Connect with us

Appalachia on the Hill

Regional Reaction To Iran: Ohio Valley Lawmakers Split On U.S. Killing Of Iranian Commander

Published

on

The U.S. Capitol Dome is seen behind the Peace Monument statue in Washington, Monday, Dec. 31, 2018. Photo: J. Scott Applewhite/AP Photo

This is a developing story and may be updated as more information is available.

Congressional members around the Ohio Valley offered mixed reactions to the U.S. airstrike that killed one of Iran’s top military officers and pushed the two countries closer to war.

Most statements from regional lawmakers pointed to Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani’s record of orchestrating violent attacks on U.S. personnel, and many Republicans praised President Donald Trump for ordering the drone missile strike that killed Soleimani in Baghdad.

However, some Democrats were sharply critical, and a few within Trump’s own party voiced concerns about the administration’s strategy, and urged the president to seek Congressional approval before sending the nation to war.

Kentucky Delegation

“Iran’s master terrorist is dead,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said of Soleimani in remarks from the Senate floor Friday. “He personally oversaw the state terrorism Iran used to kill our sons and daughters.”

McConnell said the Trump administration will be briefing staff and that a classified Senate briefing was being arranged for the coming week.

Rep. Andy Barr, a Republican who represents Kentucky’s 6th District, said via Twitter that the strike was “a massive victory for our Armed Forces,” and 1st District Republican Rep. James Comer said in a statement that he applauds the “courageous action in taking out a brutal terrorist.”

However, some other Kentucky Republicans voiced concern about a rush to war.

Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul, who is often a wary outlier within his party on questions of military use, cautioned against a rush to war without Congressional approval.

“A war without a Congressional declaration is a recipe for feckless intermittent eruptions of violence w/ no clear mission for our soldiers,” Paul wrote in a series of statements on Twitter. “Our young men and women in the armed services deserve better.”

Paul said that Soleimani was “an evil man” who ordered the killing of Americans, but said that is not the main question. 

“The question today is whether the assassination of Soleimani will expand the war to endanger the lives of every American soldier or diplomat in the Middle East?” he said.

Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky’s 4th District said via Twitter Friday morning that “War propaganda is a powerful drug and so readily available right now.” In an earlier tweet before the airstrike, Massie said, “We need to get out of the wars in the Middle East…not start another one.”

Kentucky’s lone Congressional Democrat, 3rd District Rep. John Yarmuth, said he was “deeply concerned by President Trump’s rapid escalation of hostilities with Iran and the lack of any discernible concern for the consequences.”

Yarmuth questioned why there was no support from U.S. allies, no apparent strategy, and no input from Congress.  

“The Trump administration must come before Congress to provide an explanation of what has happened thus far, what they believe might warrant further military action, and why they have brought us to the precipice of yet another deadly, open-ended war in the Middle East,” he said.

Ohio Delegation

Ohio Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown was sharply critical of the Trump administration for its “apparent lack of coordination” before ordering the strike in Iraq.

“We can’t let this Administration’s chaotic foreign policy lead to another war in the Middle East,” Brown said. “The U.S. must do all it can with our allies to de-escalate the situation.”

Brown said the highest priority is to keep Americans out of harm’s way and prevent further escalation.

“With increased tensions in the region, and the likelihood that Iran will respond in some way to this strike, the Administration must immediately brief Congress on last night’s strike, its apparent lack of coordination with Iraq’s government and any plans it has made to keep Americans safe,” Brown said.

Republican Sen. Rob Portman said via Twitter that he is monitoring the situation in Iraq and looking forward to a full briefing by the administration. He said Soleimani has been responsible for the deaths of many Americans and that “Iranian aggression must not go unchecked.”

Portman serves on both the Senate Foreign Relations and Homeland Security Committees.

Republican Rep. Bill Johnson from Ohio’s 6th District said in a statement that Soleimani’s death is “welcome news to all who oppose the Iranian regime’s unchecked aggression in the Middle East.”

West Virginia Delegation

West Virginia Republican Sen. Shelley Moore Capito said in a statement that Soleimani has been “a leader of the world’s greatest state sponsor of terrorism.

“There is no question that Soleimani is responsible for the murders of many Americans, and he was actively plotting to kill more,” she said, and blamed Iran for sponsoring the recent attack on the U.S. embassy in Iraq. “Yesterday’s action demonstrated that Iranian terrorism will not be tolerated,” she said.

West Virginia Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin said in a statement that Soleimani was “a terrorist who did not value human life” and that he was a “persistent threat to American troops and regional stability.”

However, Manchin added, the Trump administration should fully inform Congress of the circumstances that justified the military action, and of the plans going forward. 

“Congress cannot be left in the dark on operations of this magnitude, and the Administration must brief Congress on what imminent threat made it necessary to take him out now,” Manchin said. “I urge Administration officials to brief all members of Congress so we may better understand the circumstances surrounding the strike, potential retaliation scenarios, and the US government’s next steps in deescalating conflict in the region, both militarily and diplomatically.”

Manchin serves on the Senate’s Armed Services Committee where he is ranking member of the Cybersecurity Subcommittee. As the sole remaining Congressional Democrat in a very red state, Manchin has a pattern of defecting from Democrats to support Trump on some issues. For example, he was among a half-dozen Democrats to cross party lines to confirm Trump’s nominee Mike Pompeo as Secretary of State.

Rep. David McKinley of West Virginia’s 1st District said in a statement that “President Trump responded appropriately by striking the leader orchestrating the attacks,” on the U.S. embassy in Baghdad.

This article was originally published by West Virginia Public Broadcasting and Ohio Valley ReSource. It includes contributions from Ohio Valley ReSource staff, Ryland Barton of Kentucky Public Radio and Dave Mistich of West Virginia Public Broadcasting.  

Appalachia on the Hill

What’s the Hot Take on Capitol Hill? All You Have to Do is Ask

Published

on

100 Days in Appalachia's Washington correspondent Jan Pytalski. Photo: Tyler Channell

Ever wonder what it’s like to be a reporter on Capitol Hill? It can be a rough and tumble place, says 100 Days in Appalachia’s D.C. correspondent Jan Pytalski.

“It’s highly competitive and hugely dependent on who you know,” Pytalski says. “The climate can be hostile and it takes a lot of perseverance.”

But perseverance is something Pytalski has a lot of.

Every day in Washington, he’s tracking the biggest political stories– and top political players– and reporting on how those people and policies impact the region. But just what are those top issues? And who are those players? Well, ask him yourself.

Pytalski and 100 Days in Appalachia are the newest addition to a national experiment in engaged journalism. Called Project Text, it’s creator David Cohn and participating news outlets are attempting to cut through the clutter of social media and communicate directly with you via text.

The premise is simple: you, the reader, sign up for the service by sharing and then verifying your mobile number, and then, right away, you receive regular updates from a journalist on their reporting. But you can also flip the script and ask him or her questions yourself– questions you think need answered by a journalist.

At 100 Days in Appalachia, Pytalski will serve in that role, keeping you up to date on the latest political news from Washington and across the region leading up to the 2018 midterms.

“This allows me to bypass the noise of social media and the hundreds of other news sources out there and communicate directly with the people who need to hear from us the most: the people of Appalachia,” Pytalski says.

Cohn, senior director at Advance Digital’s Alpha Group, first tested the program in June of this year during San Francisco’s mayoral election. A reporter from the San Francisco Public Press used it to communicate directly with local political buffs. And when one of the candidates in that race let the press know he planned to concede, the Project Text participants were among the first in the city to know when the reporter texted them with the news.

“The more community members are able to engage directly with policies and politicians, the more direct impact they–and we– can have on those policies,” 100 Days in Appalachia’s Executive Editor Dana Coester says.

“By participating in this project, we are hoping to give the people of the region access to both the metaphorical and literal seat of power in this country through Pytalski and his reporting. He’s on Capitol Hill not just to cover the beat, but to make sure Appalachians have a voice there, and Project Text can only amplify those voices even further,” Coester added.

So, are you interested?

Sign up by sharing your contact information with us here. And then shoot Pytalski a text. He’s waiting to hear from you.

Continue Reading

Appalachia on the Hill

Hands Up: D.C. Correspondent Jan Pytalski on Bringing Appalachia to Capitol Hill

Published

on

100 Days’ political reporting includes “Appalachia on the Hill” — our unique take on politics and policy that connects regional issues to national context for our readers, and provides a meaningful presence for the region on Capitol Hill. Our D.C. correspondent Jan Pytalski conducts reporting, research and outreach to legislators and policymakers on the Hill and ensures 100 Days in Appalachia has its hand up for questions on the issues that matter most to our region.

— 100 Days in Appalachia

You feel strongly about Appalachia having a voice on the hill — talk about why this matters and what it means to have a DC correspondent on the ground for 100 Days in Appalachia.

I think having a correspondent directly on the Hill, or at the White House, matters for reasons that are fairly obvious, but are easy to forget. When I go to speak directly with representatives or senators, or when I try to squeeze in a question at a White House press briefing, I’m always asking questions that directly speak to the issues of this region. While national and international issues matter a lot, so do local and regional problems, and in my experience, major politicians in Washington don’t address those pressing issues at home unless they have the opportunity to benefit from it.

For example, everyone is eager to talk about the opioid crisis and how they want to help as the issue has catapulted into national consciousness, but very few politicians or administration officials want to talk about the lack of access to reliable public water infrastructure in Appalachia. Unless a community experiences some form of contamination that’s of national interest, a CNN reporter won’t ask about that. I will.

Appalachia is massive. It is made up of 13 states, millions of people, has extremely varied geography and climate and plays host to any number of industries crucial to the health of our country. Appalachian issues are American issues, but that narrative hasn’t been fully realized by those outside of the region.

You bring a unique perspective to this topic. Tell us about your own background and how that informs your political and economic perspective.

I am a native of Poland, where I studied American Studies at the University of Warsaw. It’s a program that taught me about American culture and politics from Mark Twain to the New Deal. I traveled between the States and Poland for many years, first working as a translator then a freelance journalist before finally moving to the U.S. permanently to be with my wife, who is American.

Before I made the decision to move to the U.S. permanently, I thought I’d end up translating fiction for the length of my career. But then Russia invaded Ukraine. I was living in Rochester, New York, at the time, and the media coverage of the event infuriated me. I decided to change my path and become a journalist.

I returned to Poland for a time and began reporting for Reuters — my first real journalistic experience. I was as green as they come and the learning curve was steep, but I loved my newsroom and the professionalism of my colleagues. The Warsaw Reuters newsroom taught me what it means to report the news and suss out the facts.

If you follow international politics and news, you know that over the past several years, Europe has paved a similar path to the U.S. in regards to a shift to nationalism. My native Poland makes headlines in the U.S. every now and then, but it is often used as an example of “what went wrong” in a post-communist country that became a member of the European capitalist family. Like most narratives, I don’t think it’s that simple. Just like I don’t believe the current turn in U.S. politics and Donald Trump’s rise is simple to explain. It’s not racism in a vacuum. It’s not poverty on its own that led to the divides we see in our country today. As someone who used to be on the outside of this country looking in, I didn’t think a split to this degree was possible here, but it reminds me of my home. There is an “Us vs Them” divide that, in its worst cases, can devolve into the dehumanizing of people whose opinions are different than your own.  

I think my perspective can be helpful in writing about those issues in Appalachia, and in the U.S. as a whole, because I can also look at America from a distance. It’s less personal, but also familiar. This country is a modern day empire, and empires tend to look inward much more than outward. This country thinks its problems are original, but they’re not.

I remember anti-fascist protests on the streets of Warsaw 10 years ago, and I remember white nationalists marching in my own neighborhood and Antifa responding with their own brand of militarism. This country’s “Alt-right”, to me, smells a lot like home. Investigating those ties, investigating those ideas that were shipped across the ocean can tell a worthwhile story. My experience and my perspective helps to find those stories.

What kind of content can we expect? Can you give us some examples of the ways a political and policy coverage strengthen the role of 100 Days on behalf of the region. 

As I mentioned, I truly believe the issues of Appalachia are American issues: energy policy, environmental policy, international trade, opioids – pick your poison. When I think about the people who read the work of 100 Days in Appalachia and our partners, I think about two distinct groups. There are the policy makers and people of Appalachia.

I want my coverage to be reliable so if you live in a small town affected by mountaintop removal, you’ll trust that the data and facts I listed are true; not partisan, not ideological, but true. And the same goes for the policymakers. If they happen upon my work while they’re doing research of their own, maybe while writing legislation, I want them to be able to trust the facts that I present and not be weary of some kind of spin.

The issues I cover may seem dry, but they’re important and they impact the entire region. My writing style won’t wow you with wit, but it will shed light on the important details behind policies that are being proposed, giving those details context and forcing you to ask questions of your own. If Trump were to “bring back coal” and find a way to make it clean, I promise I’ll give him credit. But if a lack of oversight results in increased environmental problems in our regions, I’ll be pointing that out as well.

Beyond the more daily reporting on policies, politics and the politicians that impact this region, I will deliver long-form, in-depth stories that blend reporting on Washington policy with on-the-ground insights on how they impact the people that live here. The strength of 100 Days in Appalachia is that we don’t parachute into the region for a day and make overarching assumptions. We are on the ground. We are Appalachians. It’s me who parachuted into D.C.  

How might this Appalachia-centric D.C. reporting complicate established narratives that get fed to Appalachia from D.C. — what is the potential impact you hope for?

My hope is that we will help people in Washington, people across the country, and even people around the world realize that Appalachia is a vast, diverse region that is much bigger than Kentucky coalfields and West Virginia hollers. And if we have an impact, I’d hope that we can shift the narrative to become more nuanced and sensitive towards the richness and span that is Appalachia.

Much of the political reporting and commentary that readers see in their social feeds reinforces divides — talk about how you build relationships across the aisle, report from facts — in essence — remind our readers what non-partisan journalism is (or used to be):

There is a tribal feeling in politics today that says if you’re not visibly with one or the other, you’re automatically under suspicion. As I interact with politicians in Washington, sometimes Republicans assume 100 Days is a media organization from what they perceive as “the liberal world of academia” and assume we have an agenda. Democrats make a similar assumption and seek to use our platform to share their own political agenda with potential voters.

My job is to be persistent and build those relationships to get both sides comfortable speaking with me so I can tell the whole story. I wrote an article about gun control shortly after the school shooting in Parkland, Florida, earlier this year, and one official who attended a White House roundtable hosted by Pres. Trump to discuss solutions agreed to talk to me. Later, he reposted our article on Facebook, saying it was fair and balanced. I couldn’t have been happier. That’s exactly the kind of dialogue I’m after – we had people for more gun control speak to us, we had people for arming teachers speak to us, we shared every side of the story and nobody felt attacked or misrepresented. It’s what we do every day.

You’ve got plans to build a D.C. wire service — talk about what this is, who can use it, and why it’s necessary.

Although it’s still in the planning phase, we’re developing a subscription-based service designed to serve small, local newsrooms in Appalachia. It would deliver news from Washington, D.C., that’s already filtered for relevance to the region. The hope is to create a source of information, a tool for writing local news coverage enriched with the national and federal policy perspective. Our service would also allow for republishing of our content, interviews and articles, as well as other original work 100 Days is putting out.

I think now more than ever it’s important to have a service that directly supports local news organizations. At a time when local newspapers are being bought up by national conglomerates, making local new harder and harder to come by, I think it’s essential we do what we can to make it stronger. This service would help local newsrooms provide their readers with regionally relevant content that is critical and give them space to put their resources toward covering what’s happening outside their front door.

 

Continue Reading

Appalachia on the Hill

Miners Urge Congressional Action On Pensions, Black Lung Fund

Published

on

Retired coal miners and coal community activists are on Capitol Hill this week urging action on two important issues for miners: pensions and black lung benefits. Advocates say funds supporting both pensions for retired miners and the federal benefits for those sickened by black lung disease are at risk if Congress does not act.

Pension Problem

A United Mine Workers of America spokesperson said the miners’ pension fund could become insolvent by 2022. Congress created a Joint Select Committee to shore up this and other similar pension funds that are in jeopardy. But UMWA spokesperson Phil Smith is concerned that the committee is not making enough progress. Smith said Congressional Democrats have proposed a potential solution but Republicans have not responded.

“They’ve had a few meetings and they’ve had a few hearings but they really didn’t hear much from workers,” he said.

If the miners’ pension fund goes under, it would be backed up by the federal Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. But lawmakers have expressed concern that the failure of large pension funds could in turn overwhelm the PBGC.

“Society at the end of the day, and taxpayers at the end of the day, are going to have to pick up that cost,” Smith warned.

A union miner at a rally for pension protection in Ohio. Photo: Aaron Payne/Ohio Valley ReSource

Black Lung Fund

Retired Kentucky coal miner Larry Miller is also skeptical about whether the committee will find a solution to the miners’ pensions. And Miller is also concerned about what’s ahead for miners who depend on federally-supported black lung benefits.

An X-ray image of an Appalachian coal miner with black lung lesions. Photo: Adelina Lancianese/NPR

Miller mined coal for more than 20 years and is on Capitol Hill this week talking to lawmakers about the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund, which covers the costs for miners who worked for companies that have gone bankrupt.

The fund is supported by a tax paid by coal companies which is set to be reduced unless Congress intervenes. In June the Government Accountability Office found that the fund could be in financial trouble without Congressional action. The issue is personal for Miller, who has been diagnosed with stage one of black lung disease.

“The doctor said you could live like this the rest of your life and not see any lung impairment,” he said of the progressive disease, “or you could start to go down tomorrow.”

The Ohio Valley has seen a surge in cases of black lung disease. That will likely mean more demand for benefits from the trust fund, which is already in debt.

Miller said the prospect of reductions in both pensions and black lung benefits is a frightening one-two punch for miners and retirees. Coal miners who developed black lung rely on those benefits and their pensions to live because they can’t work and support themselves due to their illness.

“I based our retirement on social security and this pension. If we lose one leg of that retirement, pensions, we’re going to be looking at some tough financial decisions,” he said.

And he said those effects could ripple through the economies of many communities that have already lost jobs because of coal company bankruptcies.

Congress has until the end of the year to reinstate the tax supporting the black lung trust fund. The Joint Select Committee is to present its recommendations for shoring up multi-employer pensions by November 30th.

This story was originally published by the Ohio Valley ReSource

Continue Reading

Trending