military resources.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

West Virginia sends hundreds of National Guard members to Washington at Trump team's request
West Virginia sends hundreds of National Guard members to Washington at Trump team's request

Yahoo

time26 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

West Virginia sends hundreds of National Guard members to Washington at Trump team's request

West Virginia sends hundreds of National Guard members to Washington at Trump team's request WASHINGTON (AP) — Hundreds of West Virginia National Guard members will deploy across the nation's capital as part of the Trump administration's effort to overhaul policing in the District of Columbia through a federal crackdown on crime and homelessness. Gov. Patrick Morrisey, announced Saturday that he was sending a contingent of 300 to 400 to nearby Washington at the Republican administration's request. They will arrive in the district along with equipment and specialized training services, his office said in a statement. 'West Virginia is proud to stand with President Trump in his effort to restore pride and beauty to our nation's capital,' Morrisey said. 'The men and women of our National Guard represent the best of our state, and this mission reflects our shared commitment to a strong and secure America.' The move comes as federal agents and National Guard troops have begun to appear across the heavily Democratic city after Trump's executive order Monday federalizing local police forces and activating about 800 D.C. National Guard troops. By adding outside troops to join the existing National Guard deployment and federal law enforcement officers temporarily assigned to Washington, the administration is exercising even tighter control over the city. It's a power play that the president has justified as an emergency response to crime and homelessness, even though district officials have noted that violent crime is lower than it was during Trump's first term in office. The West Virginia activation also suggests the administration sees the need for additional manpower, after the president personally played down the need for Washington to hire more police officers. Maj. Gen. James Seward, West Virginia's adjutant general, said in a statement that members of the state's National Guard 'stand ready to support our partners in the National Capital Region' and that the Guard's 'unique capabilities and preparedness make it an invaluable partner in this important undertaking.' Federal agents have appeared in some of the city's most highly trafficked neighborhoods, garnering a mix of praise, pushback and alarm from local residents and leaders across the country. City leaders, who are obliged to cooperate with the president's order under the federal laws that direct the district's local governance, have sought to work with the administration though have bristled at the scope of the president's takeover. On Friday the administration reversed course on an order that aimed to place the head of the Drug Enforcement Administration as an 'emergency police commissioner' after the district's top lawyer sued to contest. After a court hearing, Trump's attorney general, Pam Bond, issued a memo that directed the Metropolitan Police Department to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement regardless of any city law. District officials say they are evaluating how to best comply. In his order Monday, Trump declared an emergency due to the 'city government's failure to maintain public order.' He said that impeded the 'federal government's ability to operate efficiently to address the nation's broader interests without fear of our workers being subjected to rampant violence.' In a letter to city residents, Mayor Muriel Bowser, a Democrat, wrote that 'our limited self-government has never faced the type of test we are facing right now." She added that if Washingtonians stick together, 'we will show the entire nation what it looks like to fight for American democracy -– even when we don't have full access to it.' ___ Associated Press writer Josh Boak contributed to this report. Matt Brown And Mike Pesoli, The Associated Press

"This government is anti-union and anti-worker": CUPE NS Denounces Use of Bill 107
"This government is anti-union and anti-worker": CUPE NS Denounces Use of Bill 107

Yahoo

time26 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

"This government is anti-union and anti-worker": CUPE NS Denounces Use of Bill 107

HALIFAX, Nova Scotia, August 16, 2025--(BUSINESS WIRE)--CUPE Nova Scotia strongly condemns the federal government's decision to interfere in workers' right to collective bargaining and job action by invoking Section 107 of the Canada Labour Code. "Clearly, this government is anti-union and anti-worker," said Alan Linkletter, CUPE Nova Scotia President. "Forcing workers back on the job instead of supporting free and fair collective negotiations directly contradictions workers' rights that are guaranteed under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms." Air Canada has asked the government to crush striking workers' Charter rights, and Federal Labour minister Patty Hajdu is ready to deliver. Hajdu announced that the federal government will be invoking Section 107 at a press conference this afternoon, citing the financial welfare of Canadians and the economy at large as a deciding factor for this decision. "She says this move is for the financial security of Canadians—are these workers not Canadians? Does their welfare not matter? How can you be financially secure when you don't even get paid for all of the hours you work?" Contrary to the Minister's remarks, this will not ensure labour peace in Canada. This will only push this fight onto the next group of workers in negotiations, while Air Canda's flight attendants continue to work for a billion-dollar company for free. Flight attendants are only paid when the plane is moving, and work as many as 35 unpaid hours a month performing vital duties that ensure the safe and smooth operation of each flight. Now, instead of paying flight attendants for all the hours they work, Air Canada has clearly sought help from the federal government to continue exploiting their employees. "Minister Hajdu's comments indicate a clear lack of respect for workers' rights," said Sherry Hillier, President of CUPE Newfoundland and Labrador and National General Vice President for Atlantic Canada. "By using Section 107 to force workers back on the job yet again, they're setting a pattern. And that pattern is that Liberals don't care about Canadians." Recent polling data indicates that 9 out of 10 Canadians support Air Canada flight attendants' fight for fair pay. 88% per cent of Canadians believe flight attendants should be paid for all work-related duties including boarding, delays, and safety checks. 76% support raising their pay to reflect the important safety role they play. 59% believe the federal government should respect flight attendants' right to take job action–even if it causes travel disruptions. CUPE represents over 10,000 Air Canada flight attendants across the country, and workers have been demonstrating at Halifax Stanfield International Airport since 6AM. "Messages of support have been pouring in for these workers from across the country," continued Linkletter. "Canadians stand with us. Our elected representatives should, too." View source version on Contacts Sherry HillierPresident, CUPE Newfoundland & LabradorNational General Vice President, CUPE Atlantic and Maritimes regions709-765-2996 Alan LinkletterPresident, CUPE Nova Scotiapresident@ Taylor JohnstonCUPE Atlantic Communications Representativetjohnston@ Haseena ManekCUPE Atlantic Communications Representativehmanek@ Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

Amid bitter partisanship, permitting reform is a golden opportunity for bipartisanship
Amid bitter partisanship, permitting reform is a golden opportunity for bipartisanship

The Hill

time27 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Amid bitter partisanship, permitting reform is a golden opportunity for bipartisanship

With states now fighting over redistricting maps, America's two political parties will need an opportunity to work together again. Permitting reform is one issue that is just right for this, even amidst an apparent trifecta. Strengthening American energy production has long been a bipartisan issue, as it fosters economic growth, protects national security, and increases the energy supply to drive down or stabilize utility costs for U.S. households in the face of growing demand. There has never been a better time for it. Done right, it secures American global leadership for another century. While recent debates around tax credits have made this issue seem increasingly partisan, reforming our existing energy permitting process is something on which lawmakers on both sides of the aisle largely already agree. Congress should capitalize on consensus to pass comprehensive permitting reform legislation. Debates surrounding energy tax credits in the One Big, Beautiful Bill Act, in particular, brought energy production back into the spotlight this year. Reconciliation can leave bitter feelings, but permitting reform has a chance to offer both parties something they dearly want — energy dominance, reduced emissions, fewer arcane rules, and less back and forth political games undermining the development of new energy projects. All energy production would benefit from permitting reform. America's permitting system should be a gateway for energy projects. Right now, it's a bottleneck. Unpredictable processes and delays in approval are bringing new developments to a grinding halt. With the rise of AI and a digital world that increasingly relies on data centers, global energy demand has spiked. Congress is now tasked with ensuring that American energy production can keep pace with this demand and not fall behind foreign adversaries vying for our position as the global leader in innovation and technology. But as of late, lawmakers have remained stagnant on addressing permitting reform. Yet, while demand for all energy production is on the rise, Democrats have a lot less to fear from loosening rules than they may think. The vast majority of projects stuck in grid connection queues are renewable — over 95 percent of proposed new generation capacity is solar or wind. Much-needed reform to the approval process could free up all new projects, strengthen American energy dominance and unleash clean energy all at once. Permitting reform has long been a bipartisan issue. Last year, Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), then-ranking member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, and then-Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Joe Manchin ( introduced the Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024 aimed at streamlining and expediting the approvals process. While this legislation was not ultimately passed, it is a prime example of members reaching across the aisle to drive movement on this front. Most recently, a bipartisan group of governors made an urgent call for permitting reform. 'It shouldn't take longer to approve a project than it takes to build it,' said Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt (R). He also highlighted the bipartisan nature of the issue, 'Democrats and Republicans alike recognize permitting delays weaken U.S. economic growth, security and competitiveness. Governors from both parties are working together to inject some common sense into our permitting process.' Voters in both parties agree. Recent polling conducted by Cygnal found that two-thirds of respondents agree that Congress should modernize permitting rules to accelerate completion of energy projects and reduce long-term cost pressures. Some conservative stalwarts will never support anything they see as helping clean energy, while some environmental activists are more concerned with punishing fossil fuel companies than they are with actually addressing climate change. These short-sighted visions represent the horseshoe of scarcity, decline and pessimism that has plagued American energy politics for decades. They believe we can succeed only by taking from the other side. America cannot afford delay. A dangerous world requires energy dominance in all industries, including new ones like clean energy. Moreover, Americans deserve to know that they will have reliable, accessible energy needed to power their businesses and residences. Permitting reform will make energy access more reliable, more abundant, cheaper and much cleaner. All Americans, and our planet, will win. The only losers will be those profiteering from political polarization. With some energy tax credits phasing out sooner than originally planned, many energy producers want to act swiftly to get new projects up and running. The permitting process, as it stands, is their biggest obstacle. As we head into the fall, our lawmakers should keep the cross-partisan opportunity on permitting reform top of mind. Liam deClive-Lowe is the co-founder of American Policy Ventures, an organization that builds projects to help policymakers collaborate and get things done.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store