Trump Deals Final Death Blow to the Planet

In the 476 months that he’s been in office, Donald Trump has made it abundantly clear that he would like the earth to die in a fire—literally. In that time he has abandoned the Paris climate agreement; unveiled a proposal to freeze rules on planet-warming pollution from cars and trucks; claimed wind turbines aren’t a viable source of energy because the sound they make “causes cancer”; and hired a guy who believes carbon dioxide has been demonized like “Jews under Hitler” to discredit the findings of 13 federal agencies that increased levels of CO2 pose a national emergency. But it was only today that his pièce de résistance, when it comes to letting climate change really rip, was officially put into place.

On Wednesday, the administration officially replaced Barack Obama’s Clean Power Plan with an alternative it cooked up called the Affordable Clean Energy rule. How do the regulations differ? Well:

While Obama’s measure would have substantially reduced planet-killing pollution from coal plants, by setting national emissions limits and requiring the “reconstruction of power grids to move utilities away from coal,” Trump’s rule will almost certainly increase levels of greenhouse gas in the atmosphere by allowing states to decide how much they want to cut emissions. If they don’t want to cut them at all? That’s totally cool! (A 2018 joint study from Harvard, Syracuse, and Resources for the Future, a research organization showed that 18 states and D.C. would experience higher greenhouse emissions from the Trump rule; in 19 states, pollutants like nitrogen oxide and sulfur dioxide emissions would increase.)
The Clean Power Plan was expected to prevent between 1,500 and 3,600 premature deaths annually by 2030. The Affordable Clean Energy rule? Last August, Trump’s own E.P.A. (quietly) estimated that its replacement would cause between 470 and 1,400 premature deaths each year by 2030, due to “increased rates of microscopic airborne particulates known as PM 2.5.” In addition, its own analysis concluded the rule would cause 48,000 new cases of “exacerbated asthma” and a minimum of 21,000 missed school days a year by 2030 due to ozone-related illnesses. Perhaps realizing how bad all this looked, last month, the New York Times reported that the E.P.A planned to get thousands of those pesky deaths “off the books,” not by doing anything to actually prevent them, but by altering “the way it calculates the health risks of air pollution.”
The coal industry, along with the 28 states who sued to block Obama’s measure, were not fans of the Clean Power Plan, whereas, shockingly, companies whose profits rely on the burning of fossil fuels love themselves some Affordable Clean Energy.

The Trump administration, in all its shameless glory, is naturally trying to pitch the ACE as the best thing that ever happened to the environment. “We’re on the right side of history,” Environmental Protection Agency chief Andrew Wheeler actually said to the Times, adding that whereas Obama’s plan would have cruelly led to the closure of many a coal plant, Trump’s rule “is going to reduce emissions while not immediately putting an end to our industry,” excitedly noting that it could even lead to the creation of new, planet-destroying coal plants. (Wheeler, who worked as a coal lobbyist before landing the top job at the EPA, highlighted the fact that from 2005 to 2017, the U.S. cut its energy-related carbon emissions by 14 percent, not mentioning that they increased in 2018 and are on track to keep growing this year.)

Incredibly, the new rule, which is expected to go into effect within 30 days, isn’t even the scariest part of this horror story. That will come after the legal challenges to the Affordable Clean Energy rule, which are all but a certainty, make it to the Supreme Court, where a ruling by Trump’s close pals could make it extremely difficult for future presidents to address climate change. Per the Times:

At issue is whether the Environmental Protection Agency has authority to set national restrictions on carbon emissions and force states to move away from coal, as assumed under Mr. Obama’s rule. Under the Trump administration’s interpretation, the agency only has authority over environmental infractions at individual plants, like chemical spills and improper handling of hazardous materials.

Jody Freeman, a professor of environmental law at Harvard University and a former legal counsel in the Obama administration, said it would be “a blockbuster” if the Trump rule reached the Supreme Court and justices endorsed the administration approach. “It could foreclose a new administration from doing something more ambitious,” she said…. Jeffrey R. Holmstead, who served in the EPA during both Bush administrations and now represents utility companies as a lawyer for the firm Bracewell, said he thought the current Supreme Court would be skeptical of any presidential effort to regulate carbon emissions under existing law. “It will establish what the EPA can and can’t do,” Mr. Holmstead said of the new Trump rule. “I think it really will tie the hands of future administrations.”

If you would like to receive the Levin Report in your inbox daily, click here to subscribe.

The FBI wants to know if Deutsche Bank gave Trump a free pass on possible money laundering

Back in May, or 73 lifetimes ago in Trump years, the New York Times reported that anti-money-laundering specialists at Deutsche Bank had flagged “suspicious activity” on the accounts of both Donald Trump and his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, in 2016 and 2017, advising that they be reported to a financial-crimes regulator—only to be told by management that their concerns were unfounded and to stop being so “negative.” And apparently, the Federal Bureau of Investigation thinks that merits a closer look:

Federal authorities are investigating whether Deutsche Bank complied with laws meant to stop money laundering and other crimes, the latest government examination of potential misconduct at one of the world’s largest and most troubled banks, according to seven people familiar with the inquiry.

The investigation includes a review of Deutsche Bank’s handling of so-called suspicious activity reports that its employees prepared about possibly problematic transactions, including some linked to President Trump’s son-in-law and senior adviser, Jared Kushner, according to people close to the bank and others familiar with the matter. The criminal investigation into Deutsche Bank is one element of several separate but overlapping government examinations into how illicit funds flow through the American financial system, said five of the people, who were not authorized to speak publicly about the inquiries. Several other banks are also being investigated.

According to the Times, the FBI recently got in touch with Tammy McFadden, the Deutsche Bank whistle-blower who reviewed Kushner’s accounts after several of their transactions were flagged by the company’s software. Three other former Deutsche employees have said that just after Trump was elected president, multiple suspicious activity reports “involving different entities that Mr. Trump owned or controlled” were generated, yet bank executives chose not to follow the recommendation to file the reports with the Treasury Department. A year prior, a similar situation occurred concerning transactions by Kushner’s real estate company.

McFadden concluded that the suspicious transactions should be reported to the government but, strangely, the case went not to an unbiased group of anti-money-laundering experts, but instead to the private-banking division, where managers had a relationship with Kushner. From there, the executives reportedly decided McFadden’s worries were “unfounded” and decided not to submit her report to the government, a decision she and her colleagues believe was made “to maintain the private-banking division’s strong relationship with Mr. Kushner.” (Last year, months after she started raising objections, McFadden was fired. Deutsche Bank says she wasn’t processing enough accounts, but McFadden says her supervisors cut the number of transactions she was assigned to review after she started asking questions, and both she and two former managers believe her firing was retaliatory.)

Fed opens the door to 2020 rate cut

What Donny-boy wants, Donny-boy gets!

The Federal Reserve indicated a readiness to cut interest rates for the first time in more than a decade to sustain a near-record U.S. economic expansion, citing “uncertainties” in their outlook. While Chairman Jerome Powell and fellow policymakers left their key rate in a range of 2.25% to 2.5% on Wednesday, they dropped a reference in their statement to being “patient” on borrowing costs and forecast a larger miss of their 2% inflation target this year.

The change in tone follows attacks on the Fed by Trump for not doing more to bolster the economy and Tuesday’s report by Bloomberg News that the president asked White House lawyers earlier this year to explore his options for demoting Powell from the chairmanship…. That risks casting a political shadow over whatever policy decision the Fed makes, though Powell and his colleagues say they’re focusing only on the economic goals Congress gave them.

Asked yesterday about an attempt to demote Powell—which legal experts say the president likely doesn’t have the power to do—Trump responded, “Let’s see what he does [tomorrow].” Presumably this turn of events should please him, but like a stunted 3.5-year-old in a 71-year-old’s body, it’s also possible we’re in for an I want my rate cut and I want it now-style tantrum before the week is out.

Well this sounds like a good argument for increasing taxes on hedge fund managers

Or at least one hedge fund manager in particular:

A wealthy Manhattan couple has emerged as significant financiers of the anti-vaccine movement, contributing more than $3 million in recent years to groups that stoke fears about immunizations online and at live events—including two forums this year at the epicenter of measles outbreaks in New York’s ultra-Orthodox Jewish community. Hedge fund manager and philanthropist Bernard Selz and his wife, Lisa, have long donated to organizations focused on the arts, culture, education, and the environment. But seven years ago, their private foundation embraced a very different cause: groups that question the safety and effectiveness of vaccines.

How the Selzes came to support anti-vaccine ideas is unknown, but their financial impact has been enormous. Their money has gone to a handful of determined individuals who have played an outsize role in spreading doubt and misinformation about vaccines and the diseases they prevent. The groups’ false claims linking vaccines to autism and other ailments, while downplaying the risks of measles, have led growing numbers of parents to shun the shots.

According to the Washington Post, the Selzes provide approximately 75 percent of the funding for the Informed Consent Action Network, whose self-described mission is to promote vaccine safety and parental choice in vaccine decisions. The face of the group and CEO, Del Bigtree, said at an event on June 4, “They should be allowed to have the measles if they want the measles. It’s crazy that there’s this level of intensity around a trivial childhood illness.”

Elsewhere!

Trump administration threatens furloughs, layoffs if Congress doesn’t let it kill personnel agency (Washington Post)

Warren emerges as potential compromise nominee (Politico)

Cramer: The Fed pleased investors, but there’s “no escaping” the wrath of this White House (CNBC)

Stressed out Facebook monitors forced to toil in filth: report (NYP)

Slack’s Reference Price Set at $26 in Direct Listing (WSJ)

White House blocks former Trump aide Hope Hicks from answering House panel’s questions, angering Democrats (Washington Post)

Trump awards Presidential Medal of Freedom to economist Art Laffer (Washington Post)

“Parents of 7-year-old youth baseball players in Colorado brawled over the weekend after a controversial call was made by the umpire — who is 13.” (NYDN)

Trump Deals Final Death Blow to the Planet

Bess Levin

Politics Correspondent