Trump Diverting $3.6 Billion from Military to Build Border Wall
The Department of Defense has approved a plan to divert $3.6 billion to pay for the construction of parts of President Trump’s border wall, Defense Secretary Mark Esper said Tuesday. The money will be shifted from more than 100 construction projects focused on upgrading military bases in the U.S. and overseas, which will be suspended until Congress provides additional funds.
In a letter addressed to Senator James Inhofe, chair of the Armed Services Committee, Esper said that in response to the national emergency declared by Trump earlier this year, he was approving work on 11 military construction projects “to support the use of armed forces” on the border with Mexico.
The $3.6 billion will fund about 175 miles of new and refurbished barriers (Esper’s letter does not use the term “wall”).
Esper described the projects, which include new and replacement barriers in San Diego, El Paso and Laredo, Texas, as “force multipliers” that, once completed, will allow the Pentagon to redeploy troops to high-traffic sections of the border that lack barriers. About 5,000 active duty and National Guard troops are currently deployed on the border.
Months in the making: Trump’s declaration of a national emergency on the southern border on February 15, 2019, came in the wake of a showdown with Congress over funding for the border wall. The president’s demand for $5.7 billion for the wall sparked a 35-day government shutdown, which ended when Trump reluctantly agreed to a deal that provided $1.375 billion for border security. By declaring a national emergency, Trump gave the Pentagon the legal authority to move billions of dollars around in its budget to address the purported crisis. Legal challenges to the emergency declaration are ongoing.
Conflict with lawmakers: Congress passed a resolution opposing the national emergency declaration in March, prompting Trump to issue the first veto of his presidency. Democrats on the House Appropriations Committee reiterated their opposition to Trump’s move Tuesday, saying in a letter, “As we have previously written, the decision to take funds from critical military construction projects is unjustified and will have lasting impacts on our military.”
Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer was more forceful, saying in a statement, "It is abhorrent that the Trump Administration is choosing to defund 127 critical military construction projects all over the country … and on U.S. bases overseas to pay for an ineffective and expensive wall the Congress has refused to fund. This is a subversion of the will of the American people and their representatives. It is an attack on our military and its effectiveness to keep Americans safe. Moreover, it is a political ploy aimed at satisfying President Trump's base, to whom he falsely promised that Mexico would pay for the construction of an unnecessary wall, which taxpayers and our military are now being forced to fund at a cost of $3.6 billion.”
A group of 10 Democratic Senators said in a letter to Esper that they “are opposed to this decision and the damage it will cause to our military and the relationship between Congress and the Department of Defense.” They said they also “expect a full justification of how the decision to cancel was made for each project selected and why a border wall is more important to our national security and the well-being of our service members and their families than these projects.”
Politico’s John Bresnahan, Connor O'Brien and Marianne LeVine said the diversion will likely be unpopular with Republican lawmakers as well. Republican Senators Mike Lee and Mitt Romney expressed concerns Wednesday about funds being diverted from their home state of Utah. "Funding the border wall is an important priority, and the Executive Branch should use the appropriate channels in Congress, rather than divert already appropriated funding away from military construction projects and therefore undermining military readiness," Romney said.
The Pentagon released a list of construction projects that will be affected late on Wednesday (you can review a screenshot tweeted by NBC News’ Alex Moe here).
An $8 billion effort: In addition to the military construction funds and the money provided by Congress, the Trump administration is using $2.5 billion in drug interdiction money and $600 million in Treasury forfeiture funds to support the construction of barriers on the southern border, for a total of approximately $8 billion. (More on that here.)
The administration reportedly has characterized the suspended military construction projects as being delayed, but to be revived, those projects would require Congress approving new funding. House Democrats have vowed they won’t “backfill” the money.
The politics of the wall: Trump has reportedly been intensely focused on making progress on the border wall, amid news that virtually no new wall has been built during the first two and a half years of his presidency. Speaking to reporters at the White House Wednesday, Trump said that construction on the wall is moving ahead “rapidly” and that hundreds of miles will be “almost complete if not complete by the end of next year … just after the election.”
The Surprising Reason for the Boom in Snack Sales
Americans are increasingly dining alone, and they’re opting for snacks rather than full meals, according to a new report from NPD group.
A key driver of the trend is the growing number of single-person households, since solo eaters are more likely to opt for snack foods for dinner. Nearly a quarter of all snack foods consumed last year were consumed at mealtime.
“Smaller household sizes and eating alone are among the growing factors with snacking,” NPD food and beverage industry analyst Darren Seifer said in a statement. “Food manufacturers should think about the unique needs of the solo consumer when developing products and packaging, and marketing messages should be crafted to be relevant to them and their snacking behaviors.”
Related: The 12 Hottest Food Trends for 2015
A separate report released by Nielsen last year found that more than half of global diners had selected snacks in the past 30 days to replace a lunch, 48 percent had snacked for breakfast and 41 percent had snacked for dinner.
When making their selection, single diners prefer single-serve packages and are increasingly turning to “better-for-you” snacks, like fresh fruit, breakfast bars, and yogurt, NPD found.
Food manufacturers are starting to adapt to the demand for healthier options. In June, General Mills said it would stop using artificial colors and flavors by 2016, and Kellogg Co. has vowed to do so by 2018.
Even as demand grows for healthier snacks, the most popular snacks in North Americans might make a nutritionist cringe. Nielsen found that the most popular snacks were chips, followed by chocolate and cheese.
Top Reads from the Fiscal Times:
- The $1 Trillion Question for the F-35: Is the U.S. Buying an Inferior Plane?
- Hillary’s College Plan—Debt Free College Now, Tax Them When They Make Money
- You Won’t Believe What Some Job Seekers Are Putting on Their Resumes
Obamacare Drives Uninsured Rate to Record Low
With the number of Americans lacking health insurance in decline, the rate of uninsured Americans has hit a record low, reaching levels not seen since the National Center for Disease Statistics began keeping records in 1972.
In the first quarter of 2015, 9.2 percent of all Americans were uninsured, according to new data from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, down from 11.5 percent in 2014. The total number of uninsured Americans fell by 7 million over the past year, from 36 million in 2014 to 29 million in the first three months of 2015.
The largest declines were seen among adults who were poor or near-poor, suggesting that the Affordable Care Act was responsible for the most significant gains in coverage. Both groups dropped from uninsured rates near 50 percent in 2010 to 28 percent among poor adults and 23.8 percent among near-poor adults in 2015.
While Democrats are citing data as evidence that the Affordable Care Act is working, Republicans will likely argue that the reduction is being driven by an improving economy and a steadily declining unemployment rate.
Arkansas and Kentucky continue to record the most noticeable reductions in uninsured rates since Obamacare took effect at the beginning of 2013, according to a new report by Gallup. Texas is the only state to still have an uninsured rate higher than 20 percent.
We Built a $335 Million Power Plant in Afghanistan that Can Barely Turn on Lightbulb
USAID is denying that a $335 million “vital component” of their mission to aid the massive energy deficit in Kabul, Afghanistan is an utter failure, but a new report contradicts that claim.
A power plant built by U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) is extremely underused and in danger of being wasted, according to the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR). USAID attempted to defend itself by saying the plant was only built to provide occasional backup and insurance for Kabul’s electrical grid, not for electrical power on a continuous basis. SIGAR’s report provides evidence that the plant was built for regular usage.
Related: U.S. Military Builds a $15 Million Warehouse That Nobody Wants
First, the basis of design was for a base load plant, built to operate 24 hours per day, 7 days a week. Also, the plant hasn’t made any impact on reducing Kabul’s massive energy deficit that USAID says is one of the plant’s main priorities. Not only is it not being used regularly, but it’s not even contributing additional electricity to increase the overall power supply in Kabul.
The Tarakhil Power Plant was built in July 2007 on the outskirts of Kabul, with the intention of supplying 18 diesel engines worth of operating power. Since Da Afghanistan Breshna Sherkat (DABS) – Afghanistan’s national power utility – assumed responsibility for the operation and maintenance of the facility in 2010, the plant has only performed at a shred of its total capability. Between July 2010 and December 2013, the USAID IG found that the plant performed at a mere 2.2 percent of its potential.
Since the Tarakhil Power Plant was used incorrectly and only on an intermittent basis, the plant has suffered premature wear and tear on its engine and electrical components. The damage is expected to raise already steep operation and maintenance costs.
Top Reads from the Fiscal Times:
- How ‘King Coal’ Could Swing the 2016 Election
- Kerry to Congress: Sign the Iran Deal or the Dollar Gets Hit
- China’s Currency Devaluation Brings Stocks to a 'Death Cross'
We Built a $335 Million Power Plant in Afghanistan that Can Barely Turn on Lightbulb
USAID is denying that a $335 million “vital component” of their mission to aid the massive energy deficit in Kabul, Afghanistan is an utter failure, but a new report contradicts that claim.
A power plant built by U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) is extremely underused and in danger of being wasted, according to the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR). USAID attempted to defend itself by saying the plant was only built to provide occasional backup and insurance for Kabul’s electrical grid, not for electrical power on a continuous basis. SIGAR’s report provides evidence that the plant was built for regular usage.
Related: U.S. Military Builds a $15 Million Warehouse That Nobody Wants
First, the basis of design was for a base load plant, built to operate 24 hours per day, 7 days a week. Also, the plant hasn’t made any impact on reducing Kabul’s massive energy deficit that USAID says is one of the plant’s main priorities. Not only is it not being used regularly, but it’s not even contributing additional electricity to increase the overall power supply in Kabul.
The Tarakhil Power Plant was built in July 2007 on the outskirts of Kabul, with the intention of supplying 18 diesel engines worth of operating power. Since Da Afghanistan Breshna Sherkat (DABS) – Afghanistan’s national power utility – assumed responsibility for the operation and maintenance of the facility in 2010, the plant has only performed at a shred of its total capability. Between July 2010 and December 2013, the USAID IG found that the plant performed at a mere 2.2 percent of its potential.
Since the Tarakhil Power Plant was used incorrectly and only on an intermittent basis, the plant has suffered premature wear and tear on its engine and electrical components. The damage is expected to raise already steep operation and maintenance costs.
How Good Is Your Insurance? ‘Cadillac Tax’ Looms for Large Employer Health Plans
While most companies expect health care cost increases to hold steady next year, nearly half of large employers say that if they can’t find new ways to cut costs, they’re going to cross the “Cadillac tax” threshold in 2018, according to a new study by the National Business Group on Health.
Passed as part of the Affordable Care Act and going into effect in 2018, the Cadillac tax will hit employers whose plans cost more than $10,200 for an individual or $27,500 for a family. The employer will have to pay a 40 percent tax on the cost of each plan above those levels.
Among the companies surveyed, 48 percent said that at least one of their benefit plans would trigger the Cadillac Tax. By 2020, 72 percent of employers say one of their plans will trigger the tax, and 51 percent say their most popular plan will be subject to the tax.
Related: Obamacare’s Cadillac Tax Hits the College Campus
“The need to control rising health care benefits costs has never been greater,” NGBH President and CEO Brian Marcotte said in a statement. “Rising costs have plagued employers for many years and now the looming excise tax is adding pressure.”
Employers expect keep benefit costs increases to 5 percent this year by pushing more costs onto workers via consumer-directed health plans (76 percent) and expanding wellness initiatives (70 percent).
None of the 425 employers surveyed said they planned to eliminate their health care coverage, but nearly a quarter said they’d consider offering employees a private exchange.
Top Reads from the Fiscal Times:
- How ‘King Coal’ Could Swing the 2016 Election
- Kerry to Congress: Sign the Iran Deal or the Dollar Gets Hit
- China’s Currency Devaluation Brings Stocks to a 'Death Cross'