Latest news with #MorganGriffith
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Griffith likes budget bill, wants 3-judge panel to oversee injunctions
bluefield – U.S. Rep. Morgan Griffith, R-Va., admits there is no such thing as a perfect bill. But he believes there is much to like in the so-called 'Big, Beautiful Bill' recently passed by the U.S. House of Representatives. Griffith, who represents Virginia's Ninth Congressional District in the House, spoke on a wide range of issues during a visit to the Daily Telegraph, including the budget bill and the growing debate over whether district court judges have the power to block much of President Donald Trump's agenda. In recent months, district court judges have issued injunctions blocking many of Trump's executive orders. Those injunctions will eventually make their way to the U.S. Supreme Court, according to Griffith. But until then Griffith said legislation already passed by the Republican-controlled House — and awaiting action in the Republican-controlled U.S. Senate — would address the issue of judicial overreach. That bill would establish a three-judge panel that would consider any nationwide injunction. 'We passed it out of the House a month and a half ago,' Griffith said of the proposed legislation. 'It's sitting in the body of the Senate. It's hard to predict what the Senate will do. They may or may not move it forward.' Using Southwest Virginia as an example, Griffith said a district court judge in the Western District of Virginia shouldn't be able to issue a nationwide injunction blocking the actions of the President of the United States. Griffith said the district court should be making local decisions that impact Bluefield, Va., Richlands and Roanoke Va. — three cities that are located in the Western District — but should not be empowered to issue a nationwide injunction blocking a presidential order. Under the proposed legislation, Griffith said a component of the U.S. Supreme Court would select three judges at random that would consider any cases involving a nationwide injunction of a presidential order. 'I think it gets you a better decision,' Griffith said of a three-judge panel. 'You should have more than one judge making that decision.' As it stands now, Griffith said those who are seeking nationwide injunctions also are seeking out district court judges that they think may be more favorable to their viewpoint. By having a component of the Supreme Court to select three judges at random, it helps to ensure there will be no inherent biases in any decisions that are rendered, according to Griffith. Griffith also talked about the federal budget bill recently passed by the U.S. House, and its chances of remaining intact in the U.S. Senate. 'The bill is not perfect,' Griffith said. 'There is things in the bill I don't like, particularly the SALT tax increase.' The debate over the SALT tax surrounds the cap on federal deductions for state and local taxes. The House passed a bill increasing the cap to $40,000. But some conservatives argue the move is essentially a federal subsidy for blue states at the expense of red states. Griffith said the citizens of Southwest Virginia don't support providing a tax break to California or New York. 'In the Senate, there are not senators who represent SALT states,' Griffith said. 'So will the Senate pull SALT out? I think they will pass something similar to what we passed, or nothing at all.' Parts of the budget bill that Griffith said he likes includes taking the tax off tips and taking the tax off hourly wage overtime. The bill also includes a provision to help with the development of coal, natural gas and nuclear facilities. Griffith described it as a 'revolving loan fund' that would provide protection to those developers if a future Democrat-led administration is elected and orders those coal, natural gas and nuclear facilities to be closed. Griffith said Democrats also continue to misrepresent the work requirement for abled-bodied adults in Medicaid and those cuts that are proposed for Medicaid over a 10-year period in the budget bill. According to Griffith, the traditional Medicaid population consists of individuals with disabilities, pregnant mothers, children and seniors. He said the work requirements in the reconciliation budget bill do not apply to this traditional Medicaid population. The work requirement in Medicaid expansion would only apply to able-bodied people aged 19-64 who do not have a young child, a disabled person or an elderly relative in need of care living in the home, according to Griffith. Griffith said the bill requires these able-bodied adults on Medicaid expansion to be engaged in their community for 80 hours a month. With 4.33 weeks in a month, that means an average of 18.47 hours a week. Griffith said those requirements promote community engagement, adding that community engagement can be community service, pursuing educational programs, participating in a rehabilitation program or a job. By working to improve their communities and their own lives, Griffith said some of these individuals will be lifted out of poverty, depression and isolation. 'But if you are able-bodied and sitting at home, you should be trying to get out there and educate yourself, help your community with community service or find a job for a small part of the week,' he said. At the end of the day, Griffith said Republicans had to compromise in order to get the 'Big, Beautiful Bill' passed. It's passage in the Republican-controlled House was by a slim margin of 215-214. Griffith also was asked about the auto-pen investigation by the House, and whether or not former President Joe Biden was fully aware of a number of pardons and executive orders that were signed by the so-called auto-pen. A number of individual who are not charged with any type of crime were pardoned by Biden anyhow in the waning days of his presidency. House Republicans are investigating a number of pardons and executive orders that were signed using the autopen. Griffith said the courts will have to take a 'serious look' at the issue, adding that the question will center around the former president's mental state when those pardons and executive orders were issued. If Biden was unable to act upon those executive orders and pardons on his on, Griffith said the responsibility of those decisions should have then fallen upon former Vice President Kamala Harris. Griffith also was asked about this November's gubernatorial election in Virginia, and a handful of polls that show Democrat Abigail Spanberger with a large lead over Republican Winsome Earle-Sears in the closely-watched governor's race. Incumbent Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin can't seek re-election. In Virginia, a candidate can only serve as governor for a single term. Griffith said the polls will tighten as it gets closer to Election Day. He said voter turnout in Southwest Virginia will be key to Republicans winning the governor's race — just as it was four years ago when voters across Southwest Virginia came out in large numbers to support Youngkin. That large voter turnout across Southwest Virginia tipped the scales in favor of Republicans, Griffith said. 'There is no question that Southwest Virginia put Youngkin over the top,' Griffith said. 'There is no question about it. It was a big turnout. We've got to have the same thing now. If the turnout happens in Southwest Virginia, Winsome Sears who I have known for 20 years can win.' Contact Charles Owens at cowens@
Yahoo
4 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
Abingdon PD responds after town placed on Homeland Security's ‘sanctuary jurisdictions' list
ABINGDON, Va. (WJHL) — The Abingdon Police Department and Congressman Morgan Griffith are speaking out after the town was placed on the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) list of 'sanctuary jurisdictions.' DHS describes sanctuary jurisdictions on as 'cities, counties, and states that are deliberately and shamefully obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration laws endangering American communities.' Cattle stolen from Glade Spring farm, reward offered Sanctuary jurisdictions are detailed on the under its 'Making America Safe Again' campaign tab. The department claims that sanctuary cities and communities 'protect dangerous criminal aliens from facing consequences and put law enforcement in peril.' The by state that is considered a sanctuary jurisdiction. Under Virginia, two cities in News Channel 11's viewing area are included: Abingdon and Duffield. Nearby Tazewell and all of Tazewell County are also on the list. The Abingdon Police Department to its inclusion on the list on Friday afternoon. According to the police department, the town was not notified or informed as to why it was classified as a sanctuary jurisdiction. 'Upon learning of the listing, we immediately contacted the Office of the U.S. Representative Morgan Griffith for assistance in correcting the error,' the post states. 'We also contacted our federal law enforcement partners and have been advised that Abingdon will be removed from the list.' The Abingdon Police Department stated that it has and will continue to fully comply with federal law and cooperate with all law enforcement agencies. Griffith issued his own statement in response to the inclusion of the Southwest Virginia communities on the list. The U.S. representative called the designation surprising and claimed that local law enforcement has always cooperated with the federal government, and he claimed the issue was likely due to paperwork problems. 'Ninth District law enforcement organizations and localities are very cooperative with the federal government in the handling and detainment of illegal aliens. 'It is a surprising development to see some of our localities listed as 'sanctuary jurisdictions' by DHS. My office has been in contact with our liaisons in the federal government for an explanation and solution. As of now, we do not have a definitive answer. However, it appears that there may be some paperwork anomalies related to federal detainers, particularly at some regional jails. 'I will continue to monitor the situation and hope I will have specific answers within the next week.' Congressman Morgan Griffith No towns or counties in Northeast Tennessee were included on the DHS list. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
6 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
Bristol, Va. Swift Water Rescue Team recognized by congressman for work during Helene
BRISTOL, Va. (WJHL) — The Bristol Virginia Swift Water Rescue Team was recognized on Tuesday by Congressman Morgan Griffith (R-Va.) for its efforts in responding to emergencies during Hurricane Helene. Griffith visited the Bristol, Virginia Fire Department (BVFD) to speak with crew members and learn more about their personal testimonies from responding during Hurricane Helene. He also provided a copy of his extension of remarks he presented to Congress recently, highlighting the work the Bristol Swift Water Rescue Team has done. 8 Months Since Helene: 4 state-owned bridges still closed in Northeast Tenn. 'Somewhere on one of these times that they've gone into rescue, those people wouldn't have gotten out,' Griffith said. 'And so there have been lives saved. How do you count those lives? Well you can't. Because we saved them. But the odds are that of those 80 rescues that they've done in six months, some of the people that they went out to rescue probably, I'm just guessing, but one could guess, maybe as many as half would not have survived the swift water without this team.' BVFD Lt. Tyler Wright told News Channel 11 that he can't begin to list all of the people in the department who helped tremendously during the aftermath of the recent storms, Helene and otherwise, and he's glad they're getting recognized nationally in Congress. 'Luckily, we have a team here in the region that can come out and help you,' Wright said. 'You know, our guys go through rigorous training each year, and they're obviously very aware of the dangers of being around water. And they take certain steps to try to mitigate that danger and operate as safely as they can.' Griffith explained why he ensured that the crew was honored for their work. 'This is about presenting what we call an extension of remarks that's put into the Congressional Record. And just basically, it's to recognize the great work that the Bristol Swift Water Team has done, not just here in Bristol, but all throughout the region.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Time of India
27-05-2025
- Automotive
- Time of India
Republican vote against EV mandate felt like an attack on California
There is little question that California leaders already see fossil fuels as a relic of the past. At the Southern California headquarters of the state's powerful clean-air regulator, the centerpiece art installation depicts in limestone a petrified gas station. Fuel nozzles lie on the ground in decay, evoking an imagined extinction of gas pumps. For more than a half-century, the federal government has allowed California to set its own stringent pollution limits, a practice that has resulted in more efficient vehicles and the nation's most aggressive push toward electric cars. Many Democratic-led states have adopted California's standards, prompting automakers to move their national fleets in the same direction. With that unusual power, however, has come resentment from Republican states where the fossil fuel industry still undergirds their present and future. When Republicans in Congress last week revoked the state's authority to set three of its mandates on electric vehicles and trucks, they saw it not just as a policy reversal but as a statement that liberal California should be put in its place. "We've created a superstate system where California has more rights than other states," Rep. Morgan Griffith, R-Va., who represents rural southwestern Virginia, said in an interview. "My constituents think most folks in California are out of touch with reality. You see this stuff coming out of California and say, 'What?'" Federal law typically preempts state law under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution. But in 1967, the federal government allowed smoggy California to receive waivers from the Environmental Protection Agency to enact its own clean-air standards that were tougher than federal limits, because the state historically had some of the most polluted air in the nation. Federal law also allows other states to adopt California's standards as their own under certain circumstances. California has used that authority to build one of the world's most powerful environmental agencies, the California Air Resources Board . The board now regulates the airborne emissions released by everything from perfumes to power plants. Products that repeatedly fail to comply with its standards can be barred from sale in the state. So many consumers live in California or in states such as New York and Pennsylvania that adopt the same standards that manufacturers see little to be gained by making their products in two versions, one to satisfy those states' rules and another for the rest of the country. So, California's requirements often become de facto national standards. The policy that has drawn the most Republican opposition has been California's mandate to ban the sale of new gasoline-powered vehicles starting in 2035. Republicans, whose party has strong ties to the oil industry, spoke last week about why EVs would be impractical for their constituents. Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., the second-ranking Republican in the Senate, said on the floor that EVs' limited range made them unsuitable for farmers, ranchers and others in his rural state who must drive long distances each day. Although California's rules would not bar the sale of gasoline-powered vehicles anywhere else, Barrasso and other Republicans suggested that without the California market, manufacturers would curb their production. "Every American would lose options -- whether you live in California or not," Barrasso said. "California's EV mandates ban the sale of gas-powered cars and trucks. No more in America. Can you imagine that in Oklahoma or my home state of Wyoming?" Their arguments also ventured into the ideological realm. In floor arguments and in statements to The New York Times, Republican lawmakers spoke of what the technology -- and California -- represented to the wider populace. "The American public on Election Day rejected the liberal agenda of California, whether it comes to EVs, whether it comes to open borders, whether it comes to sanctuary cities, a sanctuary state, their efforts to defund police," Barrasso said in his floor speech. Other Republican lawmakers condemned what they called California's "extreme environmental agenda." Rep. Troy Nehls, R-Texas, said in a statement that the "radical liberal state of California" should not be governing for the "hardworking patriots in my district." Nehls is the House author of the Stop California from Advancing Regulatory Burden Act of 2025. It is otherwise known as the Stop CARB Act, an indication of just how large California's air board -- known by its initials, CARB -- looms in the eyes of Republicans. That bill, which would repeal the section of the Clean Air Act that lets California get waivers to set its own regulations, is pending in the House, as is a similar measure in the Senate. In the 1960s and 1970s, the smog in Los Angeles was so thick that the giant Hollywood sign often could not be seen from just a few miles away. Over the years, CARB sharply reduced the state's pollution problem by enacting stringent rules, many of which were eventually adopted nationwide. California's regulatory climate encouraged technical innovations such as the low-emission engine that Honda produced in the 1970s; the three-way catalytic converter with an oxygen sensor that Volvo pioneered later that decade; and Tesla's popularization of EVs.
New York Times
26-05-2025
- Automotive
- New York Times
Republican Vote Against E.V. Mandate Was Also a Vote Against California
There is little question that California leaders already see fossil fuels as a relic of the past. At the Southern California headquarters of the state's powerful clean-air regulator, the centerpiece art installation depicts in limestone a petrified gas station. Fuel nozzles lie on the ground in decay, evoking an imagined extinction of gas pumps. For more than half a century, the federal government has allowed California to set its own stringent pollution limits, a practice that has resulted in more efficient vehicles and the nation's most aggressive push toward electric cars. Many Democratic-led states have adopted California's standards, prompting automakers to move their national fleets in the same direction. With that unusual power, however, has come resentment from Republican states where the fossil fuel industry still undergirds their present and future. When Republicans in Congress last week revoked the state's authority to set three of its mandates on electric vehicles and trucks, they saw it not just as a policy reversal but also as a statement that liberal California should be put in its place. 'We've created a superstate system where California has more rights than other states,' Representative Morgan Griffith, who represents rural southwestern Virginia, said in an interview. 'My constituents think most folks in California are out of touch with reality. You see this stuff coming out of California and say, 'What?'' Federal law typically pre-empts state law under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution. But in 1967, the federal government allowed smoggy California to receive waivers from the Environmental Protection Agency to enact its own clean-air standards that were tougher than federal limits, because the state historically had some of the most polluted air in the nation. Federal law also allows other states to adopt California's standards as their own under certain circumstances. California has used that authority to build one of the world's most powerful environmental agencies, the California Air Resources Board. The board now regulates the airborne emissions released by everything from perfumes to power plants. Products that repeatedly fail to comply with its standards can be barred from sale in the state. So many consumers live in California or in states like New York and Pennsylvania that adopt the same standards that manufacturers see little to be gained by making their products in two versions, one to satisfy those states' rules and another for the rest of the country. So California's requirements often become de facto national standards. The policy that has drawn the most Republican opposition has been California's mandate to ban the sale of new gasoline-powered vehicles starting in 2035. Republicans, whose party has strong ties to the oil industry, spoke last week about why electric vehicles would be impractical for their constituents. Senator John Barrasso of Wyoming, the second-ranking Republican in the Senate, said on the floor that electric vehicles' limited range made them unsuitable for farmers, ranchers and others in his rural state who must drive long distances each day. Though California's rules would not bar the sale of gasoline-powered vehicles anywhere else, Mr. Barrasso and other Republicans suggested that without the California market, manufacturers would curb their production. 'Every American would lose options — whether you live in California or not,' Mr. Barrasso said. 'California's E.V. mandates ban the sale of gas-powered cars and trucks. No more in America. Can you imagine that in Oklahoma or my home state of Wyoming?' Their arguments also ventured into the ideological realm. In floor arguments and in statements to The New York Times, Republican lawmakers spoke of what the technology — and California — represented to the wider populace. 'The American public on Election Day rejected the liberal agenda of California, whether it comes to E.V.s, whether it comes to open borders, whether it comes to sanctuary cities, a sanctuary state, their efforts to defund police,' Mr. Barrasso said in his floor speech. Other Republican lawmakers condemned what they called California's 'extreme environmental agenda.' Representative Troy Nehls, Republican of Texas, said in a statement that the 'radical liberal state of California' should not be governing for the 'hard-working patriots in my district.' Mr. Nehls is the House author of the Stop California from Advancing Regulatory Burden Act of 2025. It is otherwise known as the Stop C.A.R.B. Act, an indication of just how large California's air board — known by its initials, C.A.R.B. — looms in the eyes of Republicans. That bill, which would repeal the section of the Clean Air Act that lets California get waivers to set its own regulations, is pending in the House, as is a similar measure in the Senate. In the 1960s and 1970s, the smog in Los Angeles was so thick that the giant Hollywood sign often could not be seen from just a few miles away. . Over the years, C.A.R.B. sharply reduced the state's pollution problem by enacting stringent rules, many of which were eventually adopted nationwide. California's regulatory climate encouraged technical innovations like the low-emission engine that Honda produced in the 1970s; the three-way catalytic converter with an oxygen sensor that Volvo pioneered later that decade; and Tesla's popularization of electric vehicles. Ann Carlson, who helped write policies for the Biden administration on tailpipe emissions and now teaches law at the University of California, Los Angeles, recalled the severe smog that made her eyes burn and her lungs ache when she was a child in Southern California in the 1960s. The bad air was a product of the postwar explosion in population across a vast area of the Los Angeles basin, high rates of car ownership and topography that tended to trap smog, she said. 'Cars today are 99.5 percent cleaner than they were when they had no emission control,' Ms. Carlson said. 'That's almost all because of California.' Crucial to California's efforts was Mary Nichols, an environmental attorney who helped transform the state air board into an international power. Her leadership was so influential that the agency dedicated its Southern California office to her. In 2022, Ms. Nichols and other California leaders christened the new building by cutting a gasoline hose with a pair of oversized shears. On Friday, the day after the Senate vote, Ms. Nichols sounded sanguine about the fact that California — and the work of her former agency — was being targeted by federal lawmakers. 'That's the price you pay for success, I suppose,' Ms. Nichols, who lives in Los Angeles, said in an interview. 'We're in a period of lashing out against all kinds of progress, and that's what C.A.R.B. represents.' She said that the federal government over the years had sent members of the board's staff to India, China and Russia to help other countries with their smog problems. In turn, delegates from countries around the world have visited Sacramento to learn about what the state has done to reduce its emissions, she said. Is California trying to influence national policy? 'There's no question about that,' Ms. Nichols said. But she added, 'It's not a crusade to make the rest of the world look like California. It's a recognition that we've been privileged to be able to pioneer some very good technologies, and we're pleased to be able to share them with the world.' Senator Adam Schiff, Democrat of California, said that he thought Republicans were upset that so many states wanted to follow California's lead. 'Their overarching goal was not energy independence,' Mr. Schiff said. 'Their overarching goal was oil dependence, and California was making the country less dependent on oil.' Senator Alex Padilla, Democrat of California, suggested that Republicans were acting counter to the states' rights philosophy that had been a core principle of their party. And he warned that Republicans were giving China an economic advantage, as electric vehicles become essential around the world. 'It's wrongheaded that they have it in for California as badly as they do,' he said. The three bills passed by the Senate Thursday had already been approved by the House, and President Trump is expected to sign them all. To pass the bills, though, the Senate acted against a ruling by its own nonpartisan parliamentarian, who said that it was inappropriate to use the provisions of the Congressional Review Act in the way the Senate did, to revoke California's clean air waivers and to avoid a filibuster. Rob Bonta, California's Democratic attorney general, has said he would sue the federal government if the bills became law. Mr. Bonta and Gov. Gavin Newsom denounced the congressional moves at a news conference Thursday, and displayed a sign declaring that 'Trump's G.O.P. Is Making America Smoggy Again.' Mr. Griffith, the Virginia representative, said he thought electric vehicles might be all right for California but were not suitable for his large, mountainous district and the cold winter weather of central Appalachia. And he argued that it did not make sense for California policies to influence Virginia. 'They're different from us,' Mr. Griffith said. 'They don't think the same way we think.'
