In Donald Trump’s first act as president, he signed a high-profile executive order intended to dismantle Obamacare, instructing federal agencies to take any measures they could to roll back the Affordable Care Act. In retrospect, the vaguely worded directive was only symbolic. The Trump administration did eventually make moves to obstruct the law, but they took months and another executive order to implement. For all the theater, it’s hard to say whether that order had any effect at all.

Less noticed on Inauguration Day was a surprise move by the Federal Housing Administration to scratch a planned reduction in mortgage insurance premiums. That change helped shore up the financial health of the FHA’s mortgage insurance fund —but came at a real cost to homeowners, who would have saved an average of $500 a year if the Obama-era plan had stayed in place.

If you didn’t hear about the $500 you may have lost that day—well, that’s how the year went. The attention gap between the empty executive order and the real-life mortgage insurance rollback turned out to be representative of the whole first year of the Trump administration.

Again and again, Trump has taken the stage to an adoring crowd and declared victory on some issue, or announced lavish new promises, without any real results or plans to back them up. Meanwhile, very steadily, and almost totally separately from Trump’s speeches and tweetstorms, his administration has been ushering in a new conservative era of government—taking specific aim at Obama-era rules, and broader aim at the big regulatory mission of government.

At The Agenda, we’ve been tracking these policy changes weekly since June, ignoring the noise and explaining what the Trump administration actually accomplished each week. This week, we’re pulling them all into one mega-list—a portrait of a quiet but very serious Republican push against the scope and ambition of government.

What does it look like? There are a few consistent themes: Rolling back President Barack Obama’s legacy on everything from labor regulations to environmental protections, and more broadly tearing down rules across the government. Some topics have been largely missing: his infrastructure push has gone nowhere. Many of the rules are still in progress, or being delayed so long that it’s anyone’s guess what will really happen. (As you’ll see, some of our items are recurring episodes in long-running dramas, like what will finally happen to Obama’s fiduciary standard, which required stockbrokers to act in the best interest of their clients.) And finally, there are some perplexing surprises. After all the rhetoric against China and Mexico, the year’s big trade-war enemy has been … Canada?

Welcome to the annual wrap-up of our weekly guide to what Trump did while you weren’t looking.

June 3-9



1. A boost for Uber and McDonald’s

It’s the most controversial question in the labor world these days: When is a worker an employee, and when is he or she an independent contractor? That question has been especially controversial for “gig economy” companies like Uber and Postmates. But increasingly, regular businesses are also opting to classify their workers as independent contractors, which can cut their labor costs sharply by not obliging them to offer benefits like health insurance or pay employer payroll taxes. According to one recent study, the percentage of workers employed as contractors grew almost 30 percent from 2005 to 2015.

In 2015, the Obama administration gave workers a win on this one: It issued a guidance document explaining how the Department of Labor would interpret the law, outlining the economic tests it employed in determining whether an employer was misclassifying its workers. The agency had been using that policy in enforcing the law, but putting it in writing sent a clear message to employers across the country that the Obama administration was serious about cracking down on worker misclassification.

On Wednesday, the Trump administration withdrew the guidance document. This was a win for business owners in any number of sectors — not just Uber, but industries such as farming and construction, which increasingly use independent contractors. The withdrawal of the document doesn’t change the underlying law, the Fair Labor Standards Act, or the DOL’s current interpretation of it but sends a strong signal to employers that Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta plans to interpret it differently than his predecessor. “The big story is not that, for whatever reason, they pulled down guidance,” said David Weil, who issued the document under Obama. “The real question is what else comes with this.”

Acosta also withdrew another Obama-era guidance document on how the department will determine whether a parent company, like McDonald’s or Subway, is jointly responsible for its franchises’ labor violations. As with worker misclassification, the Obama-era DOL interpreted the joint employment standard favorably for workers; its withdrawal is a victory for businesses.

2. A trade war with Mexico averted—for now

Trump has stormed on about the North American Free Trade Agreement, calling it a “trading disaster” and vowing to rip it up, suggesting that a trade war with Mexico may be on the horizon. But on Tuesday, the United States and Mexico went the other direction and actually came to a deal, averting a potential trade crisis when they ended a dispute on Mexican sugar exports. The showdown was seen as a first test for the two countries as they, along with Canada, seek to preserve and update NAFTA later this year.

The sugar deal is a quintessentially in-the-weeds trade agreement: It raises the minimum prices for raw and refined sugar and cuts the percentage of Mexico’s sugar exports that are refined from 53 percent to 30 percent, while redefining the purity level for refined sugar. The U.S. sugar industry objected to the deal, arguing that it did not address loopholes that give Mexican producers an unfair advantage in the U.S. market. It wasn’t the win that industry wanted, but many experts were encouraged that the administration’s first big dispute with a major trading partner had an amicable ending.

3. The end of a DOJ “slush fund”

Three years ago, when the Department of Justice settled a $17 billion settlement with Bank of America over its mortgage lending practices, it came with a requirement: The bank had to pay $100 million to various legal and community groups, a sum intended to help homeowners hurt by Bank of America’s wrongdoing. Many other DOJ settlements with financial institutions during the Obama administration required similar payouts to outside groups.

Conservatives have long objected to this practice, which was used by Obama and, before him, George W. Bush: They see it as a way for a president to direct money to his favored organizations, illegally sidestepping the congressional appropriations process. The Obama administration argued that so-called third-party settlements were simply another tool for reparations: The money, they said, didn’t go to random organizations but to groups that could help repair the damage caused by financial misdeeds. Opponents called it a “slush fund.”

That ended Wednesday , when Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued a memo prohibiting U.S. attorneys from including such third-party payouts in any settlements. When the Department of Justice settles a case from now on, third-party groups won’t get a dime.

4. A win for nursing homes

Last October, the Obama administration banned any nursing home that receives federal funding — which is most of them — from requiring that prospective tenants sign an arbitration agreement as a condition to be admitted, a common practice in the industry. Such agreements prevent residents from taking the facility to court, requiring them to appeal to an arbitration tribunal. Nursing homes prefer arbitration because it’s usually cheaper than getting sued; critics say it’s unfair to residents, who often have no idea they signed away their right to sue in court until they actually try to file charges, at which point the nursing home shows them the fine print.

The nursing home industry fought the rule, suing the Department of Health and Human Services. In November, it won a temporary injunction against the regulation, so it never actually took effect. And now it may be dead. On Tuesday, the Trump administration signaled its view on arbitration agreements: the DHS issued a new proposed regulation that rolled back the Obama rule. Because it’s not final, the new rule doesn’t immediately overturn the ban on arbitration agreements; it has to go through the same process as any other rule. But it sends a strong signal for where the administration will ultimately land.

5. Get THAAD out of here

Not every major policy change affecting America originates in Washington. On Wednesday, South Korean President Moon Jae-in blocked the deployment of an American missile defense system intended to block missile attacks from North Korea.

The Pentagon’s Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system became a hot-button issue in Asia: China sees the North Korea angle as a cover story for a system that’s really intended to block Chinese missiles, an incursion on its sovereignty. (The Pentagon disputes that argument.) It already was a delicate issue in South Korea; Beijing had been successfully using state media to persuade Chinese consumers to boycott South Korean stores and cancel vacation plans, which has hurt many Korean businesses. Then Trump rattled relations with its ally by insisting in April that South Korea foot the $1 billion bill for the system, an idea later walked back by his national security team.

Moon — a left-leaning leader who supports a more open dialogue with North Korea than his scandal-plagued predecessor—was already reluctant to host THAAD at all, but allowed its continued deployment until he discovered last week, to his surprise, that the Pentagon had sent four more launchers into the country. On Wednesday, he stopped any further deployment of the system—just a day before North Korea conducted its 10th missile test of the year.

June 10–16



1. U.S. and China make nice on beef, dairy and poultry

Throughout his campaign, Trump railed against Chinese trade policies, vowing to label the country a currency manipulator and scaring the business community that a trade war was on the horizon. But Trump backed off his promise to officially label Beijing a “currency manipulator.” And in May, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross announced the U.S.-China 100-Day trade agreement, calling it a “herculean accomplishment.”

Still, trade experts who looked at the details of the agreement, were less convinced. Many of the ten policy changes were already underway; on the new changes, China made few firm commitments.

This week, a trio of trade announcements revealed there was more substance to the deal than originally thought, if not quite “herculean.” On Tuesday, the Department of Agriculture announced it had finalized an agreement with its Chinese counterparts to allow U.S. beef imports into China, breaking a 14-year ban that Beijing has more-than-once promised to end. On Thursday, the U.S. and China signed a memorandum to promote U.S dairy products in China , and , on Friday, the USDA published a proposed rule to allow Chinese poultry products into the U.S.

These aren’t huge changes to the U.S.-China trade relationship, and some were in the works long before Trump took office. In fact, China promised last September to lift the ban on U.S. beef exports; the dairy agreement wasn’t actually part of the “100-Day” trade deal. But the trio of agreements show that even as Trump rails against Beijing’s trade policies, the two sides are still capable of compromising. For all the eye rolls that Trump’s initial “100-Day” deal invited, it’s looking a lot more real two months later, especially once beef shipments actually arrive in China, which Ross estimated could be as soon as 10 days. “Everyone has been justified in taking a wait and see attitude,” said Bruce Hirsh, a former assistant U.S. trade representative. “Even now, until actual shipments are accepted, it's best to wait and see.”

2. Education Department targets Obama-era student protections

With student-loan debt a trillion-dollar issue, the Obama administration announced a new policy last October that would allow defrauded borrowers to have their federal student loans cancel ed—an expensive proposition for the government, which would cover the cost. Student advocates, who had long pushed Obama to adopt such a rule, cheered the news, arguing it was simply a matter of fairness.

One problem: The rule wasn’t scheduled to take effect until July 1—and now it looks like it will never take effect. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos announced this week that the agency was delaying the implementation of the so-called “defense to repayment” rule indefinitely, on the grounds that it is the subject of an ongoing lawsuit. In effect, this means the idea is almost certainly dead: DeVos also announced that the department intends to rewrite the rule altogether, along with another major Obama-era education rule, known as “gainful employment,” that required colleges to meet certain standards or risk losing access to federal student loan dollars.

Unlike “defense to repayment,” the “gainful employment” rule was finalized in 2014 and had already taken effect, so the Trump administration will have to undertake a full rulemaking process to rewrite it, a time-consuming process.

The changes are a defeat for defrauded students and a big victory for for-profit colleges, which are disproportionately represented among both loan-fraud cases and colleges that leave students with high debt levels. For-profits loudly argued that the Obama administration was effectively trying to choke out the industry altogether. This week, DeVos gave it new life.

3. The Pentagon flexes its muscles

During the Obama administration, the military often complained that the White House was micromanaging its affairs, requiring high-level, interagency approval for decisions on troop levels or drone strikes outside of active war zones. Trump has dramatically reversed those policies, giving the Department of Defense wide autonomy to conduct overseas military operations.

That autonomy was on display in two countries this week: Somalia and Afghanistan. On Sunday, the U.S. struck al- Shabab, a terrorist group, in s outhern Somalia, the DOD’s first known use of additional war-making powers in Somalia. In March, the Trump administration had declared parts of Somalia as an “area of active hostilities,” which gives military commanders the same authority to conduct raids and strikes as they now have in active war zones like Iraq; it also reduces protections for civilians. Human rights advocates criticized the move, saying it effectively allows the Pentagon to conduct unauthorized wars with little oversight. U.S. officials responded that it was necessary to confront emerging threats quickly. The U.S. Africa Command was slower than the White House expected in launching operations after the March change; Sunday’s strike appears to be the first under the new authority.

This week, Trump also gave the Department of Defense the autonomy to decide whether more troops are needed in Afghanistan. Washington had been anticipating a decision from the White House on the proposed Afghan troop surge for weeks, with Defense Secretary James Mattis arguing in favor and White House officials like chief strategist Steve Bannon arguing against it. Trump’s decision to outsource the decision to the Pentagon is a big win for the agency and for Mattis—and an outcome that would have been unthinkable under Obama.

4. VA civil service reforms heads to Trump’s desk

For years, Congress has tried to reform the rules for firing workers at the Department of Veterans Affairs, having grown frustrated at the difficulty of removing employees responsible for the scandal at VA hospitals in 2014, which eventually led to the resignation of Secretary Eric Shinseki.

This week lawmakers sent a substantive set of reforms to the president’s desk; he is expected to sign them in the days ahead. The legislation, called the VA Accountability and Whistleblower Protection Act, creates a new office to provide greater protection for whistleblowers and significantly shrinks the time needed to fire VA employees. Previously, it could take months, if not years, to broom out problem employees; agencies often deemed it not worth the effort to try. Under the bill, the review structure largely remains in place for rank-and-file employees—it changed more for senior executives—but it sharply cuts the time for filing appeals and for the oversight board to reach a decision. It also lowers the burden of proof necessary for agencies to take action against employees. Groups representing federal employees, including the American Federation for Government Employees and the Senior Executives Association, said the legislation would undermine worker protections like due process. Veterans’ groups cheered the changes.

Civil-service reforms don’t often get much attention, but these are significant changes with bipartisan support, and government reformers are watching them closely. If they prove successful at the VA, lawmakers could soon look to implement them across government.

5. New food labels? Not so fast.

Not every Trump rollback targets a Barack Obama policy—some of them target Michelle Obama policies. The former first lady made healthy living her top priority during her husband’s presidency, promoting exercise with her “Let’s Move” program and working to improve the nutrition of school lunches. One of her big policy wins was the redesign of the nutrition facts panel, the one that appears on all the packaged foods you buy. Unveiled by Obama in May 2016, the first redesign in more than two decades makes the calorie number more visible and includes information on “added sugars” for the first time, provoking a sharp response from the sugar industry.

Food makers were supposed to start using the new labels by July 26, 2018—but on Tuesday, the Food and Drug Administration put them on indefinite hold. There’s no timetable for when it could be implemented; industry groups had also been pushing to align the timing with another FDA rule on the disclosure of genetically modified organisms, which isn’t expected until 2018. In a note explaining the delay, the FDA said the extra time was needed for manufacturers to print the new label. It said nothing about actually rethinking the redesign altogether, although it’s possible that could happen too.

June 17–23



1. The Labor Department loosens a rule on beryllium exposure

You haven’t heard of it since chemistry class, but beryllium is a chemical toxic to lung tissue. The Department of Labor took years to finalize a rule protecting workers from exposure, and didn’t issue the final version until the tail end of Obama’s presidency—January 9, to be exact. It was always at risk of removal by the Republican Congress, which could have repealed it with just a majority vote, but it survived until now.

On Friday, the Department of Labor proposed a new rule on beryllium exposure; it doesn’t change the original exposure limits imposed by Obama but instead eliminates additional safety requirements for the construction and shipyard industries, such as conducting medical surveillance or providing training for those workers who are near, but not above, the exposure limits. Labor groups slammed the change, saying that it would lead to more lung disease and cancer among workers. Industry groups applauded the changes; the original rule, they argued, was too restrictive.

The DOL must still go through a full rule-making process, so the new beryllium rule won’t be finalized for months. In the meantime, the department said it wouldn’t be enforcing the Obama-era rule.

2. A new emergency alert for cops

We’ve all noticed the emergency warnings on television or radio, which alert audiences about a child abduction (the “Amber Alert”) or severe weather. Soon, there may be a new alert: a “Blue Alert” for when a police officer is missing, seriously injured or killed in the line of duty.

On Thursday, the Federal Communications Commission unanimously approved the first stage of rulemaking to add such a “Blue Alert” to the FCC’s Emergency Alert System , which was created in 1997 to enable the president to communicate quickly and directly with the American people in the case of an emergency. Stations are required to carry such presidential alerts , but alerts for a child abduction or severe weather are voluntary.

A “Blue Alert” has already been implemented in 27 states; the FCC proposal would make it a national standard. The change has bipartisan support—it’s hard to see politicians taking a stance against showing concern for officer safety—but it also fits with the Trump administration’s focus on attacks on cops, and the Department of Justice’s pivot from Obama-era policies on police accountability toward a more protective stance on police.

3. The Yucca nuclear controversy reopens

So … where is America supposed to put its spent nuclear fuel over the long term? A decades-old debate was reawakened this week when Rick Perry, the energy secretary, announced at a congressional hearing on Tuesday that he was reconstituting the Office of Civilian Radioactive Management, which ran a proposed Nevada site for long-term waste storage.

Throughout the Obama administration, with Nevada Sen. Harry Reid leading the Senate Democrats, plans to store nuclear waste in Nevada’s Yucca Mountain had no chance of actually happening. Now it’s back. This wasn’t exactly a surprise, since Trump’s budget included $120 million to restart the licensing process for the Yucca site; in fact, in May, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission took the first steps toward restarting that process. But Perry’s words nevertheless created a sharp backlash from Nevada politicians who have long fought any plan to store nuclear waste in their state.

Perry somewhat walked back his comments at a separate congressional hearing on Wednesday, saying that “no decision has been made at this time with respect to the timing or the location, for that matter, of waste storage." But the Office of Civilian Radioactive Management is still set to reopen during fiscal 2018. The next Yucca fight is just beginning.

4. The White House gets tough with Russia

Amid multiple congressional inquiries and the investigation by s pecial p rosecutor Robert Mueller, the Trump administration hasn’t done much to distance itself from Moscow. So it may have come as a surprise on Tuesday when the Treasury Department imposed sanctions on more than three dozen individuals and organizations involved in Russia’s annexation of Crimea.

The announcement coincided with Ukraine President Petro Poroshenko’s visit to the White House, but many observers wondered if the administration had a different motive: discouraging the House from taking up the Senate’s Russian sanctions bill. That legislation, which passed the Senate last week by a 98-2 vote, would limit Trump’s ability to ease sanctions on the Russian government. The White House has been working to water down or kill the Senate bill. The new sanctions can’t hurt those efforts.

5. Trump quietly releases another immigration executive order

It went almost entirely unnoticed: At 9:20 p.m. on Wednesday, the White House released a new executive order on immigration. Compared to Trump’s past orders on immigration, which have set off national protests and ongoing court cases, this one was minor. It makes a very small change to an Obama-era executive order, removing one section that directed the secretaries of state and homeland security to create a plan so that “80 percent of nonimmigrant visa applicants are interviewed within 3 weeks of receipt of application.”

So now, DHS and State can take more time to review nonimmigrant visa applicants. What’s the reasoning for this? Michael Short, a White House spokesperson, said in an email that the change was “a very straightforward step that removes an arbitrary requirement and ensures the State Department has the needed discretion to make real world security determinations.” He explained that the White House didn’t want to set an “arbitrary deadline” for reviewing and vetting visa applicants.

For people seeking nonimmigrant visas, which include everything from business travelers to foreign athletes to diplomats, this could mean longer waits as their applications are processed. But to the White House, any additional waits are simply a necessary step to keep the country safe.

June 24–30



1. The Labor Department was busy, Part 1

The Department of Labor issued some big regulations under Obama, and Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta isn’t wasting any time targeting those. Just this week, he took aim at three big ones: the overtime rule, the fiduciary standard and an electronic recordkeeping rule.

Under Obama, the department said it would require certain large employers to electronically submit data on injuries and illnesses, starting July 1. But on Tuesday, the Department of Labor officially proposed delaying the record-keeping rule to December 1. The rule isn’t final yet, so it will technically take effect Saturday , but the Department previously said it won’t yet accept electronic submissions. Supporters of the rule hope that sunshine will act as a disinfectant, shaming companies into better labor practices; companies say it is onerous and unnecessary.

Then on Thursday, the Department asked for comments about delaying the January 1, 2018 , compliance date of another major Obama rule—the “fiduciary standard,” which requires financial advisers selling investment products to act in the best interest of their clients. In May, Acosta announced in a Wall Street Journal op-ed that he was going to allow the fiduciary rule to take effect as planned on June 9, prompting cheers from Democrats who thought the rule was doomed. Those cheers may have been premature: The department had previously announced that it wouldn’t actually enforce the rule until January 1—and Thursday’s news is a sign that Acosta is considering more substantive reforms.

Finally, this week the agency sent some signals against Obama’s overtime rule, which doubled the salary threshold under which almost all employees are entitled to time-and- a-half pay for working overtime. What actually happened was technical: T he department defended its authority to set a salary threshold in determining whether an employee qualifies for overtime, filing a brief in federal court in a case challenging the rule. However, what didn’t happen was crucial: The agency didn’t defend the overtime rule itself. In fact, it gave a very strong indication this week that it doesn’t support the rule . On Tuesday, the Department sent a request for comments about the overtime rule to the White House for review, the first step toward significantly reforming the rule.

2. The Labor Department was busy, Part 2

The Department of Labor has two big policy tools at its disposal: rule-making and enforcement. Rules get most of the attention, but enforcement can have a larger impact on worker’s daily lives—and under Obama, the DOL used its enforcement powers broadly, earning praise from labor groups and criticism from businesses.

On Tuesday, the Labor Department gave a big hint that a new enforcement regime is beginning. The DOL’s Wage and Hour division announced that it would resume issuing opinion letters, which are documents requested by an employer or employee that provide case-by-case legal guidance over potential federal labor law violations.

Businesses like opinion letters: They give individual companies a clear idea if their labor practices are likely to violate the law. Many labor groups don’t: Critics say they suck up department resources that could be spent on investigations, and unfairly favor big employers, who have the resources and know-how to submit formal queries to the government, over employees, who don’t.

Under Bush, the Labor Department issued lots of opinion letters. but Obama discontinued the practice, instead issuing general guidance documents that explain broadly how the DOL interprets the law. Acosta rescinded those guidance documents three weeks ago. The resumption of opinion letters doesn’t signal a policy change in itself. But the shift is telling: Under the Acosta regime, business is finding the door open again.

3. Trump expands his trade fight with Canada

During his presidential campaign, Trump slammed China for its currency practices and sharply criticized Mexico over its cheap labor. But Canada largely avoided the crossfire—until Trump took office.

Since then, our n orthern neighbor has become the chief target of Trump’s trade ire as the Commerce Department imposed preliminary tariffs of 7.7 percent on certain Canadian lumber companies. This is the second time Trump has imposed penalties on the Canadian lumber industry; in April, Commerce announced tariffs of 24 percent on certain Canadian lumber companies. It’s the latest moves in the long-simmering dispute that has turned hot in the p ast few months.

The lumber fight is the background battle as the two sides, along with Mexico, are preparing to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement. This week, the U.S. t rade r epresentative hosted a three-day public hearing on NAFTA with 140 witnesses giving five - minute statements and then answering questions from government officials. All involved appear to agree that the renegotiation will be long and hard—and the escalating fight over Canadian lumber won’t engender any good will.

4. EPA targets a top Obama-era rule

In May 2015, the Obama administration issued the Waters of the United States rule—colloquially known as WOTUS—a far-reaching and long-awaited plan to limit pollution in America’s wetlands. The culmination of years of work, WOTUS was hailed by environmentalists as a marquee moment in America’s commitment to cleaning up its polluted waters.

But two years later, WOTUS is on the verge of defeat. Twenty - seven states sued the Obama administration over the rule, arguing that the EPA exceeded its authority to regulate small streams and tributaries. A judge blocked the rule last year, so it hasn’t taken effect, and on Tuesday, the EPA, along with the Army Corps of Engineers, took the first step towards killing it, issuing a 52-page proposed rule to repeal WOTUS. The agencies are accepting comments for 30 days. Soon after, they will issue a final rule.

5. Trump tightens the grip on China—and North Korea

When Trump took office, he quickly realized the threat posed by North Korea, even saying he was willing to go easier on trade if China helped Washington with Pyongyang. Those days appear to be waning.

On Thursday, the Treasury Department imposed sanctions on a small Chinese bank, saying that it “acts as a conduit for illicit North Korean financial activity,” along with two individuals and another Chinese company. The moves are the clearest sign that the Trump administration has decided that Beijing is unlikely to pressure North Korea into giving up its nuclear program and that unilateral action is necessary. Apparently, Trump meant what he tweeted last week: “While I greatly appreciate the efforts of President Xi & China to help with North Korea, it has not worked out. At least I know China tried!”



July 1–7



1. A new era for the renewable fuel standard

The Renewable Fuel Standard is one of the biggest annual fights in energy policy, a bruising battle between oil and agriculture interests. Under Obama, the agriculture industry frequently came out ahead as the Environmental Protection Agency upped the volume of biofuels—mostly corn-based ethanol—that oil refiners are required to mix into their gasoline supply.

Those days may be over. On Wednesday, the EPA , under new Administrator Scott Pruitt, released its proposed Renewable Fuel Standard for 2018, which would leave the requirement for conventional biofuels unchanged at its 2017 level. But the EPA would reduce the requirement for advanced biofuels, the first reduction in volumes under the Renewable Fuel Standard. It’s a victory for oil and gas interests who praised the move but said it still did not go far enough. Biofuel producers slammed it.

Pruitt also signaled that he could undertake broader reforms to the Renewable Fuel Standard, saying the EPA will conduct a technical analysis to “inform a future rule” about the program and will be “assessing higher levels of ethanol-free gasoline.” A new regulatory regime is well underway.

2. More oil and gas drilling on federal lands

Under Obama, oil and gas companies frequently criticized the administration for limiting drilling on federal lands, an effort that was praised by environmentalists as a way to keep oil and gas in the ground and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

On Thursday, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke took a step in the exact opposite direction when he issued a secretarial order directing the Bureau of Land Management to speed up the permitting process for oil and gas leases. Zinke wants the BLM to hold quarterly lease sales and to issue permits within 30 days. The bureaucratic move is a first step toward opening up more federal land to oil and gas drilling but, as Zinke said, nothing will change overnight. With oil prices depressed, many producers aren’t interested in drilling on federal land. The order won’t change those market forces.

3. Another big victory for for-profit colleges

A few weeks ago, the Department of Education targeted an Obama-era protection for students known as the “gainful employment” rule, which required colleges to meet certain standards or risk losing access to federal student loans. It was a big victory for for-profit colleges, which are disproportionately affected by the rule. But since the “gainful employment” rule was finalized in 2014, the department would have to undertake a full rule-making process to rewrite it.

As of July 1, the rule required schools to disclose a range of information to prospective students, including completion rates and post-graduate earnings. But on Wednesday, the Department of Education issued a notice that it was extending the compliance date for those disclosures by a year, to July 1, 2018. In the meantime, schools must still disclose that information on their websites. The move is another victory for for-profit schools, which have found a much more welcome regulatory regime under new Education Secretary Betsy DeVos.

4. Trump takes another shot at Obama’s climate policy

Just a couple weeks after Trump won the presidential election, Obama took a major step to secure his climate legacy when he blocked any oil or gas drilling in most of the Arctic waters. The plan, released by the Interior Department’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, guides offshore energy development from 2017 to 2022, and was a major victory for environmentalists, obstructing Trump’s pledge to expand offshore drilling.

On Monday, the Interior Department took the first step toward revising that five-year road map and opening the Arctic’s Chukchi Sea, Beaufort Sea and Cook Inlet areas to oil and gas drilling. The BOEM issued a notice in the Federal Register seeking comments from the public on a replacement plan that would cover 2019 to 2024. Oil and gas groups praised the move as a necessary step to secure America’s energy future, but critics said it would undermine U.S. efforts to fight climate change and put the Arctic waters at risk. Either way, changes won’t happen overnight: Zinke expects the rewrite to take two to three years.

In the meantime, offshore drilling in most of the Arctic will remain off limits. Trump cannot overturn Obama’s climate legacy that easily.

5. The Pentagon delays lifting the ban on transgender troops

In June 2016, the Obama administration announced that it would allow transgender troops to serve openly in the military, a move lauded by gay-rights groups and criticized by many Republicans who worried it could undermine the strength and stability of U.S. armed forces.

The move was set to take effect on July 1—but late last Friday, the Department of Defense announced that it was delaying lifting the ban until January 1, 2018 , to determine the impact on "the readiness and lethality of our forces." Some military experts are concerned that allowing transgender troops to serve openly would undermine unit cohesion and reduce the military's effectiveness. Gay-rights advocates vigorously dispute that argument and slammed the Pentagon 's delay. But they are hopeful that it signals a broader reversal of the Obama-era policy.



July 8–14



1. Foreign entrepreneurs not welcome

Trump’s overhaul of U.S. immigration policy hit a new target this week: foreign-born entrepreneurs.

In 2016, President Barack Obama passed a rule to allow foreign-born entrepreneurs to remain in the U.S. while they build new companies. The so-called startup visa was a linchpin in Obama’s effort to encourage innovative foreigners to remain the U.S. as long as they were creating jobs for Americans; it was a top priority for many technology companies and venture capitalists. It was supposed to go into effect on July 17.

This week, the Department of Homeland Security pushed it back, delaying the effective date until March 2018. The agency also said it will propose another regulation to repeal the original rule, which relies on the government’s parole authority to allow foreigners to temporarily stay in the United States even if they don’t meet the requirements for a visa. This all has its roots in Trump’s executive order on immigration, signed in January, that directed the government to limit its use of parole to only a case-by-case basis. That provision didn’t make headlines, but many immigration experts saw it as a signal that Trump was planning to kill the startup visa—and this week’s move confirms that that is the case.

2. A Korean trade war brewing?

Trump’s favorite targets on trade are well-known: China, Mexico and Germany. But there’s another country—an important U.S. ally—that often is a frequent target of Trump’s ire: South Korea.

This week, U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer took the first formal step to combat ing Korea’s perceived trade infractions when he formally requested the two sides enter into discussions to consider changes to the five-year-old U.S.-South Korea trade agreement, which was signed under George W. Bush and approved by Congress in 2011. In a one-page letter to his Korean counterpart, Lighthizer specifically wrote that the Trump administration was determined to reverse the U.S.’ $28 billion bilateral trade deficit, a top goal for Trump, who brought up Korea’s trade policies as recently as Thursday in an interview with reporters on the plane ride to Paris.

The stakes are high: Both the U.S. and South Korea are seeking a strategy to block North Korea’s nuclear weapons program, a difficult issue that has already created some tension between the longtime allies. Any trade disputes would only hurt the U.S.-Korea relationship.

3. A milestone for Obamacare

As the Republican health care reform stands on a knife’s edge on Capitol Hill, states can’t just wait and see how those efforts end up; they need to take immediate steps to stabilize their health insurance markets—and they have a powerful tool to do so.

A so-called Section 1332 innovation waiver, for its section of the Affordable Care Act, allows states to opt out of many Obamacare regulations within the basic parameters of the law. This week, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services approved its first waiver, to Alaska, which wants to set up a reinsurance program to help insurers that end up with a disproportionate number of high-cost enrollees. The program is intended to moderate premium increases and prevent its individual insurance market from collapsing. CMS will provide $323 million from 2018 to 2022, and estimates that Alaska’s plan will reduce premiums by 20 percent in 2018. The agency had previously signaled support for the waiver, so Tuesday’s announcement wasn’t a surprise. But it still marked a milestone for the law.

The ACA puts strict rules around when and how states can waive Obamacare requirements but that could change if Senate Republicans reach a compromise on their health reform . Under their bill, states could receive approval for waivers much easily—with less oversight, and more freedom to spend money as they see fit.

4. The rollback of Obama’s environmental legacy continues

While the Clean Power Plan and the Paris deal garnered most of the headlines, Obama’s environmental legacy touched all corners of the government, from offshore drilling leases to energy efficiency policies. But under Trump, a new environmental regime is underway, quickly reversing those policies.

This week brought two such efforts. First, on Tuesday, the Environmental Protection Agency announced that it was accepting comments on its proposal to rescind a ban on mining in Alaska’s Pebble Mine. Under Obama, the EPA refused to issue permits for gold and copper mining in Pebble and instead officially restricted mining in the area. The decision was the subject of a fierce legal battle, with developers arguing that the EPA’s determination violated the law and environmentalists arguing that pollution from the mining would threaten a nearby wild salmon fishery, the world’s largest. In May, the EPA, under Administrator Scott Pruitt, announced a deal with the owner of the Pebble Mine to withdraw an ongoing lawsuit, repeal the mining restrictions and allow Pebble a fair process to apply for a permit. Tuesday’s move is the first step in implementing that agreement and allowing drilling in Pebble.

On Thursday, the Interior Department announced its first oil and gas lease sale since Trump took office, offering 75.9 million acres in the Gulf of Mexico—more than the agency offered in the Gulf of Mexico during all of 2016, in part due to a lack of demand. Secretary Ryan Zinke also announced that he was lowering royalty rates—the government’s share of the take—on shallow-water leases, an effort to encourage oil companies to drill despite the fact that oil prices remain depressed. The lease sale is scheduled for August 16.

5. A move to lower drug prices

As prescription drug prices have climbed higher and higher, Americans have become angrier and angrier at drug companies and the government’s inability to rein in the price hikes. Trump has said the issue is a top priority for his administration, but he has made few real policy changes on it so far.

That changed on Thursday when the Department of Health and Human Services released two major new rules setting 2018 payment rates and policies for hospital outpatient departments and ambulatory surgical centers. If it sounds complicated, that’s because it is: The proposed rules run almost 1,500 pages in total. But experts immediately focused on a reform to the prices that the government will pay certain doctors and hospitals for prescription drugs.

The change relates to the 340B discount drug program, which was created in 1992 and requires drug manufacturers to offer outpatient drugs at a heavy discount—around 22.5 percent on average—to hospitals and doctors that serve a large share of low-income patients. Under last year’s payment schedule, CMS reimbursed hospitals for 340B drugs by about 6 percent above their average sales price. The new proposal would reimburse hospitals for such drugs at 22.5 percent below their average sales price, effectively negating the discount. CMS says that this reform will lower out-of-pocket costs for patients, ensuring that the 340B program is actually benefiting Medicare patients and not just goosing the bottom line of 340B hospitals and doctors.

The Trump administration heavily promoted the changes, even sending out a statement from Trump touting the reforms. But hospitals warned that the changes would hurt patients’ access to care by threatening the financial health of 340B hospitals. The payment rates aren’t final, and the agency is accepting comments on it. Expect a major fight to come.



July 15–21



1. Reinstating property seizure

In 2015, then-Attorney General Eric Holder reversed nearly three decades of federal policy when he severely limited state and local police from using federal law to seize cash, cars and other personal property from crime suspects. (The Justice Department eventually allowed a very restricted version of the policy to resume last year.) That policy of enabling civil asset forfeiture (dubbed, euphemistically, Equitable Sharing) had enabled law enforcement to seize property worth $3 billion since 2008, a lucrative income source for cash-strapped police departments. But Democrats and Republicans alike had sharply criticized the whole idea, arguing that seizing assets from people who had not yet been convicted of a crime was a violation of due process—and a terrible incentive for police.

On Wednesday, Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued a new policy guidance reinstating much of the old policy on civil asset forfeitures—with additional safeguards to prevent abuse, including for cash seizures of less than $10,000. Sessions and his deputy, Rod Rosenstein, stressed that civil asset forfeitures, a policy that began at the start of the w ar on d rugs, would be critical for state and local police to combat the opioid crisis. But critics said the safeguards were too weak to guard against abuse and worried it was a reward to police departments for supporting Trump during the presidential campaign. Rosenstein denied that, but Trump has been receptive to requests from local police. In February, sheriffs from the National Sheriffs Association visited the White House and stressed to the president the need to reverse Holder’s policy. In the ensuing discussion, Trump didn’t seem to know much about asset forfeitures—but sided with the sheriffs. “Asset forfeiture,” he said, “we're going to go back on, okay?"

2. Trump’s first big regulatory blueprint

Twice a year, the White House regulatory office releases a compendium of the regulatory agendas for all government agencies, from C abinet agencies like the Department of Labor to obscure independent entities like the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency. The compendium, called the “ Unified Agenda,” includes what rules the agency intends to issue and the timeline for issuing them and is highly anticipated by businesses, lawmakers and regulation experts.

This spring’s version took on even more importance because it is Trump’s first Unified Agenda, the most comprehensive look at how his administration will approach the regulatory state. Experts are still picking through all of the information , but a few broad themes are clear: Trump intends a far less active regulatory state than Obama, proposing fewer rules and more deregulatory actions, wiping Obama-era rules off the books.

So what’s actually in it? There’s a lot: The Environmental Protection Agency intends to repeal Obama’s Clean Power Plan, which imposed limits on greenhouse gas emissions, although the EPA did not provide a specific timeline. The Bureau of Land Management also intends to repeal a rule on hydraulic fracking ; the DOL will “reconsider” a rule requiring employers to track workplace injuries and illnesses ; and the Department of Homeland Security intends to issue a rule for returning border crossers to Mexico and Canada. In some cases, the absence of a rule is telling: The Agriculture Department, for instance, dropped multiple rules on organic products that were close to being finalized during the Obama administration. There’s lots more: Check out the entire Unified Agenda.

3. 15,000 additional visas for foreign workers

During the presidential campaign, Trump blasted visa programs that allow foreign workers to temporarily work in the U.S. “[I will] institute an absolute requirement to hire American workers first for every visa and immigration program,” he promised in March 2016. “No exceptions.” In turn, many immigration experts expected a crackdown on such programs under Trump.

But on Monday, the Department of Homeland Security announced that it was granting businesses an additional 15,000 H-2B visas for low-skilled, non-agricultural workers for fiscal 2017. Congress had capped the H-2B program at 66,000 visas annually, but in last year’s spending bill, lawmakers granted DHS the authority to issue up to 69,000 additional H-2B visas. Critics called the provision a back -door increase in foreign labor, allowing Washington to further undercut American workers, and hoped that the Trump administration would not use its new authority. But DHS determined that 15,000 extra visas were needed.

John Kelly, the secretary of homeland security, justified the move as a “demonstration of the Administration's commitment to supporting American businesses ,” and DHS guidance said that hiring companies must attest that they are "likely to suffer irreparable harm" without the extra workers, a standard that drew some praise from some H-2B critics.

4. Selling rice to China

Trump blasted China for its trade practices during the presidential campaign but as president, the U.S. and China have found some real common ground on trade. They’ve reached agreements on beef, dairy and poultry. And this week, you can add rice to that list.

On Thursday, the Department of Agriculture announced that China—the world’s biggest rice importer—would allow the U.S. to export rice into the country, the culmination of 10 -plus years of negotiations. The U.S. rice industry praised the deal, which will allow American rice into the country after China conducts an audit of U.S. rice facilities.

Of course, the trade relationship has some real sticking points. For instance, this week, the sides were unable to agree on a one-year plan on trade at the U.S.-China Comprehensive Economic Dialogue, a talk between high-level American and Chinese officials. And Trump is expected to infuriate China by signing off on steep steel tariffs in the near future. Still, that Washington and Beijing are finding common ground on long-stalled trade issues is an unexpected development in Trump’s first six months, after he spent so much time bashing China during the campaign.

5. No more traveling to North Korea

The death in June of Otto Warmbier, an American college student, after 18 months of captivity in North Korea sent shock waves across the United States and provoked outrage from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, with many calling for a ban on travel to the North. Warmbier was convicted in 2016 to 15 years of hard labor after attempting to steal a poster from his hotel room. Two months into his sentence, he suffered a severe head injury; in June, North Korea released a comatose Warmbier to his family in the United States. He died a few days later.

On Friday, State officially banned all Americans from travel ing to North Korea, “due to mounting concerns over the serious risk of arrest and long-term detention under North Korea’s system of law enforcement.” Officially, State is imposing a “Geographical Travel Restriction” on all U.S. citizens from using a passport to travel to North Korea , and the d epartment said it may make exceptions for Americans traveling for humanitarian purposes. It’s unclear whether such a restriction can really stop Americans determined to enter the North—hundreds visit each year—but it sends a very clear message about the threat posed by Pyongyang.



July 22–28



1. Trump targets Obama’s fuel economy standards

On January 13, Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency attempted to lock in its 2022-2025 fuel economy standards for cars and light trucks, issuing a finding that wasn’t due for another 15 months. The goal was clear: block Trump from weakening the standards. But this week, the Trump administration made clear that those standards aren’t going to last.

On Tuesday, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration began the process to write fuel efficiency regulations for years 2022-2025, seeking comment on an upcoming environmental review. Within the notice, the agency also offered clear signs that it is likely to weaken Obama’s fuel economy standards: It is considering freezing the fuel efficiency targets, instead of raising them each year as the Obama administration had proposed. It may also go back a year and review the 2021 fuel efficiency standards, which NHTSA issued in 2012.

How can NHTSA issue new fuel efficiency standards if the EPA already issued them in January? Because the standards are, in fact, a dual effort between the EPA and NHTSA; the EPA issues a rule on greenhouse gas emissions from cars and light trucks while NHTSA issues a rule on fuel efficiency. So while the EPA attempted to lock in the 2022-2025 standards through its January rule, NHTSA must still go through a full rule-making process on its own to set the fuel economy standards, giving Trump an opening to weaken those rules. And it appears he’s going to do just that.

2. DOJ takes another swing at sanctuary cities

For Sessions, the week was dominated by Trump’s repeated attacks on his job performance and questions about whether the president was setting the gears in motion to fire him. But at the Department of Justice, he was busy implementing Trump’s immigration agenda, imposing new restrictions on so-called sanctuary cities—states and localities that refuse to help the feds enforce immigration laws.

The new policy, released Tuesday, imposes new restrictions on cities that receive certain grants from the DOJ. Cities that seek money under the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program—known as “Byrne JAG”—must comply with two new conditions: They must give officials at the Department of Homeland Security at least 48 hours notice before releasing an undocumented immigrant from custody, and allow DHS authorities to visit state and local jails.

The new policy is Trump’s first real attempt to crack down on sanctuary cities, a top campaign promise. With $347 million in funding this year, the Byrne JAG program is the largest federal grant for state and local law enforcement; cutting funding to sanctuary cities could leave a real budgetary hole for police departments. Will that actually happen? Political leaders of many sanctuary cities, such as San Francisco and Chicago, have already said they won’t change their immigration policies based on the new threat; they are also certain to sue the DOJ, arguing that the coercive use of grants is an unconstitutional use of government power. Like nearly all of Trump’s immigration agenda, the fate of his sanctuary city effort will likely be decided by the courts.

3. Obama’s overtime rule is in trouble

In May 2016, Vice President Joe Biden announced a huge expansion of the Department of Labor’s overtime rule, which requires employers to pay employees time-and-a-half for more than 40 hours of work. The revised rule expanded the definition for who qualified for overtime pay and raised the salary threshold under which most workers are required to receive overtime, from $23,660 to $47,476. The effort represented a top second-term priority for Obama—a unilateral attempt to give American workers a raise.

But businesses hated the rule and sued the administration over it; when Obama left office, the rule hadn’t taken effect and remained in legal limbo. This week, the Trump administration sent a strong message that it will never take effect: The Labor Department kicked off the process to rewrite the rule, publishing a “ request for information” that seeks comments from the public about further changes. The notice wasn’t exactly a surprise, since last month, the Trump administration declined to support the rule in a legal brief it filed in the ongoing lawsuit. But Tuesday’s news still represents the clearest sign that the Trump DOL doesn’t support Obama’s overtime rule and intends to roll it back.

4. Repealing Obama’s fracking rule

In March 2015, the Interior Department released a high-profile rule governing hydraulic fracturing on public lands. The process, known as “fracking,” involves pumping millions of gallons of water into the earth to release oil and gas; it has helped make the U.S. one of the world’s leading oil and gas producers, but environmentalists have criticized it for worsening climate change, polluting groundwater and causing earthquakes. The rule was intended to impose stronger safety measures on fracking on public lands, requiring producers to safely store waste fluids and disclose what chemicals they use.

But the rule never actually took effect, due to lawsuits from the oil and gas industry. Now, it’s on the verge of death. The Interior Department on Monday released a 33-page proposed rule to repeal the fracking regulation, saying the Obama-era rule was “unnecessarily duplicative of state and some tribal regulations and imposes burdensome reporting requirements and other unjustified costs on the oil and gas industry.” The agency is accepting comments for 60 days and will release a final rule soon thereafter. But it’s clear how this will end: The fracking rule is dead.

5. Ending an Obama retirement program

In 2014, the Treasury Department created a new way for Americans to save for retirement, allowing people without access to a workplace retirement plan to open a starter account, known as a “myRA.” It was designed to encourage all Americans to save for retirement—without fees—and participants could contribute up to $5,500 a year from pre-tax earnings, a savings account or a federal tax refund.

The Obama administration heavily promoted the program, but myRA never garnered much interest: Only about 20,000 people have opened accounts since it launched at the end of 2015. On Friday, the Treasury Department announced it was shutting down the myRA program; participants’ funds would be transitioned into Roth IRA accounts. The death of myRA isn’t a huge deal, given the limited enrollment. But Friday’s news still marks the end of a top Obama effort to expand retirement savings opportunities.



July 29–August 4



1. DHS waives laws to help build a border wall

Congress doesn’t appear very interested in funding Trump’s promised wall on the U.S.-Mexico border. Senate Republicans, for instance, introduced a $15 billion border security bill this week—and none of that money was earmarked for the wall. Democrats are refusing to vote for any bill that includes border wall money.

But the Trump administration is continuing to take steps to build an actual, physical wall. On Tuesday, the Department of Homeland Security issued a notice that it was waiving more than three dozen environmental laws in order to build border wall prototypes along a 15-mile border in the vicinity of San Diego, California. The waived laws include the Endangered Species Act, Clean Water Act, Safe Drinking Water, and the Antiquities Act, freeing the government from costly regulations like environmental reviews. The notice is still a small move, since the department has only about $20 million to construct the prototypes—money repurposed from other accounts. But it’s another signal that Trump isn’t backing down from his wall.

2. Trump targets a major financial regulation

In the aftermath of the financial crisis, Congress passed the Dodd-Frank Act, a law intended to protect consumers, tighten up oversight of banks and prevent another deep recession. Republicans for years have complained that the law was unduly harsh, discouraging banks from lending and contributing to the slow economic recovery.

On Wednesday, the Trump administration took a first step to reforming a major component of the law, known as the “Volcker r ule,” which prevents banks from risking depositors’ money on certain speculative investments. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, an independent agency currently run by a cting Director Keith Noreika, who Trump appointed in May, requested comments on revising the Volcker r ule, a clear sign that he intends to change the underlying regulation.

This won’t be a quick process: Dodd-Frank was passed in July 2010 , and the final Volcker r ule wasn’t released until December 2013. Despite its seeming straightforward nature, the rule is incredibly complicated, running 272 pages and crafted by four agencies, along with the OCC. Any changes to the rule will require approval from those other agencies—the Federal Reserve, SEC, FDIC and CFTC. Still, the OCC’s notice is a clear message to Wall Street: A new cop is on the beat.

3. A setback for the Department of Education

Sometimes rolling back Obama’s legacy is harder than expected. In May, Betsy DeVos, the secretary of education, announced that the Education Department would select a single company to service the agency’s $1.2 trillion portfolio of student loans. The Obama administration had intended to spread different aspects of loan management—such as consolidation, financial reporting, and default—among multiple companies.

The move sparked an immediate backlash from Democrats, and some Republicans, who said competition was needed to ensure that servicers had the best interest of students at heart. This week, DeVos abandoned those plans, canceling a solicitation for bids to manage the loan portfolio. The agency will now seek a new “more innovative approach” to managing the portfolio and is collecting feedback on how to do so. The reversal is a lesson for the Trump administration that Obama’s regulatory legacy is not always so easy to tear down.

4. State Department begins “extreme vetting” rule

Much of Trump’s March executive order preventing people from six Muslim countries from entering the United States remains blocked by the courts. But the Trump administration is moving forward with the parts of it that aren’t blocked.

On Thursday, the State Department published a notice in the Federal Register soliciting comments on its proposal to begin the “extreme vetting” that Trump promised in his campaign. The agency intends to collect a wide array of information on a “subset of visa applicants,” including their travel, address and employment histories, names of siblings and children and social media information. The proposal requires more information from applicants than the current visa application but doesn’t represent a radical departure from past department practices. The agency is accepting comments for 60 days and will issue a final decision soon thereafter.

5. The FDA makes a mixed move on tobacco

In May 2016, the Food and Drug Administration in a landmark move imposed the first real rules on electronic cigarettes, banning their sale to people under the age of 18 and requiring companies to apply to the FDA for approval of the product. Democrats cheered the announcement for instituting long-overdue oversight of the industry while Republicans said it was misguided, potentially causing Americans to smoke regular cigarettes over the electronic versions.

Under the FDA’s original rule, companies with markets currently on the market had two years to apply to the agency to market e-cigarettes and premium cigars. Earlier this year, the FDA extended that deadline by three months. Now, new FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb is postponing that deadline for five years, effectively killing it for Trump’s entire first term.

That looked like a rollback of tobacco restrictions—but at the same time, the agency said it would examine whether to lower the amount of nicotine in traditional cigarettes, a surprise announcement that worried the tobacco industry. The dual changes split the traditional party-line approach to tobacco regulation—Democrats in favor of it, Republicans against—and are sure to set up a knockdown fight with the industry if the FDA really does decide to reduce nicotine levels. Stay tuned.

(And yes, we know—the announcement didn’t really come this week, but it was so late last Friday afternoon that it didn’t make our deadline for last week’s list.)



August 5–11



1. Interior relaxes Obama-era sage grouse rules

In September 2015, the Obama administration announced new protections for the sage grouse, a bird whose habitat happens to cover some of the most resource-rich lands in the American West. The administration declined to list the bird on the endangered species list—a big victory for oil and gas companies—but the new conservation plan included strong measures to protect sage grouse habitat.

This week, the Interior Department, led by Secretary Ryan Zinke, began rolling back the conservation plan, directing the Bureau of Land Management to shrink the buffer zones between sage grouse breeding grounds, among other changes. Environmentalists slammed the move, saying it jeopardized the carefully crafted Obama-era compromise between oil and gas interests and environmental groups. The changes won’t take effect overnight: It can take years for the agency and states to implement new land-use policies that determine where companies can drill for gas and oil, but it was another big sign of the Interior Department’s new priorities under Zinke.

2. EPA eases the approval process for new chemicals

Last year, in the largest revamp of America’s chemical safety laws in 40 years, Congress required that the Environmental Protection Agency examine “reasonably foreseen uses” of chemicals when they evaluate them for safety. The changes were designed to ensure that the EPA examines chemicals for their likely real-world impact, instead of narrowly evaluating them on the specific uses for which they were intended.

On Monday, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt announced new “ operating principles” for how the agency will apply the law. In a surprise, the EPA will first assess chemicals based only on their intended use—similar to how the agency operated before passage of the new law. If the EPA has any concerns about other potential uses, “as a general matter,” those will be adjudicated through a separate rule-making. In other words, new chemicals may still be approved while the EPA is reviewing their potential further impact—the exact outcome lawmakers were trying to avoid. The change is a big victory for industry groups, which wanted a lighter touch approach to regulation. Pruitt also announced Monday that the agency had cleared a backlog of 600 new chemicals awaiting approval—another move that drew praise from the chemical industry and strong rebukes from consumer groups.

3. DOJ switches sides in Ohio voting case

Under Obama, the Department of Justice frequently challenged voter ID laws and similar state-level laws in court, arguing they unfairly affected minority voters while “solving” a voter-fraud problem that was essentially nonexistent. Under Trump, the DOJ is taking the opposite position; this week the Justice Department reversed its position on a controversial Ohio voting law, under which the state has purged tens of thousands of people from the voter rolls if they haven’t cast a ballot in the past two years and don’t respond to a piece of mail asking them to confirm their registration.

The Obama-era DOJ had argued that the Ohio law discriminated against minorities and thus violated federal voting laws, but in a filing on Monday, the department said it had reconsidered its position and determined that the Ohio voting roll purge was legal.

Since the election, Trump has repeatedly claimed—without evidence—that millions of people cast illegal ballots, allowing Hillary Clinton to win the popular vote. In response, he created a commission to investigate voter fraud, led by controversial Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, which has done little so far. In addition, the Justice Department in February dropped its opposition to a Texas voter ID law, a major shift that signaled the priorities of the new administration.

4. The fiduciary standard gets punted

Perhaps the biggest financial reform of the late Obama era was the “fiduciary rule,” the 2015 Obama regulation that requires investment advisers to act in the best interest of their clients when selling products like retirement investments. (The concern was that many advisers were pushing investments with a higher commission for the adviser, rather than a better return for the client.) It was assumed to be doomed under the new administration, but Democrats enjoyed a brief moment of celebration in May when Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta wrote in a Wall Street Journal op-ed that he would allow the rule to take effect in early June.

It now appears the celebration was premature. Only part of the rule took effect in June, and the Labor Department isn’t enforcing that part until the entire rule takes effect on January 1, 2018. But now even that won’t be happening . This week, in a court filing, the Labor Department revealed that it had sent a rule to the White House for review that would delay full implementation of the fiduciary rule for 18 months, until July 1, 2019—enough time for the Trump administration to make significant changes or repeal it altogether.

5. The nuclear waste storage fight warms up

Where should America stash its spent nuclear fuel? A decades-old plan to create a central dumping site in Nevada’s Yucca Mountain stalled out during the Obama administration, with Nevada powerhouse Harry Reid leading Democrats in the Senate. But the Trump administration has re opened that dormant fight over the past few months, and it’s starting to really heat up. First, Trump requested $120 million in his 2018 budget to restart the licensing process for the Yucca site. Then, in June, Energy Secretary Rick Perry announced that he was reconstituting the key office that oversaw the Nevada site for long-term waste storage, setting off protests from Nevada lawmakers and forcing Perry to walk back some of this comments.

This week, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission released a memo—dated July 31—directing staff to conduct preliminary “information-gathering” on restarting the licensing process. This is a small step, a $110,000 effort to “re-establish infrastructure” to get the licensing process underway. But it’s another sign that Trump is serious about storing nuclear waste in the Yucca site. This fight is just getting underway.



August 12–18



1. DHS ends parole program for Central American children

In November 2014, Vice President Joe Biden announced that the Obama administration was taking steps to stem that summer’s border crisis, in which tens of thousands of unaccompanied minors flooded into the United States from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras. The State Department set up a program to allow the children of parents who are lawfully present in the U.S. to seek refugee or parole status while still in their home countries —without actually making the dangerous journey to the United States. The goal was to reduce the flow of unaccompanied children without leaving them in danger.

On Wednesday, the Department of Homeland Security immediately ended the parole component of that program; DHS canceled the approvals of 2,700 kids who had been conditionally approved for parole but had not received final signoff. The program was small—about 1,400 kids had been paroled and entered the United States—but had still angered immigration hawks who said it was too generous to the children.

The announcement follows Trump’s executive order in February in which he directed the three main immigration agencies to use parole “sparingly.” It will please immigration hawks who have long criticized the way officials use parole, but it also carries some risk: The number of unaccompanied minors dropped by almost half in fiscal 2015, and ticked up again last year. The exact reasons for the drop are unknown, but the parole program may have been part of the reason. (The children are still eligible to apply for refugee status without crossing into the U.S., but that bar is higher.) Trump’s repeal of the program could persuade them to head north without U.S. approval, illegally crossing the border .

2. The end of an Obama health care payment experiment

While most of the attention on Obamacare has focused on the individual insurance market and the Medicaid expansion, the law also tests numerous ideas to lower the spiraling cost of health care. One approach is known as “bundled payments,” which institutes a fixed price for certain medical procedures, like hip surgery or knee replacement. If the hospital could perform the procedure for a lower cost, it kept the difference. If not, it lost money.

The Obama administration had begun testing the concept of bundled payments through a few different programs—with mandatory participation by hospitals that take Medicare money. The mandated participation always irked Tom Price, the former congressman and current secretary of Health and Human Services, and this week, he significantly scaled back those programs. Hospitals will no longer be required to participate in a bundled payment program for certain joint replacements in many markets. Two yet-to-launch bundled care programs—an expansion of the existing joint replacements program and a new program for heart attacks and cardiac surgeries—were canceled altogether.

The rollback isn’t a repudiation of “value-based-care,” the movement to pay doctors for quality over quantity, which has bipartisan support. But it does scale back one of the goals of the Affordable Care Act, which was keeping costs under control, and signals that Price, a former physician, will be less aggressive in forcing the new payment system on hospitals, a victory for doctors who are critical of the new payment plans and a defeat for health officials seeking a rapid transition.

3. EPA’s regulatory rollback continues

No agency has been more aggressive than the Environmental Protection Agency in undoing Obama-era regulations and the August recess has not slowed down the agency. This week, EPA said it would reconsider two more rules, one on the toxic discharges from coal plants and another on emissions standards for heavy-duty trucks.

On Monday, in a court filing, Pruitt said EPA would conduct a rule-making to “potentially revise” a 2015 rule from the Obama administration that set limits on the dumping of toxic metals, like mercury, from coal-fired power plants. The news wasn’t a surprise, since Pruitt issued a rule earlier this spring delaying the compliance dates of the Obama-era rule. Then, on Thursday, EPA announced that it would review certain parts of the agency’s 2016 rule that set emissions standards on heavy trucks for model years 2021-27. It was seen as one of Obama’s last big pushes for cleaner air, as the Obama-era EPA attempted to lock down as many climate rules as possible, before a climate-skeptic administration took over.

4. The end of “Operation Choke Point”

In 2013, the Department of Justice announced a new initiative to cut off certain predatory lenders and online merchants from the banking system by cracking down on banks and payment processors. The idea was to pressure banks, as potential facilitators of potential financial crimes, to cease doing business with those companies. The program, officially called Operation Choke Point, was heavily criticized by Republicans who said DOJ was targeting legal businesses that the Obama administration just happened to dislike, like payday lenders and gun retailers, without any evidence of wrongdoing.

This week, in a letter to the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, DOJ said it would end Operation Choke Point, which it called a “misguided initiative.” The move is a victory for Republicans and industries like payday lenders who felt targeted by the program.

5. A flurry of small trade deals

In the trade world, all eyes were on Washington where American, Canadian and Mexican officials converged for the first session on renegotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement. But the Trump administration also made a series of small trade announcements this week to coincide with Vice President Mike Pence’s trip through four South American countries.

In Colombia, Pence announced that the Colombian government would lift restrictions on a certain type of U.S. rice exports, while the U.S. will now allow the import of Colombian avocados. In Argentina, Pence inked a deal to allow the export of U.S. pork products for the first time since 1992, opening up a potential $10 million per year pork market to U.S. producers. Finally, the Department of Agriculture announced that South Korea was lifting its ban on U.S. poultry and egg products, which was imposed in March after a series of bird flu cases in the United States.

All these deals are dwarfed by top issues under discussion as part of the NAFTA renegotiation. But they continue to show that career officials can make progress on sticky trade issues, willing to compromise with foreign nations despite Trump’s at-times bellicose trade rhetoric.



August 19–25



1. The State Department turns up the heat on Egypt

When Egyptian President Abdel Fat tah e l-Sisi visited the White House in April, Trump lavished the foreign leader with praise, saying he’s doing a “fantastic job in a very difficult situation” and that “we are very much behind " him. Those comments drew a sharp rebuke from human-rights groups that had been sharply critical of Sisi’s human rights record.

So, it came as some surprise this week when the State Department delayed $200 million in aid to Egypt and cut another $100 million in aid altogether. State officials said the move was a result of Egypt’s human rights record, including a new law that restricts the activities of nongovernmental organizations. But experts also suggested another motive: isolating North Korea. Egypt has historically had ties to North Korea, with North Korean pilots training Egyptian pilots in the 1970s. State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert did not deny that North Korea was a reason for the cuts in aid, saying, “We have a deep and multifaceted relationship with the country of Egypt. We have a lot of areas of close cooperation.”

The move also created troubles for White House senior adviser Jared Kushner, who was scheduled to meet top Egyptian leaders, including Sisi, this week to talk about the Israeli-Palestinian crisis. A meeting between Kushner and Egypt’s foreign minister was canceled at the last minute, potentially a rebuke to State’s move, though it otherwise did not appear to significantly disrupt the trip.

2. Interior could shrink national monuments

In his final weeks in office, Obama protected over 1.5 million acres of federal land from development by designating national monuments in the West, a final attempt to solidify his environmental legacy. Republican lawmakers, oil and gas interests and fishing and hunting groups blasted the move and appealed to Trump to review the designations. In April, they got their wish when Trump directed the Interior Department to review all monument designations larger than 100,000 acres all the way back to 1996.

On Thursday, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke delivered that review to the White House. He didn’t release it publicly, instead publishing a vague two-page fact sheet; in an interview with The Associated Press, Zinke said he was not recommending any monuments be rescinded but was suggesting a “handful” of changes. The New York Times later reported that Zinke recommended shrinking at least four monuments. It’s unclear whether—or when—the White House will accept the recommendations. But given Trump’s commitment to rolling back Obama’s environmental legacy, Zinke’s recommendations will likely find a favorable reception in the Oval Office. And if it does, it would be historic—no national monument has been shrunk by a president since 1963.

3. The White House changes American research priorities

Every year, the government funds billions of dollars in research, from large National Institutes of Health grants to small housing experiments. The sheer magnitude of money gives the government great influence over the direction of research across industries, a hidden lever for a sophisticated administration to guide the country well into the future.

This week, the Trump administration revealed that it intends to use that lever. The Office of Management and Budget, led by Director Mick Mulvaney, published a four-page memo—dated August 27—that lays out the administration’s research and development priorities for fiscal 2019, which includes a focus on military technologies, border security and treatments for drug addiction. In a break from the Obama administration’s efforts to combat climate change, there is almost no mention of environmental research, with the exception of one reference to renewable energy. The memo also directs agencies to focus on early stage research and, in a bolded section, strongly recommends the use of quantitative data to evaluate any R&D investments, terminating those in which “federal involvement is no longer needed or appropriate.”

The real-world effects of such a memo won’t be immediately apparent. Research projects generally operate on a multiyear time frame, so the White House can’t just shift the direction of federal R&D overnight. But these priorities can eventually have big policy implications as researchers focus on certain issues and ignore others. That assumes, of course, that there is actual R&D funding to disburse for research—and if Trump has his way, that may not be the case. The White House has proposed huge cuts to research programs, rolling back federal nondefense R&D by almost 20 percent. Republicans and Democrats alike have rejected those cuts, so they will not become law. While that may be disappointing to a fiscal conservative like Mulvaney, it does help the administration in one sense: More R&D money gives agencies greater influence over the direction of American research.

4. The Amazon-Whole Foods merger sails through

Trump’s disdain for Amazon and its CEO, Jeff Bezos, who owns The Washington Post, is well known. "Is Fake News Washington Post being used as a lobbyist weapon against Congress to keep Politicians from looking into Amazon no-tax monopoly?" Trump tweeted in July. Last week, he wrote, "Amazon is doing great damage to tax paying retailers."

Despite those attacks, Amazon had no problem receiving approval from regulators to acquire the grocery giant Whole Foods. Although the deal has alarmed some antitrust watchers, who worry that Amazon’s expansion is undermining competition in the long run by driving out competitors through its low prices, it barely hit a speed bump in Washington: The Federal Trade Commission released a short statement saying it had completed its investigation into the $13.7 billion deal, which was announced in June, and isn’t going to challenge it. The quick approval also assuaged concerns that Trump would attempt to interfere in the regulatory review for political reasons. The deal is set to close on Monday.

Amazon promptly announced that it will cut prices on a wide array of Whole Foods products, from avocados to tilapia, on Monday and intends to introduce benefits at Whole Foods stores for its Prime members.

5. Trump ratchets up sanctions

During his first few months in office, Trump attempted to woo Chinese President Xi Jinping, even saying he would relax his trade stance if China applied more pressure to North Korea. But those efforts have fizzled in the past few months, even as North Korea’s nuclear program has continued to advance.

This week, the administration took another unilateral step to stop Pyongyang’s nuclear ambitions when the Treasury Department imposed sanctions on Chinese and Russian individuals and entities, an effort to reduce North Korea’s exports, which it uses to finance its nuclear program, and to choke off its access to the global financial system. The move is the second time in two months that Trump has sanctioned Chinese entities over North Korea. In addition, on Friday, the White House also announced new sanctions on Venezuela that attempt to cut financing to the country and its state-owned oil company.



August 26–September 1



1. Police can buy military equipment again

In August 2014, after the fatal police shooting of Michael Brown, the streets of Ferguson, Missouri, looked something like a war zone as protesters set fires and police responded with camo-clad snipers and armored vehicles , the result of a decades-long program allowing local law enforcement agencies to receive surplus military equipment.

The controversial image of police rolling in on their own citizens like an army roused Obama into action. Nine months later, his administration prohibited the transfer of certain equipment, such as grenade launchers and armored vehicles, to local police departments and limited the transfer of other items such as drones, riot gear and explosives. Such equipment, the administration determined, didn’t serve a purpose for local law enforcement agencies. "Some equipment made for the battlefield is not appropriate for local police departments,” Obama said.

On Monday, Trump rescinded the Obama-era executive order limiting the transfer of surplus military equipment to local law enforcement agencies. Now police departments can again buy previously restricted guns, ammunition and riot gear, as well as other military-style equipment like grenade launchers, according to a Department of Justice fact sheet. The changes are a victory for local law enforcement agencies that believe the equipment helps keep their officers—and the public—safe. But it was sharply criticized by civil liberties groups and even received some pushback from Republicans like Sen. Rand Paul. “It is one thing for federal officials to work with local authorities to reduce or solve crime,” Paul said, “but it is another for them to subsidize militarization.”

2. Trump nixes an Obama policy to reduce pay discrimination

Last year, the Obama administration made a final attempt to reduce the racial and gender pay gaps, finalizing changes to a form—the EEO-1—that requires employers to report workplace demographics. Under the revised form, employers with more than 100 workers would have to report pay data by race, ethnicity and gender. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the agency responsible for the form changes, could have then used the data to launch an investigation into discrimination. The changes were set to take effect in March 2018.

But this week, the White House directed the EEOC to stop the changes and instead use the original EEO-1 form, saying the changes “lack practical utility, are unnecessarily burdensome, and do not adequately address privacy and confidentiality issues.” Labor and civil rights groups criticized the roll back, arguing that the new form was a crucial means to get employers to address continued unfair pay disparities. Business groups praised the move, saying the form changes created an unnecessary paperwork burden that would ultimately hurt growth and wages.

3. The fiduciary standard gets delayed for more than a year

One of Obama’s final financial reforms was the “fiduciary standard,” a dry-sounding policy that essentially means stockbrokers can’t put their own interests ahead of their clients’. In May, Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta announced in a Wall Street Journal op-ed that he would let the fiduciary standard take effect as planned on June 9. But that wasn’t the full story: Only some parts of the rule, which requires financial advisers to act in the best interests of their clients, took effect on that date; the rest of the rule takes effect on January 1, and it quickly became clear that Acosta wasn’t going to let that happen.

First, at the end of June, he asked for information from the public about changing the law. Then, this week, the DOL published a proposed rule delaying the effective date 18 months, until July 1, 2019. This wasn’t a surprise: I n a court filing earlier this month, the agency said it had proposed an 18-month delay. This is just a proposed rule, so the agency must still accept comments and issue a final regulation. But it’s clear that Acosta intends to delay, and likely substantively reform, the fiduciary rule. In the meantime, the agency said earlier this year that it wouldn’t actually enforce the portions of the rule that took effect in June—meaning, in effect, the rule has now been mostly mothballed.

4. Trump’s trade fights with Canada continue

During his presidential campaign, Trump railed against China’s trade practices—but he hasn’t done much to improve them since taking office, breaking his promise to name Beijing a currency manipulator and delaying investigations into steel imports from China. Instead, he has targeted a friendly country much closer to home: Canada. He has, for example, reopened NAFTA negotiations with Canada and Mexico and imposed duties on certain Canadian products, including lumber.

This week, the trade fight with Canada took a bit of a surprising turn when the Commerce Department delayed preliminary antidumping duties on certain Canadian lumber companies to give the two countries additional time to negotiate a settlement. In effect, the delay temporarily lifts the 7 percent to 8 percent duties that Commerce had imposed earlier this summer. The agency must make a final determination on the duties by November 14. In less surprising news, on Thursday, Commerce opened an investigation into certain types of Canadian paper, the first step toward imposing penalties for unfair trade practices.

Neither of these trade moves is especially important to the economy, but they are additional evidence that Trump’s trade agenda, so far, is far softer than the bombastic threats he leveled on the campaign trail. Together with his limited actions against Chinese trade policy, his agenda appears almost … conventional.

5. The diplomatic rift with Russia continues

Trump entered office hoping to improve relations with Russia, saying it was “absolutely possible” to ease tensions with Moscow. But the relationship has only spiraled downward as Trump has faced multiple investigations into potential collusion between Trump campaign officials and the Russian government. Things are only getting worse: After Trump reluctantly signed into law new sanctions against Russia, President Vladimir Putin reacted angrily, ordering the U.S. to cut its diplomatic staff in Russia by 755 people.

This week, the Trump administration responded by forcing Russia to close three diplomatic compounds, located in San Francisco, Washington, D.C., and New York City. The State Department, in announcing the retaliation, issued a sharply worded statement, saying the initial Russian action was “unwarranted and detrimental to the overall relationship between our countries.” The move is just the latest sign that Moscow and Washington aren't on better terms, even with Trump in the White House.



September 2–8



1. Trump sets a new goal for deregulation

Trump hasn’t had any big legislative wins, but he has succeeded at clogging up the regulatory system—the “deconstruction of the administrative state,” in the words of former chief strategist Steve Bannon. In one of his first actions as president, Trump directed the White House budget office to set an annual cap on regulatory costs for each agency—that is, the total economic costs of all new regulatory and deregulatory actions. For the rest of fiscal 2017, the cap was zero, meaning whatever an agency does this year, it can’t increase net costs at all. But what would the cap be in fiscal 2018?

On Thursday, the Office of Management and Budget provided an answer: Agencies are expected to “propose a net reduction in total incremental regulatory costs.” In other words, the economic cost of federal regulations must go down. The policy, which was implemented in an agency-wide memo, doesn’t apply to every regulation; many rules are exempt because their costs are minimal, they are required by law or they are related to national security, among other reasons. And OMB still can issue agencies a waiver if officials deem it necessary. But for most major regulations—the type of health and safety rules that get significant attention—the policy could impose new restrictions on agencies’ ability to issue new rules, experts said. An OMB official did not respond to a request for comment.

Given the Trump administration’s focus on deregulation, experts weren’t exactly surprised by the memo. They noted that it just “expects” agencies to cut regulatory costs—it doesn’t require it. But it still represents a dramatic shift in how agencies have traditionally regulated. For all Trump’s deregulatory successes in his first seven-plus months in office, his bigger war on the regulatory system may just be beginning.

2. DOJ takes another swipe at sanctuary cities

In late July, the administration made its first real attempt to follow through on Trump’s campaign promise to cut federal funding for sanctuary jurisdictions, like San Francisco or Chicago, which don’t help the federal government enforce immigration laws. Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced that in order to receive money from the “Byrne JAG ” grant, a $347 million program that is critical for local law enforcement, cities must effectively shed their sanctuary status. The change made national headlines and provoked immediate outcry from sanctuary cities, which are challenging the policy in court.

Less noticed, on Thursday, Sessions announced that nonsanctuary jurisdictions would get “priority consideration” in another grant program run by the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. While smaller than the Byrne JAG program, the COPS grant program is still large: State and local law enforcement agencies received around $160 million from it in fiscal 2016.

The change has gone largely unnoticed around the country, but represents perhaps the clearest shift in priorities from the Obama Justice Department to the Trump Justice Department. While Obama used the COPS program to favor law enforcement agencies that promoted trust between officers and the community through accountability and “honest recognition of past and present obstacles,” Trump and Sessions are using it to further their immigration crackdown.

3. The EPA’s Clean Power Plan repeal is coming soon

Throughout his presidential campaign, Trump railed against Obama’s environmental agenda and promised to undo his Clean Power Plan, which imposed limits on greenhouse gas emissions. In March, he took the first step toward doing just that when he directed the Environmental Protection Agency to review the rule. So it came as a surprise this summer when the EPA revealed that it wouldn’t take action on its review of the plan in the next year.

It turns out, that wasn’t correct. The agency announced in a court filing this week that its previous timeline was wrong: It’s going to issue a proposed new rule on the Clean Power Plan—likely a repeal—in the next few months. In fact, the rule has been under review at the White House since early June. Expect to hear more about it soon.



September 9–15



1. DHS suspends some visas for four countries

When the government orders someone deported from the U.S., that deportation doesn’t just happen automatically. It requires approval from the receiving country; the U.S. generally can’t just leave people in other countries. Most countries routinely approve such removal orders, but about a dozen countries are uncooperative, preventing the U.S. from actually deporting those individuals.

On Wednesday, the Trump administration took its first step to force greater cooperation when it imposed visa sanctions on four especially recalcitrant countries—Cambodia, Eritrea, Guinea and Sierra Leone. “These four countries have not established reliable processes for issuing travel documents to their nationals ordered removed from the United States,” the Department of Homeland Security said. According to DHS numbers, the government has been unable to remove around 700 Eritrean, 1,900 Cambodian, 2,100 Guinean and 800 Sierra Leone nationals. The sanctions vary for each country. For instance, senior Cambodian diplomatic officials and their families will be unable to get a B visa, which allows temporary entry into the U.S. for business or pleasure. In Eritrea, no one can get a B visa.

The move is just the latest front of Trump’s immigration crackdown, and follows on his January executive order in which he directed DHS and the State Department to enter negotiations with such “recalcitrant countries”—and, if those negotiations fail, enforce sanctions.

2. The first Trump-era guidelines on driverless cars

Last September, the Obama administration issued the first guidelines on driverless cars, recommending industrywide standards to support the growth of the burgeoning industry. The guidelines, which were nonbinding, requested that automakers submit to a 15-point “safety assessment,” touching on everything from the testing of driverless vehicles to the prevention of vehicle hacking.

On Tuesday, the Trump administration issued the first update to those guidelines, replacing the 15-point safety assessment with 12 “safety elements” that touch on many of the same issues. Consumer groups and industry officials said the plan was more industry-friendly, with significant emphasis on the voluntary nature of the guidelines. (The word “voluntary” appears 57 times in the 36-page document, compared with just five times in the original 116-page guidelines.) Critics said that the plan effectively imposes no rules on automakers, while industry officials said the light regulatory touch is essential to continued technological improvement.

This is just the beginning of what’s likely to be a long drama over federal driverless-car policy; both the House and Senate are considering legislation that would enable greater federal oversight over the industry, which, in some instances, actually wants the rules to avoid a patchwork of state laws. Expect more in the months and years ahead.

3. EPA’s regulatory rollback continues

Another week brought more regulatory rollbacks at the Environmental Protection Agency.

On Wednesday, the EPA delayed for two years parts of an Obama-era rule limiting the dumping of toxic metals, like mercury, from coal-fired water plants. The delay affects two provisions of the 2015 rule, relating to specific waste products, while allowing the remainder of the rule to take effect as planned. The news wasn’t exactly a surprise, as EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has previously said the agency intended to change parts of the rule. He now has plenty of time to do so.

Also on Wednesday, Pruitt sent a letter to industry officials—released on Thursday by the environmental group Earthjustice—saying that the EPA would “reconsider” another Obama-era rule, issued in 2015, that set standards for the disposal of “coal ash,” which is a byproduct from burning coal. That rule was the first national standard on coal ash disposal and also imposed new inspection rules to prevent leaks or spills. A formal reconsideration process doesn’t necessarily mean that the agency will change the coal ash rule, but it gives them the opportunity to do so. Any changes would have to go through the full rule-making process, including notice and comment.

4. Trump blocks the Chinese purchase of a U.S. company

For years, Chinese companies have been on a buying spree in America, investing around $45 billion in U.S. companies in 2016, accord