CHICAGO — President Donald Trump‘s transportation department has been pulling back grants already announced for recreational trails and bicycle lanes, telling local officials their projects fail to promote road capacity or are “hostile to motor vehicles.”

The U.S. Department of Transportation recently sent letters to local governments in at least six states — Alabama, California, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts and New Mexico — informing them it was withdrawing money awarded under the approximately $1.2 trillion Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act signed into law by former President Joe Biden in 2021.

The reversals are among the clearest signals yet of the drastic shift from the Biden administration’s emphasis on alternative transportation, such as transit and bicyles, to the Trump administration’s focus on preserving and expanding lanes for cars and trucks.

While the new grants announced by the transportation department this year reflect that change, it’s practically unprecedented for an administration to claw back grants awarded by a predecessor without a compelling reason, such as potential environmental harms. However, the latest recalled projects didn’t have in place fully funded grant agreements, which would have made reversing them far trickier.

The transportation department’s press office didn’t respond to emails requesting comment.

Connecticut won a $5.7 million federal grant last summer to help design segments of a 44-mile recreational trail connecting several communities along the Naugatuck River.

Rick Dunne, executive director of the Naugatuck Valley Council of Governments, said the grant’s final details were being negotiated when the U.S. Department of Transportation last month sent a letter to inform local officials that the project wouldn’t move forward. The agency wants “multimodal grant programs” to focus on “projects that promote vehicular travel,” the letter explained.

“They’re defining quality of life for Americans as enhancing automobile operations,” Dunne said.

The same reason was given in a letter sent to Albuquerque, New Mexico, pulling $11.5 million in funding for a leg of a rail trail cutting through the city’s core. It was among the first active transportation projects awarded under the infrastructure law, with funding announced in 2022, but it was still going through the approval process.

“We are going to stand up for Albuquerque and prevent the Trump administration from pulling money from a project the people of Albuquerque want,” Mayor Tim Keller stated in a press release. “We will see you in court.”

Kevin Mills, vice president of policy for the Rails to Trails Conservancy, called the cuts “an affront to the priorities set by Congress and Americans’ demands for safer, more convenient walking and biking routes.”

The transportation department also withdrew a $20 million grant awarded in 2022 to transform three streetscapes in Boston. The reversal was based in part on the project’s electric vehicle charging stations, which the administration said contradicted its preference for promoting “traditional forms of energy and natural resources,” the Boston Globe reported.

Some of the withdrawn projects were relatively small in dollars and scope but still targeted for reversal due to the department’s changing priorities.

One applied to just a single block in San Diego County, California, where the community wanted to test whether it could improve safety without disrupting traffic flow. It sought to employ “creative roadway features” such as roundabouts in place of traffic signals, with plans to expand the approach to other intersections if the model proved successful, said Donna Durckel, spokesperson for the county’s Land Use and Environment Group.

But Trump’s transportation officials flagged it as “hostile to motor vehicles” in a letter sent Sept. 9 because the project included a so-called road diet that would have reduced the stretch from four lanes to two.

On the same day, McLean County in central Illinois got a similar letter recalling federal funding awarded last year to help design a final 9-mile segment of a bicyclist and pedestrian trail along Route 66. The project wouldn’t affect motor vehicle travel but would promote safety by getting bicyclists and pedestrians off the road, county engineer Jerry Stokes said.

“We’re kind of at a standstill now until new funding sources become available,” he said.

The post U.S. DOT pulls bike and trail grants in funding shift appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

President Donald Trump‘s announced deployment of the Oregon National Guard to protect federal facilities in Portland focuses attention on a corner of the South Waterfront that has already seen significant protests this year.

Protests have coalesced at 4310 S. Macadam Ave., where U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement leases an 18,300-square-foot building. By chance, the ICE facility is located across a narrow driveway from a Tesla dealership where protesters gathered throughout the spring and summer to voice objections to CEO Elon Musk’s role in federal government cuts.

Trump’s plan to deploy 200 Oregon National Guard troops has galvanized opposition in the state. Attorney General Dan Rayfield filed a motion for a temporary restraining order on Monday, seeking to block Trump from federalizing the National Guard members.

“Putting our own military on our streets is an abuse of power and a disservice to our communities and our service members,” Rayfield stated in a news release.

The planned troop deployment caught the attention of Portland’s business community. Anyeley Hallova, founder of developer Adre, said the narrative of Portland streets as out of control — often driven by video from 2020 protests — was false.

“It’s very apparent to me and other leaders in Portland that this is a very deliberate action to come into a peaceful city that’s really on the rise and doing well,” Hallova said in a video posted to social media. “Everything that’s being said about our city is incorrect. The pictures that are being used are over five years old.”

As night fell on Monday, about 30 protesters peacefully demonstrated along the sidewalk at the ICE facility. Local and federal law enforcement personnel monitored the protesters but did not interfere or interact with them. Roads remained open, although a protest encampment occupied a portion of the sidewalk.

The ICE building is owned by the Lindquist Family Limited Partnership, led by longtime local developer Stuart Lindquist. The low-rise office structure, on 1.1 acres, was completed in 2013.

The city has initiated a land-use investigation into whether immigrants are being detained at the facility for longer periods than allowed by city zoning.

Lindquist declined to comment when reached on Monday, and did not respond to written questions. He has long been part of the city’s real estate ecosystem. He began building homes in West Portland in the 1960s and then moved into other real estate sectors.

Separately, Lindquist is part of the development group that has proposed to redevelop Centennial Mills, on the Northwest Portland waterfront. The three-building mixed-use project would hold 272 residential units and four retail spaces. The Portland Design Commission’s potential approval for that project is pending.

Protests began at the ICE building on June 2, according to the state’s lawsuit. Protesters briefly erected a temporary barrier that blocked the facility’s driveway, but it was quickly cleared by Portland police.

The controversy surrounding the ICE building adds to the strange tableau in the South Waterfront, where its neighbors include the Telsa dealership and an Old Spaghetti Factory restaurant. To the north is the former Zidell Marine land purchased by the Portland Diamond Project for a potential Major League Baseball stadium site.

In between, the neighborhood is dominated by a series of high-rise condo and apartment towers, alongside sprawling medical offices owned by Oregon Health and Science University, a major employer and anchor in South Portland.

OHSU did not answer questions about how the protests and potential troop deployment are affecting its South Waterfront sites. But in a prepared statement, the medical group wrote: “OHSU is actively monitoring the situation relative to impacts to OHSU operations. OHSU is committed to a safe, peaceful environment for our patients, students and staff.”

The South Portland Neighborhood Association did not respond to a message seeking comment on Monday.

Police made 25 arrests between June 11 and June 19 stemming from protests at the facility. No arrests have been made since June 19, according to the lawsuit. But separately, Portland police stated that two arrests were made Sunday. The Oregonian/OregonLive on Monday reported additional arrests of protesters who allegedly pointed a laser at a military helicopter.

The protests, “with some limited exceptions, have been relatively small and sedate,” according to Rayfield’s lawsuit. “And the protests bear no resemblance to the substantially larger and more turbulent protests in 2020 near the federal courthouse in Portland.”

Portland police have even stood down a 50-officer Rapid Response Team because it was not needed, according to the lawsuit.

The state’s lawsuit also expressed concern that the military presence would cause an “economic chill.” In previous urban troop deployments in California and in Washington, D.C., foot traffic dropped, and economic activity was reduced, according to the lawsuit.

Mitch Green, a veteran and District 4 city councilor, criticized what he called the Trump administration’s “unlawful designs for Portland” in a video posted to social media on Monday.

Mayor Keith Wilson was joined on Monday at a press conference by other mayors from the Portland-metro area. He pointed to the state’s lawsuit against the troop deployment as the key to Oregon’s strategy to head off the move.

“The number of troops that we want or need is zero,” Wilson said. Portland would accept federal help, particularly with housing and health care costs, he added. But “this deployment isn’t something we’ve asked for,” he said.

The state’s case was assigned to federal District Court Judge Michael H. Simon, who held a conference call between the parties on Monday. Simon said he will hear Oregon’s motion at 10 a.m. on Friday.

The post Trump’s plan to deploy troops to Portland sparks backlash appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

WASHINGTON — The Federal Reserve, one of the most powerful financial institutions in the world, is receiving a $2.5 billion renovation involving two of its office buildings.

The project has become an for the embattled chair of the Fed, Jerome Powell, as he weathers nearly incessant personal attacks from President Donald Trump.

Trump has been clear about what he wants from Powell, whom he appointed to lead the central bank in 2017: lower interest rates. Yet the Fed is intended to be an independent agency, and the Supreme Court has signaled that the president can’t fire Powell just because the Fed chair won’t cut rates as fast as Trump wants. But he might be able to do so “for cause,” meaning some kind of malfeasance or neglect. Trump last week suggested that the escalating construction costs could be grounds to fire Powell.

With that threat looming in the background, the Fed decided to open the site of its massive project to a few journalists.

A massive project is revealed

On July 24, Fed staff led a small group of reporters, photographers and television camera operators on an extensive tour of the active construction site that comprises the two 1930s-era buildings. The renovation began in 2022, and the Fed hopes to complete it in the fall of 2027.

By providing journalists — and, by extension, the public — such extensive access, the Fed clearly hopes that greater transparency will help beat back the criticism emanating from the White House. Trump toured the same site several hours after the reporters and then downplayed his threats to fire the Fed chair.

In June, Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, which oversees the Fed, suggested the rebuild has been extravagant, and includes “rooftop terraces, custom elevators that open into VIP dining rooms, white marble finishes and even a private art collection.”

Fed staff, who requested anonymity to discuss the renovation, showed reporters what they said are future conference rooms that are sometimes used for meals, not “VIP dining rooms.” An elevator is being upgraded to increase accessibility to people with disabilities. And some white marble finishes were added at the insistence of a local commission (including several Trump appointees), the staff noted.

The journalists walked around dumpsters and pipes and evaded front-end loaders, while occasionally straining to hear the explanations of Fed staff over the sounds of drilling, cutting and hammering. Approximately 700 to 800 workers are involved in the project across two shifts each day. Reporters visited the roof of the Fed’s main headquarters, the Marriner S. Eccles building, which has sweeping views of the Lincoln Memorial, the National Mall and parts of downtown Washington.

Fed staff said the roof would not have “rooftop terraces” but instead would include grass and other plants as part of a “green roof” that would reduce cooling costs and stormwater runoff. There had been plans for a seating area, but that aspect was removed because it appeared to be an amenity.

Fed staff breaks down costs

The staff sought to highlight the many costs they said were largely out of their control: blast-resistant windows and other security upgrades, modern electronics and HVAC systems, and historic preservation efforts that led to the use of more marble.

The workers also used plywood extensively to protect stairs and many wall coverings, which Trump singled out as too costly.

“You saw the protection of plywood,” Trump told reporters after his tour. “I mean, that was a lot of money just to protect it for a period of time. I would have done it very gingerly and easily and not have to spend millions of dollars on protection.”

It is clearly a massive project. The Fed has shut down a street that runs between the two buildings. Underneath will be a part of a parking garage, as well as a tunnel connecting the two renovated buildings. After the project the Fed will be able to house more of its 3,000 employees in the two buildings and reduce its rented office space, officials said.

After his own tour, Trump appeared to lower the temperature around the project, at least for now, in a post on his social media platform Truth Social: “The cost overruns are substantial but, on the positive side, our Country is doing very well and can afford just about anything — Even the cost of this building!”

Should Powell lead the charge to cut the Fed’s short-term interest rates soon — economists say it could happen in September — that could appease Trump. And after that, you may never hear about the Fed’s renovation again.

The post The Fed’s $2.5 billion renovation draws scrutiny appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

By LISA MASCARO, KEVIN FREKING and LEAH ASKARINAM
Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — House Republicans stayed up all night to pass their multitrillion-dollar tax breaks package, with Speaker Mike Johnson defying the skeptics and unifying his ranks to muscle President Donald Trump‘s priority bill to approval Thursday.

With last-minute concessions and stark warnings from Trump, the Republican holdouts largely dropped their opposition to salvage the “” that’s central to the GOP agenda. The House launched debate before midnight and by dawn the vote was called, 215-214, with Democrats staunchly opposed. It next goes to the Senate, with long negotiations ahead.

“To put it simply, this bill gets Americans back to winning again,” said Johnson, R-La.

The outcome caps an intense time on Capitol Hill, with days of private negotiations and public committee hearings, many happening back-to-back, around-the-clock. Republicans insisted their sprawling 1,000-page-plus package was what voters sent them to Congress — and Trump to the White House — to accomplish. They believe it will be “rocket fuel,” as one put it during debate, for the uneasy U.S. economy.

Trump himself demanded action, visiting House Republicans at Tuesday’s conference meeting and hosting GOP leaders and the holdouts for a lengthy session Wednesday at the White House. Before the vote, the administration warned in a pointed statement that failure “would be the ultimate betrayal.”

After the legislation’s passage, Trump posted on social media: “Thank you to every Republican who voted YES on this Historic Bill! Now, it’s time for our friends in the United States Senate to get to work.”

The Senate hopes to wrap up its version by the Fourth of July holiday.

Central to the package is the GOP’s commitment to extending some $4.5 trillion in tax breaks they engineered during Trump’s first term in 2017, while temporarily adding new ones he campaigned on during his 2024 campaign, including no taxes on tips, overtime pay, car loan interest and others.

To make up for some of the lost tax revenue, the Republicans focused on changes to Medicaid and the food stamps program, largely by imposing work requirements on many of those receiving benefits. There’s also a massive rollback of green energy tax breaks from the Biden-era Inflation Reduction Act.

Additionally, the package tacks on $350 billion in new spending, with about $150 billion going to the Pentagon, including for the president’s new ” Golden Dome” defense shield, and the rest for Trump’s mass deportation and border security agenda.

All told, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates 8.6 million fewer people would have health care coverage and 3 million less people a month would have SNAP food stamps benefits with the proposed changes.

The CBO said the tax provisions would increase federal deficits by $3.8 trillion over the decade, while the changes to Medicaid, food stamps and other services would tally $1 trillion in reduced spending. The lowest-income households in the U.S. would see their resources drop, while the highest ones would see a boost, it said.

House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York read letters from Americans describing the way the program cuts would hurt them. “This is one big ugly bill,” he said.

As the minority, without the votes to stop Trump’s package, Democrats instead offered up impassioned speeches and procedural moves to stall its advance. As soon as the House floor reopened for debate, the Democrats forced a vote to adjourn. It failed.

In “the dark of night they want to pass this GOP tax scam,” said Rep. Pete Aguilar, D-Calif.

Other Democrats called it a “big, bad bill” or a “big, broken promise.”

Pulling the package together before his Memorial Day deadline has been an enormous political lift for Johnson, with few votes to spare from his slim GOP majority whose rank-and-file Republicans have conflicting priorities of their own.

Conservatives, particularly from the House Freedom Caucus, held out for steeper spending cuts to defray costs piling onto the nation’s $36 trillion debt.

At the same time, more moderate and centrist GOP lawmakers were wary of the changes to Medicaid that could result in lost health care for their constituents. And some worried the phaseout of the renewable energy tax breaks will impede businesses using them to invest in green energy projects in many states.

One big problem had been the costly deal with GOP lawmakers from New York and other high-tax states to quadruple the $10,000 deduction for state and local taxes, called SALT, to $40,000 for incomes up to $500,000, which was included in the final product.

For every faction Johnson tried to satisfy, another would roar in opposition.

Late in the night, GOP leaders unveiled a 42-page amendment with a number of revisions.

The changes included speedier implementation of the Medicaid work requirements, which will begin in December 2026, rather than January 2029, and a faster roll back of the production tax credits for clean electricity projects, both sought by the conservatives.

Also tucked into the final version were some unexpected additions — including a $12 billion fund for the Department of Homeland Security to reimburse states that help federal officials with deportations and border security.

And in a nod to Trump’s influence, the Republicans renamed a proposed new children’s savings program after the president, changing it from MAGA accounts — money account for growth and advancement — to simply “Trump” accounts.

Rep. Erin Houchin, R-Ind., said Americans shouldn’t believe the dire predictions from Democrats about the impact of the bill. “We can unlock the ‘Golden Age’ of America,” she said, echoing the president’s own words.

By early morning hours, the chief holdouts appeared to be falling in line. Rep. Ralph Norman, R-S.C., said they “got some improvements.”

But two Republicans voted against the package, including Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, a deficit watcher who had been publicly criticized by Trump, remained unmoved. “This bill is a debt bomb ticking,” he warned.

And Rep. Andy Harris, the chairman of the Freedom Caucus who wanted more time, voted present. Some others did not vote.

Final analysis of the overall package’s costs and economic impacts are still being assessed.

Along with extending existing tax breaks, it would increase the standard income tax deduction, to $32,000 for joint filers, and boost the child tax credit to $2,500. There would be an enhanced deduction, of $4,000, for older adults of certain income levels, to help defray taxes on Social Security income.

To cut spending, those seeking Medicaid health care, who are able-bodied adults without dependents, would need to fulfill 80 hours a month on a job or in other community activities.

Similarly, to receive food stamps through SNAP, those up to age 64, rather than 54, who are able-bodied and without dependents, would need to meet the 80 hours a month work or community engagement requirements. Additionally, some parents of children older than 7 years old would need to fulfill the work requirements.

Republicans said they want to root out waste, fraud and abuse in the federal programs.

Associated Press writers Matt Brown and Joey Cappelletti also contributed to this report.

The post House Republicans pass Trump’s big bill of tax breaks and program cuts after all-night session appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

By Chuck Slothower and Ethan Duran
91��Ƶ

Construction companies watching material prices should brace for uncertainty, according to experts, as president-elect Donald Trump .

On social media, Trump said one of his first executive orders will be to sign a 25 percent tariff on goods coming from Mexico and Canada, and an additional 10 percent tax on products from China. On the campaign trail Trump promised tariffs on imported goods and additional taxes on Chinese goods.

“On January 20^th, as one of my many first Executive Orders, I will sign all necessary documents to charge Mexico and Canada a 25% Tariff on ALL products coming into the United States, and its ridiculous Open Borders,” Trump on TruthSocial. The president-elect added the moves were necessary to combat drugs and illegal immigration.

“This Tariff will remain in effect until such time as Drugs, in particular Fentanyl, and all Illegal Aliens stop this Invasion of our County,” he added.

The U.S. imports the most goods in the world from Mexico, Canada and China as its top-three importers, U.S. Census data showed. Because of how quickly the Trump administration wants to enact tariffs and how tariffs might drive up costs, economists from the largest construction associations said contractors will likely face uncertainty when managing materials prices.

“Heading into 2025 it’s unclear if prices will remain so well-behaved,” said Anirban Basu, chief economist of the Associated Builders and Contractors of America, in a statement. “The next administration’s trade policy increases uncertainty regarding construction materials costs. Beyond the implications of potential tariffs, input prices may rise in the short term if purchases rush to import materials prior to the implementation of those policies,” he added.

“Construction is more reliant than most industries on imported materials, parts and components,” said Ken Simonson, the top economist for the Associated General Contractors. “Because the industry is so diverse and obtains materials mainly through intermediaries rather than importing directly, it’s impossible to estimate the share of construction purchases that go for imports. Also, it varies by location as to whether contractors are using domestically sourced or imported materials such as lumber, steel or cement,” he added.

Simonson recalled when then-President Trump enacted 25 percent tariffs on steel and 10 percent on aluminum, which was followed by domestic producers raising prices and contractors experiencing supply chain problems. It’s not clear yet which items will be subject to tariffs and the effects, but another danger is the knock-on effects as other countries threaten to enact their own tariffs in retaliation, he added.

“Both the tariff-induced price increases and the responses are likely to be damaging to construction firms and to the demand for construction,” Simonson said.

If carried out, additional tariffs could result in higher prices for a wide range of construction materials, from Canadian softwood lumber — key for homebuilding — to concrete, glass and steel used in large commercial buildings and asphalt binder used in roads.

“Anything that contributes to further increased price of materials is never a good thing for the industry or the public, in our view,” said Mike Salsgiver, executive director of the Associated General Contractors Oregon-Columbia chapter.

“Tariffs should be a tool of last resort,” Salsgiver said. “We would rather see the administration engage in full-throated trade negotiations.”

Yet tariffs could be a boon to producers of domestically produced materials, such as Portland-based Timberlab, which is planning to build a mass-timber manufacturing facility in rural Millersburg, Oregon.

“That is going to present renewed opportunity for local production, particularly around mass timber,” said Ezra Hammer, a Jordan Ramis land use attorney in Portland.

Trump’s tariff talk may be only a negotiating position, said Jordan Schnitzer, CEO of Schnitzer Properties, a commercial developer and investment firm in Portland.

“I think President Trump will use that as a threat and not enact the draconian tariffs he’s talked about,” Schnitzer said.

Schnitzer said it makes sense to stand up to nations such as China that he said have committed widespread intellectual property theft. Intellectual property has long been a contentious issue in U.S.-China trade talks.

“China has taken advantage of the United States by basically learning and stealing its technology and ramping up its production,” Schnitzer said. “You can’t blame them, but I think we’re just waking up now that we need to strengthen our manufacturing in this country.”

Schnitzer said he was far more concerned by the prospect of an immigration crackdown than he was by tariffs.

“If President Trump starts going into businesses and rounding people up who don’t have U.S. citizenships, you will see construction projects grind to a halt, you will see service businesses in massive trouble.”

Tariffs could make project financing more unpredictable

While American-made products are important for the industry, the construction economy still relies heavily on imports, said Josh Levy, a partner and co-leader of Husch Blackwell’s Construction and Design practice at the law firm’s Milwaukee office. Materials prices were starting to stabilize after the pandemic and war in Ukraine, but now contractors might have to watch for rising materials and project costs he added.

“There’s concerns with how tariffs, if they are rolled out, raise the cost of materials for construction,” Levy said. “I think most people would prefer that the dollars get spent strengthening United States steel suppliers. The reality is that a construction economy relies on (imports), and we already saw a lot of price volatility in the past four years due to nonpartisan issues such as COVID-19 and war,” he added.

“Now injecting policy to make that material likely more expensive is going to impact how jobs move forward,” Levy said, noting that if the next president moves forward with mass tariffs on foreign producers it will raise the cost of construction for projects.

A developer raising money for a project has many plates spinning between different sources of funding, and all sources come together at a moment, Levy said. “And price fluctuation can disrupt putting the funding of a project together,” he added.

Some projects might wait until the materials market stabilizes, Levy said. Others might purchase materials ahead of time and hold on to them when projects are ready to receive them.

Contractors should keep their eyes on materials costs

Because uncertainty is a key feature with the Trump administration and trade policy, contractors will have to watch materials pricing closely in the early days, said Dan Wilson, an international trade and supply chain attorney at Husch Blackwell in Washington, D.C.

On the raw materials side, aluminum and steel will be a “target” for the incoming administration, the former central to a federal case over dumped aluminum extrusions in the U.S., Wilson said. Tariffs are expected to home in on Chinese steel sources and previously loosened trade restrictions on European steel are expected to be in jeopardy as well, he added.

Canadian softwood lumber suppliers fought hard to make progress as their products were subjected to raised tariffs in August, but that progress will likely be wiped, Wilson said. For materials further downstream, steel products in Mexico using inputs from China are on the table as well, he added.

China supplied the most goods to the U.S. and made up 16.5 percent of total goods imports, according to the Office of the United States Trade Representative. In 2022, China supplied $536.3 billion worth of goods, Mexico supplied $454.8 billion and Canada supplied $436.6 billion in imported products.

American manufacturers competing with imports will have benefits as purchasers seek alternatives, Wilson said. However, those who are physically further away from domestic producers will be most affected, he added.

“One other issue I’ve seen in construction and other infrastructure projects is different ways to assign the risk of tariff liability as a contractual matter,” Wilson said, noting contractors will triage events such as tariffs in their contracts with clients to offset risk.

“You’re really going to have to look at diversifying supply chains with an emphasis on U.S. production,” he added.

Acts such as the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the Inflation Reduction Act, which were signed by President Joe Biden with amendments preferring domestic suppliers, will likely be amended with tighter restrictions under the Trump administration, he added. Many of the preference rules are centered on steel, leading to more benefit for local steel manufacturers.

After preparing for four years, the Trump administration will likely be poised to flex its powers quickly with little challenge, Wilson said. Construction firms will have to watch and act quickly, as well, he added.

“This incoming administration has done its homework,” Wilson said. “For the last four years they’ve really poured over the statute books and found as many levers to give the president as much authority to act as quickly as possible without much Congressional oversight. So, we might even see quicker action than was the case in the first administration when it comes to tariffs,” he added.

The post Proposed tariffs could target the construction industry from many angles appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

By JOSH BOAK and ZEKE MILLER
Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — Working-class voters helped Republicans make steady election gains this year and expanded a coalition that increasingly includes rank-and-file union members, a political shift spotlighting one of President-elect Donald Trump‘s latest Cabinet picks: a GOP congresswoman, who has drawn labor support, to be his labor secretary.

Oregon Rep. Lori Chavez-DeRemer narrowly lost her bid for a second term this month, despite strong backing from union members, a key part of the Democratic base but gravitating in the Trump era toward a Republican Party traditionally allied with business interests.

“Lori’s strong support from both the Business and Labor communities will ensure that the Labor Department can unite Americans of all backgrounds behind our Agenda for unprecedented National Success – Making America Richer, Wealthier, Stronger and more Prosperous than ever before!” Trump said in a statement announcing his choice Friday night.

For decades, labor unions have sided with Democrats and been greeted largely with hostility by Republicans. But with Trump’s populist appeal, his working-class base saw a decent share of union rank-and-file voting for Republicans this year, even as major unions, including the AFL-CIO and the United Auto Workers, endorsed Democrat Kamala Harris in the White House race.

Trump sat down with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters union leadership and members this year, and when he emerged from that meeting, he boasted that a significant chunk of union voters were backing him. Of a possible Teamsters endorsement, he said, “Stranger things have happened.”

The Teamsters ultimately declined to endorse either Trump, the former president, or Harris, the vice president, though leader Sean O’Brien had a prominent speaking slot at the Republican National Convention.

Kara Deniz, a Teamsters spokesperson, told the Associated Press that O’Brien met with more than a dozen House Republicans this past week to lobby on behalf of Chavez-DeRemer. “Chavez-DeRemer would be an excellent choice for labor secretary and has his backing,” Deniz said.

The work of the Labor Department affects workers’ wages, health and safety, ability to unionize, and employers’ rights to fire employers, among other responsibilities.

On Election Day, Trump deepened his support among voters without a college degree after running just slightly ahead of Democrat Joe Biden with noncollege voters in 2020.

Trump made modest gains, earning a clear majority of this group, while only about 4 in 10 supported Harris, according to AP VoteCast, a sweeping survey of more than 120,000 voters nationwide.

Roughly 18% of voters in this year’s election were from union households, with Harris winning a majority of the group. But Trump’s performance among union members kept him competitive and helped him win key states such as Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin.

Chavez-DeRemer was one of few House Republicans to endorse the “Protecting the Right to Organize” or PRO Act, which would allow more workers to conduct organizing campaigns and add penalties for companies that violate workers’ rights. The measure would weaken “right-to-work” laws that allow employees in more than half the states to avoid participating in or paying dues to unions that represent workers at their places of employment.

Trump’s first term saw firmly pro-business policies from his appointees across government, including those on the National Labor Relations Board. Trump, a real estate developer and businessman before winning the presidency, generally has backed policies that would make it harder for workers to unionize.

During his recent campaign, Trump criticized union bosses, and at one point suggested that UAW members should not pay their dues. His first administration did expand overtime eligibility rules, but not nearly as much as Democrats wanted, and a Trump-appointed judge has since struck down the Biden administration’s more generous overtime rules.

He has stacked his incoming administration with officials who worked on the Heritage Foundation’s “Project 2025” blueprint, which includes a sharp swing away from Biden’s pro-union policies.

“Chavez-DeRemer’s record suggests she understands the value of policies that strengthen workers’ rights and economic security,” said Rebecca Dixon, president and CEO of National Employment Law Project, which is backed my many of the country’s major labor unions. “But the Trump administration’s agenda is fundamentally at odds with these principles, threatening to roll back workplace protections, undermine collective bargaining, and prioritize corporate profits over the needs of working people. This is where her true commitment to workers will be tested.”

Other union leaders also issued praise, but also sounded a note of caution.

AFL-CIO President Liz Shuler welcomed the choice while taking care to note Trump’s history of opposing polices that support unions.

“It remains to be seen what she will be permitted to do as secretary of labor in an administration with a dramatically anti-worker agenda,” Shuler said.

The post Trump’s Republican Party is increasingly winning union voters appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

By GILLIAN FLACCUS
Associated Press

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — The Trump administration said Wednesday that it would slash millions of acres of protected habitat designated for the imperiled northern spotted owl in Oregon, Washington state and Northern California, much of it in prime timber locations in Oregon’s coastal ranges.

Environmentalists immediately decried the move and accused the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under President Donald Trump of taking a parting shot at protections designed to help restore the species in favor of the timber industry. The tiny owl is listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act and was rejected for an upgrade to endangered status last year by the federal agency despite losing nearly 4 percent of its population annually.

“This revision guts protected habitat for the northern spotted owl by more than a third. It’s Trump’s latest parting gift to the timber industry and another blow to a species that needs all the protections it can get to fully recover,” said Noah Greenwald, endangered species director for the Center for Biological Diversity.

Timber groups applauded the decision, which won’t take effect for 60 days. More thinning and management of protected forests is necessary to prevent wildfires, which devastated about 300 acres of spotted owl habitat last fall, said Travis Joseph, president of the American Forest Resources Council.

Loss of the ability to log in areas protected for the spotted owl has devastated rural communities, he said. The 3.4 million acres removed from federal protections Wednesday includes all of Oregon’s so-called O&C lands, which are big timber territory. The more than 2 million acres are spread in a checkerboard pattern over 18 counties in western Oregon.

“This rule rights a wrong imposed on rural communities and businesses and gives us a chance to restore balance to federal forest management and species conservation in the Pacific Northwest,” Joseph said.

The Fish and Wildlife Service agreed in a settlement with the timber industry to reevaluate the spotted owls’ protected territory following a 2018 U.S. Supreme Court decision involving a different federally protected species.

The Trump administration has moved to roll back protections for waterways and wetlands, narrow protections for wildlife facing extinction and open more public land to oil and gas drilling.

But for decades, the federal government has been trying to save the northern spotted owl, a native bird that sparked an intense battle over logging across Washington, Oregon and California.

The dark-eyed owl prefers to nest in old-growth forests and received federal protections in 1990, a listing that dramatically redrew the economic landscape for the Pacific Northwest timber industry and launched a decadeslong battle between environmentalists and loggers. Old-growth Douglas firs, many 100 to 200 years old, that are preferred by the owl are also of great value to loggers.

After the owl was listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, earning it a Time magazine cover, U.S. officials halted logging on millions of acres of old-growth forests on federal lands to protect the bird’s habitat. But the population kept declining, and it faces another threat: competition from the barred owl.

The Fish and Wildlife Service has since said the northern spotted owl warrants being moved up to the more robust “endangered” status because of continued population declines. But the agency refused to do so last year, saying other species took higher priority.

That decision is facing a legal challenge led by the Center for Biological Diversity.

The post Trump administration slashes spotted owls’ habitat appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

By ELLEN KNICKMEYER
and MATTHEW BROWN
Associated Press

(AP) — The Trump administration moved forward Friday on gutting a longstanding federal protection for the nation’s birds, over objections from former federal officials and many scientists that billions more birds will likely perish as a result.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service published its take on the proposed rollback in the Federal Register. It’s a final step that means the change — greatly limiting federal authority to prosecute industries for practices that kill migratory birds — could be made official within 30 days.

The wildlife service acknowledged in its findings that the rollback would have a “negative” effect on the many bird species covered by the 1918 Migratory Bird Treaty Act, which range from hawks and eagles to seabirds, storks, songbirds and sparrows.

The move scales back federal prosecution authority for the deadly threats migratory birds face from industry — from electrocution on power lines, to wind turbines that knock them from the air and oil field waste pits where landing birds perish in toxic water.

Industry operations kill an estimated 450 million to 1.1 billion birds annually, out of roughly 7 billion birds in North America, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and recent studies.

The Trump administration maintains that the Act should apply only to birds killed or harmed intentionally, and is putting that “clarifying” change into regulation. The change would “improve consistency and efficiency in enforcement,” the Fish and Wildlife Service said.

The administration has continued to push the migratory bird regulation even after a federal judge in New York in August rejected the administration’s legal rationale.

Two days after news organizations announced President Donald Trump‘s defeat by Democrat Joe Biden, federal officials advanced the bird treaty changes to the White House, one of the final steps before adoption.

Trump was “in a frenzy to finalize his bird-killer policy,” David Yarnold, president of the National Audubon Society, said in a statement Friday. ”Reinstating this 100-year-old bedrock law must be a top conservation priority for the Biden-Harris Administration” and Congress.

Steve Holmer with the American Bird Conservancy said the change would accelerate bird population declines that have swept North America since the 1970s.

How the 1918 treaty gets enforced has sweeping ramifications for the construction of commercial buildings, electric transmission systems and other infrastructure, said Rachel Jones, vice president of the National Association of Manufacturers.

Jones said the changes under Trump would be needed to make sure the bird law wasn’t used in an “abusive way.” That’s a longstanding complaint from industry lawyers despite federal officials’ contention that they bring criminal charges only rarely.

It’s part of a flurry of last-minute changes under the outgoing administration benefiting industry. Others would expand Arctic drilling, favor development over habitat protections for imperiled species and potentially hamstring future regulation of environmental and public health threats, among other rollbacks.

The post Trump administration moves ahead on removing bird protections appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

By MATTHEW BROWN, JOHN FLESHER and JIM MONE
Associated Press

BLOOMINGTON, Minn. (AP) — Trump administration officials on Thursday stripped Endangered Species Act protections for gray wolves in most of the U.S., ending longstanding federal safeguards and putting states and tribes in charge of overseeing the predators.

The U.S. Department of Interior announcement just days ahead of the Nov. 3 election could lead to resumption of wolf hunts in Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin — a crucial battleground in the campaign between President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden.

It’s the latest in a series of administration actions on the environment that appeal to key blocs of rural voters in the race’s final days, including steps to allow more mining in Minnesota and logging in Alaska.

Minnesota Gov. Tim Waltz, who opposes recreational wolf hunting, called the decision disappointing and wildlife advocacy groups pledged to fight it in court.

Both feared and revered by people, gray wolves have recovered from near extinction in parts of the country but remain absent from much of their historical range.

Federal wildlife officials contend thriving populations in the western Great Lakes region, Rocky Mountains and Pacific Northwest ensure the species’ long-term survival. They argue it’s not necessary for wolves to be in every place they once inhabited to be considered recovered.

In an announcement attended by several dozen people at a national wildlife refuge overlooking the Minnesota River in the Minneapolis suburb of Bloomington, Interior Secretary David Bernhardt declared the gray wolf’s recovery “a milestone of success.”

“In the early part of the 20th century the gray wolf had essentially become a ghost throughout the United States,” Bernhardt said. “That is not the case today.”

Former U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service director Dan Ashe agreed that wolves were recovered and said it’s time for the agency to “move on” to help other imperiled wildlife. But he questioned the announcement coming so close to the election.

“It creates the perception that it’s being done for political reasons,” Ashe said in an interview.
Some biologists and former government officials who previously reviewed the administration’s proposal for lifting protections said it lacked scientific justification. And wildlife advocates worry the move will make it harder, if not impossible, for wolves to recover in more regions, such as the southern Rocky Mountains and portions of the Northeast.

Their numbers also are sure to drop in the western Great Lakes area, as happened previously when federal controls were lifted, said Adrian Treves, a professor of environmental studies at the University of Wisconsin. Hunting seasons took their toll and research showed that poachers were emboldened by the absence of federal enforcement, he said.

Agency scientists believe wolves can continue expanding even without the federal listing, although support from states is considered crucial.

Farmers and hunters welcomed the news.

Ashleigh Calaway of Pittsville, Wisconsin said 13 of her family farm’s sheep were killed by wolves in July of 2019. Reducing wolf numbers through state-sponsored hunts would help prevent such attacks, she said.

“It’s allowing them to be managed to a level to lower the risk to sheep and cattle,” Calaway said.

The decision keeps protections for a small population of Mexican gray wolves in the Southwest. It’s the latest attempt over two decades to return management authority to the states. Courts have frequently rejected such moves after opponents filed lawsuits.

Environmental groups said protections are still needed to shield small populations of wolves in West Coast states, including California, and to help them expand to new areas.

“Instead of pursuing further wolf recovery, the Fish and Wildlife Service has just adopted the broadest, most destructive delisting rule yet,” said Collette Adkins with the Center for Biological Diversity.

An initiative on the Colorado ballot next week seeks to reintroduce wolves there in coming years. With federal protections removed, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service would have no say about moving ahead with the plan, if voters approve it.

Wolves were wiped out across most of the U.S. by the 1930s under government-sponsored poisoning and trapping campaigns. A remnant population in the western Great Lakes region has since expanded to some 4,400 animals in Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin.

More than 2,000 occupy six states in the Northern Rockies and Pacific Northwest after wolves from Canada were reintroduced in Idaho and Yellowstone National Park beginning 25 years ago.

Following a protracted courtroom battle that ended when Congress intervened, the Northern Rockies wolves are now under state management and are hunted in Montana, Wyoming and Idaho.

State officials also allowed hunting of Great Lakes wolves for several years last decade when protections were removed. The hunts ended when protections were restored under a 2014 federal court order.

Wolves were given initial federal protections in the late 1960s and listed as an endangered species in 1978, except in Minnesota where they were classified as threatened. A government-sponsored recovery effort had cost roughly $160 million as of last year.

The wolves lose protection 60 days after the decision is published Nov. 3 in the Federal Register, although the wildlife service will continue monitoring their populations for five years.

Wolves have never been legally protected in Alaska, which has a population of 7,000 to 11,000.

The post Trump officials end gray wolf protections across most of US appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

With eight months in office now under his belt, President Donald Trump has had the chance to turn talk into walk, signing a number of orders and establishing budget priorities that roll back regulations on business.

It’s not surprising many unions and activists are unhappy with the changes, but not all builders are excited, either. Some are keeping their in-house policies, especially those relating to employee safety, at Obama-era levels.

“At this point, going backward is unthinkable,” said Dan Mehls, general manager of Mortenson Construction‘s Portland office.

Though businesses are generally in favor of deregulation, some in the local construction industry feel that gains related to safety and environment should stay in place.

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt attorney Stephanie Holmberg, who leads the firm’s construction services team, said she’s heard some in-house counsels are advising clients in the construction industry to keep their higher standards in place regardless of what the president does.

“It’s a new world now, and that’s how a lot of business owners see it,” she said.

PLAYING IT SAFE

Construction companies have discovered there’s money to be made from fewer accidents, said attorney Jeremy Vermilyea.

“The reason it makes sense to me is, it’s smart business, in a lot of respects,” he said. “What contractors have figured out is there’s a lot of profit to be squeezed out of safety, and that, as a matter of business, safety pays.”

It used to be that everyone in the industry hated the notion of spending money on safety and training, holding safety meetings and putting together a good safety program, Vermilyea said. But contractors have figured out there’s lots of money on the back end to be made, in the form of reduced insurance rates and other benefits. SAIF Corp., for example, recently announced a retro return of $10 million for participating members of Associated General Contractors.

Three years ago the industry pushed back against rules dictating at which height ironworkers must tie off. Builders took the position that there were too many restrictions on business and voiced concerns that satisfying so many requirements would lead to lost profit. But what they’ve found is that the regulations save them money in the long haul through fewer accidents, lower workers compensation rates, and other opportunities.

What contractors value most is predictability and consistency, Vermilyea said. So despite generally favoring fewer rules, contractors might oppose changing laws after they’d had a chance to get used to them.

“If every business changed what they’re doing on the basis of a presidential order or directive from a public agency being rolled back, you’d have chaos and inconsistency,” Vermilyea said.

Another reason builders are wary of further deregulation where safety and environment are concerned is many Obama-era contracts are already in place and many have clean water or air conditions. So irrespective of what happens at the federal level, those contracts will remain in place.

“If you’re a contractor and you’re required to do something for one job, you want to be able to say you’ve got one set of rules across the company or the state. You don’t want to do one thing on one job and another thing on another job,” Vermilyea said.

The Obama administration produced a number of influential workplace safety and health regulations. They include OSHA requirements such as a new beryllium standard, which went into effect this year. A new standard limiting employee exposure to silica dust has drawn forceful pushback from builders and other businesses. OSHA will also institute new injury reporting and anti-retaliation requirements strongly supported by unions.

A number of other rule-changes were in-progress when Trump took over in January, including OSHA requirements relating to combustible dust and infectious disease.

Trump and the Republican-majority Congress have also moved to slash the budgets of various regulatory agencies and oversight bodies. For one, the Department of Labor, which operates worker safety and health programs, was proposed to be cut by 21 percent. Budget proposals call for the elimination of the Chemical Safety Board and cut job safety research by $100 million.

A TWO-FOR-ONE TRADE

One of Trump’s first actions as president was an executive order freezing in-progress final rules not yet in place. There’s also the “two-for-one” order he signed in his first days in office, which directed that for every new business regulation passed, two existing ones had to be eliminated. Unions and advocates for workers worry anti-bullying campaigns and workplace violence and immigrant training programs will be axed in budget negotiations.

Mike Salsgiver, executive director of AGC’s Oregon-Columbia chapter, said he’s generally in favor of eliminating onerous requirements on businesses, the passage of which increased during Obama’s tenure.

But a bright line for Associated General Contractors is worker safety, he said, though he hasn’t seen anything passed so far that would cause him to want to fight the White House.

“We would strongly oppose anything that would weaken an employer’s ability to provide workers safety,” Salsgiver said.

One issue he and his counterparts at other AGC chapters around the country have experienced this year is a shortage of government appointees in critical positions. For this reason it’s still too soon to assess the impact of the Trump administration on business, he said.

“Believe it or not, it’s still too early to tell. There are still so many unfilled positions in the administration, we still often don’t know who we’re supposed to be dealing with,” Salsgiver said.

Though there aren’t many contractors that perform federal work, federal grant money regularly has strings attached. However, not much has been approved by the current Congress. Much about construction’s view of the Trump administration will come down to how Trump delivers on promises to enable infrastructure construction.

“That’s a proposal that has all of us in construction understandably very excited,” Salsgiver said.

The post As Trump strikes down Obama-era rules, builders look for certainty appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.