US state accidentally passes bill allowing pregnant women to legally murder anyone they want - Independent

US state accidentally passes bill allowing pregnant women to legally murder anyone they want

The bill as drafted allows a pregnant woman to 'commit homicide without consequences,' a House Republican says

• Emily Shugerman New York  
• Friday 23 June 2017 19:22 BST

Women in New Hampshire were almost allowed to commit murderwith impunity, when Republican legislators failed to read the fine print in their own bill.

New Hampshire Senate Bill 66 is one of dozens of “foetal homicide” laws across the country that allow foetuses to be considered people in cases of homicide or manslaughter.

The New Hampshire bill defines a foetus as a person in such cases after 20 weeks. Supporters say this allows those who might kill a foetus – in a car crash, or assault, for example – to be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

Women’s rights advocates, however, say the laws can also be interpreted to ban abortion. To assuage these fears, New Hampshire legislators added an exemption for women seeking abortions and the doctors providing them.

As originally written, the act exempted “any act” committed by the pregnant woman or her doctor from cases of second-degree murder, manslaughter, negligent homicide, or causing or aiding suicide.

“The bill as drafted allows for physician-assisted suicide and allows a pregnant woman to commit homicide without consequences,” Republican Representative JR Hoell told the Concord Monitor.

Legislators, however, only caught the error after it had passed both chambers of Congress and was headed to Governor Chris Sununu’s desk.

Members of Congress quickly voted to change the language through a process normally used to correct spelling and grammar.

“No one in this chamber voted to allow anyone to be able to murder anyone,” Republican House Majority Leader Dick Hinch said. “That was not the intent.”

Thirty-eight other states currently have foetal homicide laws on the books. The laws have raised concerns about prosecuting mothers for miscarriages, or for smoking or drinking during pregnancy.

Democrats in New Hampshire protested that the Republican-sponsored bill is redundant, pointing out that women can already pursue felony charges in cases that result in miscarriage or stillbirth.

“Senate Bill 66 puts New Hampshire on the dangerous path to recognising fetal personhood in our laws,” Senator Martha Hennessey said.

The bill, however, easily passed New Hampshire's Republican legislature. Mr Sununu is expected to sign the revised measure into law.

Four GOP Senators Spurn Health Plan Aimed at Unifying Party - Bloomberg

Four GOP Senators Spurn Health Plan Aimed at Unifying Party

By Steven T. Dennis, Laura Litvan, and Zachary Tracer

23 June 2017, 12:40 am AEST

23 June 2017, 8:45 am AEST

• Bill provides over $50 billion in addition to subsidy payments
  
• McConnell says final vote may come as early as next week
  

Senate Republican leaders issued a long-awaited health-care proposal aimed at winning over both the moderate and conservative wings of their party, but their draft bill was immediately opposed by a group of four GOP senators.

Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky said he and three other conservative Republicans -- Ted Cruz of Texas, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Mike Lee of Utah -- oppose the version released Thursday and intend to negotiate as a team to improve it. Their opposition could threaten passage of the bill. For the measure to clear the Senate, Republicans can only afford to lose two GOP votes amid unanimous Democratic opposition.

President Donald Trump offered his strong backing for measure on Thursday evening.

“I am very supportive of the Senate #HealthcareBill. Look forward to making it really special! Remember, ObamaCare is dead,” he wrote on Twitter.

The draft bill includes sharp cuts to Medicaid for the poor and disabled, more modest trims to other Obamacare subsidies and tax cuts for the wealthy that were included in a version passed by the House.

Labeled a "discussion draft," the plan would provide an additional $50 billion over four years to stabilize insurance exchanges, relying on a mechanism Republicans have criticized in the past as a way to keep insurers in the marketplace.

Graphic: How the Senate GOP Plan Would Change Health Care

It largely resembles the House bill passed last month, including the tax cuts for wealthy people, drugmakers and insurance companies. The Senate bill’s initial Medicaid cuts are more gradual than the House, though both end the open-ended funding of the health care system for the poor.

The plan, a product of months of closed-door meetings, includes $15 billion a year in market-stabilizing funds over the next two years and $10 billion a year in 2020 and 2021. These payments would come in addition to cost-sharing subsidy payments, which would be extended through 2019.

"Perhaps the discussion will begin in earnest to make the bill better," Paul told reporters. "I think you only get changes if you show you have the power to, you know, not vote for the current bill."

Cruz gave flyers to fellow Republicans with his demands: letting states design coverage without getting a federal waiver, allowing consumers to buy insurance across state lines, and allowing insurers that meet federal mandates to also sell other plans that don’t comply.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky has previously said he wants the full chamber to vote on the measure next week. Second-ranking Senate Republican John Cornyn of Texas said leaders want votes on multiple amendments starting June 29, with final passage of the bill early the next morning.

The bill will “ultimately transition away from Obamacare’s collapsing system entirely so more Americans won’t be hurt,” McConnell said Thursday on the Senate floor.

But holding a vote next week would be potentially risky for Republican leaders. 

"I don’t see how I can get the information I need to get to yes in a week," Johnson told reporters Thursday.

‘Transfer of Wealth’

Former President Barack Obama, whose health law was his biggest domestic achievement, said on Facebook the GOP plan "is not a health care bill. It’s a massive transfer of wealth from middle-class and poor families to the richest people in America."

Obama urged people to contact their representatives to demand that lawmakers seek a compromise to improve Obamacare. "Small tweaks" to the GOP bill "cannot change the fundamental meanness at the core of this legislation," he said.

Health stocks rose to highs on Thursday, following the bill’s release. The Standard and Poor’s 500 Health Care Index of drugmakers, insurers, hospitals, medical suppliers and other health companies closed at an all-time high, up 1.1 percent. Hospitals, which would face more gradual cuts to Medicaid under the Senate bill than the House version, were some of the biggest gainers. Shares of Community Health Systems Inc. closed up 5.1 percent to $9.27, while Tenet Healthcare Corp. gained 6.9 percent to $18.90.

The plan mostly affects two groups of people: the roughly 72 million whose care is covered through Medicaid, and another 20 million or so who buy insurance in the individual market.

The Senate version phases out Obamacare’s expansion of Medicaid over three years through 2023, rather than in 2020 under the House bill. But in 2025, the Senate bill moves to more severe funding caps for the federal contribution to Medicaid, using the consumer price index, rather than a measure of medical inflation that tends to rise more quickly.

Individual Market

In the individual market, the Senate bill has a subsidy system similar to Obamacare, though less generous. The subsidies would be based on the cost of a low-level bronze plan, rather than a silver plan. Silver plans have an average deductible of about $3,500, while the average for bronze plans is about $6,000, according to HealthPocket Inc., which compares health plans.

That means individuals either must pay more to get the same health insurance they had before, or end up with less generous health plans with higher deductibles. The bill would provide subsidies for people making up to 350 percent of the poverty level, rather than the 400 percent cutoff in Obamacare.

Several Republicans are still skeptical of the measure, which may undergo significant changes before a Senate floor vote.

‘A Number of Concerns’

Republican Senator Susan Collins of Maine "has a number of concerns," spokeswoman Annie Clark said in a statement. They include the upcoming Congressional Budget Office analysis of many people would have insurance coverage, the effect on insurance premiums and changes in Medicaid, Clark said.

GOP Senator Rob Portman of Ohio said in a statement he has "real concerns" about the measure’s Medicaid policies.

[Read the full text of Senate Republicans’ draft health-care bill here]

The draft bill would provide $62 billion allocated over eight years to a state innovation fund, which can be used for coverage for high-risk patients, reinsurance and other items. The draft bill would phase out Obamacare’s expansion of Medicaid over three years, starting in 2021.

Among the Obamacare tax increases that would be repealed are a 3.8 percent investment income tax and a 0.9 percent Medicare surtax. The measure would delay the so-called Cadillac tax on high-cost plans from 2020 to 2026.

Lower Subsidies

The subsidies are somewhat more generous for younger people and those with lower incomes. A young person making 250 percent of the poverty level, though, would pay 4.3 percent of income for a health plan, down from 8.2 percent in Obamacare. Older people with higher incomes could be required to pay as much as 16.2 percent of their income for health insurance, compared with a 9.7 percent cap in Obamacare.

To be eligible for tax credits, plans couldn’t cover abortion costs unless the procedure is to save the life of the mother or in cases of rape or incest.

Like the House bill, the Senate version effectively ends the employer and individual mandates to buy health insurance. Republicans released a summary of the draft measure.

Republican Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma said Thursday that the bill has his support.

“It does, but it’s just a starting point,” he said.

‘Heartless’ Bill

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York said the bill is "heartless" and "may be meaner" than the House version.

"This bill will result in higher costs, less care, and millions of Americans will lose their health insurance, particularly through Medicaid," Schumer said on the Senate floor. "It seems designed to slash support for health care programs in order to give tax breaks to the very wealthy."

The plan would make fewer people who are legally present in the U.S. eligible for insurance subsidies by eliminating them for many temporary residents and visa holders.

It also would defund Planned Parenthood for a year. Alaska Republican Lisa Murkowski, a supporter of the reproductive care organization, said, "We’re going to start drafting up amendments and if I need to draft one on Planned Parenthood, that will be one that we will include in the mix."

The draft bill does not, as of yet, include a provision to penalize people who don’t maintain coverage continuously, senior GOP Senate staff said. Drafters are meeting with the CBO and Senate parliamentarian to determine whether they can include such a provision, staff said. The House bill allows insurers to charge people more for coverage if they are uninsured for 63 days in a year before signing up.

The legislation is expected to result in millions of people losing insurance when evaluated by the CBO -- an estimate the nonpartisan office said it aims to release early next week. The CBO said the House-passed bill would result in 23 million fewer people with insurance by 2026.

Republicans plan to use a mechanism allowing the bill to pass the Senate with only 50 votes, plus the support of Vice President Mike Pence. A Senate-passed bill would go to the House, which could either approve the Senate version and sending it to Trump’s desk or negotiate a compromise version, which would then have to pass both chambers.

Meet the 13 Senators Deciding on Your Health Care Behind Closed Doors - TIME

Meet the 13 Senators Deciding on Your Health Care Behind Closed Doors

For the last several weeks, 13 Senate Republicans have been meeting behind closed doors to draft legislation to repeal the Affordable Care Act. We take a closer look at their words, who they are and their funding.

The most closely guarded piece of writing this summer isn’t the new season of Game of Thrones —it’s the GOP Senate’s health care bill.

For the last several weeks, media outlets have reported that 13 Senate Republicans have been meeting behind closed doors to discuss legislation that could lead to millions fewer Americans having health coverage—and make it hard for many people with pre-existing conditions to buy an affordable plan. While Vox and The New York Times have reported the names of the 13 members, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell didn’t even confirm the existence of the group in an email to MONEY, pointing instead to working lunches that include all 52 Republican senators.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected that the American Health Care Act, the health care bill passed by the House last month, would cause 23 million people to lose coverage by 2026, compared with current law, and that coverage would grow increasingly expensive for less healthy individuals. Republicans in the Senate vowed to start over, but from what little has leaked of their proposal, lawmakers are planning tweaks to the House version and not a wholesale revision.

McConnell has said he wants to bring the bill to the full Senate for a vote ahead of Congress’ July 4 recess. If he succeeds in gathering 50 votes to pass the legislation, with Vice President Mike Pence casting the tie-breaking 51st vote, then President Trump is expected to sign the bill into law.

Yet with less than eight full working days to go, the group has not released a draft of the legislation that would repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, informally known as Obamacare. Senate Democrats on Monday began a campaign to thwart the Senate’s regular business to protest their colleagues’ lack of transparency. Axios reported Tuesday that McConnell plans to release a “discussion draft” of the bill on Thursday.

Who are these 13 senators? MONEY took a look at their public statements as well as their biggest donors, using data from the Center for Responsive Politics.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY)

What he’s saying: Known as a wily tactician, McConnell has been pushing the line that Americans deserve “relief” from failing Obamacare.

Biggest donors: Louisville, Ky.-based Kindred Healthcare, a health care services company, was the third-largest contributor to McConnell’s campaign committee from 2011 to 2016, donating $104,650. Health insurer Humana was number 4, with $103,300 in donations. Financial firm Blackstone Group came in first with $217,700 in donations.

Senate Finance Committee Chair Orrin Hatch (R-UT)

What he’s saying: At a recent budget hearing, Hatch needed help from a staffer to answer a question from Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill on whether there would be a hearing on the health care bill before the vote. He replied that there might not be one but, “we’ve invited you to participate and give your ideas.” McCaskill emphatically disagreed. Hatch has pointed to Obamacare’s high costs and “collapsing coverage” as evidence that the law is failing. Health policy experts say that the Trump Administration’s lack of support for the law is partly to blame for pushing premiums up and causing insurers to exit the markets.

Biggest donors: Human resource firm OC Tanner was Hatch’s campaign committee’s top donor from 2011 to 2016, with $81,010 in contributions. BlueCross BlueShield came third, with $68,500 and Cancer Treatment Centers of America came rounded out the top five with $65,000.

Senate HELP Committee Chair Lamar Alexander (R-TN)

What he’s saying: A vocal critic of the Affordable Care Act from the start, Alexander criticized that legislation as a “completely partisan bill” in a 2009 op-ed in Capitol Hill newspaper The Hill. Some parts of his home state were at risk of having no insurers participating in the Obamacare marketplace for 2018, until BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee indicated plans this spring to step in.

Biggest donors: BlueCross BlueShield was the second-biggest donor to Alexander’s campaign committee from 2011 to 2016, with $36,250 in contributions after International Paper’s $48,950. Franklin Tennessee-based Community Health Systems, a hospital operator, is the fourth-biggest donor with $28,850 in donations.

Sen Mike Enzi (R-WY)

What he’s saying: A ranking member of the Senate Health Committee, Enzi has a 10-step plan on his web site for transforming health care in America. One step would give Medicaid beneficiaries the ability to convert the value of their benefit into private health insurance. The American Health Care Act would slash federal funding for Medicaid by $834 billion by 2026, according to the Congressional Budget Office, forcing cuts in coverage for low-income Americans, individuals with special needs, and elderly people receiving long-term care.

Biggest donors: DaVita HealthCare Partners is Enzi’s campaign committee’s top donor from 2011 to 2016 and the only health care name in the top five, with $27,000 in contributions. Peabody Energy comes in second, with $21,650 and Comcast Corp in third with $19,200.

Sen. John Thune (R-SD)

What he’s saying: A common complaint about the Affordable Care Act is that the law has caused premiums to spike, and Thune told Fox News this month that South Dakota has seen premiums rise 124% since 2013. The fact that roughly 85% of Obamacare consumers receive premium subsidies to defray these increases has received less attention from critics. The House version of the American Health Care Act would switch Obamacare’s premium assistance to a flat, age-based subsidy, a change that would lower prices for younger, healthier consumers but hit some older, lower income ones with premium increases of more than 800% by 2026, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

Biggest donors: At number three and $40,246, Sanford Health is the only healthcare name among the top five donors to Thune’s campaign committee; Nextera Energy comes in first with $52,000 and Blackstone Group is next with $50,097.

Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT)

What he’s saying: A pro-life politician, Lee writes on his web site that, “every individual, regardless of age, health, or condition of dependency, deserves the respect and protection of society.” The House version of the American Health Care Act would allow states to apply for a waiver to weaken protections for those with pre-existing conditions and strip Medicaid reimbursements from Planned Parenthood, funding that accounts for 40% of the organization’s annual budget overall.

Biggest donors: Conservative group Club for Growth tops the list of Lee’s committee donors from 2011 to 2016, with $360,732 in donations; the Senate Conservatives Fund comes next with $169,907 and Kirkham Motorsports comes third with $111,200.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)

In 2013, Cruz led a government shutdown that failed in its goal of defunding the Affordable Care Act, but not before Cruz read the Dr. Seuss classic “Green Eggs and Ham” as part of a 21-hour floor speech. Cruz today is reportedly pushing to allow states to waive Obamacare’s requirement that insurers cover everyone, regardless of health status, and that they not charge people with pre-existing conditions any more than healthy people.

Biggest donors: Cruz doesn’t have any health care names among his campaign committee’s top five donors from 2011 to 2016; the conservative Club for Growth is first with $707, 607, the Senate Conservatives Fund second with $315,991 and the Woodforest Financial Group third with $170,350.

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR)

What he’s saying: Currently the youngest U.S. senator, 40-year-old Tom Cotton is known for his very conservative views. Despite aligning with President Trump on most issues so far, Cotton has differed on health care, arguing that Medicaid reform is crucial to the overhaul debate. Although he supports repealing Obamacare like many of his GOP colleagues, Cotton has criticized the House repeal efforts numerous times, denouncing it on Twitter for “moving too fast.”

Biggest donors: Cotton’s biggest donor is also Club for Growth with $457,924 in donations from 2013 to 2016. New York City-based hedge fund Elliot Management was the second-largest contributor, donating $137,900. The Stephens Group, a private investment firm headquartered in Little Rock, AR, was number 3 with $122,100 in donations.

Sen. Cory Gardner (R-CO)

What he’s saying: As an established member of the Senate GOP leadership team, Gardner is among those in his party who have expressed reservations about cuts to Medicaid. In March, he was joined by senators Portman (R-OH), Capito (R-WV) and Murkowski (R-AK) in signing a letter to Majority Leader Mitch McConnell that outlined concerns about the house health care draft, and how it crucially lacked “stability and certainty” for those in Medicaid expansion. While he supports the repeal of the ACA, Gardner backed Obamacare’s efforts at Medicaid expansion and raised concerns about the House bill’s timeline. His state’s Democratic governor, John Hickenlooper, is working with Ohio governor John Kasich to bring together a bipartisan group of governors to protect Medicaid funding.

Biggest donors: Club for Growth is Gardner’s largest contributor, with $97,552 in donations from 2013 to 2016. His fourth largest contributor was Blue Cross/Blue Shield, with $33,000; United Health also contributed $25, 500.

Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY)

What he’s saying: As Chairman of the Senate Republican Policy Committee, ranking no. 4 in the GOP leadership, Barrasso has often been a point man for the party on the health care issue. He supports the push to repeal and replace Obamacare, which he has regularly condemned as a failing law. Despite acknowledging that some Obamacare taxes might have to stay in the short term, Barrasso has followed GOP leadership in advocating, “certainly there’s an agreement that you eliminate every tax that has to do with increasing the costs of insurance premiums.” The former doctor, who practiced medicine for 25 years before his political career, has furthermore called Medicaid “a system that has been broken for decades.”

Biggest donors: Richie’s Specialty Pharmacy, one of Texas’ leading pharmaceutical providers, is Barrasso’s biggest contributor from 2011 to 2016, with $44,800 in donations. Second was Murray Energy, the largest coal mining company in America, with $41,781 in donations. The third-largest donor was New York City-based private equity firm Apollo Global Management, with $38,850 in donations.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX)

What he’s saying: As the Senate Majority Whip, Cornyn has been heavily involved with garnering the required support for the repeal vote on Obamacare, urging his Democratic colleagues not to obstruct the Senate as it works to present its new plan. While hinting at the House bill’s completion and a repeal vote before the July recess, Cornyn has told reporters, “my goal is to pass it,” and solidify the 50 votes needed. As a staunch opponent of Obamacare, Cornyn is expected to solidly stand with GOP leadership in his stances on abolishing mandates, addressing rising premiums, and overhauling Medicaid.

Biggest donors: Cornyn’s largest contribution has been through the Votesane PAC, with donations of $63,250 from 2011 to 2016. His second largest donor was from multinational oil and gas corporation Exxon Mobil, totaling $60,600. Third was Mednax Inc., a medical solutions group and one of the nation’s leading providers of health services, with donations of $57,450.

Sen. Robert Portman (R-OH)

What he’s saying: Another Senate Republican who hails from a state that expanded Medicaid under Obamacare, Portman has emerged as a leader of the effort to compromise on the issue. His state’s GOP governor, John Kasich, is actively trying to garner bipartisan support for protecting Medicaid funding. Portman has led efforts to get GOP leadership to accept a seven-year “glide path,” which would allow for a longer transition period in which state governors could figure out alternatives to the program. Yet on Tuesday Portman objected to what he called McConnell’s “arbitrary deadline,” urging lawmakers to take the time to “get it right,” the Columbus Dispatch reported.

Biggest donors: Portman’s largest campaign contributions from 2011 to 2016 came from the Votesane PAC, totaling $303,000 in donations. Goldman Sachs, the large multinational finance company based in New York City, were his second largest donors, with $199,100. His third largest contributor during this period was from conglomerate General Electric, with $157,900 in donations.

Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA)

What he’s saying: An active opponent of the Affordable Care Act, Toomey believes that the House bill’s current plan to replace and repeal it is only a mere first step. While some Republicans are anxious to soften Medicaid cuts, the more-conservative leaning Toomey is among those who want to go even further in reducing future Medicaid spending. His stance, backed by Senate conservatives, calls for a more comprehensive overhaul of Medicaid, which the fiscal hawk has claimed is “growing at an unsustainable pace” and needs to be done away with in order to help check the federal deficit. Toomey has defended the secrecy of the Senate’s behind-the-scenes work on replacing Obamacare, saying that there would be a CBO scoring of the proposal prior to any vote and that even then, there would still be opportunities for further amendments.

Biggest donors: Toomey’s largest donor is also Club for Growth, which contributed a total of $418,416 between 2011 and 2016. Second was the Rothman Institute, the internationally recognized orthopedic care center, which donated $101,300.

Stephen Hawking working on spacecraft that could reach ‘Second Earth’ in 20 years - Independent

 Stephen Hawking working on spacecraft that could reach ‘Second Earth’ in 20 years

The tiny probe could send back images of a planet in the habitable zone of Alpha Centauri, the nearest star to our solar system, about 25 years after taking off

• Ian Johnston Science Correspondent  
• @montaukian 
• Wednesday 21 June 2017 14:34 BST

The renowned physicist Stephen Hawking is working on a spacecraft that can travel at a fifth of the speed of light – meaning it could reach the nearest star and send back images of a suspected ‘Second Earth’ within 25 years – in a bid to save humanity.

In a speech at the Starmus Festival, Professor Hawking warned humans must soon colonise another planet if we are to survive.

One explanation for why Earth has not been contacted by an advanced civilisations from another part of the Universe is that every time ‘intelligent’ life evolves it annihilates itself with “war, disease and weapons of mass destruction”, he said.

And in addition to the chance that we will meet this fate, Professor Hawking said the planet had become too small for our burgeoning population with its “physical resources … being drained at an alarming rate”. Climate change, an asteroid strike or some other kind of cataclysmic cosmic event also pose significant threats.

Saudi King’s Surprise Shakeup Clears Son’s Path to the Throne - Bloomberg

Saudi King’s Surprise Shakeup Clears Son’s Path to the Throne

By Zaid Sabah, Alaa Shahine, Vivian Nereim, and Tarek El-Tablawy

21 June 2017, 1:57 pm AEST

21 June 2017, 11:01 pm AEST

• Prince Mohammed becomes next in line to rule the kingdom
  
• Replaces long-time counter-terror head Muhammad bin Nayef
  

The abrupt shake-up that made Saudi Prince Mohammed bin Salman heir to his father’s throne gives the 31-year-old extraordinary powers to push through his vision to wean the economy off oil and exert his influence in regional conflicts.

Prince Mohammed replaced his elder cousin as crown prince, removing any doubt of how succession plans will unfold following the reign of King Salman, now 81. Even before the promotion, the new crown prince was dictating defense and oil policy, including overseeing plans to privatize state oil giant Aramco.

The move suggests a harder foreign policy line for the key U.S. ally in a region fraught with instability. Prince Mohammed has led the war effort in Yemen against Iran-backed rebels and was a key figure in the decision to isolate Qatar in the weeks after Donald Trump bolstered ties with the kingdom during a May visit.

“Saudi has tried to assert its authority over a range of regional events, and by cementing the question of succession at this time, the region is on notice that this direction will be pursued for the long term," said Rodger Shanahan, a research fellow at the Lowy Institute for International Policy in Sydney. The crown prince "has been a very public proponent of a robust Saudi presence in the region."

In the succession overhaul announced by royal decree hours after the dawn meal that starts the daily fast in the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, the previous Crown Prince Muhammad bin Nayef, 57, was relieved of all positions.

Redrawing Succession

State television showed Prince Mohammed kissing the hands of his sidelined cousin, portraying a smooth handover and laying to rest concern there might be a power struggle for the throne in the future. Thirty-one of the 34 members in the Allegiance Council, which decides on matters of succession, voted in favor of the appointment.

Privately, some Saudis expressed concerns about the speed and totality of the changes, saying it was excessive to remove Muhammad bin Nayef, the kingdom’s top counter-terrorism official, from his role as interior minister. Credited with restoring stability following an Al-Qaeda bombing campaign in the early 2000s, the prince also kept the kingdom relatively safe against Islamic State militants. He survived an assassination attempt by an Al-Qaeda linked suicide bomber in 2009.

“Muhammed bin Nayef was Washington’s man in Riyadh for a long time,” said Peter Salisbury, a fellow at Chatham House, an international affairs research group in London. “The security establishment will be unhappy he’s gone, more so because the new crown prince has really cut out institutions and is building a direct relationship with the White House.”

Consolidating Grip

Investors, though, cheered the development for the political stability it affirms in the Middle East’s biggest economy. Stocks traded in Riyadh rallied 5.5 percent in the largest advance worldwide, also as MSCI Inc. included the kingdom in its watch-list for a potential upgrade to its emerging markets index.

For more on oil policy implications of Saudi shakeup, click here.

The succession plan “removes impediments that he had, in that he had someone more senior to him who was perhaps a bit more conservative. Now he’ll have a freer hand," said Ghanem Nuseibeh, London-based founder of Cornerstone Global Associates.

Prince Mohammed’s rise to power has accelerated since his father took the throne in early 2015 following the death of King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz Al Saud. Popularly known as MBS, he was catapulted into the global spotlight after unveiling an unprecedented strategy more than a year ago to end Saudi Arabia’s “addiction” to oil by 2030.

OPEC’s biggest producer is grappling with a 60 percent drop in crude prices in the past three years that’s forced budget cuts and compelled the government to tap bond markets as its fiscal shortfall ballooned about 15 percent of economic output.

Foreign Policy

Abroad, an emboldened Prince Mohammed raises the stakes for Iran, which Riyadh says is aggressively trying to spread its influence in the region through supporting Shiite movements and sponsoring terror. The prince is a staunch opponent of dialogue with Iran, a position backed by Trump, who’s been dialing back the Obama administration’s warming relations with the Islamic republic.

For more on Prince Mohammed, click here.

Given who’s calling the shots in Riyadh and Washington, “it is not really a question of if but rather of when a new escalation with Iran starts,” said Olivier Jakob, managing director of consultant Petromatrix GmbH. “Under his watch, Saudi Arabia has developed aggressive foreign policies and he has not been shy about making strong statements against Iran.”

In the decrees announced Wednesday, King Salman also retroactively reinstated all allowances and bonuses that were canceled or suspended to civil servants and military personnel.

The royal orders didn’t name a new Deputy Crown Prince, leaving the post of second in line to the throne vacant. They also included a change to the kingdom’s basic law, stipulating that going forward, the King and the Crown Prince cannot be from the same branch of the royal family. That means that any third in line to the throne would need to be from a different family branch than King Salman and his son.

What Are the Odds of a U.S.-China War? - Wall street Journal

SHANGHAI—Two fiery nationalists— Xi Jinping and Donald Trump —now occupy the seats of power in Beijing and Washington.

In their mission to make their countries great again, one pursues the “China Dream”, one “America First.” Both see the other as the chief obstacle to their ambition; they’re locked into a zero-sum competition.

Halting efforts to cooperate on North Korea have papered over deep tensions on a range of issues including the South China Sea.

Are the U.S. and China headed for war? That has been the recent hot question in China circles, spurred by a deluge of books that handicap the chances.

Graham Allison, the Harvard professor who popularized the term “Thucydides Trap” to describe the risk of conflict when a rising power challenges the incumbent, isn’t optimistic.

Thucydides, the Athenian historian and general, summarized the causes of the Peloponnesian War (431-404 B.C.) in a single line of a monumental history: It was the rise of Athens and the fear that this inspired in Sparta, he wrote, that made conflict inevitable.

War has resulted in 12 out of 16 similar setups over the past 500 years, Mr. Allison asserts, including Germany’s challenge to Britain that led to World War I.

China Drifts Into a U.S. Vacuum in Asia

China is building its influence in Asia more by default than design, making the region’s power brokers nervous as the U.S. retreats.

CLICK TO READ STORY

China Sees a Manufacturing Future—in America

A shoe manufacturer in China’s factory belt is scouting for a location in the U.S. for its newest machinery as manufacturing trends shift in America’s favor. One problem: a lack of skilled U.S. workers.

CLICK TO READ STORY

To China, America Finally Looks Vulnerable

China’s all-out effort against a U.S. antimissile battery in South Korea is ultimately about weakening a U.S. alliance network it sees as a hostile chain of containment.

CLICK TO READ STORY

Are U.S., China Headed for ‘Hot War’ on Trade?

Between the antitrade forces gathering in the White House and Chinese mercantilism, the stage is set for a titanic tug-of-war that risks splintering the U.S.-led global trading system.

China Gloats as Trump Squanders U.S. Soft Power

As the ideological shift in Washington threatens to undermine U.S. influence in a region it transformed, Beijing sees Donald Trump as a godsend.

South Korea’s Impossible Bargain: China Trade or U.S. Protection

China’s subtle economic retribution in the wake of plans for a U.S. antimissile system presents Seoul with a stark choice none of America’s partners in the region want to make: protection or prosperity.

For China, a Rethink on Donald Trump

Chinese policy makers respect—even admire—a tough negotiator. That’s how they first thought about the challenge of Donald Trump. By now, it must be dawning on them how badly they may have misread him.

A U.S.-China Role Switch: Who’s the Globalist Now?

As Donald Trump attempts to stir the masses with stridently nationalistic language, Xi Jinping positions himself as a leader of globalization.

A Trade War With China Could Lead to Shooting

Provocations by President-elect Trump over trade and territory could escalate into armed conflict between Washington and Beijing.

CHINA'S WORLD

In a new book that bears the ominous title “Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides’s Trap?” he lays out how conflicts over trade, the South China Sea or cyberspace could all spin out of control.

It is “frighteningly easy to develop scenarios in which American and Chinese soldiers are killing each other,” he writes

Nonsense, responds the noted Sinologist Arthur Waldron, a history professor at the University of Pennsylvania. War is by no means ordained.

In a caustic review of Mr. Allison’s book, he declares that the Thucydides Trap is a fallacy. Dig deeper into Thucydides’s text, he argues, and it becomes clear that Sparta, though warlike, tried to head off confrontation with Athens, at one point suggesting a simple compromise.

There’s much more here than an academic dispute over classical history.

Fundamentally, the two professors disagree in their estimates of China’s rise, and thus the severity of the challenge it represents to the U.S.-led order that has kept the peace since World War II.

Mr. Allison focuses on data showing China’s wealth and power soaring ever up.

Mr. Waldron dwells on figures that indicate China’s crippling vulnerabilities. He mentions chronic water shortages and energy wastage. Others point to an alarming surge in corporate debt and an aging population that could stall, or even reverse, growth.

Those who live in China, rather than observe it from afar, juggle both perspectives daily.

Inhale the toxic air in almost any city and its clear why wealthy Chinese are fleeing.

Yet, testifying to China’s creative energy are the fleets of emerald, blue and fluorescent orange bicycles that have overrun the same cities in a matter of months as multiple startups have jumped into a bike-sharing business powered by smartphone apps.

China is choking to death; China is vibrant. Both are true. Washington’s challenge is to make sense of these contradictions, and steer a policy course that avoids the extremes of capitulation and reckless belligerence.

The Obama administration was timid; Beijing seized the opportunity to start turning the South China Sea into a Chinese lake.

To the extent that the Trump administration has a China policy, it’s on hold due to North Korea.

Mr. Trump has suspended the verbal hostilities he unleashed on the campaign trail in hopes that his Chinese counterpart will use his influence to halt Pyongyang’s nuclear program. If, as seems likely, Mr. Xi can’t, or won’t, deliver a solution this truce could quickly crumble.

Influential voices are urging a hard line. Ely Ratner, a senior fellow at the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations, recommended last week the U.S. should consider basing troops on disputed South China Sea islands. Whether the White House takes that inflammatory suggestion, once its disillusion with Beijing’s North Korea efforts sets in, expect renewed bellicosity on issues from trade to Taiwan.

There’s little doubt about Chinese intentions. As the journalist Howard French points out in his erudite book “Everything Under the Heavens: How the Past Helps Shape China’s Push for Global Power,” China aspires to restore its position at the pinnacle of East Asia.

The coming decades, he writes, will involve “a certain amount of yielding to China.”

How much will depend on a fine understanding of Chinese capabilities. While China has made giant leaps in military technology—enough to strike U.S. aircraft carriers—it will become progressively harder and more expensive to advance further.

In a speech two years ago, Mr. Xi insisted that “there is no such thing as the so-called Thucydides trap.” But he went on to warn against strategic miscalculations by unnamed “major countries” that “might create such traps.”

The next few years will be perilous: The risks of conflict can’t simply be dismissed. Mr. Waldron, though, is confident that Chinese leaders would quickly smother any unintended conflict rather than escalate and risk their country’s ruin.

“They are, after all, not idiots,” he writes.

Write to Andrew Browne at andrew.browne@wsj.com