kscarbel2

Looking at this from outside the box.............. "We're going to make America great again. Politicians aren't going to do that"......Trump I couldn't agree more. But who are the "we" non-politicians? All the people on Trump's team are.......politicians. We've all seen news reports over the last 24 hours pointing out that, after running a campaign touting that he would "drain the swamp" in Washington, his team is full of "swamp people". Christie, from New Jersey where the swamp politicians theme song was written ("anything's legal as long as you don't get caught "), is facing calls for impeachment over his "Bridgegate". Now, Pence is in charge, and Pence is a great admirer of Draconian Dick Cheney, perhaps the one individual most singularly responsible for the birth of ISIS. I find that scary. “I frankly hold Dick Cheney in really high regard in his role as vice president and as an American,”.......Pence

Modular A-Double Trailer Combination Delivers Rewards MaxiTRANS Press Release / December 10, 2015 MaxiTRANS has delivered four innovative PBS A-double combinations to growing Victorian transport company, Porthaul. A collaborative effort by two MaxiTRANS brands, Freighter and Hamelex White, the combinations maximise payload while their modular design means they can be used for a variety of purposes. The ongoing cooperative efforts between MaxiTRANS and growing transport company Porthaul has produced some innovative Performance Based Standards-approved combinations in the last few years, thanks in large part to the adventurous approach of Porthaul General Manager, James Williamson. Son of company founder, Brian Williamson, James says one of the most exciting projects he has been working on with MaxiTRANS is a modular PBS A-double concept – a project that has now come to fruition. The combinations consist of Hamelex White aluminium tubs, similar to those found on a grain tipper, mounted on lightweight skels from Freighter, with Freighter dollies, creating a modular combination produced entirely by MaxiTRANS. “The fact that all parts of the trailer came from MaxiTRANS made the process a lot cleaner than going to two or three different suppliers to provide the separate dolly, skel and bin components. It meant I only needed one company who could coordinate the whole job for me. They put a team of engineers at my disposal to work together on the project, from a dedicated PBS expert to skel and tipper engineers,” says James. “Using their Solidworks 3D CAD design software, MaxiTRANS was able to simulate the trailers in action, ensuring they would work as intended before manufacturing began.” The innovative combination is designed to allow the trailers to “tip through” their contents when loaded onto the tipping ramp in Portland, Victoria. The sliding dolly allows the front trailer to be backed up directly onto the rear trailer. The doors of the front and rear trailer then swing open together when the tipping ramp is raised to allow product to tip through from the front trailer, all the way out the rear door of the rear trailer. The modular design also allows the trailers to be used in different combinations based on the type of application they will be put to, providing Porthaul with increased diversity without purchasing extra equipment. “We work a lot with woodchips, transporting around two and a half million tonnes a year. But there are only two tipping ramps we work with in Victoria and if they break down we need to be able to put our equipment to different uses,” says James. “These A-doubles can transport pretty much anything we want, from hauling woodchips, grain or fertiliser in the tubs, to removing the tubs to transport logs. We’ve diversified but haven’t had to add more equipment. In fact, we’ve taken about 20 per cent of our combinations off the road, because this configuration gets it done.” Adding to that saving, James says he has achieved a total of 81 tonne GCM – an additional 7 tonne gain over his previous quad quad Super B-doubles and 14 tonne more than a standard B-double. “With the help of MaxiTRANS and its PBS expertise, we have now maximised the total payload available to us on Victorian roads,” he says. At James’ request, MaxiTRANS has packed the trailers full of the latest technology, including full auto greasing, Electronic Braking System (EBS), Central Tyre Inflation (CTI) and weight gauges. “We purposely sourced the best products to go into these trailers, which have now got pretty much everything you can imagine in them,” James says. “Most of the technology also helps improve our driver safety, like the weight gauges, which send readings directly to the driver via a display in the cab, so they don’t have to get out into the forest when we’re working in the plantations.” The inventive design of Porthaul’s modular A-double combination earned the company a nomination for an ‘Investment in Technology’ award as part of the VTA Australian Freight Industry Awards – a just reward for having the confidence to take on a new concept. James is satisfied that the financial rewards delivered by the trailers will be equally as good. .

Can the A-double change the trucking industry? Prime Mover Magazine / April 2011 A new type of combination is appearing on our roads, Prime Mover talks to one of the developers of a new design aimed at improving productivity. When the idea of a system of Performance Based Standards (PBS) was first discussed 20 years ago in the Australian trucking industry, the pioneers of the scheme had some idea of the kind of innovative vehicles which could be developed. In fact, the main thrust of the PBS scheme, as it developed, was to create a space into which innovative thinkers about vehicle engineering could move and come up with the kinds of solutions which were capable of making a quantum leap in productivity improvements for trucking on Australian roads. However, the Australian trucking industry is aware of the relatively small impact the actual existence of PBS has had on the trucking scene here in Australia. The scheme created a great space for innovation but, so far, nothing has matched the leap in productivity achieved previously by the introduction of the B-double. Instead, apart from a small number of highly specialised vehicles designed to suit a particular small niche market, most of the PBS approvals on the highway achieved small productivity gains due to incremental dimension changes, adding axles or steering axles. The PBS system has been approving vehicles in steady numbers but the overall productivity of the Australian trucking industry has not been greatly improved. Back in the 90s, when the system was being developed, the pioneers of PBS were looking for the silver bullet, a new innovative vehicle which could become a game changer. It had to be something which could make genuine productivity gains but also would not take state and local government, the agencies tasked with maintaining road infrastructure, outside of their comfort zone. Finally, in 2010 a combination vehicle has emerged with the potential to make the quantum shift required to give the PBS system some credibility and, at the same time, give the Australian trucking industry the kind of productivity boost it has been crying out for. Surprisingly, the new innovative design comes from a type of combination which has had many critics over the years. The A-double is a very basic multiple combination with two semitrailers linked by a converter dolly between the two trailers. It is the simplest of the multiple combinations, using two trailers which can be used individually with the addition of one single extra component, the dolly. In the past, this combination has been seen as a necessary evil in remote areas, but on road performance has made it unsuitable to come anywhere near large centres of population or busy traffic conditions. In 2010, all that has changed, the A-double is still a simple basic multiple combination, but now, with one small change, it has become a modern, innovative, high productivity safe vehicle. By concentrating all of the new technology in one element of the combination, the converter dolly, Haulmark Trailers may have come up with the kind of game changer those who initiated the PBS process were looking for 20 years ago. “The whole thing started in late 2006 after Haulmark had been involved in the PBS process for many years,” says Haulmark’s National Sales and Marketing Manager, Mark Johnston. “We had built a number of PBS approved vehicles, steerable extendable trailers and a 52 foot trailer without a steering axle. “The concept of PBS had been to provide that quantum step for the industry. The A-double is that solution which comes up with the very elusive quadruple bottom line. It offers considerable improvement in productivity, emissions, congestion and safety for everyone. Those four things provide a huge step forward, the game changer.” Developing vehicles for PBS requires a deep understanding of how a vehicle performs. Designers need to know where it performs well and where it doesn’t perform well. They have to identify what needs to be worked on and improved to meet the standards. Understanding the dynamics of these vehicles leads to developing the technology to provide solutions. “We are trying to find solutions for the growing freight task, control emissions, deal with congestion, all of those things,” says Mark. “We take the principles of PBS, our understanding of the dynamics of vehicles and then we try to apply technology to a range of those vehicles to see what was actually going to come up with the real trump card. “We came up with the A-double concept because it gives us a significant step up in mass, a significant step up in trailer length and by doing that we significantly improve emissions and congestion with a safer vehicle. We had looked at a range of potential vehicles – B-doubles, quads – but every time I looked at it, it didn’t convince me as being the way to go. The vehicles are very specialised and limited by their mass. A quad/quad B-double will only give you a 77 tonnes GCM but when we looked at the A-double we could get 85 tonnes.” For many years there have pocket road trains running in Western Australia, into Perth and around the industrial areas. They are a different to the design Haulmark has come up with but they do demonstrate their effectiveness in terms of productivity and compatibility with the urban environment. “The A-double just kept coming up as the one with the most potential,” says Mark. “Then we needed to work out exactly what we needed to do to the dynamics of that vehicle to make it work really well. It’s all to do with the high-speed performance of these vehicles, that’s where the technology is required to make it do what you need. You need to keep the trailers in line and compliant with the standards. “The important thing is, it’s not just about getting something to theoretically comply, it’s about getting something you know really does work. With that technology, as we have developed it, we have vehicles up to 30m long but also others with shorter overall lengths. Because of their manoeuvrability we have got them operating in areas where they will not let B-doubles operate. They are being allowed there because of their performance. “Urban distribution is more about low speed and manoeuvrability. It’s about negotiating roundabouts and going into particular streets, those sorts of things. The 27m long A-doubles we are running have a swept path which matches that of a normal six axle semitrailer. That’s Level I PBS performance and it is only precluded from some roads by its length.” As part of the PBS development process, computer modelling was done and a range of simulations, where Haulmark took a basic non-steering A-double, put it through the system and worked out where it didn’t comply. Haulmark’s priority was not to develop a system which just complied, it was looking for something with which it could say, ‘hand on heart’, was the right vehicle for the job. A few practical priorities were also identified. It was looking for a solution which could use a standard B-double prime mover and normal trailers with ABS. Dimensions of the trailer would be vital to getting the system to work. However, the plan was to concentrate all of the technological improvements and gadgetry in the dolly. Keeping the smarts, as much as possible, contained on the dolly, gives operators the opportunity to utilise existing equipment within fleets. This also meant the technology could be expanded to be used with trailers in the wider industry, tankers and bulk tippers, trailers Haulmark don’t make. However, it would be able to supply a dolly which other people could use to make a compliant A-double. The basic principle of the technology uses sensors to tell the steering dolly which way the first trailer is moving when following the prime mover. This information is then used by the steering control to move the second trailer across to follow the first. At high speed this steering anticipates any ‘whip’ from the trailer and keeps the combination in a straight line. At slow speeds the steering dolly tries to take the second trailer in a wider arc around the corner to follow the first without ‘cutting in’. “Once we got to the point where we really understood the dynamics of the vehicle, we realised the A-double was the one which was going to work,” says Mark. “It was going to give us the mass and it was going to give us the length. The more we looked, it became really clear this was the area we needed to concentrate on. “Looking at the overall design you get the dimensional parameters right, so it fits within the 30m. Then you have to look at weight distribution, to make sure it will be able achieve the masses required. We also knew it would be vital for the vehicle to be capable of carrying two 40 foot containers and compete easily with options like the Super B-double. “The big dynamic benefits are available when you put the technology on the dolly, especially at high speed. That’s why we went down the path of the steering dolly. We needed to take the whip out of the dolly, controlling the dynamics throughout the combination. You need to control the rearward amplification and the high-speed transient off tracking when the combination makes a lane change. There is also a test called a pulse steer where the steering wheel is shifted, held and then returned to the starting position.” During the development process, Haulmark found there was a possibility the combination could meet the low speed of tracking requirements of PBS without a steering dolly. However, the steering capability was already in place so could be utilised to improve low speed performance. The final A-double out on the road now has a swept path performance better than most 26m B-doubles. These new combinations are a major step up in vehicle performance, this is not just a design which squeezes into compliance and meets the standards by a small margin. For Haulmark, it was important to demonstrate a considerable safety improvement and show the A-double exceeds the requirements by a clear margin. “We wanted to put a vehicle on the road which was the pinnacle of road safety and by fitting things like ABS, side underrun protection and spray suppression equipment we have achieved that,” says Mark. As the ideas for an A-double were coming to fruition on the technical side for Haulmark, it was approached by a customer in the Newcastle area, hauling steel, to have a look of an application which it felt justified a PBS vehicle. The customer was given a number of options including a B-double and a single trailer with five axles, but Mark did inform them that the A-double looked like the best option. The longest product they were carrying was only 9m long and they were wanting to travel over general access routes so Haulmark would only need to build the combination to a length of 27 m. Word-of-mouth then got around about what Haulmark was doing and other potential customers expressed an interest in the ideas. Haulmark now has 15 of these combinations on the road, both 27 and 30 metre versions, working in both New South Wales and Queensland. This experience has allowed them to work through all of the reliability issues and have a lot more knowledge about what the combinations are like and how they work. Before the first customer had approached Haulmark, in late 2006, Haulmark already had its first A-double going through the approval process for the PBS scheme. This is the initial process whereby the vehicle is assessed as to whether or not its performance meets the criteria for the PBS access for which it is intended. “Back then, they wouldn’t do a route assessment for your proposal until you had an approved vehicle,” says Mark. “This was a bone of contention for me because they were expecting me to go out and spend the money to develop the vehicle without knowing whether the vehicle would be acceptable for the route it was intended to use. The bureaucrats didn’t understand we could change the vehicle to suit the route requirements. “The route assessment for these trucks was a very long and drawn out process. Although I have to say, in NSW, the Roads and Traffic Authority and the Newcastle Council were very good to deal with. This was probably because the road transport industry is particularly important to the local economy and they could see the 50% reduction in truck trips along with the other benefits in emissions and safety as benefitting all. “The process of getting route assessments has highlighted the fact these jurisdictions have very little knowledge of their infrastructure and its capabilities. The jurisdictions need to make a more committed effort to analyse their assets. The real issue is for them to develop freight routes for PBS vehicles. The roadblock for us now is route assessments, operators cannot tender for major contracts with innovative vehicles because they don’t know how long permission to use a route will take. “All the bridges on our highways are not going to be upgraded overnight. We need the information from the jurisdictions to enable us to alter the design of the vehicles to suit the infrastructure we are hoping to use. Sometimes, if we are lucky, the authorities are willing to upgrade bridges on a route. This is what happened with our application for a route between Port of Brisbane and Toowoomba.” By the end of this year the bridge upgrade work will have been done and A-doubles up to 85 tonnes GCM will be able to use the route. This means they can carry two 40 foot containers, each weighing 31 tonnes from Toowoomba to the Port of Brisbane. It was only when Queensland Transport and Main Roads had to do the route assessments for the PBS application, it realised these particular bridges needed improvement. “There is a collaboration required between those of us who are designing vehicles and jurisdictions who are responsible for the infrastructure, to get the best out of the infrastructure and identify where it needs to be improved,” says Mark. “We’re not looking for policy change, that’s all in place – it’s all been accepted. It’s just a matter of getting a better focus on the requirements of the trucking industry and directing resources into these departments to develop the networks on which these innovative vehicles can run. “In the past, it has taken people, like me, who have been willing to make a fuss, thump the table and generally be a nuisance to get some of the progress we have achieved. Now, that time is over, there are routes which have been approved. All we are doing is accessing a system of which all of the regulators have approved. “Coming out of using these vehicles are really great productivity improvements, a direct reduction in traffic congestion, a reduction in emissions and a direct improvement in road safety. Once transport operators see this is working properly, they will be willing to invest capital to make it work and improve their productivity. There is no reason why everybody shouldn’t embrace this.”

Australasian Transport News (ATN) / November 11, 2016 A range of high-productivity vehicles showcased their productivity and safety benefits in a demonstration event held at the Toowoomba Showgrounds on Wednesday. Administered under the NHVR Performance-Based Standards (PBS) program, the vehicles exhibited their performance benefits and impact on local roads, as well as their contribution to the viability of local businesses. On display were: 23m (75ft) 5-axle truck and dog trailer combination 26m (85ft) A-Double tanker combination 30m (98ft) A-Double combination capable of transporting two 40ft shipping containers A new heavy vehicle being rolled out by the Australian Defense Force (ADF). Part of the ongoing National Local Government Roads and Transport Congress, the open day offered road managers an opportunity to better understand options to tackle their local freight task. Organised by the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator (NHVR) in association with the Toowoomba Regional Council (TRC), the event was attended by TRC deputy mayor Carol Taylor, TRC infrastructure services portfolio leader James O’Shea, NHVR director – access Peter Caprioli, and Australian Local Government Association vice president and Mayor of Alice Springs Damien Ryan. "It was great to see trucking industry representatives having a range of conversations with councils to give them a better understanding of the capabilities of these vehicles," NHVR stakeholder specialist Tim Hansen says. "A number of councils are keen to explore how the vehicles can be part of major projects planned in their areas. "The event was also a great demonstration of the cooperation between the NHVR, industry and road managers to make gains in productivity and safety in Australia's road freight task." NHVR says the event was in keeping with the success of another similar heavy vehicle demonstration event held in Bundaberg in August. Photo gallery - http://www.bigrigs.com.au/photos/big-trucks-come-to-town/46213/#/0

Ford Trucks Brasil / November 4, 2016 The calendar of homesickness is a timetable that, in addition to showing the days, lets your family when you're coming home. After all, for Ford trucks, the most important moment of your trip is coming back. .

ST-KY.ru / November 10, 2016 A pictorial history of the Yaroslavl Automobile Plant (YaAZ), which produced trucks from 1925 to 1951. Photo gallery - http://st-kt.ru/articles/domotornaya-era-yaroslavskogo-«avtodizelya»

Renault Trucks Press Release / November 10, 2016 Renault Trucks has been actively engaged during 2016 in paying tribute to Marius Berliet and celebrating the history of the men and women who helped spread the French truck's renown from their base in Vénissieux and Saint-Priest on the outskirts of Lyon. The cradle of the Renault Trucks brand, the Lyon site is continuing to design and build tomorrow's transport solutions. In 1915, Marius Berliet made the decision to buy up a large number of plots of land in the east of Lyon and build a production plant in Vénissieux. After outgrowing the Monplaisir site in Lyon's 8th arrondissement, he needed room to undertake his ambitious projects, meet the urgent demand for trucks and contribute to the war effort by producing weapons for the French Army in the grip of the First World War. Marius was up against a huge challenge: in record time, he had to design, build and outfit his plant even as production began. After successfully meeting this challenge, successive extensions took the site's total area to 387 hectares on the eve of the Second World War. But Marius Berliet had set his sights on greater things than simply building a plant: "The only motivation behind all my hard work is the burning desire to finally realize my life's dream: to create a vast, thriving industrial city". This vision gave birth to the Cité Berliet in 1917, which was built to cater for the plant's operations. This self-contained town contained housing, a school, a creche and a farm. Today the Lyon site houses the nerve center of Renault Trucks and is a key component of the industrial and global engineering facilities of the Volvo Group, which the Renault Trucks brand joined in 2001. It hosts over 4,000 people work on a 180 hectare site straddling the municipalities of Vénissieux and Saint-Priest. The site is home to an engine assembly plant, a bridge and axle assembly plant, a swaging center and a spare parts logistics center. In addition to Renault Trucks' headquarters and global management team, the Lyon site accommodates numerous tertiary activities, including a research facility with a staff of 1,300. It is mainly devoted to developing medium-payload trucks and their engines, as well as transport solutions for urban areas. A design studio boasts a team of international designer to whom we owe the design of Renault Trucks' new range of trucks launched in 2013 and whose flagship vehicle, the Renault Trucks T, was elected International Truck of the Year 2015. To celebrate its centenary, the Lyon site is getting into the party spirit and organizing a series of events to spotlight the establishment and its people: .

Heavy Duty Trucking / November 10, 2016 Isuzu Technical Center of America is recalling 25,018 2014- to 2016-model year Isuzu NPR and NPR HD trucks and 2016-MY Chevrolet Low Cab Forward 3500 HD, 4500HD, and 4500XD trucks because of potential unintended acceleration, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). These vehicles have an accelerator pedal that may get stuck under the steel stopper bolt, causing the pedal to remain in the full throttle position. “A stuck open accelerator pedal may result in very high vehicle speeds and make it difficult to stop the vehicle, which could cause a crash, serious injury or death,” NHTSA warned on its website. The Isuzu NPR and NPR HD trucks were manufactured from Aug. 26, 2013, to Nov. 11, 2016. The Chevrolet Low Cab Forward 3500 HD, 4500HD, and 4500XD trucks were manufactured from July 27 to Nov. 11 of this year. Isuzu dealers will remove and replace the stopper bolt with a flanged plate to prevent lateral movement of the throttle. There will be no charge for this service. The trucks are equipped with a brake override system. If the accelerator pedal becomes trapped, drivers can still push on the brake pedal to slow, stop, and turn off the vehicle, NHTSA pointed out. The recall is expected to begin Nov. 14. Truck owners can reach Isuzu customer service at (866) 441-9638.

Automakers reach out to Trump on regulation, seek review of fuel efficiency mandates Automotive News / November 10, 2016 Major automakers are seizing on the infancy of President-elect Donald Trump’s administration to mount a push to ease regulatory headaches faced under President Obama. In a letter to Trump’s White House transition team today, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers proposed that the new administration pause a key step in the ongoing midterm evaluation of the Obama administration’s 2025 fuel economy and greenhouse rules until Trump’s administration can “lead efforts” with regulators and automakers on “a pathway forward” for the final four years of the rules. The Alliance called the rules, which become increasingly stringent starting in model year 2017, a “substantial challenge” for the industry. While the industry has expressed support for the broader efficiency and environmental goals of the program, automakers are concerned about the timing and costs of the rules, which will require billions of dollars in investment. The proposal is among a series of policy and regulatory recommendations submitted to the Trump transition team aimed at streamlining the industry’s regulatory obligations. Taken together, they signal that automakers view the early stages of Trump’s administration as a key opportunity to secure regulatory reforms that they say create friction and drive up vehicle costs. “We live at a moment where technology and change are swamping the regulatory capacity to manage our emerging reality. Reform is imperative,” Alliance CEO Mitch Bainwol said in the letter, obtained by Automotive News. Trump himself has vowed a broad review of existing regulations that threaten jobs and a moratorium on all new regulations. Advisory committee The Alliance called for a comprehensive review of all regulatory and policy actions by the Obama administration since Sept. 1. This would include the Transportation Department’s guidelines for autonomous vehicle deployment. It also proposed the creation of a new "presidential advisory committee" to coordinate the many federal agencies that oversee parts of the industry such as the EPA, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Federal Trade Commission, Federal Communications Commission, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and others. The Alliance said the committee could recommend a “new paradigm” for vehicle regulation. “As car prices rise, it becomes vital to look at the full cost of regulatory initiatives,” Bainwol said in the letter. “Well-meaning regulatory action risks increasing compliance costs to the point that additional safety and fuel-efficiency technologies put new vehicles out of financial reach of the average new car purchaser.” Much of the Alliance’s letter focuses on changes to the so-called National Program of joint greenhouse gas rules administered by the EPA and mpg standards overseen by NHTSA. The coordinated regulations were put into effect by the Obama administration in the 2012 model year. The Alliance says discrepancies between the two programs have led to unneeded costs and make it possible for an automaker to comply with the EPA’s CO2 limits but risk paying noncompliance fines under NHTSA’s program. “This regulatory friction is already occurring, driving up vehicle costs, and will become even more counterproductive as the regulatory requirements become more stringent in future Model Years,” Bainwol wrote. “Potentially billions of dollars in fines under the NHTSA CAFE program are anticipated.” In the Trump letter, the Alliance called on the Trump administration to back agency and legislative changes to iron out those differences. An EPA spokesman refused to comment. ZEV mandates The trade group also wants costs incurred from California’s zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) sales mandates to be considered in the midterm evaluation of the national mpg program. They currently are not factored in. The California requirement, which is followed by nine other states, requires that 15 percent of sales in California be zero-emission vehicles like battery-electrics or hydrogen fuel cell by 2025. California has supported the mandate with tax incentives and other programs but other states haven’t followed suit, leading to “dramatically” different ZEV purchase rates outside of California, the Alliance said. “The Administration should engage as appropriate to help address these ZEV issues -- especially to help avoid the creation of a patchwork of requirements that will frustrate the overall intent of the ‘One National Program,’” Bainwol wrote. Greenhouse gas and mpg targets through model year 2021 are already on the books. A required midterm evaluation is underway to determine whether proposed mpg and greenhouse gas standards through 2022 are appropriate, or if they should be changed. The next step in the evaluation comes in 2017, likely midyear, when the next EPA administrator will propose whether the standards are appropriate or should be changed, which would kick off a rulemaking process. A final determination is due by April 2018. The Alliance argues that that proposed determination shouldn’t happen until Trump’s administration has had a chance to review the regulations, and can lead talks between regulators and automakers about the final years of the program, which currently aim for a fleet average of more than 50 mpg. A Technical Assessment Report issued by the EPA about the 2025 rules found that automakers were on track to comply and adopting technologies to boost efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions faster than anticipated. The Alliance believes that the report “over-projects” the benefits of certain technologies and fails to fully consider consumer acceptance and market factors. “The combination of low gas prices and the existing fuel efficiency gains from the early years of the program is undercutting consumer willingness to buy the vehicles with more expensive alternative powertrains that are necessary for the sector to comply with the more stringent standards in out-years,” Bainwol wrote. Reaction The 2025 fuel economy and greenhouse gas rules are a cornerstone of President Obama’s effort to combat climate change. Trump meanwhile has said he believes climate change is a hoax and indicated he’d pare back EPA regulations aimed at reducing carbon emissions. Any weakening of the 2025 standards will be met by stiff opposition from environmental groups, who’ve broadly championed the Obama administration policy. “If the Trump Administration seeks to roll back fuel efficiency standards, which are highly popular with the American people and even have been supported by the auto industry, it will find us standing in the way,” Luke Tonachel, director of the Clean Vehicles and Fuels Project at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said in an e-mail.

VW Accused of Concealing Emissions Cheating in Audi Gasoline Cars Bloomberg / November 10, 2016 Volkswagen’s plot to cheat emissions tests by installing so-called defeat devices in its vehicles wasn’t limited to diesel cars, but also included at least six models of Audi 3.0-liter gasoline engines, according to a consumer lawsuit. In a class action on behalf of owners of more than 100,000 vehicles, the German carmaker’s Audi unit is accused of installing software designed to beat emissions tests in its A6, A8, Q5 and Q7 cars since February 2013 and possibly earlier. Audi executives encouraged use of the devices in gasoline-powered vehicles as recently as May, eight months after the diesel cheating was publicly disclosed, according to the complaint filed Tuesday in Chicago federal court. VW spokeswoman Jeannine Ginivan and Audi spokesman Mark Clothier refused to comment on the complaint. The lawsuit comes two weeks after U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer gave his final approval to VW’s $14.7 billion settlement covering 480,000 diesel cars with 2.0-liter engines, widely seen as a benchmark achievement for the carmaker. VW still doesn’t have an approved way to fix any of the 560,000 cars still polluting U.S. roads. The automaker faces a potential trial with owners of 3.0-liter diesel cars in the U.S., in addition to shareholder claims, environmental lawsuits by multiple states and criminal investigations by the U.S. Justice Department and European authorities. “Throughout the yearlong dieselgate scandal, Audi chose to continue to deceive consumers across the country with yet another emissions-cheating device installed in even more of its vehicles,” said attorney Steve Berman of Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP, the Seattle-based firm representing consumers in Wednesday’s complaint “This kind of flagrant disregard for federal environmental regulations and consumers’ expectations is unacceptable, and we intend to hold Audi to the law on behalf of those who overpaid for Audi’s noncompliant, polluting cars.” While the algorithm-based defeat device in diesel cars would veil the vehicle’s real emissions, the gas cars are capable of detecting that the vehicle is in a testing bay and then shifts into “low rev” mode, according to the complaint. “This modified shifting scheme effectively falsifies the vehicle’s emissions and fuel efficiency results by keeping the engine RPM artificially low, thereby using less fuel and emitting less carbon dioxide," Audi owners alleged in the complaint. The consumers seek unspecified damages including restitution from Audi’s sales and profit. This case is Stokar v. Audi of America LLC, 16-cv-10456, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois (Chicago).

Trump’s economic policy explained: the era of fiscal restraint is over The Financial Times / November 10, 2016 As Donald Trump prepares for the White House, a theme is beginning to emerge: the era of fiscal restraint in the US could be coming to an end. Mr Trump was scathing during the campaign about the increases in US national debt under Barack Obama, and the businessman at one point claimed implausibly that he would pay the entire $19 trillion stock off in eight years. Yet as bond markets have been recognizing over the past 48 hours, by prioritizing tax cuts and an infrastructure package for the first 100 days of the Trump administration, his team appears to be envisaging a stimulus program that comes at a time when the US is already close to full employment. That could mean not only higher growth, but quicker inflation. If this is indeed what the Republican-led Congress signs up to next year, it would represent a major shift at a time when organizations including the International Monetary Fund have argued in favor of greater budgetary support around the world. The upshot for the Federal Reserve could be an acceleration of the return to more normal interest rates. “Fiscal policy is coming back big-time relative to what we have seen in the past five or six years,” said Torsten Sløk, chief international economist at Deutsche Bank. “From a Fed perspective if fiscal policy is coming back the corollary to that is monetary policy will have to do less easing.” What does the plan entail? Mr Trump’s plans for cutting personal and business taxes would, according to analysis from the Tax Policy Center, lead to a rise in the federal debt by $7.2 trillion over the first decade. In addition, Mr Trump’s transition team has pledged to invest $550 billion in infrastructure and has spoken of ramping up defense spending, including adding 42 ships to the navy and renewing nuclear and missile defense. The agenda also includes supply-side measures such as a regulation-slashing blitz. His sketchy fiscal plans will now have to be fleshed out in dialogue with Congress. A template on the tax side is the Better Way plan of Paul Ryan, House speaker, which is a more conservative package but overlaps with Mr Trump’s by reducing corporate income tax and consolidating the number of income tax brackets as well as lowering some rates. How about the infrastructure side? The fact that Mr Trump mentioned infrastructure in his acceptance speech in the small hours of Wednesday morning underlines how important this component is. He rode into victory on the back of support from Midwestern states where his supporters will want to see tangible signs of government action on jobs. New bridges and roads are an obvious way of delivering. What will help Mr Trump in this area is the bipartisan consensus that has emerged over the need for renewal of US infrastructure. The American Society of Civil Engineers has projected a $1.44 trillion funding investment gap between 2016 and 2025 on infrastructure. Infrastructure was a component of Hillary Clinton’s plans for her first 100 days as well. Trump advisers have suggested that he is willing to increase the national debt in order to provide federal funding for infrastructure, which would give a further push to the prospects of a fiscal stimulus. The problem is that planning infrastructure projects takes time, so it is not clear how quickly the growth effects would come. What will Trump do on trade? Mr Trump’s campaign promises to rip up or renegotiate deals like the North American Free Trade Agreement and combat unfair trade practices by China by imposing punitive tariffs have drawn dire warnings from economists of a potential return to recession. Were he to pull the US out of NAFTA, it would threaten the elaborate North American supply chains that many US corporations rely on. A trade war with China would yield higher prices for consumers and fuel inflation. It would also hurt companies that depend on Chinese imports as well as American farmers and other businesses for whom China has become an important export market. Delivered concurrently and in their most radical forms both pillars would yield a significant blow to US growth. For that reason some trade experts have already begun to argue that, while a Trump administration is likely to bring more anti-dumping and other high-profile trade cases against China, it may not deliver the entire radical agenda he has threatened. What about Fed reform? Mr Trump’s advisers have suggested the Fed’s ultra-stimulative policies are unfair by penalising savers and have led to unequal implications for different segments of society. During the campaign Mr Trump was ferociously critical of Janet Yellen, the Fed chair, for her low-rates policies, but she is not expected to resign before her term expires in 2018. The focus on the Fed will firstly be the filling of two vacant Fed Board seats, potentially with more hawkish policymakers. Secondly there is the question of reform proposals that have been circulating among Republicans in Congress for some time. These include measures to steer the Fed towards the use of stricter monetary rules — something it fiercely rejects. Mr Trump’s arrival could provide a boost to conservative lawmakers advocating those ideas. What does this mean for the economy? While Republicans have tended to brand themselves as the party of fiscal conservatism, their new president may lead them down the path of stimulus. And while the party used to fly the free-trade banner, Mr Trump ran on a platform of protectionism — which would alienate Republican business backers. Untangling the true policy priorities is going to be fraught. “These are promises and not proposals,” said Diane Swonk of DS Economics. “The question is which promises does he deliver to core constituencies who got him elected, and what does he deliver on the pro-business side?”

This will interest some, I suggest from 16:50 on. .

Trump doesn’t see Israeli land grab as ‘obstacle for peace’ with Palestine The Wall Street Journal / November 10, 2016 Mr. Trump does not view the settlements as being an obstacle for peace,” says Jason Greenblatt, Trumps advisor for Israel, marking a stark departure from the long-time American stance that Israeli construction in areas captured in the 1967 war makes it more difficult to reach a peace agreement with the Palestinians. “The two sides are going to have to decide how to deal with that region, but it’s certainly not Mr. Trump’s view that settlement activity should be condemned and that it is an obstacle to peace. It is not the obstacle to peace.”

President Trump’s Justice Dept. could see less scrutiny of police, more surveillance of Muslims The Washington Post / November 10, 2016 The Justice Department is set to significantly shift its priorities under Donald Trump, reflecting the themes of a presidential candidate who consistently described the country as riven by chaos and in need of more powerful law enforcement. The department, which under President Obama built an aggressive civil rights division, is likely to take a more hands-off approach toward police departments alleged to have overused force and to loosen restrictions on surveillance in Muslim communities, according to legal analysts and Trump’s public statements. Trump sought to position himself as the candidate of law and order, delivering apocalyptic speeches describing a nation torn apart by crime and terror. He said police in Chicago could stop a spate of deadly violence by being “very much tougher than they are right now,” and wrote to the International Association of Chiefs of Police that he would generally keep the federal government out of local law enforcement’s business. He has been critical of Obama’s effort to give clemency to inmates serving long prison terms for nonviolent drug offenses. In response to the terrorist attack in Orlando in June, Trump said he would renew surveillance on mosques. Those positions put him at odds with the current Justice Department. Under Obama, officials have tried to position Muslims as a partner in the fight against terrorism, and they have been supportive of broad changes to the criminal-justice system, including more lenient sentences for nonviolent drug crimes. The department has also taken a tough stance toward policing issues — scrutinizing entire departments with comprehensive “pattern or practice” inquiries and investigating high-profile incidents of officers killing people. With the impending change, civil rights advocates said they are bracing for the worst. “This is a guy who will have no problem targeting civil rights leaders, targeting reporters. We’re back to a Nixon enemies-list world,” said the Rev. Al Sharpton, president of the National Action Network. “We’ve got to get ready to fight. This is serious.” The Justice Department’s policy positions and priorities often change when a Republican takes over from a Democrat, and vice versa, and in many ways, Trump’s administration will be no different. Under President George W. Bush, for example, the civil rights division took significantly fewer enforcement actions on ­anti-discrimination and voting rights laws than it did under President Bill Clinton. After Obama took office, then-Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. moved to give it back its teeth, taking aim at policies that officials thought resulted in racially disparate outcomes, even if the intent of those policies was not explicitly or intentionally racist. “The civil rights division gets whipsawed more than any other part of the Department of Justice when the White House changes parties,” said Bill Yeomans, who spent 26 years at the department, primarily in the civil rights division. “This promises to bring a dramatic shift in priorities and ideology.” Legal analysts said the core mission of the Justice Department — enforcing the nation’s federal laws — should remain the same. And they stressed that, because Trump has not yet indicated whom he will select as his attorney general, nor is he likely to follow traditional norms, it is hard to assess what his Justice Department might look like. “We’ve never had a transition like this,” said Jamie Gorelick, who served as deputy attorney general under Clinton. Two of Trump’s closest advisers — former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie — have federal legal experience. Both were U.S. attorneys, and Giuliani served as the Justice Department’s third-highest-ranking official under President Ronald Reagan. Giuliani has staked his reputation on the drop in crime during his time as mayor. Officers under him employed controversial stop-and-frisk tactics that a federal court in 2013 ruled were unconstitutional. Both Giuliani and Trump have made the dubious claim that the tactics drove down crime. Christie, likewise, built his political career on his image as a tough-on-crime former prosecutor, talking extensively during his presidential primary campaign about his national security prosecutions. The governor, though, has been tainted by the “Bridgegate” scandal, in which two of his former aides were convicted last week of conspiring to shut down the nation’s busiest bridge to punish a local mayor who refused to support Christie’s reelection bid. After his inauguration, Trump will face an early test in what, if anything, he decides to do with the investigation of Democratic presidential rival Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server while secretary of state. Although FBI Director James B. Comey recommended no charges in that case, Trump has said that he would appoint a special prosecutor to look into the matter and that, if he were president, Clinton would “be in jail.” Trump could, in theory, order his attorney general to appoint a special prosecutor to reinvestigate the former secretary of state, although many conservatives argue that it would be ill-advised to do so. Analysts say Trump already will have to contend with the perception that the Justice Department is partisan. “If anything has become clear as a result of the Justice Department’s recent involvement in political affairs, it’s that the public needs to be reassured that it’s substance, not politics, that drives Justice Department decision-making,” said George Terwilliger, who served as deputy attorney general under President George H.W. Bush. Whomever Trump appoints will take over a department that has regularly waded into eruptions of anger that followed the deaths of black men and boys at the hands of police officers. In recent months, the Justice Department has opened investigations of fatal police shootings in Baton Rouge and Tulsa. The department also is investigating the Chicago police force, the country’s second-biggest local department, after video footage emerged of an officer fatally shooting a teenager there. A U.S. official familiar with the investigation said that it is “unlikely” that the inquiry will wrap up before Trump is sworn in, and that once the new Justice Department leaders are in place, they could react to the investigation by deciding to take out some required reforms. The official said, though, that it was unlikely that new leadership would opt to override the results of the Chicago investigation or others that resulted in reform agreements already in place. Such inquiries are carried out by career officials rather than political appointees. “I can’t imagine that they would come in and undo those” existing agreements, the official said. “But would they initiate a new one in the future? They might be a little less likely to do those.” Giuliani, speaking to the Cleveland Police Patrolmen’s Association in October, said that court-mandated police reform agreements show how the Justice ­Department has become “politicized” during the Obama administration. It is possible, were he to be appointed attorney general, that the department would simply stop suing police departments to bring about new agreements, or even enforce old ones, analysts said. “The consent decree agreements already in place — they could just choose not to enforce. They can let it all die by doing nothing,” said Jonathan Smith, who for five years was the Justice Department’s chief of special litigation, overseeing investigations of police departments. Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch, who has been outspoken on the issue of race and policing, announced recently that the FBI will begin a project next year to start collecting nationwide use-of-force statistics in hopes of building a national database. Trump, in response to questions from the International Association of Chiefs of Police, seemed skeptical to the idea, writing that “the federal government should not be in the habit of demanding data from local or state law enforcement organizations.” “Crime reporting should take place, but the management of local and state law enforcement should be left to those jurisdictions,” he wrote. Sharpton and others said they are strategizing how they will apply pressure to Trump and his advisers, with the hopes of influencing his selection of attorney general, the Cabinet post most vital to issues of civil rights. “We’ve fought for years, for decades on these issues. It is all at risk,” Sharpton said. The American Civil Liberties Union, after Trump’s election, vowed to challenge in court any of his policies that might run afoul of U.S. law. Many of Trump’s changes, though, probably would draw support. The Fraternal Order of Police, which has more than 335,000 members and describes itself as the country’s biggest police union, endorsed Trump in September. “Our membership . . . is pretty energized by the results of the election,” Jim Pasco, the union’s executive director, said Wednesday. Chuck Wexler, executive director of the Police Executive Research Forum, said that after Trump’s comments about violent crime, immigration, drugs and terrorism, it remains to be seen whether his administration will provide more resources or try to expand its assistance to state and local jurisdictions in how they confront those issues. “It’s a different administration, and they will have different priorities, and they will put their resources where they think is important,” he said. “He definitely has expressed support for officers on the street. That did not go unnoticed. The question is: When you get into policy, how does that translate?”

Trump’s Vow to Target China’s Currency Could Be First Step to Trade War The Wall Street Journal / November 10, 2016 Unlike Mr. Trump’s many other policy promises, his commitment to sanction Beijing for its currency policy has been one of his most explicit Donald Trump’s pledge to declare China a currency manipulator on day one of his presidency raises the prospect of U.S. tariffs on the Asian giant that figure to push their relationship onto new, contentious ground. The threat, which Mr. Trump has made repeatedly, risks sparking a trade war with China that would complicate negotiations on a host of other strategic and economic issues. It also risks sparking a legal backlash by U.S. importers. Unlike Mr. Trump’s many other policy promises, his commitment to sanction China for its currency policy has been one of his most explicit, and was included in his Gettysburg, Pa., speech that outlined his first-100-days action plan. By itself, the currency-manipulation designation has little practical effect. It requires an escalation in negotiations with currency offenders and gives the White House power to preclude countries from some U.S. financing and trade deals. If used in conjunction with other laws that give the president broad authority to unilaterally sanction trade partners, however, Mr. Trump could use the designation to justify costly fees on imports from China, as he has also promised. “Trump has a lot of legal authority to intervene in trade,” said Michael Gadbaw, a former U.S. Trade Representative attorney who is now a Georgetown University law professor. Under the Foreign Trade Act of 1974, for example, “he could determine that this is an unreasonable and unjustifiable restriction on trade, and use that authority to impose tariffs on China,” Mr. Gadbaw said. Few economists would dispute Beijing kept the value of its exchange rate artificially low for more than a decade to gain an unfair export advantage against trade competitors. That competitive devaluation helped transform the nation into the world’s second-largest economy at the expense of manufacturers in the U.S. and other countries. But over the past two years, Chinese authorities have burned through nearly $1 trillion of the country’s foreign exchange reserves to prop up the yuan against heavy downward pressure on the currency. A fast-cooling economy has led to an unprecedented exodus of capital out of the country, tugging the currency down with it. “The fact is that China has not manipulated for over two years,” said Fred Bergsten, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics and a longtime advocate for stronger trade sanctions against Beijing for its yuan policy. “It would be highly inappropriate and inaccurate to label them a manipulator at this time.” Still, Mr. Trump could use his authority in the Treasury Department’s semiannual currency report to Congress, due out in April next year, to censure China as part of a broader strategy to leverage trade concessions from Beijing. Gregory Daco, an Oxford Economics economist, says he thinks Mr. Trump will most likely refrain from imposing 45% trade tariffs on China, as he proposed many times during the campaign. But he could threaten to use more targeted and limited protectionist measures. China’s finance and commerce ministries didn’t respond to questions about the potential for a more protectionist U.S. under Mr. Trump, or of Washington labeling China a currency manipulator. Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang said Thursday that Beijing was still waiting to assess the new administration’s policies toward China. Chinese exporters and economists, meanwhile, warned of a backlash for U.S. firms. “If there really is a 45% tariff, I don’t think Boeing will sell any more airplanes in China,” said Lawrence Lau, an economics professor at Chinese University of Hong Kong. Investors, analysts and economists are uncertain whether Mr. Trump’s policies as president will match his campaign rhetoric as a candidate. Many say they are counting on his move into the White House, with the burden of responsibility that comes with leading the world’s largest economy, to moderate his most controversial economic proposals. Even if Mr. Trump’s trade sanctions were temporary, many experts believe Beijing would respond in kind. That is one reason why the IMF said in its latest World Economic Outlook in October a surge in global protectionist measures could sap global gross domestic product by more than 1.5% over the next several years. “China probably would retaliate and that’s problematic for us,” said Matthew Goodman, a top Asia expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Besides the economic fallout from a trade war, imposing punitive tariffs could also endanger Washington’s already strained diplomacy with Beijing on many other economic and strategic issues. The U.S. has been trying to negotiate greater access for U.S. companies into Chinese markets, including through a bilateral investment treaty. American firms want to be able to take advantage of the business opportunities that a billion-plus population moving into the middle class represents. Washington has also been encouraging Beijing to wind down a massive overhang of excess industrial-production capacity swamping global markets, pushing down prices and forcing U.S. layoffs. U.S.-China relations have also been on edge over escalating cybersecurity tensions, Beijing’s reluctance to rein in North Korea’s nuclear weapons ambitions, and maritime border conflicts that threaten to turn into dangerous regional conflagrations. The new president could also find himself embroiled in a legal challenges from U.S. companies such as Apple Inc. that rely on Chinese imports as part of their global product supply chains.

Donald Trump’s Transition Team: We Will ‘Dismantle’ Dodd-Frank The Wall Street Journal / November 10, 2016 GOP eager to make litany of changes that until recently stood little chance of avoiding President Barack Obama’s veto President-elect Donald Trump’s transition team promised to dismantle the 2010 Dodd-Frank law, declaring that the coming administration will seek to remake the way the U.S. oversees the financial sector. Tuesday’s Republican sweep, and Mr. Trump’s commitment to focus on the issue, has the GOP salivating over a wish list of Dodd-Frank changes that until recently stood little chance of avoiding President Barack Obama’s veto pen. The lineup includes everything from regulatory exemptions for community banks and regional banks to a new regime for insurers and asset managers to curbs on the federal government’s influence over consumer-finance products such as mortgages and payday loans. The brief note on Mr. Trump’s new website was the first time since Tuesday’s election that the president-elect addressed financial regulatory policy. It was consistent with Mr. Trump’s campaign-trail rhetoric, blaming the Obama administration’s signature response to the financial crisis for a tepid economy and promising to “replace it with new policies to encourage economic growth and job creation,” but providing few details. Another sign that Mr. Trump may make Dodd-Frank overhaul a priority is the news that his transition team is considering as a candidate for Treasury secretary one of the leading critics of Dodd-Frank on Capitol Hill. People familiar with the matter said that in Trump aides’ preliminary discussions about possible candidates to fill that slot, they are looking at Texas Rep. Jeb Hensarling, the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, who has crafted a deregulatory alternative to the 2010 law. Mr. Trump’s talk of deregulation has helped fuel a rally in bank stocks this week. After struggling for much of 2016, bank stocks rose sharply Wednesday and Thursday. The KBW Nasdaq Bank index now is up nearly 12% on the year, about double the gain in the S&P 500. European bank stocks also leapt, reflecting hopes the U.S. will no longer aggressively push tougher regulations on global banks. Banks by and large would welcome a re-examination of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and other elements of Dodd-Frank, but they also have much invested in the law, which they point to as evidence that bailouts are a thing of the past. Goldman Sachs Group Inc. CEO Lloyd Blankfein said at a conference sponsored by the New York Times on Thursday that it “could be appropriate to look at” repealing some parts of Dodd-Frank, but he added that he wouldn’t “want to repeal in toto.” Whether Mr. Trump can keep his vow to upend Dodd-Frank, and how far those changes will reach, depends in large part on what happens in Congress. Financial regulation hasn’t been mentioned by Mr. Trump as something he would thrust on the White House’s agenda during his first 100 days in office and Republicans are tempering expectations. “I don’t think that you’re going to see major efforts to throw out Dodd Frank wholesale,” said a person who has advised the Trump campaign on regulatory policy. Mr. Hensarling last year laid out a blueprint for replacing Dodd-Frank that many observers view as a starting point. In an interview Thursday, he said the Trump team’s statement “is music to my ears,” and that he planned to make the bill, dubbed the Financial CHOICE Act, his top priority next year. He said he had spoken with Mr. Trump’s team about the matter in the past, adding: “I think they like the thrust of the legislation and many major components of it.” As for the prospect of him taking the Treasury slot, the Texas lawmaker said he would “certainly have the discussion” if the Trump administration comes calling, “but I’m not anticipating the telephone call.” Mr. Hensarling’s bill is built around a trade-off: Banks can free themselves from various regulations, such as tough stress testing, as long as they maintain capital equal to at least 10% of total assets and high ratings from their regulator. That would immediately help many small locally focused banks that tend to be better capitalized, but not necessarily megabanks with sprawling international operations that generally have capital levels below that level. In the interview, Mr. Hensarling said he would try to convince Mr. Trump’s team to support his approach instead of their campaign-trail promise to reinstate the Depression-era Glass-Steagall law separating traditional lending from investment banking. Mr. Hensarling’s bill also would make other significant changes, such as requiring that many financial regulations be subject to cost-benefit analysis for the first time and tying the budgets of regulatory agencies, including the CFPB, to congressional appropriations. The CFPB has enjoyed a high level of independence by getting its funds from revenues insulated from the legislative process. It is possible Senate Democrats could seek to block GOP efforts they view as overreach, but lobbyists and congressional aides are optimistic that some moderate Democrats up for re-election in 2018 in states that voted for Mr. Trump will be inclined to compromise. Republicans also may come under pressure to change the Senate rules to ease passage of controversial legislation, but it is far from clear they would make that move.

Donald Trump’s NAFTA Plan Would Confront Globalized Auto Industry The Wall Street Journal / November 10, 2016 Tens of thousands of parts that make up a vehicle often come from multiple producers in different countries and travel back and forth across borders several times Jody Fledderman is one of five original employees at the auto-parts factory his father founded in rural Batesville, Ind. He also spends a lot of time at the company’s 97,000-square-foot plant in central Mexico. The two operations have expanded together as automotive production in both countries boomed. Mr. Fledderman credits the success of Batesville Tool & Die Inc., where he is president, in part to the addition of a Mexican plant 16 years ago that helps service Honda Motor Co., Nissan Motor Co. and other clients on both sides of the border. “We have three or four clients back in Indiana that we wouldn’t have had if we weren’t here,” Mr. Fledderman, 54 years old, said in an interview at the plant in Querétaro. President-elect Donald Trump has said that in his first days in office he will begin renegotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement, which connects Canada, the U.S. and Mexico, and leave the pact if Mexico doesn’t agree to improved terms for the U.S. He blames unfair trade, in particular with Mexico and China, for the loss of millions of factory jobs. Ending the 1994 trade pact is relatively easy. The U.S. legally can pull out of Nafta six months after Mr. Trump as president notifies Mexico and Canada of his intention to do so, according to a September study by the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington. Imposing tariffs on imports lies within the authority of U.S. presidents. For the auto industry, as Mr. Fledderman’s business shows, such a change would be substantially more complicated, because of the multilayered connections between U.S. and foreign suppliers and assembly points. The tens of thousands of parts that make up any vehicle often come from multiple producers in different countries and travel back and forth across borders several times. This is a tenet of modern manufacturing: Where a product is ultimately assembled increasingly has little bearing on where its component parts are made. Assembly plants are prized engines of local economies because they tend to pay better than most factories. Mr. Trump has repeatedly criticized Ford Motor Co.’s plan to move assembly of its Focus compact from Wayne, Mich., to Mexico, vowing to impose a steep tariff on the car if Ford follows through. Ford executives have said moving the Focus to Mexico won’t result in American job losses and that the company remains committed to producing in the U.S. But more than half the parts in the Focus today are made outside the U.S. and Canada, including 20% in Mexico. Ford also ships in some of the car’s engines from Spain and transmissions from Germany. Similarly, only 10% of the parts that go into the 200,000 BMW luxury crossovers built each year in Spartanburg, S.C., come from U.S. and Canadian plants, according to U.S. government data. The rest are imported from Europe and elsewhere. BMW in turn exports most of the Spartanburg plant’s production around the world. By contrast, 70% of the components in the Honda CR-Vs assembled in Guadalajara, Mexico—the production of which soon will be moved to central Indiana—are currently made by U.S. and Canada-based factories, data show. The parts that make up a car or truck, from bolts to motor blocks, window lifts to oil filters, account for two-thirds of its value, according to the Motor & Equipment Manufacturers Association, a trade group. U.S. assembly plants vary on the amount of U.S.-made components they use. A Chevy Silverado pickup built in Indiana has 51% parts content from Mexico, according to the window sticker, while Ford’s exclusively U.S.-assembled F-Series truck, the country’s top selling vehicle for 39 years straight, has 70% U.S. and Canadian content. “This industry, particularly in North America, has integrated a lot,” said Thomas Klier, an economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago who specializes on automotive supply chains. Such integration poses a challenge for anyone wanting to buy an entirely U.S.-made vehicle. “You can’t buy an American-made car anymore. You can buy an American-assembled car,” said Loren Baisden, 32, a 13-year veteran of Ford’s assembly line now working at the company’s heavy-truck chassis plant in Avon Lake, Ohio. Auto makers and many primary suppliers have moved some high-tech production to Mexico and elsewhere. Lower-tier suppliers typically relegate labor-intensive production such as assembling wire harnesses or sewing materials for seats to low-wage Mexico plants while keeping more highly skilled and automated tasks at their U.S. factories. That strategy allows auto makers and their suppliers to be cost competitive with Asian and European imports, analysts say. “The free flow of components is integral to the supply chain in auto manufacturing,” Steve Arthur, an automotive analyst at RBC Capital Markets, said Thursday. It is “a situation not easily or inexpensively reversed.” Still, with so much final assembly moving to Mexico, the epicenter of North American auto production, which for more than a century has been deeply rooted in the Midwest, is moving an average of 14 miles toward the Southwest annually, according to a 2014 analysis by IHS Markit Automotive Advisory, the consultancy. The neighboring small Indiana cities of Anderson and Muncie, which straddle Interstate 69 less than hour’s drive north of Indianapolis, have been suffering that migration for more than three decades, as General Motors Co. and its suppliers have decamped for the south. The cities collectively have lost tens of thousands of high paying factory jobs. Mursix Corp., a family-owned supplier company on the edge of Muncie, has been under increasing pressure to move some operations to Mexico to be closer to big Japanese and U.S. firms located there. The maker of switches, connectors and other electronic components exports about 60% of what it produces, primarily to Mexico, company president Todd Murray said. The company is losing two product lines to suppliers located near his customers’ Mexico plants, he said. “That scares me,” said Mr. Murray, 47, whose company opened a plant in China 11 years ago to win business there. “I see that [competition] becoming more aggressive in the years to come.” Mr. Murray said Wednesday that if a Trump administration overhauls or scraps Nafta, and gets tough with China, it could ultimately help him fend off that competition. In the short run, he said, the healthier operating margins available to companies producing in Mexico will outweigh any new U.S. import duties. With the right policy mix, including lower corporate taxes, Mr. Murray said, any profits from Mexico operations could be invested to create cutting-edge technology jobs in the U.S. U.S. and Canada-based factories shipped nearly $29 billion worth of parts to Mexico in 2015, according to INA, the Mexican auto-parts industry’s national association. Mexican plants in turn sent more than $61 billion worth of parts to the two Nafta partners, accounting for much of the trade surplus Mexico has with the U.S. About a third of Mexico’s 1,300 suppliers, which employ some 720,000 people, are U.S. owned, according INA. Mexican, Asian and European companies make up a growing share of U.S.-based suppliers, which the U.S. Labor Department says provide jobs for nearly 600,000 Americans. Mr. Fledderman’s Batesville Tool & Die produces an array of components for the automotive, appliance and other supply chains. The 38-year-old company is a primary supplier to Honda and makes parts for Swedish air bag maker Autoliv AB, currently its biggest Mexico customer. Some components, including engine hood hinges, oil filter seals and air bag parts, are made on both sides of the border to be closer to customers who demand quick and reliable delivery of parts. The plant in Batesville, a town of 6,000 staked amid the corn and soy fields of hilly southern Indiana, also handles product design and employs robots and a 3-D printer to make more intricate or larger parts. The Batesville factory has expanded five times in recent years as the company’s North American business has surged. The company now employs 800 people, evenly divided between its two factories, and has annual revenue of $130 million, up from $8 million in 1989, when Mr. Fledderman took over. “You don’t make any money producing things that everybody in every corner of the world can make,” said Mr. Fledderman, who recently returned to Indiana from his latest tour of Eastern Europe, where he sniffed out opportunities. “If it’s not Mexico, then it’s Poland or Vietnam or wherever. We’re not the low-cost country in the world.” Auto production in Mexico by U.S., Asian and European auto makers has boomed in the past decade, nearly doubling to reach 3.4 million light vehicles last year. Despite the surge in Mexico, nearly 60% of the 17.5 million light vehicles sold in the U.S. last year were assembled within a so-called auto alley that runs from the Great Lakes to the Gulf of Mexico, said James Rubenstein, a geographer at Miami University of Ohio who writes extensively about the industry. Imports from Nafta partners Mexico and Canada, which contain a heavy mix of North American made parts, account for much of the rest. The auto-parts industry alone accounted for about 14% of the $531 billion in U.S.-Mexico trade in 2015, according to U.S. government data. “In this day and age, when so much manufacturing has left the U.S., the auto industry is a striking exception,” Mr. Rubenstein said. “It’s not a win-lose situation. It’s dividing up the growth. Mexico is winning, but so is auto alley.” In Anderson, Ind., a business incubator and economic development project known as the Flagship Enterprise Center—a joint effort by the city government and Anderson University financed in part with federal grants—tries to attract industrial investment and to foster development of advanced technology, such as electric automotive engines. “There was a realization that no one was coming to pull us out of the deep water. We got together and started pulling ourselves up,” said Charles Staley, 70, a former senior engineer at GM’s defunct Delco-Remy subsidiary in Anderson, who now heads the enterprise center. “Today, it’s stable,” he said of the local economy. “We’re growing. We’re expanding.” So far, 17 foreign companies, including Swiss foods giant Nestlé SA and NTN Corp., the Japanese drive shaft maker, have located plants in the city, only a few them tied to the automotive industry. Purdue University, which has one of the largest U.S. engineering programs, plans to open a polytechnic campus next spring on land where a GM plant once stood. “Have we replaced all the jobs we lost? No. But we’ve got the first 5,000 or 6,000 in,” said Greg Winkler, Anderson’s director of economic development. “What we’re doing now is finding a way to reintegrate this city into the global conversation.” .

In order to have a sustainable society, we must keep our environment in check. For example, there are many American cities where, in some areas, cancer rates run high due to industrial waste. Recall Love Canal. Clean air is rational, but attaining that desired outcome must be done rationally.

Beijing plans rival Asia-Pacific trade deal after Trump victory The Financial Times / November 10, 2016 China moves to fill gap amid expectations next US president will refuse to ratify TPP Chinese President Xi Jinping is rekindling efforts to promote a rival to the US-led Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement in the wake of Donald Trump’s election victory. China was excluded from the TPP, which the Obama administration signed earlier this year with Japan and 10 other countries and promoted as a strategic response to Beijing’s rise and its growing influence in the Asia-Pacific region. But Mr Trump put opposition to the pact at the heart of his campaign and his election has killed the prospects of its ratification by the US Congress. (TPP signatory countries: the US, Canada, Mexico, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Malaysia, Vietnam, Singapore, Brunei, Chile and Peru. South Korea, Taiwan and the Philippines have expressed interest in joining.) The void has offered Beijing an opportunity to argue for faster adoption of a broader Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific. With Mr Xi set to travel to Peru this month for the annual Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation (APEC) summit, vice-foreign minister Li Baodong said China’s plan could fill the void. Chinese officials have previously sought to promote the proposal at APEC, only to encounter resistance from US officials who wanted to prioritize TPP negotiations. “Protectionism is rearing its head and the Asia-Pacific region faces insufficient growth momentum,” said Mr. Li. “China believes we should set a new plan to respond to the expectations of industry and sustain momentum for the early establishment of a free trade area.” US officials have warned for months that the failure of the TPP would open the door to China to promote its own trade agreements. “We are seeing that play out in real time,” said US trade representative Mike Froman. “We are the only ones who are going to be left on the sidelines as others move forward if [TPP] doesn’t happen.” China’s efforts have been focused on wrapping up talks over a deal known as the “Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership” with the 10 members* of ASEAN and other countries including Australia and India. (ASEAN members: Brunei, Myanmar, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam.) But Beijing’s move on Thursday to seize the lead role as the top power advocating regional trade deals highlights the shift in US policy to come with Mr Trump’s election and how China is likely to take advantage. “[China] are stepping into the vacuum that is likely to be there in a Trump administration” with regard to trade negotiations, says Matthew Goodman, senior adviser on Asian economics at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. China’s move came after the lower house of Japan’s parliament voted to ratify the TPP on Thursday. Following weeks of bitter political argument, the ruling coalition of prime minister Shinzo Abe ended debate and pushed TPP through. But with the US president-elect having vowed to ditch TPP, which would encompass nearly 40 per cent of the global economy, members of the ruling Liberal Democratic party fear they have expended political capital for nothing. The TPP cannot come into force without US ratification and its failure will leave a huge gap in Mr Abe’s economic program. By slashing Japan’s tariffs on food, Mr Abe hoped the deal would lead to reform and greater efficiency in agriculture. In anticipation of a Hillary Clinton victory, Japan’s government had rushed to ratify the deal, fearing she might seek to renegotiate parts of it. TPP now goes to the upper house, where its passage is assured. Under Japanese rules for ratification of treaties, if the upper house does not approve TPP within 30 days, it will automatically enter into law. Toshihiro Nikai, secretary-general of Mr Abe’s LDP, indicated that Japan had not yet given up on persuading the US. “As an independent parliament it’s important for us to put Japan’s position openly and clearly,” he said. Mr Abe plans to meet Mr Trump in New York next week and TPP is likely to be high on the agenda. Eizo Kobayashi, chairman of the Japan Foreign Trade Council, praised the passage of TPP and indicated that he too had not given up. “To aid the ratification of TPP by the US and other participants, we have high expectations for an early passage through the Diet,” he said.

Fiat Chrysler, GM Soar as Trump May Weaken Fuel-Economy Rule Bloomberg / November 11, 2016 Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA) gained the most in two years and General Motors the most in a year after President-elect Donald Trump selected a prominent critic of global warming to lead his Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) transition team. Tesla Motors, which is betting big on alternative energy, declined. The EPA is scheduled next year to evaluate President Barack Obama’s ambitious fuel-economy regulations that were originally intended to double the efficiency of the nation’s light-vehicle fleet to 54.5 miles per gallon of gasoline by 2025. Myron Ebell, a director at the Washington-based Competitive Enterprise Institute and climate-change skeptic, is leading the agency’s transition to the Trump administration. “We believe it is unlikely that new fuel-economy rules will be passed or that existing ones will be strengthened,” says Goldman Sachs analyst Adam Jonas. “Enforcement and preservation of current CAFE standards is unclear.” That could be positive for automakers looking to sell more profitable pickups and sport utility vehicles and negative for makers of hybrids or pure-electric vehicles. Fiat Chrysler, which sells the highest proportion of light trucks among the biggest automakers, surged 9.7 percent, the most since Oct. 29, 2014, to close at $7.59. GM climbed 5.7 percent, the most since Oct. 21, 2015, to $32.73. Ford finished at $11.94, a 3.1 percent gain, the biggest since April 28. ‘Demote’ the EPA Trump will “follow the national Republican Party platform on the EPA, which will actually demote it as an agency and have it report to a joint bipartisan committee and essentially take away much of its independence,” says automotive economist Sean McAlinden. “The CAFE rules would be canceled,” he added, referring to the corporate average fuel economy standards. Even if Trump doesn’t scrap it entirely, his administration may “lessen the stringency” of the four-decade old program, says Kelley Blue Book analyst Jack Nerad. “I would think auto companies would prefer that,” he said. “They would look at that as somebody who would not put another roadblock between them and the consumer.” Weaker fuel-economy rules may accelerate the shift from cars to pickups, SUVs and vans as well as reduce demand for hybrids or pure-electric vehicles. American depositary receipts of Toyota Motor Corp., the maker of the Prius hybrid line and top seller of cars in the U.S., fell 0.8 percent to close at $110.86, and those of Nissan Motor Co., which invested heavily in its Leaf electric car and sells the fewest trucks among the top six automakers, dropped 4.9 percent to $18.65. Tesla, the Palo Alto, California-based company that produces only electric vehicles and is buying solar-panel installer SolarCity Corp., declined 2.5 percent for a second straight day to close at $185.35. Also Thursday, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers sent an eight-page letter to the Trump transition team with a series of recommendations, including aligning programs run by the EPA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Inconsistent rules threaten to saddle the industry with “potentially billions of dollars in fines,” said the trade group, which represents most of the world’s biggest automakers including GM, Ford, Toyota and Volkswagen AG. The alliance asked for a presidential panel to review all auto regulations, including fuel-economy rules, as consumers continue to reject efficient cars and electrified vehicles in favor of pickups and SUVs. “The combination of low gas prices and the existing fuel efficiency gains from the early years of the program is undercutting consumer willingness to buy the vehicles with more expensive alternative powertrains,” the group said.

From Obamacare to Yellen: What can Trump do? The Financial Times / November 10, 2016 Five questions on the limits on the president-elect as he heads for the White House Donald Trump repeatedly promised during his campaign to overhaul or repeal some of President Barack Obama’s signature policies, including his healthcare and financial reforms, on “day one”. He has also said he wants to change the people at the top of the Federal Reserve and the judiciary, which are independent parts of the US government. But the US system is famous for its checks and balances, which make it hard for one branch of government, even the president, to act unilaterally. So how fast can things change after Mr Trump takes over on January 20? Can Mr Trump repeal Obamacare? Mr Trump has vowed to repeal the Affordable Care Act, or “Obamacare” in his first 100 days in office. The law, enacted in 2010, has extended health insurance to 20m Americans but it has come under criticism for its rising costs. US government figures released in October showed that insurance premiums in the program will jump by an average of 25 per cent next year. To replace or fully roll back Obamacare, Mr Trump needs Congress to pass a new law, which is entirely possible. Republicans control both the House and the Senate, and their leadership shares his distaste for the law. Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell has called it the “single worst piece” of legislation passed during Obama’s presidency. But the process could become bogged down if Congress and Mr Trump do not agree on what should replace it. Should he desire, Mr Trump could take other steps to cut back the program unilaterally. For example, he could stop enforcing certain Obamacare provisions, such as the individual mandate that requires most people to have insurance, or refuse to approve states’ changes to their Medicaid programs for low-income people. Can Mr Trump replace Janet Yellen? In May, Mr Trump said he would “most likely” replace Federal Reserve chair Janet Yellen if elected, telling CNBC that Ms Yellen is “not a Republican” and that it would be “appropriate” to put someone new in the position when her four-year term expires in February 2018. As president, Mr Trump will have the power to nominate all members of the central bank’s Board of Governors to 14-year terms. He also appoints the Federal Reserve chair and vice-chair to four-year terms. However, Federal Reserve governors may not be removed from office before their terms run out except for “cause”, which does not include their policy views. Will Mr Trump scrap Dodd-Frank? Mr Trump has sent mixed signals on his plans for financial regulation, but said he wants to come “close to dismantling” Dodd-Frank, the complex 2010 Wall Street reform act aimed at preventing a repeat of the financial crisis. Many Republicans in Congress abhor the reform law, which created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and includes 2,000 pages of new regulations, including tighter capital requirements for banks and the so-called “Volcker rule” that clamps down on banks’ ability to bet their own money. Key Republicans in Congress, including House Speaker Paul Ryan, have floated Dodd-Frank reform plans. But as with Obamacare, the difficulty will be in agreeing on the details. Democrats do not have the votes to stop a new law on their own, but they can make political hay from provisions that appear to go too easy on Wall Street. However, Mr Trump can reshape some financial regulation more quickly by using the regulatory process. He will be able to appoint new chairs to each of the main financial watchdogs, who could then rewrite or repeal the detailed rules that spell out how the principles laid down in Dodd-Frank apply in practice. For example, a new chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission could rewrite the rules governing the trading and clearing of interest rate and credit derivatives, and take a more relaxed approach. Mr Trump could also seek to defang the CFPB without killing it by appointing a new director who is more friendly to industry than the incumbent, Richard Cordray. However, there is an ongoing legal dispute over the president’s power to remove a CFPB director. The brokerage industry is hoping that Mr Trump will also move quickly to scrap another regulation put in place recently by the US Labor Department that requires financial advisers to act in the best interests of their clients. One of Mr Trump’s top Wall Street advisers, Anthony Scaramucci, has said the president-elect will repeal the rule, which can be done without congressional approval. Will Mr Trump make the Supreme Court more conservative? The highest US court consists of nine justices, who are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. They serve until they die in office, resign or retire. The court currently has four Democratic appointees and four put in place by Republicans. There is one vacancy created by the death earlier this year of conservative Antonin Scalia. Mr Obama nominated centrist appeals court judge Merrick Garland in March, but Senate Republicans refused to vote on his appointment. Mr Trump has already published a list of 21 people that he would consider to fill Justice Scalia’s vacancy, but a right-leaning appointment by Mr Trump would not alter the balance of opinions on the high court. There are also three justices in their 70s or early 80s — liberal justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is 83 years old, while liberal Stephen Breyer is 78 and justice Anthony Kennedy, who is a Republican but has been the swing vote on crucial issues, is 80. If any of them step down, Mr Trump would be in a position to shift the court more decisively to the right on issues such as abortion and gay rights. All Supreme Court appointments need the approval of a simple majority of the Senate, but if one party filibusters, or seeks to stop an appointment with an extended debate, a so-called “supermajority” of 60 senators is needed to end the debate and force a vote. After Tuesday’s election, the Senate will have 51 Republicans, 46 Democrats and two independents who generally vote with the Democrats. The open Louisiana seat is scheduled for a December run-off election. Will Mr Trump roll back environmental protection? Mr Trump, who has called climate change a hoax invented by China to make US manufacturers uncompetitive, has vowed to “cancel” the Paris climate agreement, which was adopted last year and received the approval of 55 countries last month. No single country can abolish the Paris deal. But Mr Trump could decline to participate in the accord and refuse to work to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the US — non-compliance that is unlikely to result in any penalty. Mr Trump has also promised to open up more federal land to oil and gas drilling and coal mining, while diminishing the role of the Environmental Protection Agency. He has talked about scrapping a range of environmental regulations, including Mr Obama’s $5bn Clean Power Plan, which seeks to cut greenhouse gas emissions. However, changes to the Clean Power Plan or other environmental laws would likely face legal challenges from environmental groups. .

From 2004 to 2010, U.S. truck engines were nothing less than advanced science experiments, all thanks to the EPA. The under-hood temperatures of Mack brand trucks was so hot that plastic reservoirs were melting. Given the price point of US market trucks, and the technology at hand, it was a walk out into the darkness, at immense cost to the US market truck operator. Truth be told, the EPA's ignorant demands, pushing too far too quickly, are worthy of congressional investigation. The government should provide compensation payments to buyers of 2004-2009 model year trucks. And you also had the EPA, who is not in the business of designing and manufacturing truck engines, advocating unacceptably higher levels of EGR. We did successfully use EGR in Europe thru Euro 5. The US trucks, to meet that lower price point, had cheaper components that couldn't hold up.

Military celebrating Donald Trump's win The Washington Post / November 10, 2016 Like many Americans, active-duty service members stationed around the world were stunned at Tuesday's night's presidential race results. "More than one person has compared it to the day Osama [Bin Laden] was killed," said one Army officer, referring to the day the al-Qaida leader was killed during a raid by U.S. Navy SEALs. "I guess there's a feeling among soldiers that Trump will care about them and fix everything they see as broken about the Army." The officer, who like others spoke on the condition anonymity because of his active-duty status, also passed on a Snapchat image from a fellow Army officer. The picture depicted an alcoholic beverage with white text superimposed over the half-full glass that said: "Taking flag off wall, resigning commission tomorrow." As a traditionally Republican stalwart, the U.S. military appears to be embracing real estate executive Donald Trump's Wednesday presidential win, though there is also a healthy amount of reservation as well, according to nearly a dozen active-duty service members interviewed for this report. Pictures and videos were also circulating of soldiers celebrating the victory across the United States. At the Army's National Training Center at Fort Irwin, California, soldiers cheered in their barracks as Trump's electoral vote count broached 270. Overseas in places like Afghanistan and Iraq, however, the response was more muted. A soldier serving in southern Afghanistan said that the election was barely discussed at his small base. Afghanistan in particular received hardly any attention during the presidential race. The soldier said troops were more focused on what was going to be for dinner last night. Outside Mosul, Iraq's second-largest city and the site of a bloody campaign against the Islamic State, BuzzFeed's Mike Giglio tweeted a few impressions from the soldiers with whom he was embedded. "Last night no one wanted to sleep. We stayed up on the phones trying to watch results come back," he quoted one soldier as saying. "Our TV screen: drone footage on one half, FOX & CNN on the other," another soldier said. Many in uniform said that they see support for Trump, with his vague foreign policy goals, as more of a referendum on former secretary of state Hillary Clinton, who many rank-and-file troops view with suspicion for handling classified material in a manner that would garner severe punishments if they had acted in a similar manner. They also said that they see Trump as a candidate that could usher in serious change on the military's cultural issues, including gender integration. Service members interviewed for this report spoke of what they see as a groundswell of potential for Trump reversing the effects of the 2013 sequester and an announcement that same year by the Obama administration that opened all combat jobs to women. The decision was finalized by Defense Secretary Ashton Carter in December 2015. Two active-duty enlisted infantry Marines, one at a sniper school and another in an infantry battalion, said some members of their units hope Trump looks at the data provided by the Marine Corps on its gender integration studies and comes to a conclusion that isn't "political" and hopefully reverses the decision to allow women in combat roles. In 2014, the Marines started a nine-month experiment with a gender integrated infantry unit that concluded with mixed results. A female Army lieutenant, who also spoke on the condition of anonymity, said that she was worried about losing some of the gains that women in the military have made in recent years. She said that she didn't trust Vice President-elect Mike Pence to believe in gender equality. At the Pentagon and higher headquarters, where the military's bureaucracy is a maze of offices and acronyms, troops stationed there are worried that Trump might not have the firmest grasp on how the defense of the country actually works, and they said that they are increasingly concerned about how mission priorities and resources might be shuffled - for better or for worse - in the coming months. It is unclear and probably difficult to say whether Trump's support is split between officer and enlisted lines, as those interviewed for this report said pockets of both supported and decried the candidate. On Wednesday morning, Carter issued a statement about the election to the Pentagon, but the short paragraph did not mention Trump by name. "I am very proud of the way each and every one of you conducted yourselves during this campaign, standing apart from politics and instead focusing on your sacred mission of providing security," Carter said. "I am committed to overseeing the orderly transition to the next Commander-in-Chief. I know I can count on you to execute all your duties with the excellence our citizens know they can expect."