Supreme Court To Decide Fate Of Checks And Balances

U.S. Supreme Court

By Nathan Mehrens: President Obama’s January 2012 decision to unilaterally declare the Senate in recess and install three Members to the National Labor Relations Board stands as one of the most egregious usurpations of power in our history.

Using a purported power under the Constitution’s recess appointment clause, the President steamrolled the constitutional advice and consent process, seizing away the Senate’s confirmation duties.

The legality of the Obama appointments, and the more than 200-year-old Senate confirmation check will be tested as the Supreme Court recently announced that they will review the NLRB v. Noel Canning case, which challenges these appointments.

The consequences that this case has for our system of limited government with its constitutionally mandated checks and balances cannot be overstated. If the President is allowed to bypass the Senate and unilaterally install appointees, a key limit on the power of the presidency will be lost and the center of gravity for federal power will move even further toward the Executive Branch and away from Congress and the people.

If the Court fails to uphold Canning, there will no longer be a limit on the President’s recess appointment powers effectively rendering the entire principle of Senate confirmation meaningless. The recess exception then swallows the rule, allowing the President to make appointments whenever he deems the Senate is “unavailable,” such as during lunch, over the weekend, or perhaps after hours on a Thursday. Little if any incentive will exist for the President to submit nominees to the Senate. He will simply install them by his own command.

Eviscerating the confirmation check on the President’s appointment power is also likely to affect the type of appointees that the President chooses. It is exactly because the President is required to work with the Senate to confirm his nominees, he is forced, to submit nominees that are likely to be confirmed.

Consider Tom Perez, Obama’s nominee for U.S. Secretary of Labor. Due to his radical past and views, the Senate is currently carefully reviewing his record and has delayed his confirmation vote. If the President can unilaterally install Perez and other nominees like him, then no meaningful review of their records will occur. Presidents will be able to appoint people like Perez to wield enormous power on a whim because confirmation is not required.

Presidents name hundreds of appointees into positions requiring confirmation. These positions range from the Secretary of the Treasury to administrators of agencies that generally fly under the radar.

The power these appointees possess has steadily grown, and in fact has exploded during the Obama Administration as a consequence of the increase in the regulatory power of bureaucracies needed to implement regulatory laws such as Dodd-Frank, Obamacare, and the expansion of regulatory authority for the EPA and other environmental agencies.

These bureaucracies reach deep into daily life, dictating everything from the type of toothpaste label is printed to what your boss can tell you when discussing a union in your workplace.

In spite of Obama having nominating numerous persons with positions and backgrounds that gave limited government advocates significant pause, the President’s nominees have been confirmed with very few exceptions. In fact, the Obama Administration has had little difficulty getting nominees through the Senate with more than 1,500 confirmations since his term began.

But that is not enough for the President, and one can only wonder how far he would push the envelope to install even more radical appointees if the Court were to allow the evisceration of the advice and consent process.

Examples of presidential overreach are legion and the long-standing checks and balances on presidential powers must not be weakened. There is too much at stake to allow President Obama or any future president to amass more appointment power. The Supreme Court must uphold the D.C. Circuit’s opinion in Noel Canning and preserve the constitutional Senate confirmation check on Executive branch power.
-----------------
Nathan Mehrens is president of Americans for Limited Government and a former George W. Bush political appointee to the Department of Labor. A version of this article appeared on WashingtonExaminer.com and NetRightDaily.com.

---

Tags: Supreme Court, to decide, checks and balances, President appointments, U.S. Senate, consent, Constitution, Senate confirmation, check on Executive branch power, Nathan Mehrens, Americans for Limited Government To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

House Speaker Boehner On CBS News: Resistance to ObamaCare Is Hardly “Futile”

(Official Photo by Heather Reed)

“ObamaCare is bad for America,” Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) told CBS News – so bad, in fact, tha President Obama himself has already signed into law seven House-passed bills that repeal or defund parts of it.

Indeed, when the president complained on Thursday that Republicans voted “for nearly the 40th time to dismantle” ObamaCare, he neglected to mention that  Democrats have supported these and several other proposals repealing or defunding parts of this train wreck – and he has already signed seven of them into law. Resistance to ObamaCare is hardly “futile.”

Washington Post fact checker Glenn Kessler pointed to these bills in response to similar claims made by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV). Here’s the list:

• H.R. 4: Repealed the small business paperwork (“1099”) mandate.  Signed by President Obama on April 14, 2011. The paperwork mandate was called “one of Washington’s dumbest ideas” – it would have destroyed jobs and “hit start-ups hardest, not to mention farms, charities and churches.” House Republicans kept their Pledge to America and repealed it. H.R. 4 also reduced exchange subsidy overpayments by $25 billion.
• H.R. 1473: Cut $2.2 billion from a “stealth public plan” and froze the IRS budget.  Signed by President Obama on April 15, 2011. H.R. 1473 undermined ObamaCare by cutting $2.2 billion from the “Consumer Operated and Oriented Plan” (CO-OP) program – a “stealth public plan.” It saved $400 million by eliminating “Free Choice Vouchers,” which The Hill warned “could lead young, healthy workers to opt out” of their employer plans, “driving up costs for everybody else.” And it ensured the IRS wouldn’t receive additional funding for new agents to enforce the president’s health care law.
• H.R. 674: Saved taxpayers $13 billion by adjusting eligibility for ObamaCare programs.  Signed by President Obama on November 21, 2011. This bill not only repealed a devastating IRS withholding tax – it saved taxpayers $13 billion by changing how the eligibility for certain programs is calculated under ObamaCare. Without the change, a couple earning as much as much as $64,000 could still qualify for Medicaid.
• H.R. 2055: Made more cuts to CO-OPs, IPAB, IRS.  Signed by President Obama on December 23, 2011.  This bill shaved another $400 million off the CO-OPs; cut another $305 million from the IRS to hamper its ability to enforce the law’s tax hikes and mandates; and rescinded $10 million from the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) of bureaucrats, to which Republican leaders are declining to recommend appointments.
• H.R. 3630: Slashed billions from ObamaCare slush funds.  Signed by President Obama on February 22, 2012. Republicans fought for another $11.6 billion in savings, saving taxpayers $5 billion from the Prevention & Public Health slush fund, $2.5 billion from ObamaCare’s “Louisiana Purchase,” and more.
• H.R. 4348: Saved another $670 million from the “Louisiana Purchase.”  Signed by President Obama on July 6, 2012. This saved another $670 million by further adjusting a drafting error that made the “Louisiana Purchase” even costlier.
• H.R. 8: Repealed the unsustainable CLASS program.  Signed by President Obama on January 2, 2013. H.R. 8 saved $6.5 billion by repealing the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports (CLASS) program, an unsustainable entitlement program whose phony “savings” were used by Democrats to mask the true cost of ObamaCare. The former Democratic chairman of the Senate Budget Committee called CLASS “a Ponzi scheme of the first order, the kind of thing Bernie Madoff would be proud of.” The bill also rescinded all unobligated CO-OP funds – another $2.3 billion savings for taxpayers.

Boehner’s comments were part of an interview that will air tomorrow, July 21, 2013, on CBS News’ Face the Nation. In the interview, he also said, "If Obamacare was workable, why did the president announce that he wasn't going to enforce the employer mandate?”  And, if ObamaCare was workable, why has the president already signed seven bills repealing or defunding parts of it?

Maybe because it’s not so “ wonderful” or “fabulous” after all.

---

Tags:  Speaker, John Boehner, CBS, Face the Nation, Sunday, 21, 2013, Obamacare, House actions To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Middle East Insanity

Iraq Bombing

Alan Caruba, Contributing Author: There’s not much I like about President Obama’s policies, but I am beginning to think that his resolve to militarily withdraw the U.S. from the Middle East is likely based on his insights into the Islamic mind.

The last U.S. troops left Iraq in 2011 and they are scheduled to leave Afghanistan in 2014. The President has been reluctant to send arms to the insurgents fighting Syria’s regime on the grounds that they are likely al Qaeda or similar jihadist groups. Makes sense to me.

Using drones to target al Qaeda leaders wherever they can be found, Pakistan or Yemen for example, also seems a sensible application of limited force applied with extreme prejudice.

During the course of the nearly nine years the U.S. was involved in Iraq, the U.S. lost almost 4,500 troops there while the cost of Iraqi lives during that period is estimated to be 100,000.

I have been thinking about Iraq because the only news from that horrid nation has been about the constant bombings there. Not that long ago Iraq was front page news every day, but no longer. Recently two senior Arab journalists wrote about the war in Iraq and their views are quite instructive.

JihadAl-Khazen, a columnist for the London daily Al-Hayat, took the view in March that U.S. officials, including former President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Chaney, and others, should be prosecuted and executed for “fabricating evidence to justify the war.” To Western eyes, the actions of the former Iraq dictator, Saddam Hussein, may have had something to do with Bush’s decision which came after 9/11 and had been preceded by the invasion of Afghanistan.

It was widely believed at the time that Saddam had stores of poison gas and it is now believed they were transferred to Syria to avoid detection. According to Al-Khazen, Bush’s decision was based on the “pro-Israel gang of war” otherwise known as the neo-cons in the Bush administration.

Also in March, Abd Al-Bari Atwan, the editor of the London daily, Al-Quds Al Arabi, took the opportunity of the anniversary of the U.S. invasion to opine that Arabs are the victims of a series of ongoing conspiracies against them; conspiracies meant to serve Israel, seize the Arab’s oil, and to sow sectarian strife between Sunnis and Shiites.

Moreover, this moonbat suggested that Saddam had been “tricked” into invading Kuwait by the then U.S. ambassador and several Arab leaders. The notion that Saddam wanted to get his hands on Kuwait’s oil apparently did not occur to Al-Bara Atwan.

I cite these two journalists by way of illustrating the intense level of paranoia and total lack of logic that permeate the Arab mind throughout the Middle East. Apparently nothing that occurs there has anything to do with the intense hatred between Sunnis and Shiites—a hatred that dates back to 632 A.D. when these Islamic factions were formed over the question of who was to be the caliph following the death of Mohammed.

The most recent bombing in Iraq occurred during Ramadan. As the Associated Press reported on July 15, “The pace of the killings has picked up since the Muslim holy month Ramadan began Wednesday, with daily mass-casualty attacks marring what is meant to be a month of charity and peaceful reflections.” What better way to celebrate Ramadan than to engage in the murder of fellow Muslims?

“Violence in Iraq has risen to its deadliest level since 2008,” reported the AP, “with more than 2,800 people killed since the start of April. The spike in bloodshed is growing increasingly reminiscent of the widespread sectarian killing that peaked in 2006 and 2007, when the country teetered on the brink of civil war.”

After being eager to see the U.S. military leave, Ali al-Moussawi, a media advisor to Iraq’s Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, told the AP in late June that “Baghdad would welcome increased arms sales and faster weapons deliveries, along with U.S. training teams to help it confront rising regional instability and terrorist threats.” Much of the violence in Iraq is attributed to its Sunnis. The government there is controlled by Shiites.

“Iraq,” the AP reported, “is struggling to contain a resurgent al-Qaeda that is one of the main drivers behind the country’s worst uptick in violence in half a decade.” Al-Qaeda is a Sunni organization founded by Osama bin Laden. Bin Laden’s close associate, Ayman al-Zawahiri, got his start in Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood and is directing al Qaeda’s present effort to overthrow Syria’s Basher Al-Assad and take over the entire Middle East and the Maghreb, northern Africa’s Muslim nations.

President Obama’s efforts to put some distance between the U.S. and the turmoil in the Middle East are beginning to look like a good idea. Blood will flow in Iraq, in Syria, in Egypt, in Afghanistan, and anywhere else on the map of that horrid Islamic madhouse. It makes one yearn for the good old days of strong dictators who kept a lid on it.
------------------
© 2013 Alan Caruba. Alan is a writer by profession; has authored several books, and writes a daily column, "Warning Signs" disseminated on many Internet news and opinion websites and blogs. He is a contributing author at ARRA News Service.

---

Tags: Middle East, Insanity, Iraq, Egypt, Syria, al Qaeda, Muslim Brotherhood, Muslims, murdering Muslims, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Let's Have Fairness For All in ObamaCare

In this week’s Republican address, Reps. Tim Griffin (R-AR) and Todd Young (R-IN) call on the Democratic-run Senate to allow a vote on their legislation, which would – as a matter of basic fairness – protect all Americans from the mandates in the president’s health care law.

Transcript:
Remarks of Representatives Tim Griffin (R-AR) and Todd Young (R-IN)
Weekly Republican Address, The Capitol, July 20, 2013

REP. TODD YOUNG: Hello, I’m Congressman Todd Young, from Indiana’s Ninth District.

REP. TIM GRIFFIN: And I’m Congressman Tim Griffin, from Arkansas’s Second District.
Equal justice under the law is a basic, founding principle of our country. As Americans, we want to see our children have the same opportunities we’ve had. We want them to work hard and have a fair shot at achieving success. So whenever Washington helps businesses and ignores families and workers, Americans have a duty to speak up.

REP. YOUNG: Recently, the Obama administration announced it was going to delay the employer mandate in the president’s health care law. They took this action, they say, because businesses are having a hard time complying.

Well that’s great news for big businesses, but it’s left many hardworking taxpayers asking, ‘what about me? what about my family?’ After all, the law’s mandates are just as daunting for individuals. And they don’t have an army of lawyers, lobbyists and accountants at their disposal to make sense of it all. The government just put out an additional 145 pages of regulations on the individual mandate alone. How are ordinary citizens supposed to keep up?

REP. GRIFFIN: Republicans understand Americans are worried about the impact of the President’s health care law, so we acted. Because let’s be fair about this: if the president’s going to help out businesses by exempting them from the law, he ought to give the same relief to folks like you.

That’s why, this week, the Republican-led House of Representatives passed a bipartisan bill I introduced authorizing President Obama’s delay of the employer mandate.

REP. YOUNG: The House also approved my bill, the Fairness for American Families Act, which provides the same relief to the rest of the country.

Unfortunately, many Democrats voted to stand with big business and against fairness for individuals and families. President Obama threatened to veto our proposals altogether. We take that to mean he thinks it’s fair to let businesses off the hook while leaving middle-class families in harm’s way.

Well, it most certainly is not, and we urge him to reconsider his veto threat. We also call on Democratic leaders in the Senate to give our proposals a vote immediately in the name of fairness.

REP. GRIFFIN: Republicans will continue to do everything we can to protect all Americans from the president’s top-down, one-size-fits-all, Washington-knows-best approach to health care that is driving up costs and hurting our economy.
The story I recently heard from a 21-year old Hispanic-American who runs a small business in my district is becoming all too familiar.

He currently employs 45 workers, and according to him, he’s ready to hire 10 or 20 more, but he can’t because ObamaCare makes him choose between new, higher insurance premiums or hefty fines. He said “the government should be my partner, so I can help my employees prosper. I can help them more than the government, but I’m literally not able to.”
The whole thing is a train wreck, plain and simple.

REP. YOUNG: Bottom line: the sooner we can delay, dismantle, and repeal the president’s health care law, the sooner we can get people back to work and focus on expanding opportunity for everyone.

For now, thank you for listening.

REP. GRIFFIN: And thank you for speaking out in support for fairness for all. Have a great weekend everyone.

---

Excerpts from early media coverage of the address:
UPI:  “GOP calls for ‘fairness,’ urges delay in individual healthcare mandate”
“Two Republican congressmen called on Senate Democrats Saturday to vote to delay the individual mandate in the federal healthcare law ‘in the name of fairness.’ Reps. Todd Young, R-Ind., and Tim Griffin, R-Ark., said President Obama had allowed businesses to delay providing healthcare coverage until 2015, and individuals should be permitted to do the same.  Young said the president should reconsider his threatened veto and called on Democratic Senate leaders ‘to give our proposals a vote immediately in the name of fairness’… The healthcare law ‘is a train wreck, plain and simple,’ Griffin said.”

CBS News: “GOP: Delay Obamacare's individual mandate, too”
“Griffin and Young touted a pair of bills passed by the House of Representatives on Wednesday that would delay implementation of both mandates by one year to buy people and businesses additional time to adjust to the new law.  ‘President Obama threatened to veto our proposals altogether,’ Young said. ‘We take that to mean he thinks its fair to let businesses off the hook while leaving middle class families in harm's way.’  ‘We urge him to reconsider his veto threat,’ he added, calling on Democrats in the Senate to schedule a vote on the delayed mandates ‘in the name of fairness.’ … Republicans, for their part, have said they'd like to uproot the law in its entirety, a goal reiterated by Young on Saturday.”

The Hill: “GOP urges Senate to delay ObamaCare’s individual mandate”
“House Republicans on Saturday called on the Senate to vote to delay ObamaCare's individual mandate since businesses will not be required to provide healthcare coverage until 2015. … Young and Griffin accused Democrats and the White House of ignoring the needs of individuals by opposing their legislation.  Griffin told the story of a ‘21-year old Hispanic-American who runs a small business in my district’ who says he cannot hire more workers because ‘ObamaCare makes him choose between new, higher insurance premiums or hefty fines.’  Republicans have stepped up their criticism of the healthcare law since July 2, when the Treasury Department announced the delay of the employer mandate. … Republicans quickly turned the argument on the White House, saying individuals deserve as much flexibility as companies.”

CNN: “Republicans argue for extending ObamaCare delay”
“A one-year delay of the Obamacare employer mandate should be extended to the individual requirement that Americans obtain health insurance, two Republican lawmakers argued in their party's weekly address on Saturday. … In Saturday's weekly address, Rep. Todd Young of Indiana called the move ‘great news for big businesses,’ but claimed it didn't go far enough. … Rep. Tim Griffin, who represents Arkansas, said it wouldn't be reasonable to only offer businesses a delay in complying with Obamacare.  ‘Let's be fair about this: if the president's going to help out businesses by exempting them from the law, he ought to give the same relief to folks like you,’ he said.”

Voice of America
“In the Republicans' weekly address, two members of the Republican-controlled House of Representatives - Todd Young and Tim Griffin - are calling on the Democratic-controlled Senate to vote on House-approved bills that would delay requirements put into place by Obama's health care reforms.”

Associated Press
“In the Republican message, Reps. Todd Young of Indiana and Tim Griffin of Arkansas are calling on the Democratic-controlled Senate to vote on bills passed by the House to delay requirements on individuals and businesses by Obama’s health care law.”

---

Tags: Republican, Weekly Address, Rep Tim Griffin, Arkansas, Rep. Todd Young, Indiana, healthcare mandate, fairness, Obamacare To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

The Perfect Storm Is Coming . . .

. . . Obamacare + Tornado = ObamaCareNado.

Another ad from the Carl Rove group which while below their former production standards does warn about the destructive nature of Obamacare. It also reminds of the principle creators (power brokers) who forced this system of healthcare on us without the people or our elected officials even knowing what was in the bill. Democrats overwhelmingly supported this "ghost operation" which negatively affects the American economy, the healthcare system, personal choice and the freedom of every American.

Crossroads GPS:

---

Tags: Crossroads GPS, ObamaCareNado, Obamacare, National health care To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Nevada Family's Constitutional Rights Violated By Authorities

Investment Business Daily: A Nevada family files a lawsuit after police literally seize their house to use as a command post after entering without a warrant and assaulting family members. Isn't this what helped start the American Revolution?

For those who snoozed through civics class, recent news events have provided an education on the U.S.

Constitution, the bedrock of American democracy, assaulted by an administration that views it as obstructionist and irrelevant and by courts that view it as a "living document" — which is to say it means whatever they say it means on any given day.

The contraceptive mandate within ObamaCare has assaulted the Constitution's freedom of religion guarantee in the First Amendment, for one. It has shredded the First Amendment again by confiscating the Associated Press' records and authorizing a warrant branding Fox News reporter James Rosen a traitor.

We have also learned about the Fifth Amendment, the one that IRS exempt-organizations chief Lois Lerner invoked to protect her right against self-incrimination — for trampling on that same right of others.
This administration has also shredded the 10th Amendment principle of federalism, again through ObamaCare, which forces states to do what they don't want to do under powers they don't think the feds have.

Arguably the NSA surveillance program violates the Fourth Amendment, the one that reads: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Speaking of the Fourth Amendment against unreasonable search and seizure, consider the case of the Mitchell family of Henderson, Nev.

The Mitchells filed a lawsuit on July 1 after their home was seized by police who claimed they needed it to gain "tactical advantage" in a domestic violence investigation in the neighborhood.

This act by a militarized police force would also seem to violate the Third Amendment, which reads: "No soldier shall in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law."

According to the complaint, when the police showed up, homeowner Anthony Mitchell refused to vacate his castle as it were, whereupon police smashed through the door, forced him to the floor at gunpoint, then shot him and his dog with rounds of pepper-spray pellets.

Police then allegedly handcuffed and arrested Mitchell in connection with "obstructing a police officer" before occupying his home.

Not happy with seizing one house, police went to the house of Anthony Mitchell's parents, Linda and Michael Mitchell, who lived in the same neighborhood. There they lured Michael Mitchell out of his house by saying they needed his help to persuade the neighbor involved in the domestic dispute to surrender. They then returned to yank Linda Mitchell out of her house after she refused to let them in without a warrant.

As University of Tennessee law professor Glenn Harlan Reynolds argues, when the Constitution was written, the modern day police force with Nomex coveralls, body armor, AR-15 rifles, grenades and armored vehicles didn't exist or they, too, would have been mentioned.

Sounds like "soldiers" to us, and as Mitchell family attorney Frank Cofer states, "After entering the houses, they drank water, ate food, enjoyed the air conditioning. That struck me as quartering." That's because it is.
Our liberties are slowly slipping away, whether it be on the grounds of fighting terrorism, fighting crime or that favorite liberal canard, "if it saves just one life."

We are being constantly reminded why the Founding Fathers wrote the Second Amendment right to bear arms. It was to protect the other nine in the Bill of Rights.
--------------
Author unknown for article on Investment Business Daily (IBD); Shared under Fair Use Doctrine for educational purposes.

---

Tags: Nevada, Constitution, Third Amendment, Fourth Amendment, Bill of Rights, Constitutional Rights, property rights, abusive of power, Investment Business Daily, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Is Canada's Oil Charm Offensive Yesterday's News?

Oil major Shell announced 'it drilled into a discovery in the Gulf of Mexico that is estimated to hold as much as 100 million barrels of oil equivalent. Shell made the discovery while drilling in its Vicksburg exploratory well in deep waters near an area thought to contain five times the amount of the recent find. That's good news for a U.S. economy looking to buffer itself against turmoil overseas.' Good News for the USA as long as oil companies are allowed to drill for the oil

by Daniel J. Graeber: Canadian oil production is expected to be in a boom cycle for the next 20 years or so, fed largely by oil sands production in Alberta. Smaller players in the vast oil sands region are already making a splash with new operations while majors like TransCanada and Enbridge are quickly getting back to work following last month's flooding. Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper said parts of Quebec look like a "war zone" following last weekend's train wreck. With a fight on his hands to counter the dirty oil narrative, his administration, and those invested in the energy sector, may face more combat in the future if the oil sands engine runs out of track.

The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers expects national oil production to hit 6.7 million barrels per day by 2030, more than double the production level from last year. North American oil production is so strong that it's too much for existing pipeline capacity to handle. Canadian energy company Enbridge just got its pipeline services back on stream following devastating floods in oil-rich Alberta. It aims to build the mega Northern Gateway pipeline to British Columbia for energy-hungry Asian markets. On the other side of the country, Harper was forced to deal with the "war zone" left over when an oil train derailed in a Quebec town near Maine, refueling the oil debate on both sides of the border.

CAPP said oil production from Alberta is expected to make up about 75 percent of the production gains through 2030. While no secret to those in the industry, oil sands production has been in the public's eye for the past few years because of the debate surrounding TransCanada's planned Keystone XL pipeline from Alberta through the United States. In the shadow of giants like Enbridge and TransCanada are juniors like Aroway Energy, which said Wednesday it got the nod from the Alberta Energy Regulator to increase production from its Kirkpatrick Lake operations in the province. CEO Chris Cooper said the approval "could not have come at a better time" because oil prices are at all-time highs for the year. The boom from Alberta is such that even OPEC stood up and took notice in reporting this year.

Harper spent last month trying to woo European investors to the Canadian economy. European leaders are considering legislation that would put a black mark on Alberta's oil sands because they're seen as more polluting than other types of crude oil. Canadian Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver said the Harper administration didn't want its "reputation sullied" over oil sands.

Aroway in February said it had almost doubled production from 600 to more than 1,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day in quick fashion thanks to Alberta oil sands. Rival majors like Talisman Energy, however, are slashing their spending already because of higher operating costs. The U.S. oil boom in states like Texas and North Dakota, meanwhile, may leave Canadian companies in the dust. Harper, for his part, was in enemy territory in a European community already debating how it can outdo renewable energy goals it hasn't even met yet. The mid-term outlook for even marginal players in Canadian oil sands, like Aroway, looks optimistic. The energy tides may be shifting, however, suggesting that while production may gain steam, Canada's heavy reliance on heavy crude may run off the rail.
--------------
© 2013 OilPrice.com. This article was contributed to the ARRA News Service by James Stafford, the Editor of OilPrice.com - the leading online energy news site, Its news and analysis covers all energy sectors from crude oil and natural gas to solar energy and hydro.

---

Tags: Canada, Canadian companies, Oil, Oil Charm, oil sands, U.S Oil boom, Texas, North Dakota, OilPrice To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Fast and Really Really Furious

by AF "Tony" Branco

---

Tags: AF Branco, editorial cartoon, Eric Holder, Fast and Furious, tip line, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

‘Premiums… Will Increase’

One Day After The President’s Speech, ‘Experts Predict That Premiums On Individual Plans Will Increase In Most States’
INDIANA: Costs ‘To Increase From An Average Of $255 … To $570 In 2014’

“…experts predict that premiums on individual plans will increase in most states because of the new consumer protections the sweeping legislation requires. The impact on premiums will vary across states…” (“Obama Boasts Of Health Care Savings, But Costs Likely To Rise For Many,” McClatchy, 7/19/13)

INDIANA: “Insurance rates in Indiana will increase 72 percent for those with individual plans and 8 percent for small group plans under President Barack Obama's healthcare overhaul, according to the state’s insurance department. The spike in costs is due primarily to new mandates under the law… Costs for individual plans is expected to increase from an average of $255 per member per month in 2012 to $570 in 2014, when the most aspects of the law go into effect.” (“State Says Obamacare Will Force 78 Percent Increase In Individual Insurance Plan Rates,” Indianapolis Star, 7/19/13)

OHIO: ‘average to cover those costs in 2014 is $420 representing an increase of 88 percent’ “Health Insurance Costs to Increase Significantly Under Affordable Care Act… Based on the proposals submitted to the Department, the average to cover those costs in 2014 is $420 representing an increase of 88 percent when compared to the Society of Actuaries study.” (Ohio Department Of Insurance, Press Release, 6/6/13)

MARYLAND: “Maryland’s biggest health insurer proposed raising premiums for individual policies by an average of 25 percent next year, saying that President Obama’s health law would require it…” (“With Health Law Looming, One Large Insurer Wants A 25 Percent Premium Hike,” The Washington Post, 4/24/13)

“…study finds that insurance companies will have to pay out an average of 32 percent more for medical claims under President Barack Obama's health care overhaul. What does that mean for you? It could increase premiums…” (“Study: Health Law To Raise Claims Cost 32 Percent,” AP, 3/27/13)

• “…the overwhelming majority [of states] will see double-digit increases in their individual health insurance markets, where people purchase coverage directly from insurers. The disparities are striking. By 2017, the estimated increase would be 62 percent for California, about 80 percent for Ohio, more than 20 percent for Florida and 67 percent for Maryland." (“Study: Health Law To Raise Claims Cost 32 Percent,” AP, 3/27/13)

IDAHO: ‘Percentage change, per-person, per-month … Idaho 62.2%.’ “Medical claims costs are the main driver of health insurance premiums. A study by the Society of Actuaries estimates the new federal health care law will raise claims costs nationally by an average of 32 percent per person in the individual health insurance market by 2017. ... STATE Percentage change, per-person, per-month … Idaho 62.2%.” (“States Change In Claims Cost In Health Overhaul,” AP, 3/27/13)

MISSOURI: “Much of the reason for the higher claims costs is that sicker people are expected to join the pool, the report said. In Missouri, the rate is 59 percent; in Illinois, 51.” (“Health Overhaul Will Raise Claims Cost 32 Percent, Study Says,” AP, 3/26/13)

KENTUCKY: “A new study says costs of medical claims would rise an average of 34 percent for individuals in Kentucky next year under the Affordable Care Act. … The cost of medical claims is the biggest driver of health insurance premiums.” (“Report: Under ACA, Ky. Claims To Go Up 34 Percent,” AP, 3/27/13)

---

Tags: Obamacare, Premiums, Will Increase, Higher premiums, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

House Passes Student Success Act | Indiana Says Obamacare Forcing Increases In Health Insurance Rates

Today In Washington, D.C. - July 19, 2013:
The Senate reconvened at 12:15 PM today for a pro forma session and will return for legislative business on Tuesday. Yesterday, every Republican voted against confirming Thomas Perez to be Secretary of Labor, but majority Democrats confirmed him. Also yesterday, the Senate voted 69-31 to invoke cloture (cut off debate) on the nomination of Gina McCarthy to be EPA director. The Senate later voted 59-40 to confirm the McCarthy nomination.

The House convened at 9 AM. They took up amendments and at 11:20 AM voted on and passed H.R. 5 (221-207), Student Success Act — "To support State and local accountability for public education, protect State and local authority, inform parents of the performance of their children's schools, and for other purposes." All Democrats apposed State and local accountability for public education and protecting the State and local authority and informing parents of the performance of their children schools.
Some of the Amendments approved to this bill were as follows - all were by voice votes except where the vote is indicated:
Kline (R-MN), Rokita (R-IN) – Amendment No. 1 (Managers Amendment) – Clarifies that a state opting not to receive funds for a program under the Act shall not be required to carry out any of the requirements of such program and that states and school districts can support civics education efforts, and makes other technical improvements.
Jackson Lee (D-TX) – Amendment No. 5 – States that if funding for awards to states is not sufficient then funding will be targeted to schools serving neglected, delinquent, migrant students, English learners, at-risk-students, and Native Americans, to increase academic achievements of such students.
Reed (R-NY), McKinley (R-WV), Owens (D-NY) – Amendment No. 8 – Clarifies that LEA’s and SEA’s are able to use multiple measures when identifying academic performance measurements instead of the current one-size-fits-all testing assessments.
Benishek (R-MI) – Amendment No. 9 – Encourages states to include the number of students attaining career and technical education proficiencies enrolled in public secondary schools, in its annual State report card. This information is already required to be collected by the Perkins Act, and would simply streamline access to information to the public.
Heck (R-NV) – Amendment No. 10 – Provides LEAs with the option of entering into partnerships or contracts with other entities to implement programs that serve youth in, or transitioning out of, institutions and correctional facilities, and youth at-risk of dropping out of school. This would provide LEAs with the option to partner with organizations that have the existing experience and resources to enhance the effectiveness of services provided by school districts to vulnerable populations through the Neglected/Delinquent program in an integrated fashion.
Scalise (R-LA), Bishop (R-UT) – Amendment No. 12 – States that under Title II in H.R. 5, there would be no federal mandate for States to conduct teacher evaluations.
Moore (D-WI), Wilson (D-FL) – Amendment No 13 – Delays implementation of new Title II formula until the Secretary of Education determines that the implementation will not reduce funding for schools serving high percentages of students in poverty.
Bishop (R-UT) – Amendment No. 14 – Eliminates Subsection C of Section 2111, which allows grant money to bypass states and go directly from the Department of Education to local districts.
Young (R-AK), Gabbard (D-HI), Hanabusa (D-HI), McCollum (D-MN) – Amendment No. 2 – Restores, and make policy improvements to, educational support programs for American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian students which are currently authorized under Title VII of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and would be diminished by HR 5, the Student Success Act. Passed 263 – 161
Luetkemeyer (R-MO) – Amendment No 4 – Expresses the sense of the Congress that States and local education agencies should maintain the rights and responsibilities of determining curriculum and assessments for elementary and secondary education. Passed 241 – 182
Schock (R-IL), Meehan (R-PA) – Amendment No. 11 – Ensures that greater authority and governance are restored to local educational agencies as delegated by their States. It also ensures that the Secretary of Education does not impose any additional requirements or burdens on local educational agencies unless explicitly authorized by federal law. Passed 239 – 187
Brooks (R-IN), Polis (D-CO) – Amendment No. 16 – Clarifies that federal funds may be used for computer science education.
Polis (D-CO), Petri (R-WI) – Amendment No. 17 – Allows charter schools to use grant funds for teacher preparation, professional development, and improving school conditions; ensures that charter schools expand outreach to low-income and underserved populations.
Velázquez (D-NY) – Amendment No. 18 – Requires that applicants consider how to target their services to low-income students and parents, including low-income students and parents who are not proficient in English.
Broun (R-GA) – Amendment No. 21 – Requires the Secretary of Education to include in their report to Congress the average salary of employees who were determined to be associated with eliminated or consolidated programs or projects by the underlying legislation and a report on the average salaries of the employees of the Department according to their job function.
Fitzpatrick (R-PA), Meehan (R-PA) – Amendment No. 23 - Provides a funding condition for state or local educational agency to be eligible for funds, agency personnel cannot facilitate the transfer of an employee if they know, or have probable cause to believe, that the employee has engaged in sexual misconduct with a minor. Agencies must also require employees be subjected to background checks in compliance with the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act.
Cantor (R-VA), Bishop (R-UT) – Amendment No. 25 – Allows Title I funds to follow students to other public schools or charter schools, upon the state opting to allow it.
Culberson (R-TX) – Amendment No. 22 – Empowers States by giving them the opportunity to accept or reject federal grant money. Grant money rejected by State legislatures would be dedicated to paying off our outstanding national debt. Passed 227 - 196

House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) stated after the House passed the Student Success Act (H.R. 5):“When parents have a choice and great teachers have more flexibility, students have a better shot at an education that will help them succeed and pursue their dreams. The Student Success Act provides both. I thank Chairman Kline, Chairman Rokita and all of the Members of the Education and the Workforce Committee for their work, and urge the Senate to take up the bill as soon as possible.

“I remain proud of what we accomplished more than a decade ago, but the simple fact is that our nation’s education policies are long overdue for an update. The No Child Left Behind Act was intended to empower parents with information about their children’s education and weaken the grip of lobbying groups and special-interests on struggling local schools. More than 10 years later, the Student Success Act builds on and adapts some of the things that worked, and changes some of the things that didn’t. Like the original No Child Left Behind Act, which actually reduced the number of federal K-12 education programs under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the Student Success Act eliminates ineffective and duplicative federal programs, consolidating many of the programs that have grown and multiplied in the decade since NCLB was enacted. It protects local schools from new requirements and red tape, and lets school districts identify, recruit, and keep the best teachers possible.

“I’m also pleased the House today adopted Leader Cantor’s school choice amendment to allow states to have Title I funds follow students to the public school of their choice, including charter schools. As the author in 1994 of the first school choice language ever to pass the House and become law, I’m proud that the Leader offered this amendment, and very pleased it was adopted by the House. All children in America deserve the opportunity to attend the best schools possible, and giving parents and students as many options as possible through education reform is an important step in strengthening our economy and making life work for more Americans.”McClatchy reports today, “President Barack Obama assailed Republicans on Thursday for trying to dismantle his signature health care law, saying it’s already providing a benefit of one kind or another to millions of Americans, including a drop in projected premium costs in nearly a dozen states. But experts predict that premiums on individual plans will increase in most states because of the new consumer protections the sweeping legislation requires.”

Indeed, the day after Obama again claimed, “what we've seen is that health care costs have slowed drastically in a lot of areas since we've passed the Affordable Care Act,” another state announced that premiums will go up because of Obamacare.

According to the Indianapolis Star, “Insurance rates in Indiana will increase 72 percent for those with individual plans and 8 percent for small group plans under President Barack Obama's healthcare overhaul, according to the state’s insurance department. The spike in costs is due primarily to new mandates under the law, which requires insurers to cover those with pre-existing conditions and to offer a minimum level of benefits, said Logan Harrison, chief deputy commissioner with the Indiana Department of Insurance under Republican Gov. Mike Pence. New taxes and fees under the law also contributed, Harrison said. ‘This new data regrettably confirms the negative impact of the Affordable Care Act on the insurance market in Indiana,’ he said. ‘The Affordable Care Act requires many Hoosiers to purchase more comprehensive and more expensive health insurance than they may want or need. These rates call into question just how affordable health insurance will really be for many Hoosiers.’ Costs for individual plans is expected to increase from an average of $255 per member per month in 2012 to $570 in 2014, when the most aspects of the law go into effect.”

Previously, we’ve seen reports of Obamacare causing higher health insurance premiums in Ohio and Maryland and studies showing rates are likely to go up in Kentucky, Idaho, Missouri, and other states. As McClatchy writes, “[W]hile Obama pointed to a reduction in premiums in New York state, state officials in Ohio say the average premium proposal for individual coverage next year is up 88 percent from this year’s average price as reported by the Society of Actuaries. In Maryland, CareFirst BlueCross BlueShield proposed a 25 percent increase in premiums next year, after first seeking a 50 percent increase.”

The Wall Street Journal’s Kimberley Strassel points out the overall mess the unpopular health care law has become: “Democrats for three years have comforted themselves with the thought that 2014 would be the year they broke free of the ObamaCare night sweats. Their political washout in 2010, their failure to take back the House last year, all was the result of their having to defend a law that had yet to take effect. Once the law was up and running, Americans would wake up to its benefits. Or so they believed. Instead, it is Democrats who are waking up—to a horror film. Every morning brings fresh news of terror: missing deadlines, programs running of money, premiums set to soar, flailing technical implementation. And this week Republicans nimbly forced them to choose between abandoning core provisions of the bill or renewing ownership of what may prove to be one of the biggest political liabilities in decades.”

As Leader McConnell said yesterday, “[I]f the Administration is concerned with saving people money on their health care, I have some advice for them. Work with us to repeal Obamacare and start over – work with us to implement common-sense, step-by-step reforms that can actually lower costs for Kentuckians. Because jacking up our constituents’ health care costs is bad enough, but to try to then convince them the opposite is happening – that they’ve actually won some Publishers Clearinghouse sweepstakes, well, it’s just as absurd as it sounds. It’s an insult, really. And I know Kentuckians aren’t going to buy it.”

---

Tags: Student Success Act, US House, Indiana, Obamacare, Forcing Increases, Health Insurance, Rates To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Getting Fired Up . . . With E.W. Jackson

E.W. Jackson, Sr.

If your a conservative and especially a Republican and are tired of the "namby pamby" rhetoric of many would be candidates, watch the following "lay it on the line" speech by E.W. Jackson, Sr., the great-grandson of slaves from Orange County, Virginia, who is running for Virginia Lt. Governor in the Commonwealth of Virginia in 2013.

Jackson is an American conservative politician, Christian minister and lawyer in Virginia. On May 18, 2013, he was nominated as the Republican Party candidate for Lieutenant Governor of Virginia in the 2013 election at the state party convention.

Jackson is the founder and current president of S.T.A.N.D. (Staying True To America's National Destiny), a conservative non-profit organization that describes itself as "a national organization dedicated to preserving life, the traditional family and our Judeo-Christian history and values as the Foundation of our Constitution and culture."[2] He is head pastor at Exodus Faith Ministries, located in Chesapeake, Virginia. Jackson has appeared as a commentator on national news networks such as C-SPAN, Fox News and MSNBC.

Jackson served 3 years in the United States Marine Corps during Vietnam War and then attended the University of Massachusetts Boston and graduated in three years.  He went on to earn a law degree from Harvard Law School and practiced law in the Boston area for 15 years. Jackson studied theology at the Harvard Divinity School and became a preacher.

In June 1998, Jackson was consecrated a bishop and moved his family moved to Chesapeake, Virginia, and founded Exodus Faith Ministries. He has taught commercial law at Strayer University's campuses in Chesapeake and Virginia Beach. On July 4, 2010, Jackson established Staying True to America's National Destiny (STAND) as a grassroots political organization with conservative stances on issues such as abortion, marriage, and government.

E.W. Jackson's Convention Speech - May 18th, 2013

---

Tags: E.W. Jackson, speech, video, Virgina, GOP Convention, candidate, 2013, Lt. Governor To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

New York City's Bad Boys

Alan Caruba, Contributing Author: All great cities get compared to Sodom and Gomorrah, the biblical cities known for their debauchery and immorality. In the end, God destroyed both, having found no righteous people living in either city. Surely there are enough righteous people in New York City to save it from electing Anthony Weiner as its Mayor and Elliot Spitzer as its comptroller. At least one can hope.

Political scandals, often involving sex, are nothing new. In a recent Wall Street Journal, columnist Peggy Noonan recounts the story of John Profumo who, fifty years ago, was Britain’s secretary of state for war and fell prey to the charms of 19-year-old Christine Keeler who, at the time was also romantically linked to a Soviet attaché, a spy. The affair only lasted a few months, but when it was revealed, Profumo first lied about it, and then resigned.

What Noonan found significant was that Profumo never again sought political office and, indeed, spent the next forty years helping the poor. He never sought to publicly exonerate himself. He let his good deeds speak for themselves even if most people were unaware of them.

To the question, when is the right time to come back from a big sex scandal, Noonan responds, “The right questions would go something like: "What can I do to stop being greedy for power, attention and adulation? How can I come to understand that the question is not the public's capacity to forgive, but my own capacity to exercise sound judgment and regard for others? How can I stop being a manipulator of public emotions and become the kind of person who generates headlines that parents are relieved—grateful—to explain to their children?”

These are all good questions for Anthony Weiner, a former member of Congress, and Elliot Spitzer, a former state attorney general and Governor of New York, to ask themselves, but the answer they have already reached is that they can only regain their former reputations by seeking public office.

The details of their utter lack of judgment and seriously immoral behavior are, presumably, well known. Weiner sent indecent photos of himself via the Internet to young women whose interest, despite his being married, he was soliciting. Spitzer was caught hiring a prostitute though he too was married. Both, in fact, remain married to some very forgiving wives.

New Yorkers, however, need not nor should be forgiving. Putting aside the failure to make moral choices in their personal lives, the issue for voters is their judgment which, in both cases, is so egomaniacal and so flawed that putting them into either office defies common sense.

Bloomberg, a billionaire, has been elected Mayor three times. New Yorkers, one must assume, like being told they cannot make any personal lifestyle choices for themselves, whether it is smoking or drinking lots of soft drinks. He is a fanatical anti-gun opponent, so the Second Amendment is of no concern to him. When the Times Square bombing by an Islamic terrorist failed Bloomberg initially suggested the culprit might be someone who didn’t like Obamacare!

In early July, Bloomberg unveiled a $20 billion plan to defend New York City from what he says will be the ravages of global warming in the coming decades. The plan will cost the average New York City household nearly $3,000. Meteorologists will tell you that the sub-tropical storm Sandy was an anomaly, not something likely to occur again for decades, if not longer. And there is no global warming. The Earth has been in a cooling cycle for nearly 17 years. In August 2008, Bloomberg suggested putting wind turbines on top of the city’s skyscrapers to generate electricity. He is a loon.

Bloomberg at least had the good sense to surround himself with capable people to run the city and no one is suggesting they haven’t done a good job despite his authoritarian attitude toward the citizens who live there, work there, or visit. In this respect, he is the quintessential liberal.

The thought of a Mayor Weiner should send New Yorkers a very big message about yet another howling liberal, capable of saying anything to advance his political agenda, but mostly as the one person to subject the Big Apple to years of comedian’s jokes. Who would want to invest in a city led by a fool? And a liar whose first instinct was to deny what he had done.

As for Spitzer, as the former NY Attorney General he did a lot of damage to Wall Street, one of the world’s financial centers. He had a disdain for corporate interests as well; in short, another liberal benefitting from capitalism while hating capitalism. As comptroller he would have a lot to say about the city’s investments and financial health.

Both men are lawyers by training. Weiner’s administrative capabilities are unknown. It is one thing to be a representative in Congress and quite another to be in charge of a major city. Spitzer has already demonstrated an antipathy to the means by which the financial health of an institution is maintained.

The warning is always that elections have consequences. If New Yorkers vote either or both of these men into office, they will be inviting future scandal or, at the very least, the well-earned derision of the entire nation.
------------------
© 2013 Alan Caruba. Alan is a writer by profession; has authored several books, and writes a daily column, "Warning Signs" disseminated on many Internet news and opinion websites and blogs. He is a contributing author at ARRA News Service.

---

Tags: New York City, Big Apple, Bad Boys, Sodom and Gomorrah, Anthony Weiner, Candidate for Mayor, Elliot Spitzer, candidate for comptroller, elections To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Common Core Is A Combination of Federal and UN Curriculum On Steroids

Did Janet Napolitano wrote Obama's Common Core Curriculum?

Debbie Pelley

by Debbie Pelley: Imagine the likes of Janet Napolitano writing the curriculum for your child's education. Few people realize this is exactly what has happened under Obama's Race to the Top and Common Core curriculum that establishes international benchmarks.

Remember Janet Napolitano - Obama's Secretary of Homeland Security, the official issuing the bulletin warning law officials across the nation to watch for rightwing extremist activity - labeling returning veterans, and citizens opposed to abortion, firearms restriction, illegal immigration, homosexuality, high taxes, government control, etc. as possible violent antigovernment groups.¹ Napolitano was also attorney for Anita Hill who trumped up sexual harassment charges against Clarence Thomas in 1991, hoping to prevent his appointment to the US Supreme Court.²

A press release states that the centerpiece for Obama's Common Core (Race to the Top) includes "adopting internationally benchmarked education standards." "Internationally" suggests just what it means - curriculum developed through the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Ten billion dollars in grant money from the stimulus bill and the 2009 budget were made available to states and districts that would implement Obama's reform (buying our curriculum with our taxpayer money).³

An International Benchmarking Advisory Group was created by three leading education policy organizations to provide the states a roadmap for implementing international benchmarks standards in the US. The Advisory Group was co-chaired by then Governor Janet Napolitano. The organizations that created this Advisory Group were the National Governors Association, Council of Chief State School Officers, and Achieve, Inc.⁴

The only comprehensive "internationally benchmarked" education standards in existence are those developed by UNESCO and the International Baccalaureate Organization. Schools incorporating these standards are called IB or IBO schools and are found in 31 countries, 1,439 in the United States and 12 schools (not districts) in Arkansas.⁵ UNESCO provided the funding to create the IBO program.⁶

"In one of its first efforts in 1949, the UNESCO textbook for teachers, titled Toward World Understanding,' reads, 'As long as the child breathes the poisoned air of nationalism, education in world-mindedness can produce only rather precarious results. As we have pointed out, it is frequently the family that infects the child with extreme nationalism.'"⁷

So what is IBO? IBO or IB stands for International Baccalaureate Organization. "School board members in a Minnesota district call it anti-American and anti-Christian. Critics argue that IBO's multicultural themes promote values that conflict with traditional Judeo-Christian values. One teacher objects to the program because of IBO's endorsement of the Earth Charter that calls for sustainability of the Earth through, among other things, responsible reproduction and wealth distribution. Many opponents have called it Marxist. Another critic says IBO promotes socialism, disarmament, and moral relativism, and radical environmentalism.⁸

Obama's Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, has been a leader in implementing IBO schools in the nation and in the world. In 2007 Duncan was one of the keynote speakers at the World Conference for heads of IB [International Baccalaureate] World schools. The title of one of his presentations was "Using IB for Systemic Reform in North America."⁹ Duncan is former superintendent of schools in Chicago and was previously the Director of Magnet Schools and Programs before he became superintendent of schools. Chicago has the highest concentration of IBO schools in the country - 24 IB schools in Chicago.¹⁰

Obama's former controversial White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, now Mayor of Chicago, continues with Duncan's expansion of IB schools, saying in Press Releases in 2012 that the Chicago Schools will create 10 new International Baccalaureate (IB) Diploma Programmes in high schools and some wall-to-wall International Baccalaureate (IB) schools.¹¹

IBO was slipped through the Arkansas legislature by allowing IBO courses to substitute for Advanced Placement (AP) courses in 2005 with not one legislator voting against it. However, in the 2007 session some legislators, who had learned about IBO, fought back legislation to encourage more IB schools in Arkansas. At one point one of the magnet schools in Arkansas was in the process of becoming an IBO school. That too was dropped, at least officially.

As a public school teacher in Arkansas I researched education at the state and national level for 30 years. I learned all the buzzwords, the experts, organizations, and techniques used to deceive the public. But it was only about five years ago that I learned all our US educational reforms were rooted in the United Nations. I discovered 142-page booklet that can be found on the web http://www.esdtoolkit.org/ that spells it out. The booklet is entitled, "Education for Sustainable Development Toolkit, Version 2, July 2002."¹²

Among many other such quotes, the author says, "Chapter 36 of Agenda 21 calls for reorienting education to address sustainable development. Reorienting education can appear as an insurmountable task that requires reform at every level of education - reform that would require more funding than is currently available in national budgets."¹³

Despite what proponents say, Common core and Race to the Top curriculum do not consist of rigorous internationally benchmarked academic standards. But like other educational reforms in the last 30 years, they are designed to gain government control over education so as to implement the liberal curriculum. The names of reforms have changed, but the basic philosophy has not. The reforms began with Outcome Based Education, then Standards and Accountability, School to Work, NCLB, and now Race to the Top and Common Core.

The main difference now is that Obama's Common Core Curriculum is a combination of federal and United Nations curriculum on steroids.

---

Documentation:
1. Washington Times: Napolitano bulletin on right wing extremists.
and ARRA News Service:Janet Napolitano Has a List - We Are Wearing Yellow Stars
2. Anita Hill when Hill testified against U.S. Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas.”
3. Press Release on international standards centerpiece of Obama's Race to the Top. US Department of Education, July 24, 2009, "President Obama, U. S. Secretary of Education Duncan Announce National Competition to Advance School Reform."
4. Napolitano co chair of International Benchmarking Advisory Group "Top State Education Policy Organizations Form Expert Advisory Group on International Benchmarking" September 8, 2008
5. IB Schools in Arkansas. 12 schools and Number of IBO schools in various countries and the US
6. UNESCO provided funding for IBO "U. N. influence in U.S. schools by Henry Lamb" See this link for further partnership of UNESCO & IBO
7. See # 6
8. See # 6 and IBO - A Controversial UN Global Education Program . . .
9. Arne Duncan, Sec. of Education spoke at World Conference for heads of IB World schools in 2007 Topic: "Using IB for Systemic Reform in North America."
10. Arne Duncan, supt of Chicago schools, magnet schools & highest concentration of IB schools in the country. "Follow The Bouncing Ball ...From Obama, Ayers And Duncan To Ibo, Bellamy And Soros" and 24 B schools in Chicago
11. Rahm Emanuel & Ten new IBO schools in Chicago press release 2012 and Rahm Emanuel & wall to wall IB schools in Chicago press release
12. The 142 page booklet entitled, "Education for Sustainable Development Toolkit, Version 2, July 2002."
13. page 42 in booklet in number 12
14. Other articles author wrote on IBO:
- IBO UN Global Education Program With Ties to Earth Charter in Arkansas
- IBO promotes Total Disarmament but praises Islam
- IBO - Excerpts from IBO Director Himself, G. Walker
- IBO - Results in Low Scores & Performance
-----------
Debbie Pelley is Retired Arkansas Teacher of 27 years. She is presently a grassroots citizen activist, researcher and writer who advocates for the Arkansans and for transparent and limited government.

---

Tags: Common Core, Combination, Federal Curriculum, UN Curriculum To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!

Obamacare = Higher Costs

Consumers Could See Insurance Rates Double Or Even Triple’
OHIO: ‘Average To Cover Those Costs In 2014 Is $420 Representing An Increase Of 88 Percent’

“Healthy consumers could see insurance rates double or even triple when they look for individual coverage under the federal health law later this year…” (“Health-Insurance Costs Set for a Jolt,” The Wall Street Journal, 6/30/13)

CALIFORNIA: “Medical claims costs filed by individual policy holders could rise as much as 62 percent over the next four years in California under the Affordable Care Act, according to a study released Tuesday by the nation's leading group of financial risk analysts. The costs are the biggest driver of health insurance premiums and that could mean higher prices for residents…” (“Study: Health-Care Law To Increase Cost Of Claims In California By As Much As 62%,” AP, 3/27/13)

• “Katharine King, 59 and a self-employed concert and event producer in Santa Monica, already pays $497 a month for her individual health insurance from Anthem Blue Cross. She wouldn't qualify for federal premium help based on her income. Using the state's online calculator, which doesn't yet reflect the final rates, her premiums could shoot up to nearly $600 a month next year. … ‘It will likely be another case of the middle class kind of getting screwed.’” (“New California Health Insurance Rates Unveiled,” Los Angeles Times, 5/23/13)

OHIO: ‘average to cover those costs in 2014 is $420 representing an increase of 88 percent’ “Health Insurance Costs to Increase Significantly Under Affordable Care Act… Based on the proposals submitted to the Department, the average to cover those costs in 2014 is $420 representing an increase of 88 percent when compared to the Society of Actuaries study.” (Ohio Department Of Insurance, Press Release, 6/6/13)

MARYLAND: “Maryland’s biggest health insurer proposed raising premiums for individual policies by an average of 25 percent next year, saying that President Obama’s health law would require it…” (“With Health Law Looming, One Large Insurer Wants A 25 Percent Premium Hike,” The Washington Post, 4/24/13)

“…Study finds that insurance companies will have to pay out an average of 32 percent more for medical claims under President Barack Obama's health care overhaul. What does that mean for you? It could increase premiums…” (“Study: Health Law To Raise Claims Cost 32 Percent,” AP, 3/27/13)

• “…the overwhelming majority [of states] will see double-digit increases in their individual health insurance markets, where people purchase coverage directly from insurers. The disparities are striking. By 2017, the estimated increase would be 62 percent for California, about 80 percent for Ohio, more than 20 percent for Florida and 67 percent for Maryland.” (“Study: Health Law To Raise Claims Cost 32 Percent,” AP, 3/27/13)
• INDIANA: ‘premiums will rise by more than 67 percent for Indiana’ “A study by the nation's leading group of financial risk analysts shows the biggest driver of health insurance premiums will rise by more than 67 percent for Indiana residents' individual policies under President Barack Obama's health care overhaul.” (“Study: Indiana Individual Health-Claim Costs To Rise,” AP, 3/26/13)
• IDAHO: ‘Percentage change, per-person, per-month … Idaho 62.2%.’  “Medical claims costs are the main driver of health insurance premiums. A study by the Society of Actuaries estimates the new federal health care law will raise claims costs nationally by an average of 32 percent per person in the individual health insurance market by 2017. ... STATE Percentage change, per-person, per-month … Idaho 62.2%.” (“States Change In Claims Cost In Health Overhaul,” AP, 3/27/13)
• MISSOURI: “Much of the reason for the higher claims costs is that sicker people are expected to join the pool, the report said. In Missouri, the rate is 59 percent; in Illinois, 51.” (“Health Overhaul Will Raise Claims Cost 32 Percent, Study Says,” AP, 3/26/13)
• KENTUCKY: “A new study says costs of medical claims would rise an average of 34 percent for individuals in Kentucky next year under the Affordable Care Act. … The cost of medical claims is the biggest driver of health insurance premiums.” (“Report: Under ACA, Ky. Claims To Go Up 34 Percent,” AP, 3/27/13)

---

Tags: Obamacare, Higher Costs To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!