新闻资讯

作者： root

  • 美国将暂缓向加州拨付13亿美元医疗补助资金，万斯称


    2026年5月13日 美国东部时间下午6:19 更新于1小时前 / 路透社

    2026年2月25日，美国副总统JD·万斯在华盛顿特区艾森豪威尔行政办公大楼，与美国医疗保险与医疗援助服务中心主任穆罕默德·奥兹一同就打击欺诈行为发表讲话。路透社/凯文·拉马克 资料图 购买授权许可

    华盛顿，5月13日（路透社）——美国副总统JD·万斯周三表示，美国政府将暂缓向加州拨付13亿美元的医疗补助资金。

    路透社伊朗简报新闻通讯将为您带来伊朗局势的最新动态与分析，点击此处订阅。

    考特尼·罗森 报道

    我们的准则：汤森路透信托原则。

    US to defer $1.3 billion in Medicaid funds for California, Vance says

    May 13, 2026 6:19 PM UTC Updated 1 hour ago / Reuters

    U.S. Vice President JD Vance speaks next to Administrator for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Mehmet Oz about combating fraud at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building in Washington, D.C., U.S, February 25, 2026. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/File Photo Purchase Licensing Rights

    WASHINGTON, May 13 (Reuters) – The ​U.S. ​government ⁠will ​defer $1.3 ​billion in ​Medicaid ​funding ‌for ⁠California, ​Vice ​President ⁠JD ​Vance ​said ⁠on ⁠Wednesday.

    The Reuters Iran Briefing newsletter keeps you informed with the latest developments and analysis of the Iran war. Sign up here.

    Reporting ​by ​Courtney ​Rozen

    Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

  • 卡什·帕特尔与特朗普政府对国会听证会的嘲弄


    2026-05-13T17:05:58.803Z / 美国有线电视新闻网（CNN）

    特约分析：
    亚伦·布莱克
    2小时前
    发布时间：2026年5月13日 美国东部时间下午1:05

    特朗普政府的高级官员从上任第一天起就明确表明，他们极度轻视国会，尤其是国会依据宪法履行的监督职责。

    不妨看看前司法部长帕姆·邦迪的“黑名单”以及她在2月听证会上对道琼斯指数的信口开河，还有国防部长皮特·赫格斯近期过度对抗性的证词。总体策略似乎是攻击议员，以避免回答涉及敏感议题的哪怕是直截了当的问题——即便提问者是同为共和党的议员。

    但很少有哪一次听证会能像联邦调查局局长卡什·帕特尔周二出席的国会听证会那样，集中体现出本届政府对问责制的彻底蔑视。

    参议院拨款小组委员会的议员们就帕特尔执掌联邦调查局的诸多问题向他施压，其中包括《大西洋月刊》近期的一篇报道：帕特尔酗酒成性，令同事们感到不安（他已否认这些指控，并起诉了该媒体），以及他在美国冰球队在意大利冬奥夺冠后与队员们过度庆祝。

    来自马里兰州的民主党参议员克里斯·范·霍伦的质询尤为激烈，他在开场陈述中严厉批评了帕特尔及其所谓的酗酒习惯。

    轮到帕特尔回应时，他不仅否认了相关报道，还试图将矛头指向这位马里兰州民主党议员。

    “唯一用纳税人的钱在萨尔瓦多与一名有帮派暴力前科的定罪强奸犯喝玛格丽特酒的人，就是你，”帕特尔对范·霍伦说道，“唯一在华盛顿特区罗比酒吧欠下7000美元酒吧账单的人，也是你。这间会议室里唯一在白天用纳税人的钱喝酒的人，就是你。”

    特朗普政府的盟友们大肆追捧这段对话，并在社交媒体上广泛传播。

    但帕特尔的这番言论存在四个问题——事实上，这位联邦调查局局长在短短20秒的证词中就抛出了所有这些不实之词。

    帕特尔所指的是范·霍伦去年前往萨尔瓦多探望基尔马尔·阿布雷戈·加西亚的行程。阿布雷戈·加西亚是来自范·霍伦家乡州的无证移民，特朗普政府将其非法遣返至萨尔瓦多一座严酷的监狱。

    但事实是：

    1. 阿布雷戈·加西亚并未有帮派犯罪前科。

    2. 他也未被定罪犯有强奸罪。

    3. 范·霍伦与阿布雷戈·加西亚合影时摆在桌上的“玛格丽特酒”显然是萨尔瓦多政府官员安排的摆拍。该国总统纳伊布·布克尔是特朗普的亲密盟友。

    4. 没有证据表明范·霍伦在萨尔瓦多之行或罗比酒吧事件中用纳税人的钱在白天饮酒。

    帕特尔很快在X平台上发布了一张范·霍伦竞选财务报告的截图，显示2025年12月一笔7128美元的罗比酒吧消费账单。但这笔账单属于一般性“餐饮”费用，可涵盖食品和酒水，范·霍伦周二表示，这笔钱用于员工圣诞派对。

    且无论这笔钱的具体用途是什么，都并非“纳税人的钱”，而是竞选资金。

    （议员们通常会在餐厅或酒吧举办筹款活动或员工活动，可能产生高额账单并从竞选经费中列支。这或许存在问题，但绝非帕特尔所暗示的那种问题。）

    即便帕特尔所谓的“纳税人的钱”指的是萨尔瓦多之行而非竞选活动，也没有证据表明范·霍伦喝了摆在桌上的酒水。事实上，他当时就表示：“我们两人都没碰那些酒。”

    联邦调查局局长卡什·帕特尔周二在德克森参议院办公楼出席参议院拨款委员会商务、司法、科学及相关机构小组委员会听证会期间旁听。

    温·麦克纳米/盖蒂图片社

    萨尔瓦多总统纳伊布·布克尔在X平台上发布的一张照片显示参议员克里斯·范·霍伦与基尔马尔·阿曼多·阿布雷戈·加西亚会面。范·霍伦称，带有盐边的酒杯是布克尔的工作人员摆在桌上的，他和阿布雷戈·加西亚都未碰过。

    纳伊布·布克尔/X

    范·霍伦在听证会上指责帕特尔散布“右翼媒体的都市传说”。

    政府多次歪曲此类事实，试图辩称阿布雷戈·加西亚是坏人，而民主党急于为一名无证移民辩护。他们反复声称已有证据证明阿布雷戈·加西亚参与帮派并犯下非移民类罪行，但至今并无此事。

    （阿布雷戈·加西亚因涉嫌人口贩运被起诉，但甚至未被指控犯有强奸罪。）

    但帕特尔在此背景下并非普通的政府官员。他是联邦调查局局长，在国会作证时需承担伪证罪的法律责任。但他却发表了可被合理理解为诋毁他人——包括阿布雷戈·加西亚和范·霍伦——的言论。

    这一切都有违司法部的道德准则，该准则规定官员不得捏造他人信息或预先判定他人有罪。

    （邦迪也无疑违反了这些准则。今年6月阿布雷戈·加西亚被起诉时，她在新闻发布会上声称阿布雷戈·加西亚犯下了起诉书中未提及的其他令人发指的罪行。）

    显然，帕特尔在给阿布雷戈·加西亚贴上“有帮派暴力前科的定罪强奸犯”标签时并非口误。在随后的证词中，他再次称范·霍伦“与重罪犯共饮玛格丽特酒”，尽管阿布雷戈·加西亚再次并未有重罪定罪记录。

    在一届常规政府中，此类证词本应引发人们要求帕特尔更正记录并收回其主张。即便帕特尔担心面临刑事起诉，共和党议员也可能会坚持要求他这么做，以维护国会对行政部门的监督职责。

    但没人会幻想帕特尔会受到任何形式的问责。而特朗普第二次就职后，由共和党控制的国会似乎早已放弃维护其作为独立强大政府分支的职权与特权。

    事实上，帕特尔并非过去一周唯一在国会作证时发表虚假言论的高级政府官员。

    赫格斯上周三和周四也曾如此，他声称拜登政府在2024年向15个州的投票站部署了军队。

    美国备受尊崇的制衡体系如今显然已彻底失效，官员们可以在证词中随心所欲地发言，只要言辞具有对抗性且能取悦特朗普即可。

    Kash Patel and the Trump administration’s mockery of congressional hearings

    2026-05-13T17:05:58.803Z / CNN

    Analysis by

    Aaron Blake

    2 hr ago
    PUBLISHED May 13, 2026, 1:05 PM ET

    Top Trump administration officials have made it abundantly clear from Day One just how little regard they have for Congress, including and possibly especially its constitutional oversight duties.

    Just look at former Attorney General Pam Bondi’s “burn book” and her riff on the Dow at her February hearings, or Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s over-the-top combative testimony of late. The general strategy seems to revolve around attacking lawmakers to avoid answering even straightforward questions about dicey subjects — even if the questioner is a fellow Republican.

    But rarely has an appearance epitomized the administration’s utter disdain for accountability like FBI Director Kash Patel’s congressional hearing on Tuesday.

    Members of a Senate Appropriations subcommittee pressed Patel on a number of questions about his stewardship of the FBI, including a recent report in the Atlantic that he has alarmed colleagues with his excessive drinking (he has denied these claims and sued the publication) and his exorbitant celebrating with the US hockey team after its Olympic win in Italy.

    Things got particularly testy with Democratic Sen. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, who read an opening statement particularly critical of Patel and his alleged drinking habits.

    When Patel got the chance to respond, he wasn’t content to deny the reporting. He tried to flip it back on the Maryland Democrat.

    “The only person that was slinging margaritas in El Salvador on the taxpayer dollar with a convicted gangbanging rapist was you,” Patel told Van Hollen. “The only person that ran up a $7,000 bar tab in Washington, DC, at the Lobby Bar was you. The only individual in this room that has been drinking on the taxpayer dime during the day is you.”

    Allies of President Donald Trump’s administration gobbled up the exchange and shared it far and wide on social media.

    But there’s a problem with that Patel quote — four of them, in fact, all of which the FBI director managed to squeeze into just 20 seconds of testimony.

    Patel’s allusion was to Van Hollen’s visit last year to El Salvador to check on the welfare of Kilmar Abrego Garcia. Abrego Garcia is the undocumented immigrant from Van Hollen’s home state whom the Trump administration illegally deported to a brutal El Salvador prison.

    Except:

    1. Abrego Garcia has not been convicted of being in a gang.
    2. He has not been convicted of rape.
    3. The “margaritas” that were placed in front of Van Hollen and Abrego Garcia during a photo op were apparently staged by El Salvador government officials. President Nayib Bukele is a close Trump ally.
    4. There’s no evidence of Van Hollen day-drinking using taxpayer funds in either the El Salvador or the Lobby Bar incident.

    Patel on X soon posted an image from Van Hollen’s campaign finance reports showing a $7,128 bill from December 2025 at the Lobby Bar. But the bill was for general “catering,” which can mean food as well as alcohol, and Van Hollen said Tuesday that it was for a staff holiday party.

    And regardless of what the money was spent on, it wasn’t “on the taxpayer dime”; It was campaign money.

    (Lawmakers commonly host fundraising or staff events at restaurants or bars that can rack up large tabs and charge it to the campaign. That might be problematic, but not for the reasons Patel suggested.)

    Even if Patel’s “taxpayer dime” reference was to the Abrego Garcia meeting rather than the campaign event, there is no evidence Van Hollen drank what was placed in front of him in El Salvador. In fact, he said back then, “Neither of us touched the drinks.”

    FBI Director Kash Patel looks on during a Senate Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies hearing in the Dirksen Senate Office Building on Tuesday.

    Win McNamee/Getty Images

    An image posted on X by El Salvador’s president Nayib Bukele shows Sen. Chris Van Hollen meeting with Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia. Van Hollen says the salt rimmed glasses were placed on the table by Bukele’s staff and were not touched by Van Hollen nor Abrego Garcia.

    Nayib Bukele/X

    Van Hollen at the hearing accused Patel of spreading an “urban legend in right-wing media.”

    These are the kinds of facts the administration has butchered many times over, as they’ve sought to argue Abrego Garcia is a bad guy and that Democrats were too anxious to defend an undocumented immigrant. They’ve repeatedly suggested it was proven that Abrego Garcia was in a gang and had committed non-immigration crimes, even though it still hasn’t been.

    (Abrego Garcia has been indicted for alleged human trafficking, but he hasn’t even been charged with alleged rape.)

    But Patel isn’t just any administration official in this context. He’s the FBI director, and he’s testifying to Congress under penalty of perjury. But he’s saying things that could logically be understood to impugn others — both Abrego Garcia and Van Hollen.

    All of which is contrary to Justice Department ethics, which state that officials aren’t supposed to make false statements about people or prejudge someone’s guilt.

    (Bondi, too, has quite arguably violated these standards. When Abrego Garcia was indicted in June, she in a press conference cited claims Abrego Garcia had committed other heinous crimes that weren’t even included in the indictment.)

    And it’s pretty evident that Patel didn’t just trip over his words in labeling Abrego Garcia a “convicted gangbanging rapist.” Later in his testimony, he again cited Van Hollen supposedly “drinking margaritas with felons,” even though Abrego Garcia, again, has not been convicted of a felony.

    In a typical administration, testimony like this would lead to questions about Patel correcting the record and withdrawing his claims. Even shy of Patel fearing criminal prosecution, Republicans might insist on it to assert Congress’ role in overseeing the executive branch.

    But nobody has any illusions about any kind of accountability for Patel. And the GOP-controlled Congress seemingly gave up on protecting its prerogatives and status as a powerful, separate branch of government when Trump was inaugurated a second time.

    Indeed, Patel isn’t even the only top administration official to make false statements in congressional testimony over the past week.

    Hegseth did so last Wednesday and Thursday, when he claimed that the Biden administration had sent the military to polling places in 15 states in 2024.

    The government’s revered system of checks and balances has apparently broken down so much now that officials can say whatever they want in testimony, as long as it’s combative and pleases Trump.

  • 参议院确认凯文·沃什出任美联储主席，特朗普施压要求降息


    2026年5月13日 / 美国东部时间下午3:11 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻

    华盛顿—— 参议院周三投票确认凯文·沃什为美联储主席，这对特朗普总统而言是一场胜利。此前特朗普与即将卸任的美联储主席杰罗姆·鲍威尔多次发生争执，并敦促美联储大幅降息。

    此次投票结果为54票赞成、45票反对，来自宾夕法尼亚州的民主党参议员约翰·费特曼与所有共和党议员一同支持沃什的任命。

    沃什的四年美联储主席任期将于本周五启动。鲍威尔表示，他暂时将以普通美联储理事的身份留任。

    今年早些时候，美国司法部对鲍威尔展开刑事调查的消息引发参议院部分共和党议员不满，他们称将暂停支持沃什的提名，直到该调查被撤销。检察官于4月放弃了调查，为沃什的确认铺平了道路。

    沃什已于周二另行获得确认，出任美联储七人理事会理事，任期至2040年结束。

    image
    凯文·沃什，特朗普总统提名的美联储主席人选，于2026年4月21日周二在参议院银行委员会作证。格雷姆·斯隆 / 彭博社 via 盖蒂图片社

    沃什曾于2006年至2011年期间担任美联储理事会理事。此后他曾在斯坦福大学胡佛研究所担任研究员，并在亿万富翁斯坦利·德鲁肯米勒的个人投资办公室担任合伙人。

    这位新任美联储主席近年来曾批评美联储，呼吁央行进行“体制改革”，并质疑其在新冠疫情后应对通胀飙升的举措、银行监管方式以及资产负债表规模。

    沃什去年还曾暗示支持降息，这与特朗普的诉求一致。不过多位分析师指出，沃什过去曾持有鹰派货币政策立场，即强调通胀风险，倾向于支持加息。

    特朗普并非首位希望美联储通过降息提振经济增长的总统，但他对这一问题的持续关注引发了人们对美联储能否维持传统独立性的担忧。在上月的参议院确认听证会上，沃什承诺将成为一名“独立决策者”，并表示：“货币政策独立性至关重要。”

    在鲍威尔任内，美联储在2022年和2023年大幅加息后，对降息采取了谨慎态度，担心此举会导致通胀卷土重来。这一做法引发特朗普的不满，他称鲍威尔为“笨蛋”“顽固的骡子”和“太迟先生”。

    今年早些时候，美联储收到大陪审团传票，成为司法部调查的一部分。鲍威尔称此次调查是施压运动的一部分，旨在胁迫他降息，但检察官坚称这是针对美联储一项耗资巨大的建筑翻新项目以及鲍威尔在参议院作证时就该工程发表的可能虚假陈述展开的合法调查。一名法官支持美联储的诉求，撤销了传票，并认定传票的目的是“骚扰”鲍威尔。

    此次调查成为特朗普替换鲍威尔计划的重大阻碍。北卡罗来纳州共和党参议员汤姆·提利斯曾拒绝将包括沃什在内的美联储提名法案提交参议院银行委员会投票，直到司法部撤销该调查，提利斯称此次调查是“毫无根据的”。

    华盛顿特区联邦检察官珍妮娜·皮尔罗于上月结束了此次调查，同时指出如果美联储监察长的审查发现存在不当行为，她可以重启调查。这一结果让提利斯满意，为共和党控制的参议院确认沃什的任命扫清了障碍。

    沃什接任美联储主席之际，正值美联储应对伊朗战争带来的经济影响。上个月，美联储利率制定机构联邦公开市场委员会投票决定将利率目标维持不变，这已是连续第三次会议保持利率稳定，鲍威尔将此归因于伊朗局势。

    “经济前景仍存在高度不确定性，中东冲突加剧了这种不确定性，”鲍威尔在上月的新闻发布会上表示。

    通胀率已低于2022年的峰值，但仍高于美联储2%的目标，且受战争推高的能源价格影响出现飙升，因此目前尚不清楚美联储何时或是否会决定降息。失业率仍维持在较低水平，4月就业报告表现强劲。

    根据芝加哥商品交易所集团的美联储观察工具，金融市场认为今年降息的概率低于50%。美国财政部长斯科特·贝森特上月表示，如果美联储决定在降息前“等待局势明朗”，他可以理解。但特朗普仍持续呼吁降息。

    无论沃什对此持何种观点，他对利率政策的掌控都并非绝对。尽管美联储主席通常对联邦公开市场委员会拥有较大影响力，但从正式层面而言，他只是12名投票成员之一。

    该委员会由5名不由总统任命的地区联邦储备银行行长以及美联储7名理事组成。目前，理事会7个席位中有3名是特朗普提名的官员——包括沃什，他接替了另一名特朗普提名的理事——另有3名是拜登提名的官员。特朗普试图解雇拜登提名的理事丽莎·库克，但迄今为止该举动被法院驳回。

    还有鲍威尔的问题。鲍威尔最初是奥巴马任命的美联储理事，在特朗普第一任政府期间被提拔为主席，并在拜登政府期间获得连任。

    美联储主席通常会在任期结束后离开理事会，但鲍威尔表示，他将留在美联储，直到司法部的调查——他认为这是对美联储独立性的威胁——“真正彻底结束”。

    上月，鲍威尔表示他将“在一段待定的时间内”继续留在理事会，但他表示计划保持“低调”。

    “我尊重主席的角色，”鲍威尔解释道，他在最后一次以普通美联储理事身份任职期间，“真切体会到达成共识有多困难，我一直觉得自己不应该不必要地添乱。”

    Senate confirms Kevin Warsh as Fed chair as Trump presses for lower interest rates

    May 13, 2026 / 3:11 PM EDT / CBS News

    Washington— The Senate on Wednesday voted to confirm Kevin Warsh as chairman of the Federal Reserve, marking a victory for President Trump, who has clashed with outgoing Fed chief Jerome Powell repeatedly and urged the central bank to slash interest rates.

    The vote was 54-45, with Democratic Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania joining all Republicans in support of Warsh’s confirmation.

    Warsh’s four-year term as Fed chair will begin Friday. Powell has said he will remain a rank-and-file Fed board member for the time being.

    Earlier this year, the Justice Department’s efforts to criminally investigate Powell rattled some Republicans in the Senate, who said they would withhold their support until the probe was dropped. Prosecutors abandoned their efforts in April, paving the way for Warsh’s confirmation.

    Warsh was separately confirmed Tuesday to be a member of the Fed’s seven-person Board of Governors for a term that ends in 2040.

    Kevin Warsh, President Trump’s nominee to chair the Federal Reserve, testifies before the Senate Banking Committee on Tuesday, April 21, 2026. Graeme Sloan / Bloomberg via Getty Images

    Warsh previously served on the Federal Reserve Board of Governors from 2006 to 2011. He then worked as a fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution and a partner at billionaire Stanley Druckenmiller’s personal investment office.

    The new chair has been critical of the Fed in recent years, calling for a “regime change” at the central bank and questioning its handling of the post-COVID inflation surge, its approach to regulating banks and the size of its balance sheet.

    Warsh also signaled support for lowering interest rates last year, in line with Mr. Trump’s wishes. Many analysts have noted, though, that Warsh has held hawkish views on monetary policy in the past, meaning he emphasized inflation risks and tended to favor higher rates.

    Mr. Trump is hardly the first president to want the Fed to lower interest rates in order to boost economic growth, but his focus on the issue has prompted concerns about whether the Fed will maintain its traditional independence. In a Senate confirmation hearing last month, Warsh promised to be an “independent actor” and said: “Monetary policy independence is essential.”

    Under Powell, the Fed has taken a cautious approach to lowering interest rates after raising them sharply in 2022 and 2023, wary of causing inflation to resurge. That approach has drawn the ire of Mr. Trump, who has called Powell a “numbskull,” a “stubborn mule” and “Mr. Too Late.”

    Then, earlier this year, the Fed was served grand jury subpoenas as part of an investigation by the Justice Department. Powell alleged the probe was part of a pressure campaign to intimidate him into cutting rates, but prosecutors insisted it was a legitimate investigation into a pricey Fed building renovation project and possible false statements by Powell in Senate testimony about the construction. A judge sided with the Fed, quashing the subpoenas and finding their purpose was to “harass” Powell.

    The investigation posed a major speed bump in Mr. Trump’s efforts to replace Powell. GOP Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina refused to vote any Fed nominees out of the Senate Banking Committee — including Warsh — until the Justice Department dropped the probe, which Tillis called “bogus.”

    U.S. Attorney for D.C. Jeanine Pirro closed the investigation last month, while noting she could restart it if a review by the Fed’s inspector general finds wrongdoing. That satisfied Tillis, clearing the way for the Republican-controlled Senate to confirm Warsh.

    Warsh is taking the helm of the Federal Reserve as it grapples with the economic impacts of the Iran war. Powell pointed to Iran when the Fed’s rate-setting Federal Open Market Committee voted last month to leave its interest rate target steady for the third meeting in a row.

    “The economic outlook remains highly uncertain, and the conflict in the Middle East has added to this uncertainty,” Powell said in a press conference last month.

    Inflation is below its 2022 peak but still exceeds the Fed’s 2% target, and has spiked due to higher energy prices brought about by the war, making it unclear when or whether the central bank will decide it’s appropriate to lower interest rates. The unemployment rate has also remained fairly low and the April jobs report was strong.

    Financial markets believe the odds of a rate cut this year are below 50%, according to CME Group’s FedWatch tool. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said last month he would understand if the Fed decides to “wait for some clarity” before cutting rates. Mr. Trump, however, has continued to call for rate cuts.

    Regardless of Warsh’s view on the issue, his control over interest rates will not be absolute. While the Fed chair typically has a lot of influence over the FOMC, the chair is formally just one of 12 voting members.

    The panel is made up of five regional Fed bank presidents who are not appointed by the president, along with the Fed’s seven governors. Currently, three governors are Trump nominees — including Warsh, who replaced a Trump pick — and three were Biden nominees. Mr. Trump is trying to fire Biden pick Lisa Cook, but that move has so far been blocked by the courts.

    And then there’s Powell. Originally an Obama-appointed Fed governor, he was elevated to chair during the first Trump administration and re-upped during the Biden administration.

    Fed chairs have typically left the board after their term as the boss ends, but Powell has said he will remain at the central bank until the Justice Department’s probe — which he views as a threat to the Fed’s independence — is “well and truly over.”

    Last month, Powell said he will remain on the board “for a period of time to be determined.” But he said he plans to keep a “low profile.”

    “I respect the role of chair,” Powell said, explaining that during his last stint as a rank-and-file Fed governor, he “had real sympathy for how hard it is to get that group to consensus, and I always felt like I don’t want to add to that unnecessarily.”

  • 新闻


    您还没有提供需要翻译的英文新闻文章，请您输入对应的英文内容，我会按照要求为您完成翻译。

    No English content available

  • 当地居民起诉阻止迈阿密黄金地块成为特朗普总统图书馆


    2026年5月13日，美国东部时间下午2:45 / 美国有线电视新闻网（CNN）
    作者：史蒂夫·孔托诺

    埃里克·特朗普在X平台发布了这段视频，展示了计划中的唐纳德·J·特朗普总统图书馆的首批样貌。
    @EricTrump/X

    本周三，少数南佛罗里达州居民提起诉讼，试图阻止该州将迈阿密滨水黄金地块移交给负责为前总统唐纳德·特朗普修建纪念图书馆的基金会。

    这起诉讼指控特朗普、该基金会、佛罗里达州高级官员以及迈阿密戴德学院违反了美国宪法《国内薪酬条款》，该条款禁止各州在任总统提供经济利益。

    佛罗里达州州长罗恩·德桑蒂斯和其他州官员于去年9月提出，将迈阿密市中心2.63英亩的州有土地捐赠给唐纳德·J·特朗普总统图书馆基金会有限公司。该非营利组织去年由特朗普的儿子埃里克·特朗普、女婿迈克尔·布卢斯以及曾代表特朗普集团的律师詹姆斯·基利在佛罗里达州创立。据当地房产评估师估价，这块土地价值约6300万美元，此前一直归迈阿密戴德学院所有，直到该校董事会去年投票决定将其移交给州政府。

    埃里克·特朗普随后公布了该地块的规划方案，包括一座刻有特朗普名字的巨型塔楼，以及设有波音747“空军一号”展品的大厅。特朗普总统本人也曾表示，该图书馆将设有酒店或办公区域，相比其前任们修建的博物馆，更贴近他的其他房地产项目风格。

    “我不主张修建单纯的图书馆或博物馆，”特朗普去年对记者说道。他还称这片土地位于“迈阿密最佳街区”。

    在诉讼中，原告方表示，这些言论“清楚表明特朗普总统打算将这座摩天大楼商业化，为自己和家人谋取巨额利润”。诉讼还称，鉴于附近近期的其他地产交易，这片土地的价值可能高达数亿美元，如果在公开市场出售，其价值可使迈阿密戴德学院的捐赠基金翻倍。

    “这些资金本可用于满足学院的研究需求、开设更多学士学位课程、吸引更多世界级设施和师资，或是降低学生开支，”诉讼文件中写道。

    这起诉讼于本周三由宪法问责中心——华盛顿特区的自由派智库——以及佛罗里达州格尔伯·夏克特与格林伯格律师事务所联合向佛罗里达南区美国地方法院提起。

    诉讼原告包括一名迈阿密戴德学院的学生、一家希望在该地块开展运营的本地活动家马文·邓恩旗下的非营利组织，以及两名迈阿密居民，他们称拟建的特朗普摩天大楼会遮挡他们的视野。

    CNN已向白宫、图书馆基金会、迈阿密戴德学院和佛罗里达州政府寻求置评。

    佛罗里达州官员为特朗普的后总统任期项目在“阳光之州”快速选址的行动，始于他重返白宫后不久。

    去年，由共和党控制的州议会通过一项法案，并由德桑蒂斯签署生效，该法案禁止地方政府对总统图书馆项目进行监管，以防特朗普选择在其定居的家乡州修建图书馆。

    同年秋季晚些时候，迈阿密戴德学院董事会召开会议，讨论“潜在房地产交易”。公共公告中未提及此次交易的其他细节，会议议程仅提到董事会将讨论向州政府移交地产的事宜，并未提及总统图书馆项目。

    投票结束后不久，德桑蒂斯宣布，州内阁将在一周后投票决定将迈阿密戴德学院的这片土地移交给特朗普基金会。佛罗里达州总检察长詹姆斯·尤特迈尔也在社交媒体上发布了一段预先录制并剪辑过的相关计划视频。

    本地活动家邓恩曾提起诉讼，指控迈阿密戴德学院违反了州公开会议法，试图阻止土地移交。去年11月，一名法官发布临时禁令，阻止土地转移。

    但在迈阿密戴德学院董事会举行第二次投票、披露了土地移交目的的更多细节并允许公众发表意见后，法官于一个月后解除了禁令。

    根据当地记录，该州已于今年1月正式将这片土地移交给图书馆基金会。

    Locals sue to block prime Miami land from becoming Trump presidential library

    May 13, 2026, 2:45 PM ET / CNN

    By Steve Contorno

    Eric Trump posted this video to X showing a first look at the planned Donald J. Trump Presidential Library.

    @EricTrump/X

    A handful of South Florida residents filed a lawsuit Wednesday seeking to block the state from handing over a prime piece of Miami’s waterfront to the foundation tasked with building a legacy library for President Donald Trump.

    The lawsuit accuses Trump, the foundation, top Florida officials and Miami Dade College of violating the Domestic Emoluments Clause in the US Constitution, which prohibits states from giving a financial benefit to a sitting president.

    Gov. Ron DeSantis and other state officials moved last September to donate 2.63 acres of state-owned land in downtown Miami to the Donald J. Trump Presidential Library Foundation, Inc., a nonprofit formed last year in Florida by Trump’s son Eric Trump; his son-in-law Michael Boulos; and James Kiley, a lawyer who has represented the Trump Organization. The land, valued by the local property appraiser at about $63 million, previously belonged to Miami Dade College until the board voted last year to turn it over to the state.

    Eric Trump has since announced plans for the site that include a massive tower emblazoned with the Trump name and a lobby that features a 747 Air Force One. President Trump himself has suggested the library would feature a hotel or offices and more closely mirror his other real estate endeavors than the museums built by his predecessors.

    “I don’t believe in building libraries or museums,” Trump told reporters last year. He also said the land sits on the “best block in Miami.”

    In their lawsuit, the plaintiffs said these statements “make clear that President Trump intends to monetize this skyscraper, generating significant profit for himself and his family.” The lawsuit also claims that the land is likely worth hundreds of millions of dollars given other recent property sales nearby and could double Miami Dade College’s endowment if sold on the open market.

    “These funds could have been used to advance the college’s research needs, offer more bachelor’s degree programs, secure more world-class facilities and faculty, or reduce student expenses,” it said.

    The lawsuit was filed jointly Wednesday in the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida by the Constitutional Accountability Center, a liberal Washington DC think tank, and the Florida law firm Gelber Schachter & Greenberg.

    The plaintiffs in the lawsuit include a Miami Dade College student; a nonprofit owned by local activist Marvin Dunn that hoped to operate on the land; and two Miami residents who say the proposed Trump skyscraper would block their sightlines.

    CNN has requested comment from the White House, the library foundation, Miami Dade College and the state of Florida.

    Efforts by Florida officials to quickly find a home in the Sunshine State for Trump’s post-presidency project started soon after he returned to the White House.

    A bill passed by the Republican-controlled state legislature and signed into law by DeSantis last year barred local governments from regulating presidential libraries in anticipation that Trump would move to build one in his adopted home state.

    Later that fall, the Miami Dade College board conducted a meeting to discuss “potential real estate transactions.” No other details about the transaction were included in the public notice and the agenda stated only that the board would discuss conveying property to the state. A presidential library was not mentioned.

    Shortly after the vote, DeSantis announced that the Cabinet would vote a week later to give the land from Miami Dade College to the Trump foundation. Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier also posted a pre-recorded and edited video on social media about the plans.

    Dunn, the local activist, sued to stop the handoff in a lawsuit that accused Miami Dade College of violating the state’s opening meeting laws. In November, a judge granted a temporary injunction to block the transfer of land.

    But the judge lifted the injunction a month later after the Miami Dade College board held a second vote that included more details about the purpose of the land transfer and allowed for public comment.

    The state officially transferred the land to the library foundation in January, according to local records.

  • 美国国家运输安全委员会：美航司应改进飞行员座舱烟雾应急培训


    2026-05-13 19:02:45 UTC / 路透社

    作者：戴维·谢泼德森

    2026年5月13日 美国东部时间19:02 更新于31分钟前

    2025年8月1日，在美国华盛顿特区国家运输安全委员会总部，该委员会主席珍妮弗·霍门迪准备主持一场调查听证会。路透社/肯特·西村 获取授权许可，新标签页打开

    华盛顿5月13日路透电 —— 美国国家运输安全委员会（NTSB）周三发布建议，要求改进飞行员应对座舱烟雾紧急情况的培训，此前2023年曾发生过类似事件。

    该委员会援引了2023年12月西南航空（LUV.N）一架波音（BA.N）737 MAX航班的事故：当时一只飞鸟撞入发动机，座舱内迅速充满烟雾。NTSB表示，“如果此类事件发生在夜间或仪表飞行气象条件下，后果可能是灾难性的。”

    《路透社伊朗简报》新闻简报将为您提供伊朗局势的最新动态与分析，点击此处订阅。

    广告 · 滚动继续阅读

    西南航空未立即置评。

    NTSB称，在这起西南航空航班事故中，从新奥尔良起飞的机组人员在数秒内舱内能见度急剧下降后，难以看清仪表和检查单。飞行员戴上了氧气面罩，完成了应急程序，宣布进入紧急状态并安全返回机场。机上139名乘客无人受伤。

    NTSB表示，尽管美国联邦航空管理局（FAA）几乎每天都会收到座舱烟雾引发的空中紧急情况报告，但客运航空公司并未被要求开展贴合实际的座舱烟雾应急模拟培训。

    广告 · 滚动继续阅读

    NTSB称：“现有培训往往仅围绕烟雾事件进行口头讨论，而非开展能见度降低或工作负荷增加场景下的沉浸式模拟训练。”

    该委员会建议FAA与行业合作，“为飞行员制定标准化、贴合实际的座舱烟雾应急模拟培训，并将该培训纳入其监督航司培训项目的指导文件中。”

    2024年，FAA在召集审查委员会评估包括2023年事故在内的波音737 MAX发动机相关担忧后，选择不要求立即采取任何行动。

    另一起类似事故发生在2023年3月西南航空的一架航班上，该航班从哈瓦那起飞，飞鸟撞击发动机后客舱充满烟雾。

    波音于2024年2月发布公告，向机组人员通报严重发动机损坏可能引发的驾驶舱和客舱影响。

    戴维·谢泼德森 报道；戴维·格雷戈里奥 编辑

    我们的报道准则：汤姆森路透社信任原则

    US airlines should improve pilot training for smoke in cockpit, NTSB says

    2026-05-13 19:02:45 UTC / Reuters

    By David Shepardson

    May 13, 2026 7:02 PM UTC Updated 31 mins ago

    National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) Chairwoman Jennifer Homendy gets ready to preside over a National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigative hearing, at the NTSB headquarters in Washington, D.C., U.S., August 1, 2025. REUTERS/Kent Nishimura Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab

    WASHINGTON, May 13 (Reuters) – The National Transportation Safety Board on Wednesday recommended improving training for pilot preparedness for ​smoke-in-cockpit emergencies after a 2023 incident.

    The board cited a December 2023 Southwest ‌Airlines (LUV.N) flight of a Boeing (BA.N) 737 MAX after a bird flew into an engine and smoke rapidly filled the cockpit. “If such an event occurred at night or in instrument meteorological ​conditions, the consequences could be catastrophic,” the NTSB said.

    The Reuters Iran Briefing newsletter keeps you informed with the latest developments and analysis of the Iran war. Sign up here.

    Advertisement · Scroll to continue

    Southwest did not ​immediately comment.

    In the incident on the Southwest flight, the NTSB ⁠said the flight crew on departure from New Orleans had difficulty ​seeing instruments and checklist items as visibility deteriorated within seconds. Pilots donned ​oxygen masks, completed emergency procedures, declared an emergency and safely returned to the airport. None of the 139 people onboard were injured.

    The NTSB said that although the Federal ​Aviation Administration receives nearly daily notifications of in-flight emergencies due to smoke ​in the cockpit, passenger airlines are not required to conduct realistic smoke-in-cockpit simulation training.

    Advertisement · Scroll to continue

    “Existing ‌training ⁠often consists only of verbal discussion of a smoke event rather than immersive simulation involving reduced visibility or elevated workload,” the NTSB said.

    The board recommended that the FAA work with industry to “develop standardized, realistic smoke-in-cockpit simulation ​training for pilots ​and incorporate that ⁠training into its guidance for overseeing airline training programs.”

    In 2024, the FAA opted not to require any immediate ​action after convening a review board to consider concerns ​about Boeing ⁠737 MAX engines including the 2023 incident.

    Another incident occurred in a Southwest March 2023 flight that had departed Havana and in which a bird strike ⁠led ​to smoke filling the passenger cabin.

    Boeing in ​February 2024 published a bulletin to inform flight crews of potential flight deck and cabin effects ​associated with severe engine damage.

    Reporting by David Shepardson; Editing by David Gregorio

    Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

  • 美联储新主席凯文·沃什对利率究竟有多大影响力？


    2026年5月13日 / 美国东部时间下午3:19 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻

    华盛顿——美联储将于本周五迎来新主席，但他的权力并不像看起来那样广泛。

    参议院周三以54票赞成、45票反对的结果确认了特朗普总统提名的美联储主席人选凯文·沃什。特朗普对货币政策岗位的目标不难看出：他数月来公开施压美联储降息，并多次抨击即将卸任的主席杰罗姆·鲍威尔没有迅速降息。

    沃什曾誓言要做一名“独立决策者”，表示不会根据特朗普的观点制定政策。他将在下月有机会发表意见，届时美联储利率设定委员会将召开下一次会议。他的计划尚不明确。他去年曾暗示对降息持开放态度，但在之前担任美联储理事会成员期间，他以支持紧缩货币政策而闻名。

    但他无法独自决定利率。美联储主席通常对利率设定委员会拥有巨大影响力，但他们的权力并非绝对。专家表示，沃什需要努力就正确的前进方向达成共识——在当前充满不确定性、对伊朗战争的担忧以及顽固的通胀问题的经济环境下，这是一项棘手的任务。大多数分析师预计未来几个月利率将保持稳定。

    此外，至少在目前，鲍威尔计划继续留在美联储理事会。此前美国司法部发起的一项有争议的刑事调查促使他留任。

    “主席拥有说服他人的权力，”兰德尔·克罗兹纳说道，他曾于2006年至2009年与沃什一同担任美联储理事，目前是芝加哥大学教授。“他们处于非常有利的位置去说服他人，但他们仍然需要去说服。”

    究竟是谁设定利率？

    2026年4月29日，周三，纽约证券交易所大厅内，联邦公开市场委员会会议结束后，美联储主席杰罗姆·鲍威尔发表讲话。迈克尔·纳格尔 / 彭博社通过盖蒂图片社拍摄

    利率目标并非由美联储主席设定，而是由每年召开八次会议的联邦公开市场委员会（FOMC）决定。从技术上讲，主席在委员会12名成员中仅有一票表决权。

    委员会的7名投票成员——美联储理事——由总统直接提名，任期14年，这使得单个行政当局对美联储成员构成的影响力有限。目前，三名美联储理事是特朗普任命的，其中包括沃什。另外三名是拜登任命的，第七名是鲍威尔，他最初是在奥巴马政府时期被任命进入美联储理事会，并在特朗普第一届政府期间担任主席。

    FOMC的另外五个席位属于纽约联邦储备银行行长，以及11名其他地区联邦储备银行行长中轮流产生的4名行长。白宫对地区联邦储备银行行长几乎没有控制权，这些行长由各地区银行理事会聘请，任期五年，随后需经美联储理事会批准。

    换句话说，至少在目前，利率设定委员会中仅有四分之一的成员是特朗普直接任命的。而且也不能保证特朗普任命的官员会站在总统一边。毕竟，鲍威尔就是特朗普任命的主席。

    美联储主席的“软实力”

    尽管如此，前美联储官员表示，主席对FOMC的影响力远超其单一表决权。

    曾担任美联储高级工作人员、联邦公开市场委员会秘书，现为耶鲁大学教授的比尔·英格利希表示，在某些情况下，美联储主席会积累“软实力”。他解释说，如果主席有着做出正确决策的记录，随着时间的推移，他们就能在委员会成员中获得公信力，而且“在边际上，人们可能愿意给主席一些宽松空间”。

    此外，2010年至2014年担任美联储理事、后在奥巴马政府期间担任财政部副部长的萨拉·布鲁姆·拉斯金表示，主席和普通委员会成员通常都希望在会议结束后达成共识。

    “这会向市场传递更有力的信号。市场会关注共识投票，其反应可能与投票分散的情况截然不同，”拉斯金在接受哥伦比亚广播公司新闻采访时说道。“主席有强烈的意愿去争取所有投票成员的共识。”

    拉斯金表示，达成共识的过程在委员会会议前几天就开始了，主席会致电或与地区联邦储备银行行长及理事会成员会面。杜克大学法学院教授拉斯金指出，通常在会议开始前，“你就相当清楚人们通常会持何种立场”。

    拉斯金指出，实际上，美联储理事会的经济学家和其他工作人员都向主席汇报工作，因此经济预测和其他信息往往会先传到主席那里，再传给其他人。克罗兹纳表示，主席“有很大能力指导工作人员关注特定问题”。

    随后，当会议召开时，主席和其他成员会花两天时间分享他们对经济状况的看法，并讨论正确的前进方向，包括是否调整被称为联邦基金利率的目标利率。克罗兹纳指出，主席通常是“讨论的焦点”，并协助准备他们权衡的政策选项。

    英格利希表示，在整个过程中，“主席的工作是与每个人沟通，试图让他们相信主席的观点是正确的”。

    “最终，主席可能无法得到自己想要的结果，但他会让委员会尽可能朝着目标前进，”他说。“通常情况下，结果可能并不完全是主席按自己意愿做出的选择，但他们必须让委员会接受这个方向。”

    最终的成果是一份简短的声明，阐明委员会选择的行动，并（有时含糊地）描述他们对未来的看法。投资者会细致入微地审视这份声明，寻找可能预示委员会下一步计划的细微措辞变化。出于这个原因，成员们会极其详细地讨论这份声明，拉斯金指出。

    “这份声明会被广泛争论，包括逗号、引号和新词汇，”她说。“最微小的细节都会引发激烈辩论。”

    在某些情况下，成员会投反对票。从历史上看，大多数反对票来自地区联邦储备银行行长，但在过去七次会议中的每一次，至少有一名特朗普任命的理事会成员支持比委员会准备支持的更低的利率。

    然而，投票结果特别接近的情况很少见，几乎全票通过的情况很常见。

    “这些决策往往是艰难的抉择，”克罗兹纳说道，他解释说，在某些情况下，成员可能会听从主席的意见，但会公开“表明立场”，表示他们对经济走向存在担忧。

    鲍威尔的情况如何？

    沃什下月主持他的首次FOMC会议时，可能需要应对75多年来其他主席都未曾遇到过的情况：他的前任仍在任上。

    2026年4月17日，周五，杰罗姆·鲍威尔抵达华盛顿特区的国际货币基金组织总部。塞缪尔·科里根 / 彭博社通过盖蒂图片社拍摄

    鲍威尔的美联储主席任期将于本周五结束，但他作为普通理事的任期要到2028年才到期。大多数美联储主席在执掌央行的任期结束后都会离职，但司法部的一项刑事调查促使鲍威尔延长了留任时间。

    这项针对美联储办公室昂贵翻新工程的调查，是由美国华盛顿特区检察官让娜·皮罗办公室发起的，美联储在今年早些时候收到了传票。鲍威尔认为这是特朗普政府向美联储施压、削弱其独立性的企图，检察官对此予以否认。皮罗上月结束了调查，但表示如果美联储监察长提出任何刑事转介，她可能会重启调查。

    鲍威尔表示，他不会在调查“真正彻底结束”之前离开美联储。

    “我对最近的事态发展感到鼓舞，我正在密切关注这一过程中剩余的步骤，”他说。“我在这些问题上的决定将完全基于我认为符合该机构和我们服务的民众的最佳利益。”

    除非情况发生变化，这意味着鲍威尔将成为自1948年马里纳·埃克尔斯的主席任期结束以来，首位继续留在理事会的前美联储主席。

    那么，鲍威尔将在利率设定决策中发挥多大作用？他上月表示，计划保持“低调”——当一名记者请他详细说明这意味着什么时，他 briefly ducked behind the lectern and cracked a half-smile.（此处按原文保留原句，因涉及动作描写，不影响理解）

    “我尊重主席的角色，”他接着说道，并提到自己在担任美联储主席前曾担任六年理事。“我非常清楚让这个团体达成共识有多困难。我一直觉得，我不想不必要地增加这种难度。”

    鲍威尔表示，他希望“非常有建设性”，这意味着尝试“支持……主席想要推进的方向，如果可以的话。如果不行，那也没办法。”他还排除了担任某种“影子主席”、对其他成员拥有过大影响力的可能性。

    尽管如此，专家表示，鲍威尔可能会比普通委员会成员获得更多关注。

    “我认为他的存在会被注意到，他表达观点的方式也会被注意到，”拉斯金在接受哥伦比亚广播公司新闻采访时说道。她指出，美联储现有工作人员对鲍威尔非常熟悉，其中许多人至少在目前可能还会留任。

    英格利希指出，鲍威尔是一位“受尊敬的人物”，已在美联储任职十多年，因此“当他在FOMC会议上发言时，人们会倾听”。

    “但他会努力避免任何形式的阻挠，我对此深信不疑，”他说。

    预计美联储不会立即采取重大行动

    2026年4月21日，周二，美联储主席提名人凯文·沃什抵达参议院确认听证会现场。汤姆·威廉姆斯/CQ滚球通讯社通过美联社拍摄

    大多数专家和投资者都认为，不会因为沃什上任，美联储就会对利率采取任何重大举措。

    在设定利率目标时，FOMC的职责是维持高就业率和物价稳定。这是一项具有挑战性的工作，因为这些目标可能相互冲突：如果委员会大幅降息，经济可能过热，但通胀可能飙升；如果为抑制通胀而将利率定得过高，可能会损害经济增长。

    该委员会在2022年和2023年加息以应对通胀。自那以后，它采取了谨慎的降息态度，在2024年底降息1个百分点，2025年底再降息0.75个百分点。今年的三次会议均维持利率不变，就业数据相当稳定，但通胀仍高于美联储2%的目标。最近，鲍威尔指出美国与伊朗的战争是不确定性的来源，也是谨慎行事的原因。

    预计美联储将在一段时间内维持利率稳定。根据芝加哥商品交易所集团的FedWatch工具，投资者认为今年剩余五次会议中任何一次加息或降息的概率都低于40%。美国银行分析师上周预测，美联储将推迟到2027年下半年降息，理由是通胀回升和就业数据强劲。

    周二公布的新联邦数据显示，4月通胀率同比飙升至3.8%，为2023年中期以来的最高水平，一些分析师认为这可能使降息的可能性进一步降低。

    沃什在利率方面的直接目标尚不完全明确。

    他去年曾在多个场合主张降低利率，并预测人工智能可能通过带来大规模生产率增长来抑制通胀，为美联储实施更宽松的货币政策留出空间。（至少有一名FOMC成员，芝加哥联邦储备银行行长奥斯汀·古尔斯比认为，人工智能炒作可能会导致通胀更高，而非更低。）

    但在2006年至2011年期间担任美联储理事会成员的早期阶段，沃什被称为更偏向鹰派，这意味着他对通胀持警惕态度，往往支持紧缩政策。

    沃什还呼吁对美联储的运作方式进行更广泛的“体制变革”。他认为，央行官员过于频繁地向公众传达他们的观点并做出明确预测，并支持从美联储资产负债表规模到银行监管等方方面面的改革。

    在上月的参议院听证会上，沃什表示，特朗普没有要求他“预先决定、确定或就任何利率决策做出裁定”。他还告诉议员们，他希望听取FOMC成员的不同观点，并赞成“比某些人更‘混乱’的会议”。

    英格利希认为，沃什不太可能立即推动降息，他指出经济前景存在不确定性，委员会成员目前似乎存在分歧。

    “我认为他目前无法让委员会接受这个方向，”他说。

    如果沃什希望立即降息——目前尚不清楚——拉斯金表示，支持这一举措的人需要提出一个“可信、分析有力且严谨的案例”，能够“经得起推敲”。

    克罗兹纳曾与沃什在美联储理事会和乔治·W·布什政府期间共事，当时克罗兹纳在经济顾问委员会任职，沃什则在国家经济委员会工作。他称沃什是一名“长期战略思想家”，“希望带领大家共同前进”。

    “他明白，要办成事情，你需要……围绕目标达成共识，”克罗兹纳说。“你不能一上来就说，‘一刀切，我想做这个或那个’。那不会有什么效果。”

    How much sway will new Fed Chair Kevin Warsh really have over interest rates?

    May 13, 2026 / 3:19 PM EDT / CBS News

    Washington— The Federal Reserve will get a new leader on Friday — but his power isn’t as vast as it might seem.

    The Senate confirmed Kevin Warsh, President Trump’s pick for Fed chair, in a 54-45 vote on Wednesday. Mr. Trump’s goals for the monetary policy job are not difficult to discern: He has openly pressed the Fed to slash interest rates for months, and has repeatedly lashed out at outgoing Chair Jerome Powell for not rapidly cutting rates.

    Warsh — who has vowed to be an “independent actor” and said he will not set policy based on Mr. Trump’s views — will get a chance to weigh in next month, when the Fed’s interest rate-setting committee is scheduled to have its next meeting. His plans are not clear. He suggested some openness to rate cuts last year, but in a prior stint as a member of the Fed’s Board of Governors, he was known for favoring tighter monetary policy.

    But he won’t be able to decide on rates all on his own. Fed chairs usually have a great deal of influence over the rate-setting committee, but their power is not absolute. Experts say Warsh will need to work to form consensus on the right path forward — a tricky task in an economic landscape marked by uncertainty, fears about the Iran war and a stubborn inflation problem. Most analysts expect interest rates to remain steady for the next few months.

    Plus, at least for now, Powell is planning to remain on the Fed board, after a controversial criminal probe by the Justice Department led him to stick around.

    “The chair has the power to persuade,” said Randall Kroszner, who served alongside Warsh as a Fed governor from 2006 to 2009 and now works as a University of Chicago professor. “And they’re in a very strong position to be able to persuade. But they still need to persuade.”

    Who actually sets interest rates?

    Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell speaks after a Federal Open Market Committee meeting on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange in New York on Wednesday, April 29, 2026. Michael Nagle / Bloomberg via Getty Images

    Interest rate targets are set not by the Fed chair, but by the Federal Open Market Committee, which meets eight times a year. Technically, the chair has just one vote out of the committee’s 12 members.

    Seven of the committee’s voting members — the Fed governors — are directly nominated by the president, and they serve for 14-year terms, giving a single administration limited power over the Fed’s makeup. Currently, three Fed governors are Trump appointees, including Warsh. Three others are Biden appointees, and the seventh is Powell, who was first named to the Fed board during the Obama administration and made chair during the first Trump administration.

    The FOMC’s other five seats belong to the president of the New York Federal Reserve and a rotating cast of four of the 11 other regional Fed bank chiefs. The White House has very little control over the regional Fed presidents, who are hired to five-year terms by the board of each regional bank and then approved by the Fed’s Board of Governors.

    In other words, at least for the time being, just a quarter of the interest rate-setting committee’s members are direct Trump appointees. There’s also no guarantee that the Trump appointees will side with the president. After all, Powell was appointed chair by Mr. Trump.

    The Fed chair’s “soft power”

    Still, former Fed officials say the chair’s influence over the FOMC extends well beyond their single vote.

    In some cases, Fed chairs have built up “soft power,” said Bill English, a former senior Fed staff member and secretary of the Federal Open Market Committee who is now a Yale University professor. If a chair has a track record of making good decisions, they can gain credibility with committee members over time, he explained, and “at the margin, people are maybe willing to cut the chair some slack.”

    Plus, both the chair and the rank-and-file committee members usually want to emerge from meetings with a consensus, said Sarah Bloom Raskin, who served as a Fed governor from 2010 to 2014 and later as deputy Treasury secretary during the Obama administration.

    “It conveys more force to the marketplace. Markets will pick up on a consensus vote, and might react differently than they would if it were a more fragmented-looking vote,” Raskin told CBS News. “The chair has a great incentive to want to get the consensus of all the voting members.”

    The process of forming a consensus starts a few days before the panel meets, with the chair calling up or sitting down with regional Fed presidents and board members. Oftentimes, “you’re pretty sure where people typically are going to stand” before the meeting begins, according to Raskin, a Duke University School of Law professor.

    In practice, the economists and other staff who work for the Fed’s Board of Governors also report to the chair, so economic forecasts and other information often goes to the chair before anybody else, notes Raskin. And Kroszner says the chair “has a lot of ability to direct the staff to focus on particular issues.”

    Then, when the meeting rolls around, the chair and other members spend two days sharing their views about the state of the economy and discussing the correct path forward, including whether to make changes to their target interest rate, known as the federal funds rate. The chair usually serves as “the focal point for the discussions” and helps prepare the policy options that they weigh, Kroszner noted.

    Throughout the process, English says, “the chair’s job is to talk to everybody, try to convince them that the chair is right.”

    “In the end, the chair may not get the outcome that they want, but they get the committee to move as far as they can,” he said. “Fairly often, probably it’s not exactly what the chair would’ve done if the chair had their druthers, but they have to bring the committee along.”

    The final product is a short statement that lays out what actions the committee chose to take and describes — sometimes vaguely — how they view the future. Investors meticulously scrutinize the statement, looking for tiny wording changes that could signal what the committee is planning to do next. For that reason, members discuss the statement in extreme detail, Raskin noted.

    “That statement gets argued on quite extensively, including commas and quotation marks and new words,” she said. “The smallest little bits are the subject of great debate.”

    In some cases, members dissent. Historically, most dissents have come from regional Fed presidents, but at each of the last seven meetings, at least one Trump-appointed board member has backed lower rates than the committee was prepared to support.

    It’s rare, however, for the vote to be especially close, and near-unanimous votes are common.

    “Often, these things are close calls,” Kroszner said, explaining that in some cases, members may defer to the chair but vocally “put down a marker” that they have concerns about the direction of the economy.

    What about Powell?

    When Warsh leads his first FOMC meeting next month, he may need to contend with something no other chair has dealt with in over 75 years: his predecessor.

    Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell arrives at IMF headquarters in Washington, D.C., on Friday, April 17, 2026. Samuel Corum / Bloomberg via Getty Images

    Powell’s stint as Fed chair ends on Friday, but his term as a rank-and-file governor does not expire until 2028. Most Fed chairs leave the central bank when their time in the corner office runs out, but a Justice Department criminal investigation caused Powell to extend his stay.

    The investigation — which focused on a pricey renovation to the Fed’s offices — was launched by the office of U.S. Attorney for D.C. Jeanine Pirro, and the Fed received subpoenas earlier this year. Powell viewed it as an effort by the Trump administration to pressure the Fed and erode its independence, which prosecutors denied. Pirro closed the investigation last month, but suggested she could restart it depending on whether the Fed’s inspector general makes any criminal referrals.

    Powell has said he will not leave the Fed until the probe is “well and truly over.”

    “I am encouraged by recent developments, and I am watching the remaining steps in this process carefully,” he said. “My decisions on these matters will continue to be guided entirely by what I believe is in the best interest of the institution and the people we serve.”

    Barring some change, that means Powell will be the first former Fed chair to remain on the board since Marriner Eccles’ term as chair expired in 1948.

    So, how active of a role will Powell play in interest rate-setting decisions? He said last month he plans to keep a “low profile” — and when a reporter asked him to expand on what that looks like, he briefly ducked behind the lectern and cracked a half-smile.

    “I respect the role of the chair,” he went on to say, pointing to his six years as a governor before he started leading the Fed. “I had real sympathy for how hard it is to get that group to consensus. And I always felt like I don’t want to add to that unnecessarily.”

    Powell said he wants to be “very constructive,” which means trying to “support … the direction the chair wants to go in, if you can. If you can’t, you can’t.” And he ruled out the idea of serving as a kind of “shadow chair” who commands outsize influence over other members.

    Still, Powell may get more attention than the average committee member, experts say.

    “I think his presence will be noticed, and how he expresses his views will be noticed,” Raskin told CBS News. She pointed out that the Fed’s existing staff know Powell well, and many of them will likely stick around, at least for now.

    English noted that Powell is a “respected figure” who has served at the Fed for over a decade, so “when he speaks at an FOMC meeting, people will listen to him.”

    “But he’s going to be trying hard to not be obstructionist in any way. I’m sure of that,” he said.

    Fed isn’t expected to make any big moves right away

    Kevin Warsh, nominee for chairman of the Federal Reserve, arrives for his Senate confirmation hearing on Tuesday, April 21, 2026. Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call via AP Images

    Most experts and investors don’t believe the Fed will make any dramatic moves on interest rates just because Warsh has taken the helm.

    When setting interest rate targets, the FOMC is charged with keeping employment high and prices stable. It’s a challenging job because those goals can conflict with each other — if the panel lowers rates too much, the economy could heat up but inflation could soar, and if it sets rates too high in order to quell inflation, it could hurt economic growth.

    The panel hiked rates in 2022 and 2023 to deal with inflation. Since then, it has taken a cautious approach to lowering them, cutting rates by a percentage point in late 2024 and another 0.75 points in late 2025. It has left rates steady in all three meetings this year, with employment numbers fairly stable and inflation still above the Fed’s 2% target. More recently, Powell has pointed to the U.S.’s war with Iran as a source of uncertainty and a reason to tread carefully.

    The Fed is expected to keep rates stable for a while. Investors believe the probability of an interest rate change at any of this year’s five remaining meetings is below 40%, according to CME Group’s FedWatch. Bank of America analysts predicted last week the Fed will hold off on lowering rates until the second half of 2027, pointing to an uptick in inflation and strong jobs numbers.

    On Tuesday, new federal data showed inflation surged to 3.8% year-over-year in April, the highest level since mid-2023, which some analysts believe could make a rate cut even less likely.

    Warsh’s immediate goals on interest rates aren’t entirely clear.

    He argued in favor of lower rates at various points last year, and has predicted that artificial intelligence could stem inflation by ushering in massive productivity gains, giving the Fed room for looser monetary policy. (At least one FOMC member, Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee, has argued that AI hype could cause more, not less, inflation.)

    But during an earlier stint on the Fed board from 2006 to 2011, Warsh was known as more of a hawk, meaning he was wary of inflation and tended to support tighter policy.

    Warsh has also called for a broader “regime change” to how the Fed operates. He has suggested that central bank officials communicate their views to the public and make definitive predictions too often, and has backed changes to everything from the size of the Fed’s balance sheet to how it regulates banks.

    At a Senate hearing last month, Warsh said Mr. Trump hasn’t asked him to “predetermine, fix or decide on any interest rate decision.” He also told lawmakers he wants to listen to a diversity of views on the FOMC and favors “messier meetings than some.”

    English thinks it’s unlikely that Warsh will push for lower rates immediately, noting that the economic outlook is uncertain and committee members seem divided right now.

    “I don’t think he’s going to be able to get the committee there right away,” he said.

    If Warsh wants lower rates immediately — which is not clear — Raskin says supporters of the move will need to make a “credible, analytically strong and disciplined case” that can “pass the laugh test.”

    Kroszner worked with Warsh both on the Fed board and in the George W. Bush administration, with Kroszner serving on the Council of Economic Advisers while Warsh was at the National Economic Council. He called Warsh a “long-run strategic thinker” who “wants to bring people along.”

    “He understands that to get things done, you need to … build a consensus around things,” Kroszner said. “You can’t just come in and say, ‘Off with their heads, I want to do this or I want to do that.’ That’s not going to be very effective.”

  • 参议院民主党人终于打破共和党在特朗普对伊战争问题上的团结立场——默科夫斯基倒戈


    此次投票距特朗普称与伊朗的停火协议处于“极度危急状态”、“存活概率仅1%”仅数小时

    2026年5月13日 美国东部时间12:28 / 福克斯新闻频道
    作者：亚历克斯·米勒 福克斯新闻

    【新增功能】您现在可以收听福克斯新闻的文章了！

    收听本文
    时长：3分钟

    共和党对唐纳德·特朗普总统对伊朗战争的支持周三出现分裂。

    数月来，参议院民主党人一直通过持久战策略，试图让共和党人脱离他们几乎团结一致支持“史诗怒火行动”的阵营，自战事爆发以来，他们多次在参议院就战争权力决议进行投票。

    经过两个月的努力，他们终于通过俄勒冈州民主党参议员杰夫·默克利的最新提案，争取到部分共和党议员倒戈反对特朗普。但这仍不足以终止美国在中东的 ongoing 军事行动。

    共和党在对伊战争问题上仍挺特朗普，但随着最后期限临近裂痕显现

    2026年5月13日周三，唐纳德·特朗普总统抵达北京，与中国国家主席习近平举行高风险会谈。（汤姆·威廉姆斯/CQ滚石公司 via 盖蒂图片社）

    缅因州共和党参议员苏珊·柯林斯、阿拉斯加州共和党参议员丽莎·默科夫斯基，以及一贯投票支持限制特朗普战争权力的肯塔基州共和党参议员兰德·保罗，都与民主党人一道投票终止“史诗怒火行动”。

    此事发生在国会错过就该地区战事进行审议的60天期限之后，也就在特朗普抵达中国数小时前。

    特朗普政府高级官员，包括战争部长皮特·赫格斯瑟，辩称60天期限已无意义，因为战事已在停火协议下暂停。

    然而，在拒绝伊朗的最新提议后，特朗普周二表示，脆弱的停火协议正处于“危急状态”。

    国会无视关键最后期限，共和党人准备约束特朗普对伊战争

    战争部长皮特·赫格斯瑟在一场激烈的参议院听证会上，强烈否认自己或其他官员可能从对伊战争中牟利的指控。（凯文·迪特里克/盖蒂图片社）

    “在看了他们发给我们的那堆垃圾提案后，我现在可以说这是最脆弱的停火——我甚至都没看完，”特朗普对记者表示。

    “我想说，停火协议正处于极度危急状态，就像医生走进来说，‘先生，您的亲人存活概率大约只有1%’，”他说道。

    在周三投票前，特朗普的海外之行以及已成为过去式的最后期限是否会对投票产生影响，仍是一个未知数。

    参议院共和党人罕见举措，试图阻止民主党人的战争权力提案，保留特朗普的作战授权

    2025年12月11日，弗吉尼亚州民主党参议员蒂姆·凯恩走进华盛顿特区参议院会议厅时对记者发表讲话。（安德鲁·哈尼克/盖蒂图片社）

    参议院多数党领袖、南达科他州共和党议员约翰·图恩指出，特朗普的中国之行可能会对国家安全产生影响，并表示“所有人都团结起来支持总统是最好的选择”。

    “人们对这些问题有自己的看法，这不是一次新的投票，我们之前已经进行过多次投票，但你知道，我们会看看最终投票结果如何，”图恩说道。

    国会可以就《军事使用授权法案》（AUMF）进行投票，该法案要么授权要么停止美国在伊朗的任何进一步军事行动。一些共和党人认为，此举将为特朗普为战争辩护提供强有力的法律工具。

    默科夫斯基本月早些时候警告称，除非有迹象表明和平协议即将达成，或者政府就其作战目标做出进一步说明，否则她将提交一项《军事使用授权法案》供参议院表决。

    在周二就特朗普政府1.5万亿美元的巨额五角大楼预算申请进行听证时，默科夫斯基询问赫格斯瑟，他是否认为“如果明确表示国会确实批准了《军事使用授权法案》，这将对总统有所帮助”，以防战事重启。

    “我认为总统——我们的观点是，他拥有第二条宪法修正案赋予的所有必要权力来执行任务，”赫格斯瑟说道。

    发起战争权力倡议的弗吉尼亚州民主党参议员蒂姆·凯恩辩称，如果一项《军事使用授权法案》提交参议院并获得通过，那将使“一场非法且不明智的战争，仅仅变成一场不明智的战争，而非非法战争”。

    “但我几乎看不到共和党人愿意在委员会或参议院就该法案进行投票的任何情况，”凯恩对福克斯新闻数字频道表示。“他们正积极试图逃避对这场战争的责任。”

    亚历克斯·米勒是福克斯新闻数字频道负责报道美国参议院的撰稿人。

    Senate Democrats finally crack GOP unity on Trump’s Iran war as Murkowski flips

    The vote came hours after Trump said the ceasefire with Iran is on ‘massive life support’ with a ‘1% chance’

    May 13, 2026 12:28pm EDT / Fox News

    By Alex Miller Fox News

    NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!

    Listen to this article

    3 min

    Republicans’ support for President Donald Trump’s war on Iran fractured on Wednesday.

    Senate Democrats have tried to splinter off Republicans from their near-unified backing of Operation Epic Fury for months with a campaign of attrition, putting war powers resolution after war powers resolution on the floor ever since fighting began.

    And after two months of trying, they finally got some in the GOP to flip on Trump with Sen. Jeff Merkley’s, D-Ore., latest attempt. Still, it wasn’t enough to terminate ongoing operations in the Middle East.

    GOP HOLDS WITH TRUMP ON IRAN WAR, BUT CRACKS EMERGE AS DEADLINE NEARS

    President Donald Trump arrived in Beijing on Wednesday, May 13, 2026, for high-stakes talks with Chinese President Xi Jinping.(Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc. via Getty Images)

    Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, and Rand Paul, R-Ky., who has consistently voted to handcuff Trump’s war powers, all joined Democrats to end Operation Epic Fury.

    It comes after Congress blew past the 60-day deadline to weigh in on fighting in the region, and hours after Trump touched down in China.

    Top Trump administration officials, including Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, argued that the 60-day deadline was moot because fighting was paused under a ceasefire.

    However, Trump, after rejecting the latest proposal from Iran, said on Tuesday that the fragile truce is on “life support.”

    CONGRESS IGNORES KEY DEADLINE AS REPUBLICANS READY ‘RESTRAINT’ ON TRUMP’S WAR IN IRAN

    War Secretary Pete Hegseth forcefully denied allegations that he or others may have profited from the war with Iran during a heated Senate exchange.(Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

    “I would call it the weakest, right now, after reading that piece of garbage they sent us — I didn’t even finish reading it,” Trump told reporters.

    “I would say the ceasefire is on massive life support, where the doctor walks in and says, ‘Sir, your loved one has approximately a 1% chance of living,’” he said.

    Whether Trump’s trip overseas and the deadline now in the rearview mirror would have an impact on Wednesday remained an open question heading into the vote.

    SENATE GOP MOVES TO BLOCK DEMS’ WAR POWERS PUSH, PRESERVE TRUMP’S AUTHORITY IN RARE MOVE

    Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., speaks to reporters as he walks into the Senate chamber in Washington, D.C., on Dec. 11, 2025.(Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

    Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., noted that Trump’s trip to China would likely have national security implications, and said that it “would be best if everybody hung together and supported the president.”

    “People have their own minds about some of these issues, and this is not a new vote, it’s one we’ve had many times before, but you know, we’ll see what votes are,” Thune said.

    Congress has the option of voting on an Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) that would either authorize or halt any further fighting in Iran. Some Republicans argue that the move would give Trump a strong legal tool in making the case for the war.

    Murkowski warned earlier this month that unless there were signs that a peace deal was nearing completion or further communication from the administration on their objectives, she would bring an AUMF to the floor.

    During a hearing with Hegseth on Tuesday to pick through the president’s staggering, $1.5 trillion budget request for the Pentagon, Murkowski asked Hegseth if he believed it would “be helpful to the president if it was made clear that, in fact, the Congress did allow, did provide an AUMF” should fighting restart.

    CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

    “I think the president — our view is that he has all the authorities he needs under Article II to execute,” Hegseth said.

    Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., who started the war powers effort, contended that if an AUMF were put on the floor, and it passed, it would make an “illegal and unwise war, just an unwise war, not an illegal one.”

    “But I see almost no circumstance in which Republicans would want to have a vote on that in committee or on the floor,” Kaine told Fox News Digital. “They are actively trying to avoid accountability for the war.”

    Alex Miller is a writer for Fox News Digital covering the U.S. Senate.

  • 特朗普与中国为何登上热搜


    2026-05-13T19:10:35.515Z / 美国有线电视新闻网（CNN）

    作者：贝琪·克莱因与马洛里·汤普森，CNN报道
    发布于美国东部时间2026年5月13日周三下午3:10

    美国总统唐纳德·特朗普于周三抵达北京，将与中国国家主席习近平举行为期两天的会谈。美国有线电视新闻网的贝琪·克莱因将介绍两位领导人预计将讨论的议题，以及随特朗普此次访华的随行人员。
    请前往我们的“观看”页面，查看更多视频内容，包括直播和独家报道。

    1分25秒 • 消息来源：CNN

    https://www.cnn.com/2026/05/13/politics/video/trump-china-trip-begins-trending-cli-hrzn

    Why Trump China is trending

    2026-05-13T19:10:35.515Z / CNN

    By Betsy Klein and Mallory Thompson, CNN

    Published 3:10 PM EDT, Wed May 13, 2026

    President Donald Trump arrived in Beijing on Wednesday for two days of talks with Chinese President Xi Jinping. CNN’s Betsy Klein explains what the leaders are expected to discuss and who joined Trump on the trip. Discover more videos, including live streams and exclusive storytelling, on our Watch page.

    1:25 • Source: CNN

    https://www.cnn.com/2026/05/13/politics/video/trump-china-trip-begins-trending-cli-hrzn

  • 议员呼吁打击中国持有的美国农田，此时特朗普正与习近平会晤


    2026年5月13日 / 美国东部时间下午3:13 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻（CBS News）

    作者：卡莉·泰特尔鲍姆（Callie Teitelbaum）

    特朗普总统本周与中国国家主席习近平举行面对面会晤之际，国会议员们以国家安全担忧为由，呼吁打击中国收购美国农田的能力。

    特朗普于周三抵达北京，出席备受期待的与习近平的峰会，预计峰会将聚焦贸易、能源、台湾问题以及伊朗战争。在访华前，两党议员团体提出了一项新法案，旨在堵住他们所称的“危险漏洞”，这些漏洞允许中国等外国对手购买美国军事基地附近的农田和房地产。

    “粮食安全就是国家安全，我们绝不能允许中国等外国对手收购我们最敏感的军事和关键基础设施所在地附近的美国农田，”牵头提出该法案的众议院中国问题特别委员会主席、密歇根州共和党众议员约翰·穆尔纳（John Moolenaar）在一份声明中说道。

    该法案得到了两党议员的支持，新泽西州众议员乔希·戈特海默（Josh Gottheimer）以及加利福尼亚州众议员朱莉娅·布朗利（Julia Brownley）、吉米·帕内塔（Jimmy Panetta）和迈克·汤普森（Mike Thompson）等民主党人也联名签署。

    特朗普政府的一名官员告诉哥伦比亚广播公司新闻，追踪外国土地所有权仍然是一项优先工作，包括审查各州如何汇编相关数据。

    根据美国农业部2024年12月的最新评估，美国目前有超过4000万英亩的农业土地由外国实体持有，约占全国总农业用地的2%。中国在美持有的土地不到外国持有土地总量的1%。

    去年2月，特朗普总统签署了一份国家安全备忘录，旨在限制中国对美国战略部门的投资，包括科技、医疗和农业领域。白宫发言人奥利维亚·威尔士（Olivia Wales）告诉哥伦比亚广播公司新闻，特朗普“致力于让美国成为投资的首选目的地，同时平衡国家安全利益——确保美国的未来牢牢掌握在美国人手中”。

    她补充道：“特朗普总统即将与习近平主席举行的会晤，将以清醒看待当前经济和安全现实的态度推进这些目标。”

    美国农业部此前报告称，中国持有最多农业用地的州包括德克萨斯州（123708英亩），其次是北卡罗来纳州（44263英亩）、密苏里州（42905英亩）、佛罗里达州（12555英亩）和弗吉尼亚州（4654英亩）。

    总部位于弗吉尼亚州的史密斯菲尔德食品公司（Smithfield Foods Inc.）是全球最大的猪肉生产商之一，2013年被一家中国肉类企业以数十亿美元收购。根据美国农业部的数据，如今史密斯菲尔德公司是美国第二大中国籍农业用地持有者，持有数万英亩土地。

    卡托研究所（Cato Institute）是一家自由意志主义智库，其负责总体经济事务的副总裁斯科特·林西科姆（Scott Lincicome）告诉哥伦比亚广播公司新闻，他认为国会议员对中国投资的担忧被夸大了。

    “看看美国农业部的最新数据，中国在美农田所有权仅占美国全部农田的极小一部分，”林西科姆说道。

    他承认，在军事基地附近的中国土地所有权问题上，“存在合理的安全考量”，但补充称，需要进一步的证据来证明限制财产权是合理的。

    “我们永远、永远都要记住，绝大多数此类农田交易的卖家都是美国人，”他说。“因此，这实际上是联邦政府在限制美国公民的财产权。”

    哥伦比亚广播公司新闻此前曾报道，美国军事基地附近的中资收购引发了国家安全担忧——促使北达科他州议员在2023年阻止一家中国公司在大福克斯空军基地附近建设玉米加工厂。

    ![2023年5月18日，位于北达科他州大福克斯的扶风集团玉米加工厂拟建地址。本·布鲁尔（Ben Brewer）/ 彭博社通过盖蒂图片社拍摄]

    穆尔纳的法案如果获得通过，将要求美国财政部下属的外国投资委员会审查涉及中国、俄罗斯或其他外国对手的土地收购事宜。该委员会曾在2022年裁定，其对一家中国公司在北达科他州卡瓦尔迪尔太空部队基地和大福克斯空军基地附近购买农田的行为没有管辖权。

    “数据报告存在巨大缺口”，使得全面了解美国的外国投资情况变得困难，曾在特朗普首届政府期间于国务院负责美中政策的前国家安全官员大卫·费思（David Feith）告诉哥伦比亚广播公司新闻。他将相关数据描述为“非常不完整”。

    独立无党派机构美国政府问责局2024年1月发现，美国农业部“需要更好地收集、跟踪和共享数据”，并指出该机构依赖各州各县提交的纸质表格。该办公室在报告中称，如果不“改进内部流程，美国农业部就无法向国会或公众 reliably 报告外国人士持有美国农业用地的地点和数量”。

    一名美国农业部官员告诉哥伦比亚广播公司新闻，该机构已采取措施加强对外国交易的强制披露，引用了用于提交报告的在线门户和供公众提交信息的在线表格。

    2025年的数据“应在2026年底前公布”，该官员说道。

    全国农业法律中心（National Agricultural Law Center）的数据显示，目前有数十个州制定了法律，“在一定程度上限制外国对本州私人农业用地的所有权或投资”。近年来限制土地所有权的努力有所增加，例如犹他州，该州共和党州长斯宾塞·考克斯（Spencer Cox）签署了一项法案，扩大了此前的外国投资限制。

    这一举措阻碍了犹他州普罗沃机场附近的一笔土地出售，买家是Cirrus Aircraft公司，该公司多数股权由中国国有航空工业集团公司持有。美国农业部和美国农场局联合会此前曾表示，犹他州约有3.4万英亩土地由中国投资者和企业持有。

    “中国共产党实体持有的农田总面积可能不大——但这并不是关键所在，”倾向保守派的哈德逊研究所（Hudson Institute）专门研究美中关系的高级研究员迈克尔·索博利克（Michael Sobolik）告诉哥伦比亚广播公司新闻，他补充称，议员们的担忧与这些地产“靠近敏感地点”有关。

    “这就是为什么我们需要认真对待这个问题，穆尔纳正在做的事情是好事，”他说道。

    https://www.cbsnews.com/video/how-china-could-use-u-s-farmland-to-attack-america/

    Lawmakers seek crackdown on China-owned U.S. farmland as Trump meets with Xi Jinping

    May 13, 2026 / 3:13 PM EDT / CBS News

    By Callie Teitelbaum

    President Trump’s face-to-face meeting this week with Chinese President Xi Jinping comes as members of Congress are calling for a crackdown on China’s ability to acquire U.S. farmland, citing national security concerns.

    Mr. Trump arrived in Beijing on Wednesday for a highly anticipated summit with Xi, which is expected to focus on trade, energy, Taiwan and the war with Iran. Ahead of his visit, a bipartisan group of lawmakers introduced new legislation that aims to close what they described as “dangerous loopholes” allowing foreign adversaries like China to purchase American farmland and real estate near U.S. military bases.

    “Food security is national security, and we cannot allow foreign adversaries like China to buy up American farmland near our most sensitive military and critical infrastructure sites,” Rep. John Moolenaar, a Michigan Republican who heads the Select Committee on China and led the bill’s introduction, said in a statement.

    The bill has backing from members of both parties, with Democrats such as New Jersey Rep. Josh Gottheimer and California Reps. Julia Brownley, Jimmy Panetta and Mike Thompson signing on.

    A Trump administration official told CBS News that tracking foreign land ownership continues to be a priority, including reviewing how states compile data on the matter.

    More than 40 million acres of agricultural land in the U.S., about 2% of the nation’s total, is owned by foreign entities, according to the latest assessment by the Department of Agriculture as of December 2024. Chinese investments amount to less than 1% of foreign-held land in the U.S.

    Last February, President Trump signed a national security memorandum that sought to restrict Chinese investments in strategic U.S. sectors, including technology, healthcare and agriculture. White House spokesperson Olivia Wales told CBS News that Mr. Trump “is committed to making the United States a premier destination for investment while balancing national security interests — ensuring that America’s future remains firmly in American hands.”

    “President Trump’s upcoming meeting with President Xi will advance these goals with a clear-eyed view of the economic and security realities of today,” she added.

    USDA has previously reported that the states with the largest Chinese holdings include Texas (123,708 acres), followed by North Carolina (44,263 acres); Missouri (42,905 acres); Florida (12,555 acres); and Virginia (4,654 acres).

    The Virginia-based Smithfield Foods Inc., one of the largest pork producers in the world, was bought by a Chinese meat company in 2013 for billions of dollars. Now, Smithfield Inc. is the second largest Chinese holder of agricultural land in U.S., with tens of thousands of acres, according to USDA.

    Scott Lincicome, the vice president of general economics at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, told CBS News he believes the congressional concerns about Chinese investments are overblown.

    “If you look at the latest data from the USDA, Chinese ownership of farmland is a tiny, tiny sliver of all U.S. farmland,” Lincicome said.

    He acknowledged there is a “justifiable security argument” when it comes to Chinese land ownership in close proximity to military bases, but added there needs to be further evidence to warrant restricting property rights.

    “We always, always have to remember that in the vast majority of these farmland transactions, the seller is an American,” he said. “So this is the federal government restricting the property rights of American citizens.”

    CBS News previously reported that China-linked acquisitions near U.S. military bases have sparked national security concerns — prompting lawmakers in North Dakota in 2023 to block a Chinese company from building a corn mill near an Air Force base in Grand Forks.

    The proposed location of the Fufeng Group corn milling plant in Grand Forks, North Dakota, on May 18, 2023. Ben Brewer / Bloomberg via Getty Images

    Moolenaar’s bill, if passed, would require the Treasury Department’s Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S. to review land purchases that involve China, Russia or other foreign adversaries. The office ruled in 2022 that it had no jurisdiction over a Chinese company’s purchase of farmland in North Dakota near Cavalier Space Force Station and Grand Forks Air Force Base.

    “Huge data reporting gaps” have made getting a full picture of foreign investment in the U.S. difficult, David Feith, a former national security official who worked in the State Department on U.S.-China policy during the first Trump administration, told CBS News. He described the data as “very incomplete.”

    The Government Accountability Office, an independent and nonpartisan agency, found in January 2024 that the USDA “needs to collect, track, and share the data better,” citing its reliance on paper forms filed in state counties. Without “improving its internal processes, USDA cannot report reliable information to Congress or the public about where and how much U.S. agricultural land is held by foreign persons,” the office said in the report.

    A USDA official told CBS News that the agency has taken steps to strengthen mandatory disclosure of foreign transactions, citing an online portal for reports and an online form for the public to submit information.

    Data for 2025 “should be available in late 2026,” the official said.

    Dozens of states now have laws on the books “that seek to restrict to some degree foreign ownership or investments in private agricultural land within the boundaries of their state,” according to the National Agricultural Law Center. Efforts have picked up in recent years to limit ownership, including in Utah, where its Republican governor, Spencer Cox, signed a bill into law that expanded previous foreign restrictions.

    That effort disrupted a land sale in Utah near Provo Airport to Cirrus Aircraft, a company that is majority-owned by the Chinese state-owned Aviation Industry Corporation of China. The Agriculture Department and American Farm Bureau previously said that roughly 34,000 acres in Utah has been owned by Chinese investors and companies.

    “Total farmland owned by Chinese Communist Party entities may be small in aggregate — but that isn’t what matters,” Michael Sobolik, a senior fellow at the right-leaning Hudson Institute who specializes in U.S.–China relations, told CBS News, adding that lawmakers’ concerns relate to the properties’ “proximity to sensitive locations.”

    “That’s why we need to take this issue seriously, and it’s good that Moolenaar is doing that,” he said.

    https://www.cbsnews.com/video/how-china-could-use-u-s-farmland-to-attack-america/