Mediaboss Marketing

President Donald Trump speaks Feb. 17 at the Boeing South Carolina facility in North Charleston, South Carolina. Photo by REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque .

WASHINGTON Presidents since Franklin Delano Roosevelt have loved to tour Boeing factories. The lessons they draw from their time on the factory floor and the inevitable photo opportunity beside shiny new airplanes can differ wildly.

President Donald Trump on Friday touted the latest Boeing 787 Dreamliner as proof of a coming American manufacturing renaissance. He toured the South Carolina facility and hailed it as a sign of steps toward generating more U.S factory jobs.

Nearly five years ago, President Barack Obama made a similar visit to the facility in Everett, Washington. His message: America needs to prepare for the loss of factory jobs to automation and retool its economy.

The contrast speaks to the fundamental difference between Trump and Obamas economic policies. Where Trump promises a return to a brawny America full of factory jobs, Obama sought to increase exports and manufacturing output to help support job creation elsewhere in the services sector.

Trump blames factory job losses on cheap foreign labor and trade pacts. His speech at the Boeing plant in North Charleston, South Carolina, never once touched on the increasing role of robots on assembly lines. It glossed over Boeings own statement that 30 percent of the parts for the 787 fleet come from foreign factories.

WATCH LIVE: Trump talks jobs in visit to SC Boeing plant

Our goal as a nation must be to rely less on imports and more on products made here in the USA, Trump said. Were going to fight for every last American job.

He proudly referenced the evolution of airplanes as proof of U.S. competitiveness. The Wright brothers invented a small wooden plane that first flew in 1903, Trump said, a far cry from the use of carbon fiber in the newest 787, which has room for 330 passengers.

The threat to U.S. workers comes not from advanced technology but from factories that have moved manufacturing overseas, Trump said something he pledged to stop, saying, There will be a very substantial penalty to be paid.

WATCH: Trump says Boeing deal for Air Force One is too expensive

Obama, too, highlighted the advancements of the 787 when speaking at a Boeing factory in 2012. But what he saw was new technology and computers making companies more efficient, allowing them to rely on fewer workers and set up shop almost anywhere with an internet connection.

The hard truth is a lot of those jobs arent going to come back because of these increased efficiencies, Obama said from the factory floor. We cant bring every job back. Anybody who says we can, theyre not telling you the truth.

The key, Obama said, was to increase the manufacturing output of high-quality products and sell those goods abroad, something that would require fewer workers than in the past. But the profits from a stronger manufacturing sector would have a spillover effect and create jobs at restaurants, stores and other parts of the economy.

The prospect of more retail jobs did little to inspire voters in November, who turned to Trump even though Obama delivered job gains of 11.5 million during his eight years in office.

But the Boeing 787 being celebrated by Trump also helps to validate Obamas description of changes in U.S. manufacturing. Subcontractors that contribute parts to the fleet of planes include firms in Japan, South Korea, France, Canada, Turkey, Australia and China, according to a report by aviation consultant Teal Group.

Jet makers are basically looking for best technology, Teal consultant Richard Aboulafia said. In the case of low-tech parts, theyre looking for lower cost, but the strong majority of components come from high-skill, high-wage countries.

___

AP airlines writer David Koenig contributed to this report.

Follow this link:
Trump's Boeing speech shows differences with Obama - PBS NewsHour

A grizzly bear eats a fish in Alaska in October 2016. Danny Green / REX/Shutterstock/AP

Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, is behind the resolution to strip away some of the federal government's control over Alaska's 76 million acres worth of federal wildlife refuges. Under the federal law, hunters are prohibited from shooting or trapping wolves while at their dens with cubs, using airplanes to scout for potential grizzly bear targets, trapping bears with wire snares and luring bears with food to get a point-blank kill.

But essentially, hunters could once again kill such predators from the air or in dens if the law is overturned.

Aerial shooting has been deemed necessary in the past in order to curb predator populations that eat moose, deer and other animals that some Alaskans consume for food.

Young argued in the House that the rule seized authority away from the state of Alaska and is a clear violation of federal law.

"We have to recognize this is not about the little polar bears, the little grizzly bears or wolves on television, this is about the state's right to manage not allowing the federal government to do so," Young said. "We want to be able to take and manage our fish and game for the sustainable yield so that our fish and game will be there forever."

The House resolution H.J. Res. 69 is set to advance to the GOP-controlled Senate, and then will be given to President Donald Trump to sign into law. His administration has not commented on the issue.

The office of Alaska Gov. Bill Walker, a political independent, said they filed a lawsuit in January challenging the federal law because it impacted the "basic means of [their] survival."

"As Alaskans, we have a unique relationship with our land especially in the most rural parts of our state where residents rely on hunting and fishing to put food on the table," Walker said in a statement. "Alaskans must be able to provide for their families, and the rules that have been put forward by the federal government do not support that."

Animal rights group The Humane Society aired a TV commercial in the Washington, D.C., area on Wednesday and Thursday in an effort to urge lawmakers to vote against Young's resolution.

"What the House did today should shock the conscience of every animal lover in America," Wayne Pacelle, The Humane Society's CEO, said in a statement. "If the Senate and President concur, we'll see wolf families killed in their dens [and] bears chased down by planes."

Prior to the hearing on the resolution, multiple House members took sides on Twitter, denouncing the resolution or celebrating the reversal of an Obama-era policy.

The Fish and Wildlife Service said last year the rule will help maintain sustainable populations of bears, wolves and coyotes on national wildlife refuges in Alaska, The Associated Press reported.

For instance, Denali National Park in Alaska's interior wilderness released data showing wolf populations declined substantially up until Obama's law was instituted.

In 2015, Denali had 112 wolves a steady decline from the average mean of 200 wolves, according to park officials. In 2016, the number rose slightly to 127 wolves.

But it was unclear whether the federal law played a role in the uptick. Still, Denali officials have asked to extend buffer zones around its park to better protect wolves outside the federal refuge.

Read more:
House Overturns Obama-Era Law to Protect Alaskan Bears and Wolves - NBCNews.com

New York Times

House GOP Leaders Outline Plan to Replace Obama Health Care Act New York Times Mr. Ryan's presentation on Thursday was meant to generate a sense of momentum for the Republicans' campaign to eviscerate President Barack Obama's health care law a campaign that has been plagued by apprehensions, doubts and divisions among ... Conservatives fret GOP is blowing Obamacare repealPolitico Doubts grow that GOP can repeal ObamacarePolitico Conservatives Take A Hard Line On Obamacare Repeal, Putting GOP In A BindHuffington Post The Hill -CNN all 325 news articles »

More:
House GOP Leaders Outline Plan to Replace Obama Health Care Act - New York Times

President Trumpon Thursdaysigned legislation ending a key Obama administration coal mining rule.

The bill quashes the Office of Surface Mining's Stream Protection Rule, a regulation to protect waterways from coal mining waste that officials finalized in December.

The legislation is the second Trump has signed into law ending an Obama-era environmental regulation.On Tuesday, he signed a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution undoing a financial disclosure requirement for energy companies.

Both the mining and financial disclosure bills are the tip of a GOP push to undo a slate of regulations instituted in the closing days of the Obama administration. The House has passed several CRA resolutions, and the Senate has so far sent three of them to President Trump for his signature.

The rule is among the most controversial environment regulations the former administration put together. The coal mining industry said it would be costly to implement and lead to job losses across the sector, which is already suffering from a market-driven downturn in demand for its product.

At the signing, Trump called the regulation "another terrible job killing rule" and said ending it would save "many thousands American jobs, especially in the mines, which, I have been promising you the mines are a big deal."

"This is a major threat to your jobs and were going to get rid of this threat," he added. "Were going to fight for you."

Republicans on Congress, especially from Appalachia, supported that argument and sought to block the rule several times before finally passing the CRA resolution this month.

In my home state of Kentucky and others across the nation, the stream buffer rule will cause major damage to communities and threaten coal jobs, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellMitch McConnellRyan: 'We are exactly on track' Overnight Tech: GOP chairman to propose high-skilled visa overhaul | Zuckerberg's 5,700 word letter | Tech lobbies gear up ahead of internet fight Trump signs bill undoing Obama coal mining rule MORE (R-Ky.) said before the bill passed. We should heed their call now and begin bringing relief to coal country.

Environmentalists supported the administration rule, saying it would protect waterways from pollution and preserve public health. They have criticized the GOP for repealing environmental rules in the name of supporting coal mining jobs, but doing little else to help displaced workers in mining areas.

If you want to help miners, then come address their health and safety and their pension program, Sen. Maria CantwellMaria CantwellTrump signs bill undoing Obama coal mining rule Nine Dem senators say hiring freeze hurting trade enforcement Overnight Energy: Congress does away with Obama coal mining rule MORE (D-Wash.), the ranking member of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, said during floor debate on the measure.

You can protect the coal industry here with special interests and the amount of lobbying they do, or you can step up in a process and have a regulation that works for the United States of America so the outdoor industry and sportsman and fishermen can continue to thrive.

The Senate this week sent Trump a CRA resolution blocking a gun sales regulation. Members could soon take up a measure undoing a methane rule for natural gas drilling operations on public land.

This story was updated at 4:10 p.m.

Read this article:
Trump signs bill undoing Obama coal mining rule - The Hill

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

Read the original here:
Bear-poking Obama - Tribune-Review