LP_468x60
ontario news watch
on-the-record-468x60-white
and-another-thing-468x60

Source: Canadian Press

HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — Facing projections of spiking energy demand, U.S. states are pressing for ways to build new power plants faster as policymakers increasingly worry about protecting their residents and economies from rising electric bills, power outages and other consequences of falling behind Big Tech in a race for electricity.

Some states are dangling financial incentives. Others are undoing decades of regulatory structures in what they frame as a race to serve the basic needs of residents, avoid a catastrophe and keep their economies on track in a fast-electrifying society.

“I don’t think we’ve seen anything quite like this,” said Todd Snitchler, president and CEO of the Electric Power Supply Association, which represents independent power plant owners.

The spike in demand for electricity is being driven, in large part, by the artificial intelligence race as tech companies are snapping up real estate and seeking power to feed their energy-hungry data centers. Federal incentives to rebuild the manufacturing sector also are helping drive demand.

In some cases, Big Tech is arranging its own power projects.

But energy companies also are searching for ways to capitalize on opportunities afforded by the first big increase in electricity consumption in a couple of decades, and that is pitting state political leaders against each other for the new jobs and investment that come with new power plants.

Governors want to fast-track power plants

Moves by states come as a fossil fuel – friendly President Donald Trump and Republican-controlled Congress take power in Washington, D.C., slashing regulations around oil and gas, boostingdrilling opportunities and encouraging the construction of pipelines and refineries that can export liquefied natural gas.

States are seeking action, with the National Governors Association asking Congress to make it easier and faster to build power plants and criticizing the U.S. as among the slowest developed nations in approving energy projects.

But there may be less that the federal government can do right away about a looming power shortage, since greenlighting power plants to feed the electric grid is largely the province of state regulators and regional grid operators.

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro wants to establish an agency to fast-track the construction of big power plants and dangle hundreds of millions of dollars in tax breaks for projects providing electricity to the grid.

The state, and the country, needs more power plants to win the artificial intelligence race and provide reliable and affordable power to residents, said Shapiro, who suggested Pennsylvania may leave the regional grid operated by PJM Interconnection in favor of “going it alone.”

“It has proven over the last number of years too darn hard to get enough new generation projects off the ground because of how slow PJM‘s queue is,” Shapiro told a news conference on Feb. 27.

Indiana, Michigan and Louisiana are exploring ideas to attract nuclear power while Maryland lawmakers are floating ideas about commissioning the construction of a new power plant there.

In Ohio, a lawmaker wants to restrict the influence of electric utilities in hopes of giving independent power producers more incentive to build power plants to feed the state’s fast-growing tech sector.

The bill, which awaits a vote, won the support of the Ohio Consumers’ Counsel, the state’s residential ratepayer watchdog, and business groups whose members care about electric prices. However, it split the energy sector between companies operating in competitive markets and those operating under state utility monopolies.

States competing against each other

In Missouri, utilities including Ameren and Evergy, as well as the Missouri Chamber of Commerce and Industry, labor unions and the state’s top utility regulator are backing legislation to repeal a nearly half-century old law preventing utilities from charging customers to build a power plant until it is operational.

The law was approved in a 1976 voter referendum when states were looking to hedge against utilities saddling ratepayers with financing upfront, potentially bloated, inefficient or, worse, aborted power projects.

Consumer and environmental groups protested the bill, saying it would result in new natural gas plants that are likelier to be more costly to ratepayers.

Last year, similar legislation passed almost unanimously in Kansas, along with companion legislation extending tax breaks to new power plants.

Within months, Evergy announced alongside the state’s leaders that it would build two 705-megawatt natural gas plants and said the legislation will “help Kansas compete with other states for investment and ultimately save customers money.”

John Coffman, the utility consumer counsel for the Consumers Council of Missouri, said utilities are playing the two states, Missouri and Kansas, against each other and were planning to build the power plants anyway.

But, he said, “They’re just looking for opportunities to squeeze more money out of the process.”

Energy companies see an opportunity

Snitchler said action is being spurred by states realizing that longstanding power reserves are dwindling, especially as coal-fired and nuclear power plants retire, and now all sorts of power companies are leaping at the chance to make money.

A pitfall he sees in the race to build plants is an undoing of protections that some states once adopted to shield ratepayers and put the risk of building expensive power projects onto corporate shareholders.

“The problem, of course, is it shifts the risk back on the people who perhaps should not be bearing it,” Snitchler said.

A Pennsylvania state lawmaker, Sen. Gene Yaw, wants to set up a massive power plant-financing fund like Texas, which established a $10 billion low-interest loan program after the state was wracked by a deadly winter blackout in 2021.

Yaw, a Republican, has no misgivings about Pennsylvania helping finance power plants. Even by conservative estimates, the state will need dozens more power plants to meet projections of rising demand, he said.

“And what do we have underway or planned right now? Nothing,” Yaw said. “And we haven’t built anything since 2019. So we’ve got to do something to encourage people to come here and build in Pennsylvania just to maintain the status quo.”

___

Follow Marc Levy on X at https://x.com/timelywriter.

Marc Levy, The Associated Press


Click here for more

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (AP) — A new law in South Dakota prohibiting the use of eminent domain to acquire land for carbon capture pipelines raises questions about the viability of a proposed 2,500 mile (4,023-kilometer) project snaking through five Midwest states.

Summit Carbon Solutions, the company behind the estimated $8.9 billion pipeline, vowed to keep pursuing the project despite South Dakota Gov. Larry Rhoden’s announcement Thursday that he had signed a bill into law that will make routing the line much more difficult. The law bans Summit from forcing South Dakota landowners to allow the pipeline through their property.

Plans call for the pipeline to carry greenhouse gas emissions from more than 50 ethanol plants in Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota to a spot in North Dakota, where it would be permanently stored underground.

Legal action is possible

It’s unclear whether Summit will pursue legal action but the company said in a statement that “all options are on the table” and the project “moves forward” in other states. The company promised it would have more news soon.

Large pipeline projects typically rely on eminent domain, with companies arguing that even if most landowners agree to grant access to their property, a project can be scuttled if only a few refuse.

Summit says the company, which has secured over 2,700 easements across the region, has approval for routes in Iowa and North Dakota and a leg in Minnesota.

Can the line be routed through Minnesota?

The current proposed route would cut through nearly 700 miles (1,126.5 kilometers) of South Dakota before entering North Dakota, so rerouting to the east through Minnesota would be a big challenge.

A Summit spokesperson did not respond to questions Friday about whether the company would consider a new route.

The sponsor of the South Dakota bill, Republican Rep. Karla Lems, said Summit could either reroute its pipeline through Minnesota into North Dakota or “negotiate with landowners in South Dakota” and go around opponents.

Gov. Rhoden said the South Dakota law wasn’t intended to kill the project and suggested Summit see it as “an opportunity to reset.”

Minnesota is a relatively small part of Summit’s overall project. The only segment approved in the state is a 28-mile (45-kilometer) leg from an ethanol plant near Fergus Falls to the North Dakota border. Summit’s project also includes two legs in southern Minnesota that would go into Iowa.

A Minnesota Public Utilities Commission spokesperson did not respond to phone or email messages.

The pipeline’s importance to the ethanol industry

The country’s transition to electric vehicles has been slower than many people expected, but most think a shift away from internal combustion engines will eventually happen.

Nearly 40% of the nation’s corn crop is brewed into ethanol, which is blended into most gasoline sold in the U.S. Midwest farmers and the ethanol industry therefore see it as essential to have new markets as less of the fuel additive goes to power cars.

They see passenger jet fuel as a potentially huge new market for ethanol. However, under current rules the process for turning ethanol into aviation fuel would need to emit less carbon dioxide to qualify for tax breaks intended to reduce greenhouses.

The carbon capture pipeline is a key part of achieving those goals, Iowa Renewable Fuels Association Executive Director Monte Shaw said.

Walt Wendland, who runs an ethanol plant in Onida, South Dakota, said the “ethanol industry is a margin business” and the new state law will put South Dakota ethanol producers at a disadvantage.

“Ever since I built a plant, I never wanted an advantage, just don’t put me at a disadvantage,” Wendland said.

Will the pipeline ever be built?

It has been four years since Summit proposed building the pipeline, along with two other companies that later abandoned their plans. It has been a challenging process for Summit, which dealt with lawsuits in Nebraska and elsewhere, opposition before a regulatory commission in Iowa and now the eminent domain ban in South Dakota.

In its statement, Summit expressed optimism about the future but didn’t offer specifics about how it could build a pipeline without eminent domain authority in South Dakota.

Since the pipeline was proposed, the federal government’s approach to climate change also has changed dramatically. Democratic President Joe Biden increased tax incentives under the Inflation Reduction Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to encourage carbon capture as an effort to slow climate change.

However, Republican President Donald Trump has emphasized the need for more oil and gas drilling and coal mining, and has put far less emphasis on alternative energy. Trump has not indicated whether his views will lead to changing federal policy regarding carbon capture pipelines.

___

Dura reported from Bismarck, North Dakota.

Sarah Raza And Jack Dura, The Associated Press

Click here for more

COX’S BAZAR, Bangladesh (AP) — Rohingya refugees in crammed Bangladeshi camps say they are worried about a U.S. decision to cut food rations by half beginning next month, while a refugee official says the reduction will impact the nutrition of more than 1 million refugees and create “social and mental pressure.”

President Donald Trump abruptly stopped most foreign aid and dismantled the U.S. Agency for International Development, which has significantly hampered the global humanitarian sector. Trump’s Jan. 20 executive order froze the funding for a 90-day review.

The World Food Program, the main U.N. food agency, recently announced that cuts to food rations will take effect from April 1 in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh, where dozens of camps are inhabited by Rohingya refugees.

More than 700,000 Muslim Rohingya fled to Bangladesh from Myanmar starting in late August 2017 when Myanmar’s military launched a “clearance operation.” The ethnic group faces discrimination and are denied citizenship and other rights in the Buddhist-majority nation. Following a miliary takeover in 2021, the country has been engulfed in an armed conflict widely seen as civil war.

It was not immediately clear if the WFP’s decision was directly related to the Trump administration’s action.

“We received a letter that (says) previously it was $12.50, and now it is $6. They used to get $12.50 per month, and from now $6, this will greatly affect them,” Shamsud Douza, additional refugee relief and repatriation commissioner of Bangladesh, told The Associated Press.

“As the food is cut, they will get less nutritious food, which may lead to a lack of nutrition. There will be social and mental pressure created amongst the Rohingya people in their community. They will have to look for an alternative for the food,” he said.

Douza said there are more sectors where budgets have been cut beyond the food rations, but he would not say whether WFP cuts were related to the U.S. funding rollback.

“Generally, there will be less (support) for the (Rohingya) response after the funding cuts. The response already has been slowed, and some people, including Rohingya, have lost their jobs, and some services are reduced. It does not bring a good result when the available services get reduced,” he said.

The interim Bangladesh government said the end of USAID payments would stop other projects in Bangladesh, but funding for Rohingya refugees will continue to flow.

The U.S. has been the top donor to Bangladesh for Rohingya refugees, providing the U.N. with emergency food and nutrition assistance. The U.S. usually provides almost half of the aid money spent on the humanitarian response to Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh, which provided about $300 million in 2024.

As the news of the impending food reductions spread through the camps in Cox’s Bazar, fear and frustration gripped the refugees.

“I am afraid now about how I am going to run my family, as we don’t have any income-generating opportunities here. I got scared when I heard it,” 40-year-old Manzur Ahmed said. “How will I buy rice, chilies, salt, sugar and dal, let alone fish, meat and vegetables, with 700 taka ($6)? We won’t even be able to buy (cooking) oil. How are we going to get them?”

Medical treatment also is decreasing, refugees said.

“When we go to the hospital, they don’t provide medicines unless it’s an emergency. They only provide medicines to the very emergency patients. Earlier, they would treat anyone who felt unwell, but now they only provide treatment to those who are in an emergency,” 32-year-old Dildar Begum said.

Hundreds of thousands have lived in Bangladesh for decades and about 70,000 crossed the border from Myanmar in 2024. During fighting with the military junta, the opposition force known as the Arakan Army effectively took over the Rakhine state where Rohingya were displaced and took shelter in Bangladesh.

Bangladesh says Rohingya refugees must return to Myanmar, which has been accused in an international court of genocide against Rohingya.

___

Alam reported from Dhaka, Bangladesh.

Shafiqur Rahman And Julhas Alam, The Associated Press




Click here for more

WINNIPEG — Manitoba’s premier says he has spoken with the family of an Indigenous woman murdered by a serial killer, and he hopes the confirmation that her remains have been found during a search at a Winnipeg landfill helps them move forward.

“For so long now, years now, her journey to the next phase with her family being able to grieve her, lay her to rest, have a funeral or however they want to remember (her), has been on hold and disrupted and made the subject of so much public scrutiny,” Wab Kinew told reporters at an event Saturday at an Indigenous resource centre.

“To me, it’s about a grieving family and healing for them.”

A statement from the Manitoba government late Friday confirmed that remains found during a search of the Prairie Green landfill were those of 39-year-old Morgan Harris.

The government statement said another set of remains was part of the recovery, and more information would be provided as facts are confirmed.

The search of the landfill for Harris, as well as another victim, Marcedes Myran, began in December and has been contentious, but Kinew said in the end government did the right thing by moving forward with it.

“I feel that Manitobans and Canadians have shown their true nature. It wasn’t easy to get to this point, but at the end of the day we did come together to do right by these families,” Kinew said.

Jeremy Skibicki was convicted last year of first-degree murder in the slayings of Harris, Myran and two other Indigenous women.

In a statement posted on social media on Saturday, Assembly of First Nations National Chief Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak offered condolences to Harris’ family, saying the victims of Skibicki were entitled to respect and dignity in death.

“For the three long years, these families have carried an unimaginable burden, fighting for the recovery of their loved ones. They should never have had to fight this hard,” Woodhouse Nepinak said.

Families of the women and Indigenous leaders in the province advocated for years for a search of the landfill, taking their fight to Parliament Hill and the Manitoba legislature.

Police refused to search the site over safety concerns. The Progressive Conservative government at the time also said it wouldn’t support a search, and during the 2023 provincial election campaign the party touted that decision.

Kinew pledged there would be a search and, after his NDP were elected, the province and the federal government put up $20 million to fund one.

Ross Gardner, a crime scene consultant in the United States, had told The Canadian Press two years ago that a search could succeed but would require a monumental effort due to the passage of time and the compacting process at the landfill.

Gardner commended the searchers on Saturday, and noted the confirmation of Harris’ remains indicates that whatever strategy they’re using is working.

“Now they’ve got an area they can at least concentrate on. That is intelligence in and of itself that, hey, we’re in the right ballpark,” Gardner said in an interview.

The murder trial heard that Harris, a member of Long Plain First Nation, had been living in Winnipeg before she was last seen on May 1, 2022.

It heard Skibicki targeted the women at homeless shelters in Winnipeg and disposed of their bodies in garbage bins in his neighbourhood.

The remains of Rebecca Contois were found in a garbage bin and at a different landfill. Those of an unidentified woman Indigenous grassroots community members named Mashkode Bizhiki’ikwe, or Buffalo Woman, have not been found and police have not said where they might be.

Winnipeg’s former police chief, Danny Smyth, retired in September. His successor, Gene Bowers, was announced on Friday and he said in a statement that the department’s thoughts go out to the families of the victims, as well as “all families who are awaiting word on their missing loved ones.”

“On Monday, March 10, 2025, my appointment as Chief of Police will take effect, and I intend to action my vision for the Winnipeg Police Service to become leaders in reconciliation,” Bowers said in the statement.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published March 8, 2025.

— By Rob Drinkwater in Edmonton, with files from Brittany Hobson.

The Canadian Press

Click here for more

A B.C. union says the federal government should put an “immediate end” to Canada’s Temporary Foreign Worker program in the face of U.S. tariffs and “uncertainty” caused by the Trump administration.

Ironworkers Local 97 business manager Doug Parton says the trade war with the U.S. and “looming tariffs” mean that jobs should go to “qualified Canadians” rather than foreign workers brought in to “fill gaps in the labour market.”

Parton says the federal government needs to “curb the misuse” of the program and prioritize investing in training Canadian workers.

The local says the program “undermines worker safety and fairness” to the detriment of temporary foreign workers and Canadian employees.

It says a “temporary pause” is needed for the construction industry in order to “review and strengthen standards” for safety and sustainability of the workforce.

Parton says the union wants to work with lawmakers to reform the program to shore up support for those in the skilled trade sector.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published March 8, 2025.

Darryl Greer, The Canadian Press

Click here for more Canada

MONTREAL — Protesters gathered in front of the United States Consulate in Montreal today to mark International Women’s Day and demonstrate against what they called the American government’s attacks on women’s rights and Canada’s sovereignty.

It was one of a dozen demonstrations planned across Quebec today, with protesters also set to demonstrate in front the of U.S. consulates in Quebec City as well as the U.S. Embassy in Ottawa.

Organizer Laure Waridel denounced what she called the U.S. President Donald Trump administration’s rolling back of reproductive rights and it turning its back on its allies across the globe.

Waridel called on Canadians to resist the rise of the American far-right authoritarianism and called for a boycott of American products.

Protesters in Montreal, many wearing red, chanted “shame on you.” They later formed a human chain and observed eight minutes of silence.

Protests were also planned in other cities in Quebec including Sherbrooke, Joliette, Victoriaville and Saguenay.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published March 8, 2025.

Joe Bongiorno, The Canadian Press

Click here for more Canada

OTTAWA — Ottawa has unveiled two major domestic shipbuilding contracts for new polar icebreakers for the Canadian Coast Guard to use in the Arctic.

The federal government says it is awarding Davie Shipbuilding a $3.25-billion contract to start building one of the two modern polar icebreakers this year.

Public Services and Procurement Minister Jean-Yves Duclos announced that Chantier Davie Canada Inc. will manufacture the new ship in Lévis, Que., expected to be finished by 2030.

The other contract, announced on Friday and worth $3.15 billion, will be built by Seaspan’s Vancouver Shipyards, with construction scheduled to begin in April.

Seaspan said on Friday this marks the first time in decades that a polar icebreaker will be built in Canada.

The contracts are being granted through the National Shipbuilding Strategy, which is designed to renew the fleets of the Coast Guard and the Navy while at the same time fostering Canada’s shipbuilding industries.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published March 8, 2025.

The Canadian Press

Click here for more Canada

NEW YORK (AP) — Long-threatened tariffs from U.S. President Donald Trump have plunged the country into a trade war abroad — all while on-again, off-again new levies continue to escalate uncertainty.

Since taking office less than two months ago, Trump has rolled out hefty import taxes on goods coming from America’s three biggest trading partners — Mexico, Canada and China — and promises that more targets are on the horizon.

Trump is no stranger to tariffs. He also launched a trade war during his first term in office, but has more sweeping plans now. Economists stress there could greater consequences on businesses and economies worldwide this time — and that higher prices will likely leave consumers footing the bill.

There’s also been a sense of whiplash from Trump’s back-and-forth tariff threats and responding retaliation, including recently-postponed levies for some goods from Canada and Mexico that followed a 30-day pause for the auto industry. The uncertainty has roiled financial markets, lowered consumer confidence, and enveloped many businesses with questions that could delay hiring and investment.

Here’s a timeline of how we got here:

Trump’s first term

Trump launches a trade war during his first term in office — taking particular aim at China.

The two countries exchange a series of tit-for-tat levies affecting hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of goods. The dispute centers around U.S. allegations that China deploys underhanded tactics — including stealing trade secrets and pressuring U.S. companies to hand over sensitive technology — in an effort to supplant the U.S. in advanced fields such as quantum computing and automated cars.

Trump puts tariffs on most Chinese goods. Meanwhile, Beijing responds with its own retaliatory tariffs on U.S. products ranging from fruit, soybeans and wine to aircraft, automotive and chemical imports.

Separately, Trump slaps tariffs on imported solar panels and washing machines. And in 2018, he imposes taxes of 25% on imported steel and 10% on aluminum imports on national security grounds, escalating tensions with other trading partners. He also uses the threat of more tariffs to force Canada and Mexico to renegotiate a North American trade pact, called the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, in 2020.

Tariffs under Biden

President Joe Biden largely preserves most of the tariffs Trump previously enacted against China, but his administration claims to take a more targeted approach.

In October 2022, he issues sweeping new restrictions on selling semiconductors and chipmaking equipment to China. These curbs will be expanded in October 2023 and December 2024 — when China responds with a ban of U.S. exports for various high-tech materials like gallium and germanium.

Biden also hikes tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles, solar cells, steel, aluminum and medical equipment in May 2024. And in July, he imposes tariffs on steel and aluminum shipped from Mexico but made elsewhere in an attempt to stop China from circumventing import taxes.

2024 campaign trail promises

Biden’s 2024 tariff moves come in the middle of a heated presidential campaign — with both Biden and Trump taking jabs at each other in attempts to show who’s tougher on China.

On the campaign trail, Trump says that he plans to impose tariffs of at least 60% on all Chinese imports if he wins a second term. He also floats the idea of a tariff of up to 20% on everything else the U.S. imports while threatening to impose even bigger levies for specific countries or manufacturers that take their business outside the U.S.

While the Biden-Harris administration uses tariffs to target China, both Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris — who becomes the Democratic nominee after Biden drops out of the race — maintain that Trump’s promise of more broad tariffs worldwide would be a mistake. Harris labels Trump’s call for tariffs as a “national sales tax” — with her campaign later saying that a 20% tariff applied across the board would raise expenses for a typical family by almost $4,000 annually.

November 2024

Trump wins the U.S. presidential election. He continues to promise steep tariff hikes in the coming weeks and months leading up to his first day back in office.

January 20

Trump is sworn in. In his inaugural address, he again promises to “tariff and tax foreign countries to enrich our citizens.” And he reiterates plans to create an agency called the External Revenue Service, which has yet to be established.

On his first day in office, Trump also says he expects to put 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico starting on Feb. 1, while declining to immediately flesh out plans for taxing Chinese imports.

January 26

Trump threatens 25% tariffs on all Colombia imports and other retaliatory measures after President Gustavo Petro’s rejects two U.S. military aircraft carrying migrants to the country, accusing Trump of not treating immigrants with dignity during deportation.

In response, Petro also announces a retaliatory 25% increase in Colombian tariffs on U.S. goods. But Colombia later reversed its decision and accepted the flights carrying migrants. The two countries soon signaled a halt in the trade dispute.

February 1

Trump signs an executive order to impose tariffs on imports from Mexico, Canada and China — 10% on all imports from China and 25% on imports from Mexico and Canada starting Feb. 4. Trump invoked this power by declaring a national emergency — ostensibly over undocumented immigration and drug trafficking. The levies on Canada and Mexico threaten to blow up Trump’s own USMCA trade deal, which allowed many products to cross North American borders duty free.

The action prompts swift outrage from all three countries, with promises of retaliatory measures.

February 3

Trump agrees to a 30-day pause on his tariff threats against Mexico and Canada, with both trading partners taking steps to appease Trump’s concerns about border security and drug trafficking.

February 4

Trump’s new 10% tariffs on all Chinese imports to the U.S. still go into effect. China retaliates the same day by announcing a flurry of countermeasures, including sweeping new duties on a variety of American goods and an anti-monopoly investigation into Google.

China’s 15% tariffs on coal and liquefied natural gas products, and a 10% levy on crude oil, agricultural machinery and large-engine cars imported from the U.S., take effect Feb. 10.

February 10

Trump announces plans to hike steel and aluminum tariffs. He removes the exemptions from his 2018 tariffs on steel, meaning that all steel imports will be taxed at a minimum of 25%, and also raises his 2018 aluminum tariffs to 25% from 10% set to go into effect March 12.

February 13

Trump announces a plan for “reciprocal” tariffs — promising to increase U.S. tariffs to match the tax rates that other countries charge on imports “for purposes of fairness.” Economists warn that the reciprocal tariffs, set to overturn decades of trade policy, could create chaos for global businesses.

Beyond China, Canada and Mexico, he indicates that additional countries, such as India, won’t be spared from higher tariffs. And in the following weeks, Trump suggests that European countries could face a 25% levy as part of these efforts.

February 25

Trump signed an executive order instructing the Commerce Department to consider whether a tariff on imported copper is needed to protect national security. He cites the material’s use in U.S. defense, infrastructure and emerging technologies.

March 1

Trump signs an additional executive order instructing the Commerce Department to consider whether tariffs on lumber and timber are also needed to protect national security, arguing that the construction industry and military depend on a strong supply of wooden products in the U.S.

March 4

Trump’s 25% tariffs on imports from Canada and Mexico go into effect, though he limits the levy to 10% on Canadian energy. He also doubles the tariff on all Chinese imports to 20%.

All three countries promise retaliatory measures. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announces tariffs on more than $100 billion of American goods over the course of 21 days. And Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum says her country would respond with its own retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods without specifying the targeted products immediately, signaling hopes to de-escalate.

China, meanwhile, imposes tariffs of up to 15% on a wide array of key U.S. farm exports. It also expands the number of U.S. companies subject to export controls and other restrictions by about two dozen.

March 5

Trump grants a one-month exemption on his new tariffs impacting goods from Mexico and Canada for U.S. automakers. The pause arrives after the president spoke with leaders of the “Big 3” automakers — Ford, General Motors and Stellantis.

March 6

In a wider extension, Trump postpones 25% tariffs on many imports from Mexico and some imports from Canada for a month. But he still plans to impose “reciprocal” tariffs starting on April 2.

Trump credited Sheinbaum with making progress on border security and drug smuggling as a reason for again pausing tariffs — and the Mexican president said in a post on X that she and Trump “had an excellent and respectful call in which we agreed that our work and collaboration have yielded unprecedented results.”

Trump’s actions also thawed relations with Canada somewhat, although outrage and uncertainty over the trade war remains. Still, after its initial retaliatory tariffs of $30 billion Canadian (US$21 billion) on U.S. goods, the government said it had suspended its second wave of retaliatory tariffs worth $125 billion Canadian (US$87 billion).

Wyatte Grantham-philips, The Associated Press






Click here for more

WASHINGTON (AP) — Almost two months into President Donald Trump’s second term, the chairman of the House Republican campaign committee is already predicting his party will pick up seats in the midterm elections some 20 months away.

Rep. Richard Hudson, R-N.C., is in charge of increasing the GOP’s slim majority in the House, or at least defending it. After Republicans met privately this past week with Elon Musk, Hudson said the cuts pushed by the Department of Government Efficiency are resonating with voters.

With disruptions at GOP town halls during the recent break, Hudson and House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., have told Republican lawmakers to skip the events for now and meet with constituents elsewhere. Nevertheless, Hudson said Republicans are confident their budget-cutting is “on the side of the angels.”

Here’s the political outlook from the chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee as he confronts Democrats trying to win back the House in 2026. This Q&A has been edited for brevity and length.

What was your advice about holding town halls?

HUDSON: “I just said that, it’s very important that all of us are communicating with our constituents, are very visible in our districts, very accessible. And it’s a shame that Democrat organizations are paying people to disrupt in-person town halls. And so this normal dialogue that we want to have with our constituents isn’t possible at in-person town halls. So we need to use technology to reach our constituents.”

Do you think the DOGE cuts will be a tough sell?

HUDSON: “I think it’s the greatest thing that’s happened since I’ve been in Congress.”

“My biggest frustration as a member of Congress is these massive bureaucracies that hide all their spending and when I ask questions or send letters, ignore it. And now it’s all mapped. You can see it all. There’s transparency for the American people. Now we can go in and decide, do we like the taxpayers’ dollars being spent on this program? Yes. Let’s keep it. This one? No, let’s cut it. I mean, we actually can do our job.”

“It’s exciting. It’s exhilarating.”

Do you feel any blowback back home from people losing their jobs, cuts to veterans?

HUDSON: “(Musk) did say that the the the firings at the VA (Department of Veterans Affairs) were a mistake done by that agency, by the VA.”

“He said mistakes were made by bureaucrats.”

What do you make of the 80,000 cuts at the VA?

HUDSON: “I’m disturbed when I hear veterans are being fired. I think we ought to give veterans priority. But, you know, I do acknowledge that there may need to be firings in all these agencies.”

“When it comes to the VA, for example, what I’m concerned about is giving world class health care to our veterans in a timely manner. And so any waste, fraud and abuse that makes that difficult or messes that up, I’m interested in cutting.”

What’s your message to the fired federal workers, what do you say to them?

HUDSON: “Hang tight.”

What’s that mean?

HUDSON: “I mean there may be some mistakes that are being corrected.”

Do you think that will be an OK message for other GOP lawmakers to use?

HUDSON: “The American people are sick of the swamp. They’re sick of waste, fraud and abuse. For the first time. ever, we finally have the tools to affect it. So I think the voters are going to reward us.”

Democrats envision a repeat of Trump’s first term, when they won back the House?

HUDSON: “I think they’re digging their own grave politically.”

“We’re on the side of the angels. We’re doing what the American people asked us to do, what 77 million people voted for Donald Trump to get.”

“We’re going to pick up seats.”

Lisa Mascaro, The Associated Press

Click here for more

WASHINGTON (AP) — Republicans in Congress have long been intent on countering America’s rivals and spreading U.S. influence abroad. But when President Donald Trump spelled out a sharp turn from that approach in his recent address to Congress, lawmakers in his party couldn’t help but stand and applaud.

Moves toward a neutral position on the war between Russia and Ukraine. Tariffs on trading partners and allies. Cuts in foreign military and humanitarian aid.

More is sure to come as Trump sweeps Washington with his “America First” agenda. “We’re going to protect our citizens like never before,” he told Congress.

Those ideas have produced some of the most dramatic moments in the early part of his second term, none more so than the Oval Office clash involving Trump, Vice President JD Vance and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

Some Republicans who were not shy about countering Trump’s foreign policy ideas during his first term are overwhelmingly standing by him now. It shows not only Trump’s ability to impose his will on his party, but also the extent to which he is ushering in a potentially generational shift in global alliances and power.

“Honestly, it’s a completely different way of looking at the world,” said Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis. “How do we avoid having enemies and how do we turn even unfriendly adversaries into no worse than friendly rivals.”

Still, in the weeks since taking office, Trump has handled foreign policy with unpredictable starts and stops.

Twice he has pledged to implement tough tariffs on Mexico and Canada, only to pause them. He has suggested the U.S. should take ownership of Gaza, Greenland and the Panama Canal, only to have his administration distance itself from such notions. And he has berated Zelenskyy, paused military aid to Ukraine and engaged in friendlier relations with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Here’s how members of Congress navigated Trump’s foreign policy moves this past week:

The Oval Office blowup with Zelenskyy

The open display of animosity between Trump and Zelenskyy had many Republicans on edge as they began the week.

Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., who is chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, repeatedly declined to speak to reporters about the exchange.

Another senior Republican who had previously been supportive of Zelenskyy, Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, seemed to make a dramatic shift. After a deal to give the U.S. access to Ukraine’s mineral riches fell apart, Graham suggested that the Ukrainian president should resign.

Then, as Zelenskyy and Trump raised the prospect of revived talks, Graham praised the deal as an “implicit security guarantee” for Ukraine because it would give Trump a business incentive for ensuring that Russia does not continue to take Ukrainian territory.

“President Trump’s a business guy. You got to make business,” Graham said, adding that the “America First” policy was a “hybrid” from the GOP’s days of “Reagan Republicans.”

“I see it as a reevaluation of traditional alignments, a outside-the-box-view of talking to traditional foes, but the reason I support it is because I think this hybrid approach is actually smart,” Graham said.

Other Republicans who are opposed to Ukraine aid were delighted to see Trump sour on Zelenskyy.

“What we’re seeing, which is a bit of a shock to the system, is a president that’s prioritizing American interests,” said Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo.

The president’s address to Congress

The only part of Trump’s address to Congress on Tuesday night that drew more applause from Democrats than Republicans was when the president spoke of how the U.S. had sent billions of dollars in military aid to Ukraine. On the Democratic side of the House chamber, members unfurled a small Ukrainian flag and wore scarfs of blue and gold.

On the Republican side, displays of support for Ukraine were hard to find. A few members wore lapel pins with the American and Ukrainian flags.

Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., who was one of the only GOP lawmakers to defend Zelenskyy this past week, said he was wearing the pin to send the message that “I support Ukraine and that I think that Vladimir Putin is a liar. And the minute that we think there’s any redeeming quality from him, we’ve made a mistake.”

Wicker, who also wore a pin Tuesday, said during a committee meeting that day that he hoped “to heaven” that Trump and Zelenskyy would reenter talks and that “friends decide to move on” after conflicts. As Trump spoke of Ukraine that night, Wicker sat on the edge of his seat.

“It’s time to end this senseless war,” Trump said, adding he wanted to speak to both sides.

A new generation of advisers

Republicans are not just worried about the future of Ukraine.

During a Senate hearing, Republican hawks such as Wicker and Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas closely questioned Elbridge Colby, Trump’s nominee for the top policy job at the Pentagon, about his ideas, which in the past have included a drawdown of military aid to Ukraine, a greater tolerance for Iran obtaining nuclear weapons and softening the U.S. position that it would help defend Taiwan in the event of a Chinese invasion.

Wicker also questioned Colby on whether he agreed with recently hired Pentagon advisers such as Michael DiMino, who has argued for reducing U.S. involvement in the Middle East, or Andrew Byers, who is in favor of a less confrontational approach to China.

Colby laid out his view that the U.S. cannot currently afford to be involved in countering multiple adversaries. But he also seemed to placate the senators by suggesting Iran could become an “existential threat” to the U.S.

Democrats repeatedly pressed Colby to say that Russia had started its war by invading Ukraine. Colby declined to do so, saying that the Trump administration was in a delicate negotiation with both countries.

Democrats try to rally support for Ukraine

As Trump changed America’s position on the war in Ukraine. Democrats took to the Senate floor Wednesday evening to try to pass a series of resolutions declaring U.S. support for repelling Russia’s invasion and decrying alleged war crimes by the Kremlin.

Sen. Jim Risch, R-Idaho, who heads the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, objected, blocking the resolutions. He said he agreed with the sentiment, but that it was unhelpful to the negotiations underway.

“Everybody wants the same outcome and that is to have peace in Ukraine,” Risch said. “There is one man on this planet, one man that can make that happen, and that is Donald J. Trump.”

Sen. Bernie Sanders, a Vermont independent who led the Democrats’ effort, responded by saying he had hoped Republicans could have agreed on rebuking Putin.

“Mr. Putin, you started this terrible war,” Sanders said. “You’re acting illegally. You’re acting barbarically. Stop that war.”

Stephen Groves, The Associated Press







Click here for more