Granite Status: Shaheen slams Biden plan to withdraw from Afghanistan

Apr. 15—BEFORE PRESIDENT Joe Biden announced Wednesday his intent to withdraw American troops from Afghanistan by Sept. 11, Sen. Jeanne Shaheen criticized the move. Call it a preemptive strike.

In a statement Tuesday, a day before the president formally announced his intent, Shaheen said withdrawing would undermine the United States' "commitment" to the people of Afghanistan — women in particular.

Shaheen has long agitated for more inclusion of women in peace negotiations, pressing former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and current Secretary of State Antony Blinken on the issue.

"I'm very disappointed in the president's decision to set a September deadline to walk away from Afghanistan," Shaheen said in a statement. "Although this decision was made in coordination with our allies, the U.S. has sacrificed too much to bring stability to Afghanistan to leave without verifiable assurances of a secure future."

Biden has promised to continue aid and security assistance to Afghanistan.

In a tweet, Sen. Maggie Hassan said she too was wary of Biden's plan.

"Withdrawal of U.S. troops must be based on the facts on the ground, not arbitrary deadlines," Hassan wrote. "After all that our service members have sacrificed, we must ensure that Afghanistan does not once again become a safe haven for terrorists who seek to harm America."

Rep. Annie Kuster said she looked forward to reviewing details of the drawdown plan, but echoed Shaheen's concern for women's rights in Afghanistan.

Rep. Chris Pappas supported the drawdown, he said in a statement, but in balance with protecting human rights in Afghanistan.

Pappas said he wanted to see Congress take back its authority to authorize military force before the next decades-long entanglement.

"We should ensure that any future military actions are narrowly defined, effectively executed, and brought to a close when the mission is complete," Pappas said in a statement Wednesday.

Rail financing: On board

Kuster this week reintroduced a bill to change a loan program for rail lines — like a train to connect southern New Hampshire to Boston.

"Bringing passenger rail to New Hampshire will spur economic competitiveness, keep Granite Staters from spending hours sitting in traffic, and ensure businesses in the Southern tier and across New Hampshire can attract the best and brightest minds in the region," Kuster said in a statement.

The bill tweaks a Department of Transportation program called Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing, in a way Kuster said she hopes will encourage more use of the loan program for passenger rail, not just freight.

Pappas is on board too, calling the loan program "an important step" toward a potential rail link to Boston, he said in a statement, which would be "an economic game-changer" for New Hampshire.

Action on PFAS

Pappas and Kuster are both backing a sweeping bill on PFAS chemicals introduced this week by Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.).

The bill includes a host of regulations related to chemicals such as PFAS, PFOA and PFOS.

If passed, the bill would require the EPA to establish nationwide standards for the level of PFAS contamination considered dangerous — New Hampshire is one of 21 states with a standard right now — and require the EPA to list PFOA and PFOS chemicals as hazardous substances and air pollutants, and figure out within five years if PFAS is also hazardous.

The bill would also ban the burning of PFAS chemical waste, and create a voluntary label for PFAS in cookware — the chemical is sometimes found in nonstick pans.

On the Senate side, Shaheen and Hassan signed a letter to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen this week, asking that state and local governments receiving money from the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan stimulus bill be allowed to spend some of their allotment addressing PFAS contamination.

The senators asked the Treasury to let local governments spend money on testing for PFAS, water treatment, aid to farmers affected by PFAS, and university research into remediation.

Onto other shots

With the COVID-19 vaccine rollout well underway, Hassan and her frequent Republican collaborator Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) introduced a pair of bills this week focusing on other vaccines.

The Maternal Immunization Coverage Act would require Medicaid programs — the health insurance program for the poor run jointly by states and the federal government — to fully cover the vaccines recommended for pregnant women by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, without charging expectant mothers a co-pay.

Right now, only the flu and Tdap (tetanus, diphtheria and pertussis) shots are recommended for all expectant mothers.

The Maternal Immunization Enhancement Act requires the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to issue guidance to state Medicaid programs, advising states on best practices to get more pregnant women and new mothers vaccinated against common illnesses — practices such as outreach to women, counseling and education. The bill would also require putting together a list of federal funding sources states could access to help with this work.

Contact Josie Albertson-Grove at jgrove@unionleader.com.