Trump Defends His Cabinet of Billionaires: ‘I Just Don’t Want a Poor Person’ Running the Economy

Donald Trump on Wednesday defended his decision to appoint cabinet members with significant personal wealth, arguing he doesn’t “want a poor person” in charge of the economy.

Trump was speaking about Gary Cohn, a former Goldman Sachs banker the president appointed as his chief economic advisor—despite promising to “drain the swamp” during his presidency.

“I love all people,” Trump said during a campaign-style rally in Cedar Rapids, IA. “Rich or poor. But in those particular positions I just don’t want a poor person. Does that make sense?”

Trump has received significant criticism for his appointment of Cohn, as well as Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross. Although he ran on a populist platform, Trump’s cabinet has a combined net worth of $6 billion.

[Raw Story]

Trump seeks sharp cuts to housing aid, except for program that brings him millions

President Trump’s budget calls for sharply reducing funding for programs that shelter the poor and combat homelessness — with a notable exception: It leaves intact a type of federal housing subsidy that is paid directly to private landlords.

One of those landlords is Trump himself, who earns millions of dollars each year as a part-owner of Starrett City, the nation’s largest subsidized housing complex. Trump’s 4 percent stake in the Brooklyn complex earned him at least $5 million between January of last year and April 15, according to his recent financial disclosure.

Trump’s business empire intersects with government in countless ways, from taxation to permitting to the issuing of patents, but the housing subsidy is one of the clearest examples of the conflicts experts have predicted. While there is no indication that Trump himself was involved in the decision, it is nonetheless a stark illustration of how his financial interests can directly rise or fall on the policies of his administration.

The federal government has paid the partnership that owns Starrett City more than $490 million in rent subsidies since May 2013, according to figures provided by a spokesman for the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Nearly $38 million of that has come since Trump took office in January.

That subsidy generates steady income for Trump and his siblings, each of whom inherited an interest in the property when their father died. Although it represents a small portion of his overall wealth, it is one of the few examples of money the president derives directly from the federal government he oversees.

HUD, meanwhile, has come under fire in recent days after news of the expected nominee to lead the department in the New York region: Lynne Patton, an event planner who has no professional experience in housing but who is a former vice president of Eric Trump’s foundation and who helped plan his wedding.

The administration’s decisions on housing programs were not influenced by Trump’s interest in Starrett City, HUD spokesman Jereon Brown said Tuesday. Several experts said cutting the subsidy paid directly to landlords can be politically difficult, in part because many beneficiaries of that type of subsidized housing are elderly and in part because landlords are more likely to be politically organized.

Starrett City is a complex of 46 brick towers that stretches across 150 acres just to the west of New York’s John F. Kennedy Airport. It was built in the mid-1970s and houses nearly 15,000 people.

Trump once called Starrett City “one of the best investments I ever made,” but it was his father who was an investor in its construction, according to a representative of Starrett City.

“Upon Fred Trump’s death, his four children inherited his interests,” Bob Liff, a spokesman for Starrett City Associates, the partnership that owns the complex, said in a statement to The Washington Post. “There’s been no change, except that Donald Trump’s holding was placed in a revocable trust upon becoming president.”

Placing his stake in a revocable trust allows it to be managed by others. Trump has not divested himself of his assets but has said he has turned over management to his sons.

Liff declined to say how large a stake Trump’s three surviving siblings own today.

The more than $5 million the president reported earning from Starrett City was part of nearly $600 million in gross revenue he claimed from January 2016 through mid-April, records show.

“It’s a conflict, and it’s why everyone has pushed Trump to not only step away from his business interests but to divest them,” said Scott Amey, general counsel at the Project on Government Oversight, an independent watchdog organization.

A White House spokeswoman declined to respond to detailed questions from The Post and directed inquiries to the Trump Organization, which did not respond to messages Monday and Tuesday.

Starrett City provides more than 3,500 subsidized housing units to low-income residents under a program that makes payments directly to landlords. Under the “project-based rental assistance program,” residents contribute 30 percent of their income toward rent, and the federal government pays the rest.

The project-based rental assistance program is one of only a few HUD programs that would be spared steep cuts under Trump’s proposed budget, which housing advocates have said would carry devastating consequences for the poor and the homeless.

The administration has proposed reducing HUD’s overall budget by $7 billion, or about 15 percent. That includes cuts to two of the other programs that, together with the program that pays landlords directly, serve the vast majority of people who get federal housing assistance.

The budget calls for a nearly 29 percent cut, or $1.8 billion, to public housing and a 5 percent drop, or nearly $1 billion, in vouchers that allow tenants to use the aid on the housing of their choice, according to Douglas Rice, a senior policy analyst at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. In contrast, the program that directs money to Starrett City and other privately owned housing would see a reduction of about half a percent, or $65 million, from its $10.8 billion allocation.

“It certainly raises questions as to why that remained relatively flat while there were other cuts,” Amey said.

But Amey and others cautioned against assuming that Trump’s holdings were a factor in the decision, noting that Starrett City represents a relatively small portion of the president’s income.

Ben Carson, the HUD secretary, has said that “no one is going to be thrown out on the street” if the proposed cuts take effect. Congress has ultimate say on the budget, but the Trump spending plan lays out the president’s priorities.

Compounding the questions swirling around HUD this week were reports that Carson was poised to name Patton, who spoke at the Republican National Convention, to the position of regional administrator overseeing the New York area. No formal announcement has been made, but Armstrong Williams, a longtime friend and adviser to Carson, defended Patton in an interview Monday evening.

Williams, a conservative commentator, said Patton earned Carson’s trust in just a few months while serving as his $160,000-a-year senior adviser. “She has shown a capacity not only to learn but to regurgitate, to put together tours where she shows she has a knowledge of HUD,” Williams said. “She has done a great job of briefing the secretary.”

Patton previously worked as an event planner for the Trump Organization and “a senior aide to the Trump family.” She organized “upscale events and celebrity golf tournaments at multiple Trump properties” and handled “celebrity talent acquisition for various marketing projects,” according to an online résumé on the website LinkedIn.

She told the Daily Mail earlier this year that she was entrusted by Eric and Lara Trump to help plan their wedding in Palm Beach, Fla. She also served as an unpaid vice president for the Eric Trump Foundation, a charity that raised money for children with leukemia.

The New York Daily News first reported her expected appointment late last week and raised questions about claims she made on her LinkedIn profile. Under “education” she lists a law degree from the Quinnipiac University School of Law, along with the notation “N/A.” After the controversy erupted, she explained that “N/A,” short for “not applicable,” was meant to signify that she did not finish law school.

Williams said that she dropped out before earning a degree but that she had been truthful with Carson about her background, including a history of substance abuse.

Patton has “been a lot of dark places” but has overcome them, Williams said. “She has a keen insight into people who overcome mental illness and addiction,” he said, adding that this will help her relate to people HUD serves.

As one of 10 regional administrators, Patton would serve as a liaison to local and state officials in the New York area and oversee HUD programs there. She did not respond to requests for comment through a person who answered her cellphone Monday.

Some New York City officials scoffed at her prospective appointment.

“Folks in that role historically have had substantial background in government or in housing,” Mayor Bill de Blasio, who served in that position previously, said during a radio program this week.

Michael Bodaken, president of the National Housing Trust, said the regional administrator would not have authority to make budget decisions or issue waivers that could benefit Starrett City. He added, “We would have been happier with someone with substantial housing experience because it’s such an important job.”

Williams dismissed criticism about Patton’s lack of experience.

“Whatever Lynne Patton was in the past doesn’t matter,” he said. “What she is today matters, and Dr. Carson has tremendous trust in her.”

He said that neither the president nor anyone in the Trump family had urged Carson to recommend her for the position and that her closeness to the family was not a factor.

“It did not help her with Dr. Carson,” Williams said. “He was skeptical, too, just like anyone else. He didn’t realize she had the intellect and the knowledge and work ethic she has.”

[Washington Post]

Trump Blames Obama for Not Doing More to Bring Otto Warmbier Home Sooner

President Donald Trump on Tuesday appeared to blame former President Barack Obama for not bringing Otto Warmbier home from North Korea sooner.

“It’s a disgrace what happened to Otto,” Trump said to reporters. “It’s a total disgrace what happened to Otto.”

“It should never, ever be allowed to happen. And frankly, if he were brought home sooner, I think the results would have been a lot different. He should have been brought home that day.”

Trump added that he had spoken with Warmbier’s family.

When asked if Obama had done enough to secure Warmbier’s release during a June 16 press conference, Otto’s father, Fred, echoed Trump’s sentiments saying the results “speak for themselves.”

Warmbier, a student at the University of Virginia, was detained in March 2016 after North Korean officials accused him of attempting to steal a propaganda poster from his hotel. He was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor.

US officials negotiated his release earlier this month, though Warmbier was in a coma by the time he arrived in the US. While North Korean officials said he had fallen into a coma after contracting botulism, US doctors who examined Warmbier said he suffered severe neurological trauma while in detention and showed no traces of the toxin.

Warmbier died at age 22 on Monday.

The White House released a statement on Monday offering Trump and first lady Melania’s “deepest condolences” to Warmbier’s family.

“The United States once again condemns the brutality of the North Korean regime as we mourn its latest victim,” the statement reads.

Warmbier’s family also released a statement on Monday announcing his death.

“It would be easy at a moment like this to focus on all that we lost — future time that won’t be spent with a warm, engaging, brilliant young man whose curiosity and enthusiasm for life knew no bounds,” the statement reads. “But we choose to focus on the time we were given to be with this remarkable person.”

[Business Insider]

Reality

Former President Barack Obama has issued a statement about Otto Warmbier, the American college student who died this week, days after being released from North Korea in a coma after more than a year in captivity.

“During the course of the Obama Administration, we had no higher priority than securing the release of Americans detained overseas,” Obama spokesman Ned Price said in the statement. “Their tireless efforts resulted in the release of at least 10 Americans from North Korean custody during the course of the Obama administration.”

Added Price, who was National Security Counsel spokesperson during Obama’s administration: “It is painful that Mr. Warmbier was not among them, but our efforts on his behalf never ceased, even in the waning days of the administration. Our thoughts and prayers are with Mr. Warmbier’s family and all who had the blessing of knowing him.”

Trump has spent $133K on White House furnishing

President Trump spent about $133,000 in taxpayer money on furnishings for the White House between January and May, Mic reported Wednesday.

Former President Barack Obama spent just about $51,000 during the same period, according to White House records – though the same records show Obama spent more money later that year, narrowing the gap between how much each president spent on furnishings.

Obama spent about $70,000 during June of 2008, compared to just $17,000 for Trump this month. That still puts Trump at roughly $24,000 ahead of Obama’s furniture spending at this point during Obama’s presidency.

According to the Mic report, one of Trump’s top dollar orders was a custom conference table from the Kittinger Company, Inc. that cost $13,000. According to Mic, former President Richard Nixon also had a Kittinger conference table, but paid for it himself.

The spending on White House furnishings comes amid scrutiny over Trump’s frequent weekend trips to Trump-brand golf clubs and luxury resorts, which have cost taxpayers millions.

[The Hill]

President Trump chooses inexperienced woman who planned his son Eric’s wedding to run N.Y. federal housing programs

She’s arranged tournaments at Trump golf courses, served as the liaison to the Trump family during his presidential campaign, and even arranged Eric Trump’s wedding.

Now President Trump has appointed longtime loyalist Lynne Patton — who has zero housing experience and claims a law degree the school says she never earned — to run the office that oversees federal housing programs in New York.

Patton was appointed Wednesday to head up the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Region II, which includes New York and New Jersey, where she’ll oversee distribution of billions of taxpayer dollars.

Patton’s tight relationship with the Trump clan dates back to 2009, when she began serving as the family’s “event planner.”

“Responsible for organizing, executing and assisting with upscale events and celebrity golf tournaments,” her LinkedIn profile says. “Handle celebrity talent acquisition for various marketing projects, philanthropic events and golf tournaments.”

From 2011 through January, she also helped run the Eric Trump Foundation, a charity that’s now under investigation by state Attorney General Eric Schneiderman.

She also claims on her LinkedIn page to have obtained a juris doctorate degree in 2000 from Quinnipiac University School of Law in Connecticut. Next to the J.D. notation is written (N/A) without explanation.

On Thursday school registrar Jim Benson said Patton attended for two semesters but did not graduate.

She also listed Yale University but HUD officials couldn’t explain why that was there. Patton, who begins her Region II job July 5, did not return calls seeking comment.

As head of the biggest HUD regional office in the U.S., Patton will oversee distribution of billions in cash to public housing authorities — including NYCHA — as well as tens of thousands of rental vouchers and block grants that fund housing inspections and senior citizen programs.

Patton is one of the handful of African Americans within Trump’s inner circle and a passionate Trump promoter. Last year she made a video entitled “I’m proof Donald Trump isn’t a bigot.”

Trump first placed her as a White House liaison at HUD in February. While there, she’s fired off multiple flamethrowing tweets for him and his family.

When comedian Kathy Griffin tweeted a photo May 30 holding a phony bloody Trump head, Patton tweeted, “To date I’ve always had a mutual respect for opinions on the other side of the aisle but tonight @kathygriffin can go f–k herself.”

On June 9, she retweeted a cartoon about leaks depicting Trump taking a wrench to a leaky pipe upon which ex-FBI Director James Comey’s head was affixed. She wrote “Just when you think you’ve fixed them all, another one pops up.”

Last month she defended HUD Secretary Ben Carson after he said poverty was a state of mind, and cheered Budget Director Mick Mulvaney’s statement that Team Trump is “no longer going to measure compassion by the number of programs or the number of people on those programs but by the number of people we help get off those programs.”

Patton has also had to defend her role as former vice president at Eric Trump’s foundation. Forbes last week reported the charity steered money to the Trump empire by holding events at Trump golf courses while she was there. She said nothing untoward happened at the charity.

Eric Trump left the charity Dec. 31; Patton left in January.

Last month she paid a surprise visit to NYCHA but never actually entered a NYCHA apartment.

During the May 5 visit, she asked to see a community center that had fallen into disrepair at the McKinley Houses in the Bronx. NYCHA Chairwoman Shola Olatoye said the agency staff who escorted Patton said she was “less interested in the actual infrastructure and more interested in an old clipping of the community center that was all glass and steel and now is struggling.”

“I think the reaction was surprise, maybe a little bit horrified,” Olatoye said.

Nearly 70% of NYCHA’s operational budget and 100% of its capital repair budget comes from HUD. The authority’s aging buildings need an estimated $17 billion in upgrades.

The Region II director’s position had been vacant since Jan. 20.

[New York Daily News]

Trump says he is under investigation, lashes out at Justice Department

President Donald Trump tweeted on Friday that he is under investigation in the probe into Russia’s involvement in the 2016 presidential election.

He also appeared to criticize Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who appointed a special counsel to oversee the investigation.

Special counsel Robert Mueller is seeking to determine whether Trump attempted to obstruct justice, following the president’s firing of former FBI Director James Comey, who had been leading the investigation of Russian interference, The Washington Post reported this week.

Rosenstein wrote the memo that suggested that Trump fire Comey over his handling of an investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server while secretary of State. Trump later contradicted his administration’s rationale, saying he had been thinking about the Russia investigation when he fired Comey.

In a striking testimony before Congress last week, Comey said he believed Trump had sought to persuade him to drop an investigation into then National Security Advisor Michael Flynn’s ties to Russia.
Trump’s acknowledgement of the reported obstruction of justice investigation came after a series of tweets in which he renewed his assertions that he is the subject of a “witch hunt.”

The Washington Post cited unidentified officials when it reported Mueller is investigating Trump. Rosenstein issued a statement on Thursday warning Americans to “be skeptical of anonymous allegations.”

“Americans should exercise caution before accepting as true any stories attributed to anonymous ‘officials,’ particularly when they do not identify the country — let alone the branch or agency of government — with which the alleged sources supposedly are affiliated,” Rosenstein said.

A senior Justice Department official told NBC News that no one pushed Rosenstein to issue the statement.

“This was 100 percent Rod. He’s tired of reading all these stories based on anonymous sources claiming to know what the Justice Department and the FBI are doing,” the official said.

[NBC News]

 

Trump Tweets His Frustration with Russia Investigation

President Donald Trump is beginning his day with a stream of tweets defending his record and lashing out at the investigation into Russian interference in the election.

In a two-part tweet posted before 7 a.m. Sunday, Trump wrote: “The MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN agenda is doing very well despite the distraction of the Witch Hunt.”

He continued by saying: “Many new jobs, high business enthusiasm …massive regulation cuts, 36 new legislative bills signed, great new S.C.Justice, and Infrastructure, Healthcare and Tax Cuts in works!”

“Witch hunt’ is how Trump characterizes the probe into Russia’s election interference and possible ties to his campaign associates.

Trump advisers describe the president as increasingly angry over the investigation, yelling at television sets carrying coverage and insisting he is the target of a conspiracy.

[ABC News]

Trump Picks Right-Wing Conspiracy Blogger for a Federal Judgeship

Here’s a pro tip. If you are a judicial nominee, and you have to spend much of your confirmation hearing denying that you endorsed birtherism, maybe “judge” isn’t the ideal job for you.

And yet John Bush, a lawyer and conservative blogger who spent years publishing many of his most controversial opinions under a pseudonym, is in line to be a judge on a powerful federal appeals court. Given Bush’s prolific history as a political blogger, those opinions were on full display during his confirmation hearing on Wednesday.

Birtherism came up after Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) noted a blog post where Bush relied heavily on World Net Daily, a conservative site famous for touting conspiracy theories such as the birther libel against President Obama. In the post — which bears the grammatically-dubious title “‘Brother’s Keeper’ — As In, Keep That Anti-Obama Reporter In Jail!”  — Bush touted a World Net Daily story claiming that one of the publication’s reporters was being held by immigration officials in Kenya after the reporter went there to investigate Obama’s Kenyan half-brother.

The post implied, without explicitly stating, that then-Sen. Barack Obama bore some responsibility for this reporter being detained. In any event, Bush felt that he needed to distance himself from the birther website he once cited, telling Franken that “I was certainly not intending to endorse any views of another group, as far as birtherism goes,” when he wrote this particular blog post.

Questionable citations aside, many of Bush’s other blog posts stated much more directly how the judicial nominee views the world. In one post in particular, for example, Bush claimed that “the two greatest tragedies in our country” are “slavery and abortion.”

After Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) asked Bush if he still held this view, Bush attempted to paint his views on Roe v. Wade as relatively innocuous. “I believe that [Roe] is a tragedy,” he said, “in the sense that it divided our country.”

Later in the hearing, however, Bush revealed that he either does not believe that all divisive decisions are tragic, or that he has a very poor command of American history.

“Wouldn’t you characterize Brown v. Board of Education,” Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) asked Bush, as “a case that divided our country?” In response, Bush first pled ignorance, then gave an historically-inaccurate answer.

“I wasn’t alive at the time of Brown,” Bush said. “But I don’t think it did.”

In reality, Brown is probably second only to Dred Scott v. Sandford, which played a major role in sparking the Civil War, among the Supreme Court’s most divisive decisions. Multiple books have been written on the Southern white backlash triggered by Brown — including two chapters of my own book, Injustices: The Supreme Court’s History of Comforting the Comfortable and Afflicting the Afflicted.

Even before the decision was handed down, Justice Hugo Black, a former Alabama senator, told his colleagues that violence would inevitably follow a decision ending public school segregation, and he relayed former justice and then-South Carolina Gov. Jimmy Byrnes’ warning that the state might “abolish [its] public school system” before it abided by such a decision.

Southern lawmakers demanded “massive resistance” to Brown. Many signed a “Southern Manifesto” accusing the Court of stirring up “chaos and confusion in the states principally affected.” Massive resistance proved so successful that, ten years after Brown, only one in 85 Southern black students attended an integrated school.

In fairness, Bush’s ignorance of American civil rights history, while certainly not an optimal trait in a judge, might not prevent him from performing the core responsibilities of an appellate jurist. Typically, judges spend far more time parsing statutory language and consulting legal precedents than they do digging into political history.

But Bush is not like most people named to the federal bench. In a 2009 panel hosted by the conservative Federalist Society — an organization which has played a major role in selecting Trump’s judicial nominees — Bush aligned himself with originalism, the belief that the only valid way to interpret the Constitution is to apply its text in the way those words were originally understood at the time they were drafted.

Whatever the virtues or demerits of originalism as an interpretive method, it only works if the judges applying it have a deep command of history and the skills necessary to sort good historical arguments from bad ones. After all, how can someone figure out the original meaning of a text if they don’t understand the historical and political context that brought that text into being?

The fact that Bush knows so little about one of the most famous judicial decisions in American history does not suggest that he is up to this task.

Franken, Feinstein, and Durbin are, of course, Democrats. And Bush will be confirmed unless some of Trump’s fellow Republicans break with him on this nominee. At least one Republican senator did appear uncomfortable with Bush’s nomination, however, during the hearing.

“I’ve read your blogs,” Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) told Bush. “I’m not impressed.”

[ThinkProgress]

Trump has made the Department of Health and Human Services a center of false science on contraception

Contraception policy may not be the biggest target of the anti-science right wing — climate change and evolution probably rank higher — but it’s the field in which scientific disinformation has the most immediate consequences for public health.

So it’s especially disturbing that President Trump and Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price have stocked the corridors of health policy with purveyors of conclusively debunked claptrap about contraception, abortion, pregnancy and women’s reproductive health generally.

That’s the conclusion of a new article in the New England Journal of Medicine identifying four Trump appointees as carriers of the disinformation virus. What makes them especially dangerous, says the author, bioethicist R. Alta Charo of the University of Wisconsin law school, is that the “alternative facts” they’re purveying could influence an entire generation’s attitude toward contraception, for the worse.

Among their themes is that condoms don’t protect against HIV or other sexually transmitted diseases and that abortions and contraceptives cause breast cancer, miscarriages and infertility. None of these assertions is true.

“The move toward misinformation at the level of sex education is dangerous,” Charo told me, “because you form instincts about what is safe very early in life.”

These appointments are all of a piece with Trump’s habit of staffing federal agencies with people actively in opposition to those agencies’ goals and statutory responsibilities — climate change deniers at the Environmental Protection Agency, corporate executives at the Department of Labor, and so on.

They’re also consonant with policies from the White House and Price’s office aimed at narrowing access to contraceptives by reducing government assistance to obtain them.

As Charo observes, the rate of unintended pregnancies has come down sharply, especially since the advent of the Affordable Care Act, which mandated that health plans make birth control available without co-pays or deductibles.

Price has defended reducing government assistance for contraception on the ground that “there’s not one” woman who can’t afford it on her own, but that’s plainly untrue; some long-lasting contraceptives such as Nexplanon or IUDs, can cost hundreds of dollars, a discouraging obstacle for many low-income patients.

Let’s take a look at the four horsewomen of disinformation on Charo’s list. What characterizes their approach to human reproduction, she says, is “rejection of the scientific method as the standard for generating and evaluating evidence.”

(We’ve asked both Charmaine Yoest, now the assistant secretary for public affairs at Health and Human Services, and the department for comment but have received no reply.)

Charmaine Yoest

Charmaine Yoest is now the assistant secretary for public affairs at HHS. Yoest is the former head of Americans United for Life, a prominent anti-abortion group. She and the organization promoted the claim that abortion increases a woman’s chance of breast cancer, a claim that was conclusively debunked by medical authorities years ago. The National Cancer Institute (a government body), declared in 2003 that thorough scientific studies “consistently showed no association between induced and spontaneous abortions and breast cancer risk.”

The same goes for the claim by Yoest’s group that abortion increases the risk of “serious mental health problems.” This notion is the basis for state laws requiring counseling before a patient is allowed to undergo an abortion. A study by UC San Francisco published last year found that the “greater risk” of “adverse psychological outcomes is faced by women denied an abortion. These findings do not support policies that restrict women’s access to abortion on the basis that abortion harms women’s mental health,” the study concluded.

Yoest was an architect of the strategy that led Texas to enact an anti-abortion law so extreme that it was slapped down by the Supreme Court last year on a 5-3 vote. The law placed heavy restrictions on abortion clinics, ostensibly to protect women’s health, that effectively shut many down. In his majority opinion, Justice Stephen Breyer essentially called that a subterfuge: “There was no significant health-related problem that the new law helped to cure,” he wrote.

Teresa Manning

Teresa Manning was appointed as HHS’ deputy assistant secretary for population affairs. Manning is a former lobbyist for the National Right to Life Committee and a legislative analyst for the Family Research Council. During a 2003 NPR interview, she said: “Of course, contraception doesn’t work. … Its efficacy is very low.” In fact, as Charo observes, hormonal methods are 91% effective, and IUDs are 99% effective.

In 2001, then as Teresa Wagner, Manning was quoted in a Family Research Council news release attacking prescriptions for the morning-after pill, which she characterized as an abortion method. She said doctors prescribing the pill were “accepting — and, in effect, — promoting promiscuity — the cause of the STD explosion, as well as the well known social problems of out of wedlock pregnancy and illegitimacy. We expect more from our doctors than collaboration with abortion advocates!”

Valerie Huber

Valerie Huber was appointed earlier this month as chief of staff to the assistant secretary for health at HHS. Huber is an abstinence advocate and the president of Ascend, a Washington group that advocates for abstinence-only sex education.

The problem there is that birth control experts have consistently found that abstinence education is ineffective at preventing teen pregnancies. In fact, just the opposite — a 2011 study at the University of Georgia reported that the “data show clearly that abstinence-only education as a state policy … may actually be contributing to the high teenage pregnancy rates in the U.S.”

Huber’s approach is moralistic. “As public health experts and policymakers, we must normalize sexual delay more than we normalize teen sex, even with contraception,” she told PBS last year. But studies consistently show that what reduces teen pregnancies is increased use of contraceptives.

Katy Talento

Katy Talento was named to Trump’s Domestic Policy Council. Talento has been the author of frequent anti-birth control screeds, including several that appeared on the Federalist, a right-wing website. Among them was an article whose headline called birth control “the mother of all medical malpractice,” and another asserting that women who took chemical forms of birth control risked “breaking your uterus for good,” ruining it “for baby-hosting altogether.”

Talento’s basis for this claim was what she called a “ground-breaking 2012 study” ostensibly showing that women who used birth control pills for several years had higher rates of infertility and miscarriage than those who did not. But as Jon Cohen of Science Magazine showed earlier this year, the study reported nothing of the kind — as its lead author confirmed. In fact, the researchers cited a study indicating that long-term use of the pill — five years — actually increased a woman’s subsequent fertility.

The lead author, Robert Casper, a Toronto fertility doctor, told Cohen that while his study found that using the pill sometimes led to thinner uterus linings, that wasn’t associated with more infertility or miscarriages — his study group was small and predisposed to fertility problems, he explained.

“The benefits of the birth control pill in preventing unwanted pregnancy or in treating painful menstrual periods far outweighs the rare possible case of thin endometrium,” Cohen wrote. “There is no evidence that the birth control pill is ‘seriously risky’ in terms of future reproductive health.”

As Charo observes, the “alternative science” underlying these appointees’ approach has infected public discussions of birth control and the courts. “Legislatures and even the Supreme court have tolerated individuals making up their own definitions for abortifacient [that is, abortion-producing] and pregnancy,” she writes, and then using them to justify refusing to fill prescriptions or offer insurance coverage for contraceptives.”

That was glaringly true in the Supreme Court’s egregious 2014 Hobby Lobby decision, which allowed owners of private companies to refuse to cover contraceptives under the Affordable Care Act. The Hobby Lobby plaintiffs specifically objected to four birth control methods — including IUDs and the morning-after pill because they produced abortions, which the plaintiffs found objectionable supposedly on religious grounds. But neither medical authorities nor the federal government classified those methods as abortifacients; the plaintiffs’ definition was accepted as gospel by Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote the opinion, which became the basis for allowing businesses to exclude all birth control methods from their health plans.

With adherents of similar viewpoints now ensconced in positions of responsibility in the Trump administration, their approach threatens to spread throughout government policy. But it’s no more based on legitimate science than it ever was.

[The Los Angeles Times]

Trump team halts rules meant to protect students from predatory for-profit colleges

The Trump administration is suspending two key rules from the Obama administration that were intended to protect students from predatory for-profit colleges, saying it will soon start the process to write its own regulations.

The move made Wednesday by Education Secretary Betsy DeVos was a victory for Republican lawmakers and for-profit colleges that had lobbied against the rules. Critics denounced it, accusing the administration of essentially selling out students to help for-profit colleges stay in business.

The Education Department released a statement saying that it was going to create new committees to rewrite rules covering borrower defense to repaying, or BDR, and gainful employment. BDR relieves students of all federal loans if a school used illegal or deceptive tactics to persuade students to borrow money to attend. Gainful employment requires that action be taken — including possible expulsion from the federal student aid program — against vocational programs whose graduates leave with heavy student loan debt. Ninety-eight percent of the programs that officials found to have failed to meet those standards are offered by for-profit colleges.

Parts of the gainful employment rule are already in effect. BDR was set to become effective July 1 but will now be postponed. The Education Department said that while new rules are drawn up, it will process applications under the current borrower defense rules.

A program is considered to lead to “gainful employment” if the annual loan payment of a typical graduate does not exceed 20% of their discretionary income or 8% of their total earnings. Exceeding those debt-to-earnings rates means possible expulsion from the federal student aid program.

DeVos criticized the regulations that were approved by the Obama administration, saying that they are unfair to students and schools and that they leave taxpayers with a big bill.

“Fraud, especially fraud committed by a school, is simply unacceptable,” she said in her department’s statement. “Unfortunately, last year’s rule-making effort missed an opportunity to get it right. The result is a muddled process that’s unfair to students and schools, and puts taxpayers on the hook for significant costs. It’s time to take a step back and make sure these rules achieve their purpose: helping harmed students. It’s time for a regulatory reset. It is the department’s aim, and this administration’s commitment, to protect students from predatory practices while also providing clear, fair and balanced rules for colleges and universities to follow.”

The American Federation of Teachers pushed back against the decision.

“The Trump administration’s actions today show that the White House stands with predatory for-profit schools, not the students they rip off,” it said in a statement. “About the only thing worse than ripping off students with worthless degrees from for-profit colleges is denying them help to relieve their substantial debt, and allowing the schools to continue to prey on students. Given that for-profit colleges were big donors to Trump and other Republican candidates, one wonders whether this is simply a new pay-to-play scheme at the expense of our students, including our veterans, who are much helped by the rules Education Secretary Betsy DeVos wants to eliminate.”

Not everyone in higher education opposed the administration’s move, however. The Chronicle of Higher Education reported that the United Negro College Fund and the National Assn. for Equal Opportunity in Higher Education — which represent historically black colleges and universities, or HBCUs — sent a letter to DeVos this week urging her to put a hold on the implementation of the regulations and reconsider them.

“We remain concerned about the sweeping scope of the regulation and vague standards for determining ‘misrepresentation’ that could unfairly leave HBCUs and PBIs liable for frivolous claims, unwarranted fines, and unfounded penalties,” they said in the letter. “Such provisions could result in significant costs that would divert precious resources better spent on serving the needs of students.”

The nonprofit consumer advocacy group Public Citizen and the Project on Predatory Student Lending smacked DeVos’ move, saying in a statement that she had “put the profit margins of for-profit colleges ahead of the interests of students and their families” in “a craven attempt to avoid the agency’s legal obligation” to enforce the rules. The statement cited a part of the Obama-era rules that included a ban on the use of forced arbitration clauses in many student enrollment contracts:

“These clauses require students to submit any dispute that might later arise between the students and the institution to binding arbitration, a private process with little right to appeal, instead of a court of law. The rules also provide new and long-needed protections for students asserting defenses against repayment of their federal loans based on fraud or other misconduct by the students’ schools.”

[The Los Angeles Times]

1 270 271 272 273 274 383