Tag Archives: Donald Trump

Delaware legislature moves to guarantee abortion access in Trump era

An exam room at the Planned Parenthood South Austin Health Center is shown following the U.S. Supreme Court decision striking down a Texas law imposing strict regulations on abortion doctors and facilities in Austin, Texas, U.S. June 27, 2016. REUTERS/Ilana Panich-Linsman

By Barbara Goldberg

(Reuters) – The Delaware state Senate on Tuesday passed a bill that would keep abortion legal in the state if a future U.S. Supreme Court shaped by President Donald Trump overturns the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that legalized it nationally.

The measure was approved by a vote of 11-7 but needs to be passed by the House and signed by Democratic Governor John Carney Jr. to take effect.

Democrats control both houses of the Delaware legislature but are facing a June 30 end to this year’s session.

Carney “supports the rights and protections afforded women under Roe v. Wade” but has not yet said whether he will sign the bill into law, said his spokeswoman Jessica Borcky.

Trump has promised to appoint justices to the nation’s top court, including recent appointee Neil Gorsuch, who would overturn the Roe v. Wade ruling and leave it up to the individual states to decide whether to legalize abortion. Trump received strong support from anti-abortion groups in the election campaign.

Delaware is one of 11 states with a pre-Roe abortion ban still on the books, according to the Guttmacher Institute which tracks reproductive policy.

If Roe v. Wade is overturned, abortion would be almost immediately illegal in four states – Louisiana, Mississippi, North Dakota and South Dakota, according to Guttmacher and the Center for Reproductive Rights. In the other 46 states, abortion would remain legal but in at least 10 states – including Delaware – it could become illegal with a step as simple and swift as a state attorney general’s opinion, Guttmacher said.

“There wasn’t a sense of urgency until President Trump got elected,” said Kathleen MacRae, executive director of the ACLU of Delaware. The ACLU and Planned Parenthood of Delaware formed the “She Decides Delaware” campaign to lobby for legislation to keep abortion legal.

“We don’t want to leave the women of Delaware in a vulnerable position,” MacRae said. “It’s up to the woman and the family to decide when she would like to become a parent.”

Momentum for the bill grew in April when a coalition of state religious leaders including Jewish, Episcopal, Methodist, Presbyterian and Unitarian clergy publicly declared “acceptance” of abortion in a show of support for Planned Parenthood. The state’s Catholic leader, Bishop Francis Malooly of the Diocese of Wilmington, immediately denounced the statement.

MINIMALIST DESIGN

The bill itself has a minimalist design. It aims to keep the provisions of Roe v. Wade rather than repeal the 1953 state ban.

“This bill simply seeks to codify the framework in place for a very long time – that a woman has a right to choose,” Senator Bryan Townsend, a Democrat who is the bill’s sponsor, told colleagues before the vote.

“It’s a decision that belongs with the woman, her doctor and her family,” said Senator Stephanie Hansen, a Democrat and bill co-sponsor.

Opponents denounced the move. “Any civilized society restricts an individual’s right to choose when it would affect an innocent person. I can think of no more innocent person than an unborn child,” said Senator Bryant Richardson, a Republican.

“You can codify abortion all you want but you are still codifying the murder of an unborn child,” said Delaware Right to Life spokeswoman Moira Sheridan.

Under the 1950s’ Delaware ban, terminating a pregnancy is a felony for the provider and a misdemeanor for the woman, except when it is deemed a “therapeutic abortion” in either case.

Dr. Larry Glazerman, medical director at Planned Parenthood Delaware, said he is confident the bill is enough to protect him and other doctors who provide abortion from prosecution.

(Reporting by Barbara Goldberg in New York; Editing by Cynthia Osterman)

No change to U.S. Navy freedom of navigation patrols: commander

FILE PHOTO: Commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet Admiral Scott Swift sits in front of a large poster of an Australian Navy frigate as he speaks during a media conference at the 2015 Pacific International Maratime Exposition in Sydney, Australia, October 6, 2015. REUTERS/David Gray/File Photo

By Himani Sarkar

SINGAPORE (Reuters) – There has been no policy change with regard to U.S. Navy freedom of navigation operations under the administration of President Donald Trump, U.S. Pacific Fleet Commander Admiral Scott Swift said on Monday.

Under the previous administration, the U.S. navy conducted such voyages through the South China Sea – most of which is claimed by China – angering Beijing. But none has been conducted in the region under the Trump administration.

The New York Times reported last week that a U.S. Pacific Command request in March to sail near the disputed Scarborough Shoal, a prime fishing ground that China seized in 2012, was rejected by top Pentagon officials.

Two other requests by the Navy in February were also turned down, it said.

Some saw this as an indication that the United States wanted to avoid antagonizing China while waiting to see how far it would go in helping to press North Korea to give up its ballistic missile and nuclear programs.

“There is nothing that has significantly changed in the last two or three months,” Admiral Scott Swift told reporters in Singapore, referring to the U.S. Navy excursions it says it conducts to ensure freedom of navigation.

“We just present the opportunities when we have a ship in the area and there’s an area of interest … They are either taken advantage of or they’re not.”

China’s extensive claims to the South china Sea, which sees about $5 trillion in ship-borne trade pass every year, are challenged by Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Vietnam, as well as Taiwan.

The United States has criticized China’s construction of man-made islands and build-up of military facilities in the sea, and expressed concern they could be used to restrict free movement.

Late last month, top U.S. commander in the Asia-Pacific region, Admiral Harry Harris, said the United States would likely carry out freedom of navigation operations in the South China Sea soon, without offering details.

Swift said there has been no change in the importance the United States placed on the South China Sea issue.

“We are on track to conduct over 900 ship days of operations this year in the South China Sea,” he said.

On China’s recent unveiling of a domestically built aircraft carrier, Swift said: “If you have a global economy, I think you need a global navy to look after that economy.”

“If they think that they need carriers to support their maritime strategy, then I am not concerned about it.”

(Editing by Miyoung Kim and Robert Birsel)

Dollar slips, yen gains, after Trump fires FBI chief

Dollar banknotes are seen in this picture illustration taken April 28, 2017. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration

By Jemima Kelly

LONDON (Reuters) – The dollar fell and the perceived safe-haven yen gained on Wednesday, after U.S. President Donald Trump abruptly fired FBI Director James Comey in a move that shocked Washington and dampened some of this week’s strong risk appetite.

Rekindled fears that North Korea could be gearing up for another weapons test also underpinned the yen, which had sunk to an eight-week low the previous day as investors’ appetite for riskier currencies increased on the back of a weekend French election result that eased euro break-up fears.

The dollar, which had strengthened to as much as 114.325 yen on Tuesday <JPY=>, slipped back to 113.87 yen.

Trump said he had sacked FBI Director James Comey – who had been leading an investigation into the Trump 2016 presidential campaign’s possible collusion with Russia to influence the election outcome – over his handling of an email scandal involving presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.

But the move ignited a political firestorm, raising suspicions among Democrats and others that the White House was trying to blunt the FBI probe involving Russia.

The dollar slipped 0.2 percent against a broad index <.DXY>.

“There’s not much risk sentiment – that’s to some extent the main driver today, mainly with respect to geopolitical questions,” said Credit Agricole currency strategist Valentin Marinov in London.

Comments from European Central Bank President Mario Draghi failed to have any clear impact on the euro, which was flat at $1.0878 <EUR=>. Draghi said it was too early for the ECB to declare victory in its quest to boost euro zone inflation.

“Draghi is repeating the same message that he made at the last ECB press conference – there are no big surprises. He’s defending the ECB’s dovish policy stance,” said Marinov.

The euro had risen to a six-month high above $1.10 on Monday, after Emmanuel Macron defeated the anti-EU Marine Le Pen in France’s presidential run-off, as worries over European political risk faded and focus returned to central bank policy.

The Swiss franc, another safe-haven currency, fell to its lowest in seven months on Tuesday and stayed close to that at 1.09575 francs per euro, flat on the day <EURCHF=>.

Commerzbank currency strategist Esther Reichelt, in Frankfurt, though, said risk appetite could only drive the currency market so far before new drivers were needed.

“Dollar strength could materialize more, given the more benevolent risk environment, but that can only move the market for so long – you always need new impetus,” she said.

U.S. political uncertainty has tended to weigh on the dollar in recent months, on the view that a divided Congress could derail Trump’s promised tax reform and stimulus programme.

(Reporting by Jemima Kelly, editing by Larry King)

Colorado school cancels classes over threat after Trump piñata incident

By Keith Coffman

DENVER (Reuters) – A Colorado high school canceled classes on Monday following an unspecified online threat, authorities said, days after a Spanish teacher there was suspended over allegations he allowed students to strike a piñata depicting President Donald Trump.

Activities at Roosevelt High School in the town of Johnstown, about 40 miles north of Denver, were put on hold out of an abundance of caution, Martin Foster, superintendent of the Johnstown-Milliken school district, said in a statement.

“Recent tragedies around the country and in our own state have heightened everyone’s concern for the safety of students,” Foster said. He did not say if the threat was related to the piñata incident.

Colorado has been the scene of several school shootings and threats, most notably the 1999 massacre at Columbine High School, where two students fatally shot a teacher and 12 students before committing suicide.

Foster said he became aware last Friday of social media posts of a Cinco De Mayo event at the school where a photograph of Trump was affixed to a piñata. Cinco De Mayo is an annual celebration commemorating the Mexican army’s defeat of French forces at the Battle of Puebla in 1862.

“This was an incredibly disrespectful act that does not reflect the values of Roosevelt High School or the school district,” Foster said.

The teacher, whom the district has not publicly identified, has been placed on paid administrative leave while the incident is investigated, Foster said.

Classes and other activities will resume on Tuesday with an increased police presence at the school, Assistant Superintendent Jason Seybert said by telephone.

(Reporting by Keith Coffman; Editing by Ben Klayman and Peter Cooney)

Judges hit Trump lawyer with tough questions over revised travel ban

FILE PHOTO: A member of the Al Murisi family, Yemeni nationals who were denied entry into the U.S. last week because of the recent travel ban, shows the cancelled visa in their passport from their failed entry to reporters as they successfully arrive to be reunited with their family at Washington Dulles International Airport in Chantilly, Virginia, U.S. February 6, 2017. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst/File Photo

By Lawrence Hurley

RICHMOND, Va. (Reuters) – Federal appeals court judges on Monday peppered a U.S. Justice Department lawyer with tough questions about President Donald Trump’s temporary ban on travelers from six Muslim-majority nations, with several voicing skepticism that protecting national security was the aim of the policy, not religious bias.

Six Democratic appointees on a court dominated by judges named by Democratic presidents showed concerns about reviving the Republican president’s March executive order that prohibited new visas to enter the United States for citizens of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen for three months.

But three Republican appointees on the Richmond, Virginia-based 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals seemed to lean toward the administration, asking whether the president should be second-guessed when it comes to protecting the country’s borders and whether the plaintiffs bringing the suit had been sufficiently harmed by the order during arguments before 13 judges.

Based on the judges’ questions, a ruling could hinge on whether the appeals court agrees with a lower court judge that past statements by Trump about the need to prevent Muslims from entering the United States should be taken into account. That would be bad news for a young administration seeking victory on one of its first policy changes.

“This is not a Muslim ban,” Acting Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall, arguing for the government, told the judges during the hearing that lasted two hours, twice as long as scheduled.

Judge Robert King, named by Democratic former President Bill Clinton, told Wall that Trump has never retracted previous comments about wanting to impose a ban on Muslims.

“He’s never repudiated what he said about the Muslim ban,” King said, referring to Trump’s campaign promise for a “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.”

POLITICAL DEBATE

Wall told the judges past legal precedent holds that the court should not look behind the text of the Trump’s executive order, which does not mention any specific religion, to get at its motivations. He warned that despite the “heated and passionate political debate” about the ban, there was a need to be careful not to set legal precedent that would open the door to broader questioning of presidential decision making on security matters.

Judge Paul Niemeyer, appointed by Republican former President George H.W. Bush, told Omar Jadwat, the American Civil Liberties Union lawyer representing the plaintiffs who challenged the order, that they were asking the court to rule on a president’s national security judgments.

“You have the judiciary supervising and assessing how the executive is carrying out his office,” Niemeyer said, pressing Jadwat, who seemed to stumble at times after pointed questioning by the judges. “I just don’t know where this stops.”

The revised travel ban was challenged in Maryland by refugee organizations and individuals who said they were being discriminated against because they were Muslim and because they had family members adversely affected by the ban. They argue the order violated federal immigration law and a section of the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment barring the government from favoring or disfavoring a particular religion.

The administration appealed a March 15 ruling by Maryland-based federal judge Theodore Chuang that put the ban on hold just a day before it was due to go into effect.

The arguments marked the latest legal test for Trump’s ban, which also was blocked by federal judge Derrick Watson in Hawaii in a separate legal challenge. An earlier version of the ban was also blocked by the courts.

Chuang, in Maryland, blocked the part of Trump’s order relating to travel by people from the six countries. Watson, in Hawaii, also blocked another part of the order that suspended the entry of refugees into the United States for four months.

‘HOW IS THIS NEUTRAL?’

To a packed audience in the ornate pre-Civil War era courthouse, Judge Pamela Harris said Trump’s action clearly had a disparate impact on Muslims, asking, “How is this neutral in its operation as to Muslims?” Judge Barbara Keenan, who like Harris was appointed by Democratic former President Barack Obama, said the order could affect some 200 million people.

Regardless of how the 13 judges rule, the matter is likely to be decided ultimately by the U.S. Supreme Court. The full 4th Circuit took up the appeal but two Republican-appointed judges did not participate. That left nine judges appointed by Democratic presidents, three Republican appointees and one judge originally appointed by a Democrat and later re-appointed by a Republican.

It was unclear when the court would rule.

Trump issued the March executive order after federal courts blocked an earlier version, issued on Jan. 27 a week after he took office, that also had included Iraq among the nations targeted. That order, which went into effect immediately, triggered chaos and protests at airports and in several cities before being put on hold due to legal challenges.

The second order was intended to overcome the legal problems posed by the original ban.

The administration’s appeal in the Hawaii case will be heard in Seattle on May 15 by a three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The three judges assigned all are Democratic appointees.

Wall said the temporary ban was intended to give the government time to evaluate whether people from the six countries were being subjected to adequate vetting to ensure they did not pose a security threat to the United States.

But he said the administration had not been able to proceed on all the work it wanted to do because of the litigation, noting “we have put our pens down.”

(Reporting by Lawrence Hurley; Additional reporting by Mica Rosenberg in New York and Dan Levine in San Francisco; Editing by Will Dunham and Mary Milliken)

France’s Victorious Macron reminded of huge and immediate challenges

Outgoing French President Francois Hollande (R) reaches out to touch President-elect Emmanuel Macron, as they attend a ceremony to mark the end of World War II at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier at the Arc de Triomphe in Paris, France,

By Michel Rose and John Irish

PARIS (Reuters) – Emmanuel Macron was confronted on Monday with pressing reminders of the challenges facing him as France’s next president, even as allies and some former rivals signaled their willingness to work closely with him.

The centrist’s victory over far-rightist Marine Le Pen in Sunday’s election came as a huge relief to European Union allies who had feared another populist upheaval to follow Britain’s vote to quit the EU and Donald Trump’s election as U.S. president.

“He carries the hopes of millions of French people, and of many people in Germany and the whole of Europe,” German Chancellor Angela Merkel told a news conference in Berlin.

“He ran a courageous pro-European campaign, stands for openness to the world and is committed decisively to a social market economy,” the EU’s most powerful leader added, congratulating Macron on his “spectacular” election success.

But even while pledging to help France tackle unemployment, she rejected suggestions Germany should do more to support Europe’s economy by importing more from its partners to bring down its big trade surplus.

European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker put it bluntly: “With France, we have a particular problem … The French spend too much money and they spend too much in the wrong places. This will not work over time,” Juncker said in Berlin.

The euro fell from six-month highs against the dollar on confirmation of Macron’s widely expected victory by a margin of 66 percent to 34 percent, as investors took profit on a roughly 3 percent gain for the currency since he won the first round two weeks ago.

France’s economic malaise, especially high unemployment, had undermined the popularity of outgoing Socialist President Francois Hollande to the point where he decided not even to run as a candidate.

“This year, I wanted Emmanuel Macron to be here with me so that a torch could be passed on,” said Hollande, who appeared with Macron at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier at Paris’ Arc de Triomphe to commemorate Victory in Europe Day and the surrender of Nazi forces on May 8, 1945 at the end of World War Two.

Elsewhere in Paris, hundreds of people, led by the powerful CGT trade union, marched in protest against Macron’s planned labor reforms.

PARLIAMENTARY MAJORITY

On assuming office next Sunday as France’s youngest leader since Napoleon, the 39-year-old faces the immediate challenge of securing a majority in next month’s parliamentary election in order to have a realistic chance of implementing his plans for lower state spending, higher investment and reform of the tax, labor and pension systems.

With the two mainstream parties – the conservative Republicans and the left-wing Socialists – both failing to reach the presidential runoff, his chances of winning a majority that supports his election pledges will depend on him widening his centrist base.

The Socialists are torn between the radical left of their defeated candidate Benoit Hamon and the more centrist, pro-business branch led by former premier Manuel Valls.

On Monday, key members of the centrist arm of The Republicans appeared ready to work with Macron despite the party hierarchy calling for unity to oppose the new president and calling those that were wavering “traitors”.

“I can work in a government majority,” said Bruno Le Maire, a senior Republicans party official, who had been an aide of presidential candidate Francois Fillon.

“The situation is too serious for sectarianism and to be partisan.”

Le Pen, 48, defiantly claimed the mantle of France’s main opposition in calling on “all patriots to join us” in constituting a “new political force”.

Her tally was almost double the score that her father Jean-Marie, the last far-right candidate to make the presidential runoff, achieved in 2002, when he was trounced by the conservative Jacques Chirac.

(Additional reporting by Ingrid Melander, Andrew Callus, Bate Felix, Adrian Croft, Leigh Thomas, Tim Hepher, Gus Trompiz; Writing by Richard Balmforth and John Irish; Editing by Mark Trevelyan and Ralph Boulton)

Japan, China to boost financial ties amid protectionist, North Korean tensions

Chinese Finance Minister Xiao Jie (R) and Japanese Finance Minister Taro Aso shake hands during their bilateral meeting, on the sidelines of Asian Development Bank (ADB) annual meeting, in Yokohama, Japan, Saturday, May 6, 2017. REUTERS/Koji Sasahara/Pool

By Tetsushi Kajimoto

YOKOHAMA, Japan (Reuters) – Japan and China agreed to bolster economic and financial cooperation, Japanese Finance Minister Taro Aso said on Saturday, as U.S. President Donald Trump’s protectionist stance and tension over North Korea weigh on Asia’s growth outlook.

Chinese Finance Minister Xiao Jie, who missed a trilateral meeting with his Japanese and South Korean counterparts on Friday for an emergency domestic meeting, had flown in for the talks with Aso, seeking to dispel speculation his absence had any diplomatic implications.

“We actively exchanged views on economic and financial situations in Japan and China and our cooperation in the financial field,” Aso told reporters after the meeting, which included senior finance ministry and central bank officials.

“It was significant that we reconfirmed the need of financial cooperation between the two countries while sharing our experiences in dealing with economic policies and structural issues,” he added.

The two countries agreed to launch joint research on issues of mutual interest – without elaborating – and to report the outcomes at the next talks, which will be held in 2018 in China.

They did not discuss issues such as currencies and geopolitical risks from North Korea’s nuclear and missile program during the dialogue, held on the sidelines of the Asian Development Bank’s (ADB) annual meeting in Yokohama, eastern Japan, Aso said.

Relations between Japan and China have been strained over territorial rows and Japan’s occupation of parts of China in World War Two, though leaders have recently sought to mend ties through dialogue.

Still, China’s increasing presence in infrastructure finance has alarmed some Japanese policymakers, who worry that Beijing’s new development bank, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), may overshadow the Japan-backed ADB.

Shortly before the bilateral talks on Saturday, Xiao voiced hope that the ADB will boost ties with China’s high profile “One Belt One Road” infrastructure development initiatives.

“China hopes the ADB … strengthens the strategic ties between its programs and the One Belt One Road initiative to maximize synergy effects and promote Asia’s further development,” Xiao told the ADB’s annual gathering.

Japan and China do agree on the need to respect free trade, which they see as crucial to Asia’s trade-dependent economies.

Finance officials from Japan, China and South Korea agreed to resist all forms of protectionism in Friday’s trilateral meeting, taking a stronger stand than G20 major economies against the protectionist policies advocated by Trump.

China has positioned itself as a supporter of free trade in the wake of Trump’s calls to put America’s interests first and pull out of multilateral trade agreements.

Japan has taken a more accommodative stance toward Washington’s argument that trade must not just be free but fair.

(Reporting by Tetsushi Kajimoto; Editing by Nick Macfie and Alexander Smith)

Pentagon to lease privately owned Trump Tower apartment for nuclear ‘football’: letter

The West facing entrance to Trump Tower on 5th Avenue in New York City, U.S., is seen April 26, 2017. Picture Taken April 26, 2017. REUTERS/Mike Segar

By Mark Hosenball and Phil Stewart

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Defense Department is finalizing a lease on a privately owned apartment in New York’s Trump Tower for the White House Military Office to use for supporting President Donald Trump without providing any benefit to Trump or his organization, according to a Pentagon letter seen by Reuters.

The Military Office carries and safeguards the “football,” the device that contains the top secret launch codes the president needs to order a nuclear attack, as well as providing him secure communications wherever he is.

The White House, Secret Service, and Defense Department had no comment on whether similar arrangements have been made at other properties Trump frequents – Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida and the Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, New Jersey, where Trump is spending this weekend.

In a letter to Representative Jackie Speier, a Democrat on the House Armed Services and intelligence committees, Defense Department official James MacStravic, said the apartment is “privately owned and … lease negotiations have been with the owner’s representatives only.”

MacStravic, who wrote that he was “temporarily performing the duties of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics,” said any acquisition of leased space with “an annual rental in excess of $1 million must first be approved by my office.”

He “approved this action” after consulting with the White House Military Office and other officials, he said.

Officials declined to reveal the cost of the lease or identify the owners of the apartment.

MacStravic’s letter, dated March 3, added: “We are not aware of any means through which the President would personally benefit from a Government lease of this space.”

The letter explained that the White House Military Office, a Pentagon unit, “requested approval to lease space in the Trump Tower for personnel assigned to support the President when at his private residence.”

The letter said such arrangements are “typical of support provided” by the Military Office to previous U.S. presidents and vice presidents at their private residences. It is not clear, however, whether the office has ever paid to rent space to house the classified equipment presidents need when they are staying at homes they own outside Washington.

A White House spokeswoman said the White House had no information on the leasing issue. The Defense Department and U.S. Secret Service declined to comment.

The Trump Organization did not reply to an email requesting comment.

When the Pentagon in February first acknowledged that it was seeking to lease space in Trump Tower, some Democrats questioned whether such a move would produce a financial windfall for Trump.

“I am concerned by the appearance that the President of the United States will financially benefit from this deal at the expense of the Department of Defense – and ultimately, taxpayers,” Speier wrote to Defense Secretary James Mattis shortly after the Trump Tower issue became public in February.

By negotiating only with representatives of the owners of a private apartment, the Pentagon said it was seeking to avoid such concerns.

(Reporting By Mark Hosenball,; Phil Stewart, and Jonathan Landay.; Editing by John Walcott and Grant McCool)

With Obamacare vote, House Republicans free to turn to tax reform

U.S. President Donald Trump (C) celebrates with Congressional Republicans in the Rose Garden of the White House after the House of Representatives approved the American Healthcare Act, to repeal major parts of Obamacare and replace it with the Republican healthcare plan, in Washington, U.S., May 4, 2017. REUTERS/Carlos Barria

By David Morgan

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The Republican-controlled U.S. House of Representatives plans to turn to tax reform in earnest, after concluding a lengthy healthcare debate this week with a vote to repeal and replace Obamacare.

But even as Republicans predicted that tax reform would succeed before year-end, lawmakers encountered new uncertainties about what a final tax package might contain, as well as doubts about whether Republicans will be able to enact reforms without Democratic help.

President Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress have pledged to complete the biggest tax reform since 1986, when President Ronald Reagan was in office, before the end of 2017. But they face an uphill battle, mainly over policy differences within their own ranks.

Thursday’s 217-213 House vote on healthcare legislation raised confidence in the Republican-controlled chamber’s ability to move major legislation after two earlier pushes ended in failure.

But to move forward on tax reform, the House, Senate and Trump administration must agree on where to set tax rates, how to pay for cuts and whether the final package should add to the deficit or pay for itself, all areas where common ground may be hard to find.

A plan to enact reforms without Democratic support will also require Republicans to pass a 2018 budget authorizing the parliamentary process known as reconciliation. But a new budget agreement poses a daunting task given Republican opposition to Trump demands for deep domestic spending cuts.

“That may prove to be one, if not the most difficult votes of the tax reform process,” Jonathan Traub, a managing principal at the consulting firm Deloitte Tax LLP.

Meanwhile, the need to reach agreement between the House, Senate and White House will likely delay introduction of a tax reform bill, which had been expected in early June.

But Republicans say it will ultimately make it easier to enact reforms before the end of the year.

The House Ways and Means Committee, which will unveil the initial tax bill, is still aiming for a revenue-neutral package that raises $2.4 trillion for tax cuts through a new border adjustment tax and elimination of business deductions for net interest payments, both controversial measures.

Panel chairman Kevin Brady told reporters that revenue neutrality is necessary to ensure bold, permanent changes to tax policy that can drive economic growth.

“That’s the argument and the case we’re going to make to the Senate and the Trump administration,” he said.

But Representative Mark Meadows, who chairs the conservative Freedom Caucus that helped block Trump’s first healthcare bill,

voiced opposition to a revenue neutral approach.

“If it’s revenue neutral, you’re not really lowering taxes. You’re shifting the burden,” Meadows told reporters.

The Trump tax plan unveiled last week calls for steep tax cuts financed by government revenues that officials say will result from higher growth. Some fear the plan could add trillions of dollars to the deficit if growth does not materialize.

Meadows said tax cuts should be offset by cuts to entitlement programs including Social Security and Medicare, which Trump has promised not to touch.

(Editing by Alistair Bell)

State Dept. seeks tougher visa scrutiny, including social media checks

A person stands at the counter of U.S. Immigration upon arriving at Miami airport March 13, 2013. REUTERS/Desmond Boylan

By Yeganeh Torbati and Mica Rosenberg

WASHINGTON/NEW YORK (Reuters) – The U.S. Department of State has proposed tougher questioning of visa applicants believed to warrant extra scrutiny, according to a document published Thursday, in a push toward the “extreme vetting” that President Donald Trump has said is necessary to prevent terrorist attacks.

Questions about social media accounts would be part of the stepped-up criteria, which would apply to 65,000 people per year, or about 0.5 percent of U.S. visa applicants worldwide, the State Department estimated. It did not target nationals of any particular countries.

A set of new questions would apply to visa applicants “who have been determined to warrant additional scrutiny in connection with terrorism or other national security-related visa ineligibilities,” the State Department said in a notice to the Federal Register.

Those applicants would be required to provide all prior passport numbers, five years’ worth of social media handles, email addresses and phone numbers, as well as 15 years of biographical information, when applying for a U.S. visa. Consular officers would not request user passwords for social media accounts, the document said.

If granted, the new criteria would mark the first concrete step toward more stringent vetting that Trump asked federal agencies to apply toward travelers from countries he deemed a threat to the United States in an executive order issued in January and revised in March.

While parts of the travel order, including a temporary ban on the entry of nationals from several majority-Muslim countries, were halted by federal courts, the review of vetting procedures detailed in an accompanying memorandum remains in place.

“Collecting additional information from visa applicants whose circumstances suggest a need for further scrutiny will strengthen our process for vetting these applicants and confirming their identity,” a State Department official said.

The State Department’s proposal also says that applicants may be asked to provide additional travel dates if a consular officer determines they have been in an area which was “under the operational control of a terrorist organization.”

The proposed changes must undergo a public comment period before being approved or denied by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) by May 18. OMB did not respond to a request for comment.

The Department of Homeland Security, which was also tasked with reviewing vetting procedures for visa applicants, said the State Department request does not preclude DHS from identifying new “ways to protect the American people.”

“Some improvement will be classified, others will be public, but the Department has only just begun ways to enhance the security of our immigration system,” DHS spokesman David Lapan said.

SOCIAL MEDIA SNAGS

Immigration lawyers and advocates say the request for 15 years of detailed biographical information, as well as the expectation that applicants remember all their social media handles, is likely to catch applicants who make innocent mistakes or do not remember all the information requested.

They also question whether the time-consuming screening can achieve its intended goal of identifying potential terrorists.

“The more effective tactics are the methods that we currently use to monitor terrorist organizations, not just stumbling into the terrorist who is dumb enough to post on his Facebook page ‘I am going to blow up something in the United States,'” said John Sandweg, a former senior official at DHS who is now with the firm Frontier Solutions, which provides investigatory, crisis management and other services.

Applicants may not necessarily be denied a visa if they fail to provide all the information if it is determined they can provide a “credible explanation,” the notice said.

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson first introduced similar measures in a March cable to American consular officers that outlined questions officers should ask in order to tighten vetting of visa applicants.

But Tillerson had to withdraw that guidance just days later because the OMB had not approved those specific questions.

The State Department estimated that the additional screening measures would take approximately an hour per applicant, meaning an additional 65,000 additional hours of work per year.

Tillerson’s cables anticipated delays as a result of the rules implementation.

“Somebody’s got to do the work,” said Greg Siskind, an immigration attorney in Memphis. “It’s going to cause operations at a lot of consulates slow to a crawl.”

(Link to proposal: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/05/04/2017-08975/notice)

(Reporting by Yeganeh Torbati in Washington and Mica Rosenberg in New York; Additional reporting by Arshad Mohammed; Writing by Julia Edwards Ainsley; Editing by Yara Bayoumy, Alistair Bell and Leslie Adler)