FAA meeting with Pentagon officials as agency considers new restrictions on military helicopter flights near DCA
The Federal Aviation Administration is meeting with Pentagon officials Thursday as the agency is considering slapping new restrictions on military helicopter flights near Reagan National Airport.
'Everything's on the table right now,' FAA Deputy Chief Operating Officer Franklin McIntosh told a hearing of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. McIntosh said that the FAA is now reviewing helicopter flights transporting military officials on non-emergency missions and is discussing 'possible restrictions' with the Department of Defense.
The new moves follow the closure of the helicopter route that was in use at the time of the January 29 midair collision of a US Army Blackhawk helicopter on a training flight and a landing American Airlines regional flight, killing 67 people. On May 1, a helicopter from the same Army unit landing at the Pentagon caused air traffic controllers to order 'immediate go-arounds' for two nearby commercial flights.
The FAA revealed in a congressional hearing Wednesday the 'hotline' between air traffic controllers at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport and the Pentagon, intended to coordinate aircraft, has not worked since March 2022.
After he was grilled by a Senate committee Wednesday, McIntosh insisted to Thursday's House committee hearing that the hotline will be repaired.
'That allows for immediate notification to the controllers,' McIntosh said. 'The issue really is making sure that that hotline is fixed.'
The FAA was not aware the direct line was broken until a May 1 incident where a helicopter circled the Pentagon and caused two flights to abort landings, McIntosh testified Wednesday.
Military flights to the Pentagon have been suspended since the incident and will not resume until the hotline is fixed, McIntosh said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
FAA nominee to face Hill grilling
Presented by With help from Sam Ogozalek and Ry Rivard QUICK FIX — President Donald Trump's pick for FAA administrator, Bryan Bedford, will face senators this week for his confirmation hearing. He's in for some tough questions. — Elon Musk and Trump's public war of words has calmed down (a bit). But Republicans on Capitol Hill fret that the situation could derail the GOP's reconciliation package. — Trump says he won't cut his 25 percent auto tariffs. But that could hamstring trade talks with the EU, Japan and South Korea, who still think the duties are on the table. IT'S MONDAY: You're reading Morning Transportation, your Washington policy guide to everything that moves. We're glad you're here. Send tips, feedback and song lyrics to Sam at sogozalek@ Chris at cmarquette@ and Oriana at opawlyk@ and follow us at @SamOgozalek, @ChrisMarquette_ and @Oriana0214. 'We can leave this world, leave it all behind/We can steal this car if your folks don't mind/We can live forever if you've got the time, oh/I'm the only friend that makes you cry.' Want to receive this newsletter every weekday? Subscribe to POLITICO Pro. You'll also receive daily policy news and other intelligence you need to act on the day's biggest stories. Driving the day FINALLY A HEARING: Bryan Bedford, the Republic Airways executive slated to be the Trump administration's next FAA administrator, will be in the Senate Commerce Committee hot seat. And we expect questions about his past stance on commercial pilot certification requirements and his plans to right the ship at FAA (with fewer employees, thanks to DOGE). Senators will want to hear how he plans to grapple with a host of challenges, namely the first major aviation disaster in nearly two decades. — To recap: Bedford's past positions on pilot training will put him at odds with Democrats especially, who have strongly objected to any changes to a longstanding rule requiring commercial pilots to have 1,500 hours of flight time. Republic Airways in 2022 asked the FAA for an exception to the rule in an attempt to train and get pilots in cockpits at its airline faster, but the FAA rejected the request. (And in general regional airlines have wanted the rules to be relaxed, saying they're crimping pilot supply.) — Not budging: Bedford has met Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), the ranking member on the Senate Commerce aviation panel, on the issue. Afterward, she issued a statement saying whoever heads up the FAA needs to ensure the 1,500-hour rule for pilot training remains in place. — The big ticket: Bedford will no doubt get questions about how he plans to push forward the Trump administration's ambitious plan to fix decades-long air traffic control woes — and he'll likely get some uncomfortable questions about the extent to which the agency's workforce has been hollowed out by resignations and early probationary firings. Expect questions about the concerning outages at Newark Liberty International Airport, as well. On The Hill SECLUDED: Elon Musk is leaving Washington with few political friends that could provide him cover over his businesses, chief among them Tesla — vulnerable to declining sales as the sentiment around electric vehicles continues to plummet. E&E News' David Ferris reports that Musk for months has worked his way to isolate the usual liberal base who once favored his electric cars, and now as he tries to turn more lawmakers away from the GOP megabill, he's whittling out any friends he possibly had in the federal government. TAKING A BEAT: While Musk and President Donald Trump each took a (small) step back from their ongoing public row over the bill — specifically about the legislation's removal of EV tax credits and other incentives — the die nonetheless was cast. Republicans' worry was in full gear by Friday morning that their fight could distract from the president's agenda and derail Congress' 'Big Beautiful Bill.' POLITICO's Congress team got lawmakers' reaction — mostly hoping for a quick detente. TOW COMING?: As of Friday morning, the Tesla Model S Trump showcased back in March on the White House lawn — and also purchased — was still parked there, though The Wall Street Journal reported Trump is considering selling the car, which retails for $80,000. (Fox News, meanwhile, said it was as good as gone). WHAT ELSE IS AT STAKE: Speaking of how Musk's firms could fare amid the ongoing feud, a POLITICO team has you covered on all the ways in which his business empire could take a hit if his fight with Trump escalates. EV/HYBRID FEE ON TAP?: The electric vehicle and hybrid vehicle annual registration fees included in the House-passed reconciliation bill were not in the Senate EPW title or the Senate Commerce title, but they could appear in the bill that comes out of the Senate Finance Committee. Some lawmakers, like Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio) want to make the $250 EV fee and $100 hybrid fee even steeper than the House proposal, but it remains to be seen what actually gets into the bill. SOME SUNLIGHT?: The House is scheduled to consider today a bill by Rep. Troy Nehls (R-Texas), H.R. 188, that would subject Amtrak's board of directors to open meeting requirements. The House Transportation Committee approved it by voice vote in April. Automobiles SEEKING A REPRIEVE: Trump says he won't cut his 25 percent auto tariffs as part of any trade deals he negotiates with other countries — but the EU, Japan and South Korea think those duties are still on the table, according to two people familiar with those talks, Daniel Desrochers and Megan Messerly report. If Trump is unwilling to reduce or nix his car tariffs, it could generate a major obstacle to securing meaningful deals. RESETTING CAFE STANDARDS: NHTSA on Friday published a rule to reset the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) program, a move that would allow it to not consider electric vehicles when outlining fuel economy regulations. It marks the latest effort by the Trump administration to hit against the electric vehicle industry and Democrat-implemented regulations. Opponents of the Biden administration's CAFE standards, including DOT Secretary Sean Duffy and a wide array of other Republicans, contend that the per gallon requirements operate as an electric vehicle mandate. — 'The previous administration illegally used CAFE standards as an electric vehicle mandate – raising new car prices and reducing safety. Resetting CAFE standards as Congress intended will lower vehicle costs and ensure the American people can purchase the cars they want,' Duffy said in a statement. Alex Guillén has the details. RECONCILIATION TIE: The Senate Commerce Committee last week unveiled its part of the reconciliation package that proposes to eliminate penalties on automakers that don't comply with CAFE standards. drones ALL THE BUZZ: Trump on Friday signed two executive orders intended to give the U.S. drone industry a leg up over foreign-made counterparts and to expedite drone and air taxi operations stateside. Oriana has more. KEEP IT U.S.: One provision outlines efforts to expand access to U.S.-manufactured drones and promote them as U.S. exports, in an effort to push federal agencies away from foreign-made drones from companies like China-based DJI that the federal government has said poses privacy or security concerns. — DJI Friday responded to the orders, saying it has 'always supported technically grounded minimum security requirements across all UAS manufacturers, regardless of their country of origin' and that it 'welcomes and embraces opportunities to demonstrate our privacy controls and security features.' Aviation SUPER SPEED: Trump also issued an executive order Friday calling for the FAA to get rid of existing prohibitions on supersonic flight over U.S. land. Oriana has more details. NEWARK FLIGHT LIMIT IN EFFECT: The FAA formally imposed its 28 arrivals and departures per hour limit at Newark on Friday, which puts the restrictions in place during airport construction on weekends from Sept. 1 through Dec. 31. Arrivals and departures won't exceed 34 of each per hour the rest of the time through Oct. 25. TINY JUMP: House Republican appropriators on Sunday unveiled their fiscal 2026 DHS funding bill ahead of a subcommittee markup today. TSA would get a slight bump to $11.2 billion, a less than 1 percent increase compared to current funding. Jennifer Scholtes has the story. DOGE WATCH WE WANT YOU BACK: The Washington Post on Friday reported that DOGE's slash and burn of federal workers is now coming home to roost, with the Trump administration scrambling to get experienced employees back at many agencies stifled with a deeper workload since their colleagues were haphazardly dismissed or pushed to take an early resignation offer. As MT readers recall, Chris and Sam broke down similar movement happening within the halls of DOT. Infrastructure TRUMP FUNDING GATEWAY: The Trump administration is recommending $700 million in the 2026 budget for the Hudson River train tunnel, the $16 billion project to bolster the connection between New York and New Jersey. The funding recommendation by the FTA is a sign that President Donald Trump is no longer attempting to upend the Gateway program, as he did by slow rolling it during his first term. — Elements of the tunnel project are already under construction and employing union workers. According to a recent Regional Plan Association report, the Gateway program could generate 'close to $445 billion in economic benefits' in coming decades. The Autobahn — 'Trump's FAA Pick Once Played a Flight Attendant on TV. It Drew FAA Scrutiny.' The Wall Street Journal. — 'Counting Up the Potential Costs of the Trump-Musk Rift.' The New York Times. — 'Boeing Poised to Restart Jet Handovers to China Amid Trade Spat.' Bloomberg. — 'Trump Has Power, a Big Megaphone and Billions to Spend. So Does Musk.' The New York Times. — 'Trump wants a manufacturing boom. The industry is buckling.' POLITICO. — 'Trump administration says it'll work with state on Long Island traffic crashes.' Newsday. — 'Over the moon: How the Trump-Musk feud helps the lunar mission.' POLITICO. — 'Exclusive: United shuts down Starlink Wi-Fi on regional jets.' The Points Guy. — 'Costco cards good for 'hot dogs & rotisserie chickens,' not airports, TSA says.' USA TODAY. — 'No fatalities reported after skydiving plane crashes in Tennessee, officials say.' CNN. Know of an event we should have on our calendar? Let MT know at transpocalendar@
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
White House struggles to find qualified people willing to work for Pete Hegseth
WASHINGTON — The White House is looking for a new chief of staff and several senior advisers to support Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth after a series of missteps that have shaken confidence in his leadership, but it has so far found no suitable takers, according to four current and former administration officials and a Republican congressional aide. Top Defense Department jobs, including the defense secretary's chief of staff, are normally considered prestigious and typically attract multiple qualified candidates. But at least three people have already turned down potential roles under Hegseth, according to a former U.S. official, the defense official and a person familiar with the matter. Vice President JD Vance and White House chief of staff Susie Wiles have taken an active interest in finding ways to help Hegseth after he abruptly suspended two handpicked senior aides in April, accusing them of leaking classified information in a Fox News interview. Soon afterward, Hegseth announced the removal of his chief of staff on Fox News and a senior press aide resigned, writing later that Hegseth's office was in 'total chaos.' Vance and Wiles have been searching for candidates who could support Hegseth ever since, according to three current U.S. officials and a former U.S. official. So far, though, the administration has not had much luck identifying people who are either willing to work for Hegseth or who fit the bill politically. And the White House has rejected some people Hegseth wants to hire, while Hegseth has rejected some of the White House's candidates. The Pentagon did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Hegseth's allies dismissed the accounts of infighting and said he is a highly effective defense secretary. 'Not a single one of these ridiculous Pentagon palace intrigue stories points to a single thing that's not getting done at the Pentagon because of the alleged 'chaos,'' Arthur Schwartz, a Republican operative with close ties to the Trump administration, said in a statement. 'This is the very definition of manufactured beltway drama that serves no purpose other than to keep reporters of questionable talent employed.' Vance, Wiles and others have looked for job candidates in some of the traditional places, including inside the White House and on Capitol Hill, according to the second former U.S. official, a defense official and a congressional aide. Some candidates have been judged politically problematic, the former U.S. official and others familiar with the process said. For example, the White House personnel office has disqualified some for not being MAGA enough, according to the former U.S. official and a current U.S. official familiar with the process. In addition to trying to assist him with hiring, the White House has taken multiple other steps to help — and manage — Hegseth. 'Vice President Vance has had Secretary Hegseth's back since the day President Trump nominated him, and he fully supports the incredible work Pete's doing at the Pentagon to improve military readiness and drive recruitment numbers to record highs,' Vance spokesman William Martin said in a statement. Another White House official it was typical for the White House to be involved in staffing for key roles across government. Anna Kelly, a spokeswoman for the White House, said Hegseth enjoys 'the full support' of Trump. But last month White House officials directed Hegseth to cancel a trip to the Middle East after they learned he planned a stop in Israel, according to a current and a former official. Instead, they put Hegseth on Air Force One to travel with President Donald Trump, who did not include Israel in his itinerary. A different Cabinet official, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, visited Israel several weeks later and met with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at Trump's request. A person familiar with Hegseth's planning said Noem's trip reflected the White House's desire to have Netanyahu meet with a trusted messenger. When they arrived at the Pentagon early this year, two senior advisers to Hegseth, Dan Caldwell and Darin Selnick, were seen as his close allies — previous colleagues of his, even friends, whom he had brought in to staff key roles. Caldwell was a senior adviser to Hegseth; Selnick was Hegseth's deputy chief of staff. But in April, security escorted Caldwell and Selnick, as well as Colin Carroll, the chief of staff to Deputy Defense Secretary Stephen Feinberg, out of the Pentagon in connection with an investigation into allegations of a leak of sensitive information. In a joint statement, the three men called the way were treated 'unconscionable' and argued that they were not given any information about the investigation, any leak allegations against them or any evidence that had been found. A little less than a week later, the turmoil around Hegseth worsened. The New York Times reported that he had shared sensitive information about an ongoing U.S. military operation in Yemen on a Signal chat that included his wife, his personal attorney and his brother, along with others close to him. The revelation came a month after national security adviser Mike Waltz mistakenly added the editor of The Atlantic to a separate Signal group chat with Hegseth, Vance and other senior administration officials focused on the same military operation in Yemen. Two days after the Times' story was published, Hegseth went on Fox News and accused Caldwell, Selnick and Carroll not only of leaking information while they were employed at the Pentagon, but also of having given the paper the information about the Signal chat. Hegseth did not publicly describe the evidence against them. The drama continued in May when White House officials removed Hegseth and his personal attorney, Tim Parlatore, also a Navy official, from overseeing the investigations into the three suspended aides, according to a current official and a person familiar with the probe. White House officials shifted responsibility for the probe to the deputy defense secretary, Stephen Feinberg, with whom such an investigation would normally reside. That move, according to two sources familiar with the investigation, was a sign that there is a growing lack of confidence in Hegseth's ability to objectively oversee the investigation of his former aides. After no evidence against the former aides emerged and it became increasingly clear that the three men were not guilty of leaking, administration officials began to question whether their firings had been hasty, two former administration officials and a current official said. Infighting among the Hegseth advisers who remain continued, meanwhile, according to the defense official and a former administration official. And Hegseth himself remains largely isolated, relying on a small group of advisers, the defense official said. Hegseth now leans heavily on a former military aide, Ricky Buria, who retired from the military in April hoping he could serve as Hegseth's chief of staff, a civilian position. But White House and Pentagon officials view Buria as a political novice who had reportedly been critical of Trump and Vance in private. (A Defense Department spokesman did not respond to a request for comment from Buria.) As a result, White House officials rejected Hegseth's plan to hire Buria as his chief of staff, one of the defense officials and an administration official said. Despite that, Buria was seen with Hegseth during his recent trip to Asia in a workout video posted on social media. Since Hegseth joined the administration in January, he has had successes. He expunged diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, programs from the Pentagon and the military services. Recruiting, particularly in the Army, is up on his watch, continuing a trend that began before Trump's inauguration but gained strength under Hegseth, according to Trump administration officials. And during his recent trip to Asia, Hegseth was seen as effective in messaging to Beijing to stop any potential aggression in the region, according to current and former administration officials. At the same time, the turmoil in Hegseth's front office has contributed to setbacks. The infighting helped delay plans for 'Golden Dome,' Trump's signature missile defense program to defend the U.S. homeland, officials said. It has also contributed to the lack of a Pentagon budget, which raised frustrations among Republicans on Capitol Hill, many of whom supported Hegseth in his tight confirmation battle. Hegseth also approved a China briefing for Elon Musk that included highly sensitive information that Trump canceled after he found about it, according to The New York Times. Trump and Hegseth denied the account, but a former and a current official said Hegseth's misstep affected Trump's view of Hegseth. Hegseth's role in the use of Signal to share sensitive military information remains a problem for him, and it is likely to resurface soon. A Pentagon inspector general report, which is likely to be completed within weeks, is expected to conclude that Hegseth shared classified information on the Signal chat, according to multiple officials. Some administration officials, including Vance and his aides, worry that the results of the investigation will further weaken Hegseth, according to a current administration and a former administration official. Hegseth's allies predict that his tenure will continue. This article was originally published on
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Would Trump and Hegseth Have Protesters Be Shot? See What They've Said
If you'd somehow forgotten what Donald Trump said to top military aides in June 2020 about the people gathered in Washington's Lafayette Park protesting the shooting of George Floyd, now seems like a good time to remember. Former Defense Secretary Mark Esper said in many interviews while promoting his book in 2022 that, during a White House meeting to discuss the protests, Trump turned to Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mark Milley and asked: 'Can't you just shoot them, just shoot them in the legs or something?' Naturally, Esper and Milley were both aghast. But now fast forward to this past January, and the confirmation hearing of current Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. As fate would have it, Hegseth was among the National Guard troops deployed by Trump to quell those George Floyd protests. Democratic Senator Mazie Hirono of Hawaii asked Hegseth about that day, and how he might handle a similar situation were he the Pentagon chief. Per The Washington Post at the time: 'In June of 2020, then-President Trump directed former secretary of defense Mark Esper to shoot protesters in the legs in downtown D.C., an order Secretary Esper refused to comply with,' Hirono said. 'Would you carry out such an order from President Trump?' 'Senator, I was in the Washington, D.C., National Guard unit that was in Lafayette Square during those events,' Hegseth replied, 'carrying a riot shield on behalf of my country.' … As Hegseth was describing his experience, Hirono pressed the point: 'Would you carry out an order to shoot protesters in the legs as directed to Secretary Esper?' 'I saw 50 Secret Service agents get injured by rioters trying to jump over the fence,' Hegseth continued, 'set a church on fire and destroy a statue. Chaos.' 'That sounds to me that you will comply with such an order,' Hirono concluded. 'You will shoot protesters in the leg.' The Post's droll next sentence? 'Hegseth didn't reject her conclusion.' Watch this video, starting at about 3:30; at exactly 4:02, Hegseth had a clear opportunity to say, 'No, Senator, I can't imagine ordering that.' He didn't take it. This, remember, is the same Hegseth who tweeted over the weekend about possibly calling in the Marines. Oh, while we're recalling stuff, it behooves us to recall this: During a 2023 campaign rally, Trump was talking about those Lafayette Square protests when he said this: 'You're supposed to not be involved in that, you just have to be asked by the governor or the mayor to come in—the next time, I'm not waiting.' I'm no math whiz, but I'm pretty sure I can add all that up. It equals the very real possibility that somewhere down the dark road ahead of us, under orders of the president of the United States, U.S. soldiers might open fire on U.S. citizens, along with possibly other civilians who don't happen to be U.S. citizens. The idea of the military firing on civilians on American soil seems impossible to imagine, something more akin to a totalitarian dictatorship or a rogue state. But the idea of U.S. soldiers firing on U.S. citizens exercising a constitutional right they've secured simply by being born is beyond incomprehensible. But today, under this president and this Defense secretary, there seems a better than remote chance that this is where we're headed. I hope people allow what's happening in Los Angeles to de-escalate. No one should give up the right to peaceful protest, of course. But everyone should be mindful that Trump and Hegseth, and Tom Homan and Stephen Miller and JD Vance, are just waiting for an excuse to invoke the Insurrection Act. Homan, the border czar, said over the weekend: 'You're going to see more work site enforcement than you've ever seen in the history of this nation. We're going to flood the zone.' That means more protests, which means more confrontations, which means many more opportunities even for something to happen either by intention or even perhaps by accident. Once we're down the Insurrection Act road, there's no telling where this leads. It's not an accident, by the way, that JD Vance called what happened in L.A. an 'insurrection'; labeling it as such makes it easier to invoke the Insurrection Act, whose Section 253, passed into law in 1871 when the Ku Klux Klan was terrorizing people, allows the president to suppress 'any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy' in a state that 'opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.' Vance undoubtedly used the word to troll us about January 6. But there's also a legal rationale for using it. Presidents have invoked the act in the past and our democracy survived just fine. That said, the reasons for those invocations have always been specific, the durations, short. Now, our concern is that if Trump decides that Blue State X isn't enforcing the law in the way he wants it enforced, he will call the lawlessness an insurrection, and then do who knows what, for who knows how long. And finally, get a load of this, which Insurrection Act expert Joseph Nunn wrote about last year in Democracy journal (which I also edit): 'Because the Insurrection Act refers simply to 'the militia,' and not specifically to the National Guard or the organized militia, a president could, in theory, use it to call private individuals into federal service—including members of the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, and other private militias.' Nunn notes Oath Keepers leader Stewart Rhodes used this interpretation of the act in his defense at his trial. No wonder that Nunn calls the Insurrection Act 'a nuclear bomb hidden in the United States Code.' Donald Trump won the election. A narrow majority backs his immigration policies (although support drops when people learn more specific facts about how they're being carried out). Those of us who opposed his election and oppose his immigration policies have to live with this democratic verdict. Our recourse is to do everything we can to make sure the next democratic verdict (assuming there is one) repudiates the man and his policies. But this is not about immigration policies. This is about the use of state power against the people of the United States, or at least the ones he doesn't like. And now, potentially, it's about the state doing violence against those people. Again: We have a president who said 'Next time, I'm not waiting,' and a Defense Secretary who refused to deny that he'd allow soldiers to shoot protestors. To some, it all sounded theoretical a year ago and was often waved away as an especially fevered manifestation of Trump Derangement Syndrome. Well, it's not so theoretical anymore. All we have to do is pay attention to what they said—or didn't say.
