News Blog for social, fiscal & national security conservatives who believe in God, family & the USA. Upholding the rights granted by God & guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, traditional family values, "republican" principles / ideals, transparent & limited "smaller" government, free markets, lower taxes, due process of law, liberty & individual freedom. Content approval rests with the ARRA News Service Editor. Opinions are those of the authors. While varied positions are reported, beliefs & principles remain fixed. No revenue is generated for or by this "Blog" - no paid ads - no payments for articles.Fair Use Doctrine is posted & used. Blogger/Editor/Founder: Bill Smith, Ph.D. [aka: OzarkGuru & 2010 AFP National Blogger of the Year] Contact: editor@arranewsservice.com (Pub. Since July, 2006)Home PageFollow @arra
One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics
is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. -- Plato
(429-347 BC)
Wednesday, April 30, 2014
EPA’s McCarthy Defends Hiding Secret Science from Public
The debate stems around access to data on the health effects of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) on humans. While EPA and researchers have blocked public access to the data, the agency has used it to justify nearly all (98%) of the benefits of EPA air regulations between 2002 and 2012.
“People are entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts. You can't just claim the science isn't real when it doesn't align well with your political or financial interests,” McCarthy said to the National Academy of Sciences, “Science is real and verifiable.”
See what I mean about straw men?
No one disagrees with any of this. What EPA critics want is public access to the data in order to scrutinize, verify, and reproduce the conclusions.
For instance, William Kovacs notes a major problem with the data:The studies used to support the 1997 PM2.5 standard have never been independently reproduced or validated, and EPA has successfully resisted all attempts – including a 2000 Freedom of Information Act request from the U.S. Chamber – to obtain the data underlying the studies upon which EPA based its standards.Nevertheless, in her speech to the Academy, McCarthy reaffirmed her agency's refusal to make the data available to public scrutiny.
Science is an iterative process. It builds on previous work and assumes that no one has all the answers. EPA shouldn’t be afraid to open the data to public inspection.
This is especially important when regulators use this data to impose tremendous costs on the economy — especially in electricity generation -- keep jobs from being created, and hold back investments. The public should be able to see the data and not merely take the word of a federal agency.
Despite McCarthy's claim that EPA critics are attacking science itself, by advocating for openness and transparency we’re defending the scientific process that’s delivered progress to humanity for centuries.
“When we follow the science -- we all win,” McCarthy told the audience, and she’s right. However, that requires that the data be open so the public can examine it.
------------------- Sean Hackbarth is a policy advocate and blogger at U.S Chamber of Commerce. He is a contributing author at the ARRA News Service. Tags:EPA, Gina McCarthy, defends, hiding, secret scinece, from public, Sean Hackbarth, U.S. Chamber of CommerceTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Where Do Conservatives Stand on Immigration Reform?
by Genevieve Wood, Heritage Foundation: As has been widely reported, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said the following at a speech in Ohio last week when talking about his colleagues and why they didn’t want to move on immigration reform: “Here’s the attitude: ‘Ohhh, don’t make me do this. Ohhh, this is too hard.’”
Boehner now says his remarks were misunderstood. Fine. But let’s make sure there is no misunderstanding on where conservatives stand on this issue. The fact is that conservatives are in favor of immigration reform. We simply aren’t in favor of amnesty. Reform should be done in a step-by-step approach, and it should make securing our borders and modernizing our legal immigration system the first orders of business.
But here is the reality of the current environment on Capitol Hill.
Does anyone seriously believe the House can pass a bill, or series of bills, after going through the House-Senate conference process that won’t include amnesty? Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer and the Gang of Eight are committed to amnesty being part of any immigration legislation coming out of Congress.
And does anyone believe President Obama won’t pull out his phone, pen, and other grossly exaggerated executive powers to further reinvent the bill to his liking? Based on his track record of ignoring Congress and making changes to the health care law more than 30 times, why would he not employ those tactics here?
Nothing has changed about what Obama and liberals want when it comes to immigration. They want amnesty first and everything else second—if ever.
Even if the House passed a bill that was primarily aimed at securing our borders, the Senate would add on a host of other measures, including amnesty. The last time we went that route, under President Reagan in 1986, the only aspect of the bill that got enforced was the part giving more than 3 million illegal immigrants amnesty. The border security provisions never got enacted. And what are the results? Today we have an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants living in the U.S.
Not only is the current debate likely leading to bad policy, it is also bad politics.
Understandably and rightly, the GOP wants to win over more Hispanic voters. But they are wrong to think the way to do that is to support some version of amnesty. Polls have consistently shown Hispanic voters put issues such as unemployment and health care ahead of immigration policies.
As I discussed with Lou Dobbs on his show Monday night, the reality is that all this chatter about an immigration (aka amnesty) plan is a surefire way to depress conservative turnout in November, which could be the difference between Republicans winning and losing the Senate. Whatever “pathway” the House GOP might try to create, Obama and Senate Democrats will turn it in to an amnesty superhighway.
We need immigration reform. But we don’t need the kind we’ve tried before that failed. And in today’s Washington, that is exactly what we’ll get. Tags:conservatives, immigration, immigration reform, John Boehner, illegal immigration, amnesty, Heritage Foundation, Genevieve WoodTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Phil Kerpen, Contributing Author: When the Obama administration bypassed the usual competitive bidding rules to issue an emergency $91 million, no-bid contract to Accenture to buld the missing back-end payment system for Healthcare.gov, the justification was that the entire system would collapse without this functionality complete by mid-March.
But was the payment system completed? Of course not. In fact, HHS has now published a timeline for payments using the manual, estimated "interim payment system" through at least the end of September -- more than six months behind the deadline that so urgently required a no-bid contract:
The Supreme Court Helps the EPA Shut Off Electricity in America
by Alan Caruba, Contributing Author: April seems to be the month in which the Supreme Court devotes itself to decisions that have no basis in real science and can do maximum damage to the economy. Invariably, the cases are brought against the Environmental Protection Agency and are decided in its favor.
In April 2007, the Court decided that carbon dioxide, the second most essential gas for all life on the planet was “a pollutant”, the definition the EPA had applied to it in order to regulate it. Now comes word that the Court had concluded that the EPA may regulate power-plant emissions that blow across state lines as per a 2011 regulation, the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule. Not content having put nearly 150 or more coal-fired power plants out of commission, the Court’s rule now gives them the authority to do the same thing to about a thousand power plants in the eastern and western regions of the U.S. that will have to adopt new pollution controls or reduce operations.
In effect, the Court has just agreed to a regulation that represents a major increase in the cost of electricity in 28 states deemed to be polluting the air in those around them. The EPA’s claims that this will save lives they attribute to the alleged pollution is as bogus as all the rest of their claims, the purpose of which is to undermine the nation’s economy in every way it can.
James M. Taylor, the Heartland Institute’s Senior Fellow for Environmental Policy said of Tuesday’s decision that “It is a shame that the U.S. Supreme Court continues to empower EPA to issue nonsensical interpretations of statutes with the primary goal of amassing more money and power.”
Every day the press is filled with reports of environmental groups suing to ensure that no new providers of electricity can be built. The Environmental Protection Agency has instituted all manner of regulations intended to shut down coal-fired plants and they are based on the total lie that carbon dioxide and other “greenhouse gases” are causing the Earth to warm. The science cited is entirely without merit and the Earth is cooling, not warming, and has been for the past seventeen years.
As winters grow colder, it is putting a tremendous demand on the nation’s electrical grid. In a recent commentary, Steve Gorham, the author of “The Mad, Mad, Mad World of Climatism: Mankind and Climate Change Mania”, quoted Philip Moeller, Commissioner of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, “the experience of this past winter indicates that the power grid is now already at the limit.”
“EPA policies,” said Gorham, “such as the Mercury and Air Toxics rule and the Section 316 Cooling Water Rule, are forcing the closure of many coal-fired plants, which provided 39 percent of U.S. electricity last year. American Electric Power, a provider of about ten percent of the electricity to eastern states, will close almost one quarter of the firm’s coal-fired generating plants in the next fourteen months. Eighty-nine percent (89%) of the power scheduled for closure was needed to meet electricity demand in January. Not all of this capacity has replacement plans.”
Before Obama was elected, coal-fired plants provided fifty percent (50%) of the nation’s electricity.
What is the Obama administration’s response to this? It is pouring billions into the wind and solar energy sector that provides barely one percent of all the electricity used in the nation and can never begin to replace traditional plants.
In an April 25 letter from the American Energy Alliance, joined by thirty other organizations, to the House Ways and Means Committee, opposition to the Wind Production Tax Credit was expressed: "The PTC has been a failure for taxpayers and ratepayers. In exchange for tens of billions of dollars in handouts to wind producers, the states with the highest wind production have seen their electricity rates increase nearly five times faster than the national average. In fact, states with at least 7 percent wind power have seen their electricity rates increase at an average of 17.4 percent over the last 5 years compared to an increase of only 3.5 percent for the U.S. as a whole" Why, indeed, are taxpayers being required to sustain providers of wind power that would not be able to stay in business otherwise?
In addition to the fact that you cannot manufacture anything without the use of electricity, a deliberate effort is being made to ensure that vast sections of the nation will not be able to receive electricity to warm homes and businesses in the winter and cool them in the summer. Simply put, people will die for lack of the warmth and coolness needed, not from the phony pollution the EPA cites.
This is the heart of an environmental agenda that views the human population as “a cancer” that needs to be vastly reduced. This agenda is directed from the United Nations and its Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that falsely claims that humans have a vast impact on the climate. They do not. Human activity barely, if at all, affects the climate. What does? The Sun! Add in factors that include the Earth’s oceans and volcanic activity, and it should be obvious that everyone is being targeted for extinction.
In an article, “The EPA’s Science Problem/b>”, Arnold Ahlert, noted in early April that “In a stunning admission, Environmental Protection Agency administrator Gina McCarthy revealed to House Science, Space and Technology Committee chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) that the agency neither possesses, nor can produce, all the scientific data used to justify the rules and regulations they have imposed on Americans via the Clean Air Act. In short, science has been trumped by the radical environmental agenda.”
The Obama administration has done everything in its power to restrict and slow down access and use of America’s huge energy reserves, enough to ensure all the electrical power we will need for hundreds of years to come. The same policy applies to transportation’s petroleum needs. Oil and gas production on federal lands is down 40% compared to ten years ago.
According to the Institute for Energy Research notes that “North America has enough oil to fuel every passenger car in the U.S. for 430 years, enough natural gas to provide the U.S. with electricity for 575 years, and enough coal to provide electricity for about 500 years.” And that’s based on known reserves. They are, however, of little use if the Obama administration continues its efforts to restrict access to them.
In an August 2013 Washington Times commentary, Ben Wolfgang warned that the EPA, the Energy Department, and other agencies’ “working group” quietly raised “their estimated social coast of carbon from $21 per ton of emissions to $35 per ton”, noting that “The dramatic increase greatly alters cost-benefit analyses offered by the EPA when floating rules, allowing the agency to claim that billions of dollars will be saved over a period of decades as a result of proposed limits on power plant emissions, tougher fuel economy standards and other steps.”
The “social cost” is a complete invention, a fiction without any basis in fact. It is a device to further restrict access and use of all fuel sources.
Americans had better wake up to the fact that their government — the Obama administration — is doing everything in its power to cut off the provision of electrical power and access to transportation fuel that it can. And the Democrats in Congress, particularly Harry Reid the Senate Majority Leader, is doing everything to advance this agenda by blocking any legislation generated in the House to counter this agenda.
In November, the midterm elections offer an opportunity to elect enough Republicans to secure control of the Senate and increase its strength in the House.
Let me end with the good news. Despite what the enemies of energy are doing, the energy sector — coal, oil, and natural gas — in the decade ahead is going to grow, going to generate many new jobs, and is going to help dig us out of the huge government debt that too much borrowing and spending has generated.
-------------------- Alan Caruba 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:Supreme Court, Obama administration, EPA, shut off, electricity, America, War on energy, Alan Caruba, warning signsTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Phyllis Schlafly: It looks like all sorts of people are joining the game of rewriting parts of the U.S. Constitution. It started with state legislators who apparently had time on their hands, and now it’s even extended to U.S. Supreme Court Justices.
Justices Antonin Scalia and Ruth Bader Ginsburg made a joint appearance at the National Press Club and added their two bits worth of advice about changing our Constitution. Justice Scalia said he would like an amendment to make it easier to pass more amendments, which probably is music to the ears of those who are trying to pass several or even a dozen new amendments. Currently it’s considered to be a laborious process even to get a constitutional amendment introduced, much less passed and ratified.
However, Justice Scalia added a caveat to his suggestion, saying “I certainly would not want a constitutional convention. Whoa! Who knows what would come out of it?”
As Hamlet bemoaned, “Aye, there’s the rub.” Any new constitutional convention, called as allowed by Article V, would surely attract and include political activists with motives and goals diametrically different from those of Justice Scalia.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg then weighed in with the tiresome complaint of the feminists. Her first choice for a constitutional change, she said, would be the addition of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA).
The American people, the mainstream media, and state legislators spent ten years (1972 to 1982) considering the proposed Equal Rights Amendment. They then let it die after it failed to get the three-fourths (38) of the states that are needed to ratify a new amendment.
ERA was marketed as something that would give new rights (with the false promise of a pay raise) to American women (whom the feminists falsely claim are oppressed by the patriarchy), but that phony sales talk failed. Since the text of ERA doesn’t use the words “women” or “gender,” but instead calls for “equality of rights … on account of sex,” it is now beyond dispute that ERA’s principal effect would be to make it unconstitutional to deny a marriage license “on account of sex.”
Our biggest trouble about constitutional revisionism comes from 93-year-old Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, who just emerged from retirement to try to make himself relevant again. He has just written a new book calling for six amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
Stevens’ most dangerous suggestion is to gut the Second Amendment. Stevens wants to reverse the Supreme Court decision that upheld our right to keep a gun at home for self-protection.
The fundamental right of Americans to own guns was considered by our Founders to be basic to a free society, and abolishing this right has long been a major goal of the liberals who oppose the conservative values at the heart of our nation. Our right to own a gun is not only necessary for personal self-defense, but it’s fundamental to preventing a takeover by a dictatorship, as we have watched happen in so many other countries.
If Congress acquiesces in the states’ petitions to call an Article V convention, you can bet that rewriting the Second Amendment to allow gun control and to forbid private ownership of guns will be a top priority of many delegates. Would they succeed?
Justice Stevens’ plan to achieve his goal is deceptively simple; he just calls for adding five itty-bitty words: “when serving in the militia.” That sounds so innocuous, but it would wipe out individual Americans’ right to own a gun unless actually serving in the militia, and that would be a dramatic takeaway of our current Second Amendment right to own guns for personal self-defense.
Now consider the usual confusion and pandemonium at a national political convention. Consider how quickly one pre-selected and coached delegate could make the motion to adopt those five little words, and the chairman with the gavel could say, “All those in favor say aye, motion carried, the change is adopted,” and bang goes the gavel. Amid the usual convention noise, most delegates would be unaware of what was happening.
It is likely that most of those who are supporting the calling of an Article V convention have never been to a noisy, controversial national political convention. But that is the way it is. If you need proof, watch the video of how the 2012 Democratic convention chairman in Charlotte illegally gaveled through a motion concerning the elimination of God in the Democrats’ Platform.
It’s amazing how some foolish Republicans are working overtime to give the liberals the opportunity and the power to do so much damage to our great U.S. Constitution.
-------------------- Phyllis Schlafly has been a national leader of the conservative movement since 1964. She founded and is president of Eagle Forum. She has testified before more than 50 Congressional and State Legislative committees on constitutional, national defense, and family issues. Tags:Constitution, constitutional changes, unsuspected suggestions, Supreme Court justices, Justices Antonin Scalia, Ruth Bader, Ginsburg, Phyllis Schlafly, Eagle ForumTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Economic Growth Slows To A Crawl While Senate Dems Push Bill That Could Cost Up To 1 Million Jobs
... Gee thanks democrats - pull your heads out #$%@!
Today in Washington, D.C. - April 30, 2014
The Senate reconvened at 9:30 AM today. The Senate began consideration of the motion to proceed to S. 2223, Democrats’ minimum wage bill, which the CBO says could cost up to 1 million jobs. Fortunately, Democrats failed to get the 60 votes needed to take up the bill, by a vote of 54-42. Question now: will Democrat Senate Majority Leader Reid use the nuclear option to pass this "jackboot" bill. A noted absence: Democrat Senator Mark Pryor of Arkansas who has said he opposed the federal increase, did not vote, which has the same effect as a vote to sustain the republican vote. Pryor is fighting to retain his seat against Rep Tom Cotton in a state which has no love for the Obama administration and has grown weary of Sen. Pryor's voting 90% of the time in support of President Obama and Senate majority Leader Reid's agenda. However, Arkansas other Senator, John Boozman, would have voted with the Republican but he is recuperating from heart surgery.
At 4 PM, the Senate is scheduled to vote on confirmation of the six district judge nominees Democrats used the abusive nuclear option precedent they established to invoke cloture on in a series of votes yesterday.
The House reconvened at 10 AM and will consider H.R. 4486 — "Making appropriations for military construction, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2015, and for other purposes."
Yesterday, the House passed the following bills: H.R. 4167 (Voice Vote) — "To amend section 13 of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, known as the Volcker Rule, to exclude certain debt securities of collateralized loan obligations from the prohibition against acquiring or retaining an ownership interest in a hedge fund or private equity fund." H.R. 4488 (Voice Vote) — "To make technical corrections to two bills enabling the presentation of congressional gold medals, and for other purposes." H.R. 627 (403- 13) — "To provide for the issuance of coins to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the establishment of the National Park Service, and for other purposes." H.R. 4414 (268 - 150) — "To clarify the treatment under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of health plans in which expatriates are the primary enrollees, and for other purposes." As a point of interest, 60 democrats joined 208 Republicans in passing this bill. While, 133 Democrats (many extreme liberals) joined 17 Republicans (many staunch conservatives) in voting against the bill. Thirteen did not vote, one of whom, Rep Tim Griffin, was known to be addressing the tragic effects of a tornado in his home district. Prayers and support are needed for the people of his district.
The Wall Street Journal reports today, “The U.S. economy nearly stalled in the first quarter as weakness overseas hurt exports and frigid weather curtailed business investment. Gross domestic product, the broadest measure of goods and services produced across the economy, grew at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 0.1% in the first quarter, the Commerce Department said Wednesday. That matched the second-weakest quarterly reading of the nearly five-year-old economic recovery. . . . ‘Not a great start to the year,’ said Lindsey Piegza, chief economist at Sterne Agee. . . . The latest numbers continue a familiar pattern. The nation's economic recovery, which started in mid-2009, has been marked as much for its choppiness as its slow pace. At several junctures, consecutive strong quarters have raised hopes for a breakout-only to be upended by a slowdown. The overall gains have been too weak to push the unemployment rate back in line with historical norms. The unemployment rate in March stood at a still-elevated 6.7%.”
And so of course Senate Democrats’ answer was to push a bill that could have cost up to 1 million Americans jobs today. As Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said “[T]oday feels like déjà vu all over again. Because even though our constituents keep telling us that they expect Washington to focus on jobs, that’s clearly not what they’re getting from the Senate. Instead, Senate Democrats are pushing legislation today that could cost as many as a million jobs in this country — legislation that the Left flank of their party demands. That’s their response to the pleas of our constituents to do something about jobs — a proposal that non-partisan analysts tell us could cost jobs. But then again, these are the same Washington Democrats who’ve been at the helm of our economy for five and a half years — the same ones who’ve been bragging about a recovery for the past four.
“Well, we learned this morning that the economy grew by just 0.1% last quarter. So I can assure you that if this is the Democrats’ idea of a recovery, the people in my state at least aren’t terribly impressed. They’re ready for new ideas. They’re ready to turn the page from the liberal playbook that just hasn’t worked. It’s clearer every day that the D.C. liberal establishment is completely out of ideas. I mean, they don’t even pretend to be serious about jobs anymore. The clearest proof of that is today’s vote — on a bill that could cost about 17,000 jobs in Kentucky alone and potentially as many as a million nationwide. But Senate Democrats don’t really seem to care. They don’t seem to care that about six-in-ten Americans oppose a bill like this if it means losing hundreds of thousands of American jobs. Because Washington Democrats’ true focus these days seems to be making the Far Left happy – not helping the Middle Class.”
Meanwhile, every day there are more stories from all across the country about how Obamacare is hurting American workers: hospital employees laid off in Kansas, Kentucky, and Michigan, teachers’ hours cut in North Carolina and university professors’ hours cut in New Jersey and Ohio, paychecks of county employees cut in Georgia and those of nurses cut in North Carolina, hours limited for prison guards and emergency service personnel in Pennsylvania, and small business owners in Maryland curbing hiring.
Leader McConnell added, “I think our constituents deserve a lot better than what they’ve been getting this year from the Democrats who control the Senate. They’re already struggling under the weight of Washington Democrats’ ideological adventure from a few years ago: Obamacare. . . . Washington Democrats downplayed Obamacare’s negative impact on jobs, just as they’re doing with this legislation today. And yet, the government’s own nonpartisan analysis shows that Obamacare will effectively drive 2.5 million people out of the American workforce. We’re already seeing the effects in Kentucky, where hospitals are laying off workers and cutting salaries because of the impact of this law. One of the largest health systems in the state recently let go of nearly 500 employees – and its CEO stated that Obamacare was a factor in that decision. The head of another community hospital in Glasgow, Kentucky also said that Obamacare was a factor in his hospital’s recent decision to reduce salaries and cut as many as 49 employees. . . . Washington Democrats promised this law would help the little guy, but it ended up hurting many of the same people it purported to help. We’re seeing the same thing with the legislation before us today.”
Democrats like to talk about helping the middle class, but their solutions, like Obamacare, are already costing middle class Americans, and so their answer is to push legislation that would cost Americans even more jobs. Quoting Sen. McConnell said, “[I]t’s time for Washington Democrats to drop the tired ideological approach that’s failed so miserably the last five and half years.” Tags:United States, economy, economic growth slows, Dems push job killer bill, minimum wage increase, CBO, could cost up to 1 million jobsTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
KS: “Over a dozen hospital employees in Emporia are out of a job. ... cuts come from the ‘negative financial impacts of the Affordable Care Act.’” ANCHOR: “Over a dozen hospital employees in Emporia are out of a job. The cuts at Newman Regional Health hospital in Emporia are due to a projected $3.5 million loss this year. Newman Regional Health said in a press release today the cuts come from the ‘negative financial impacts of the Affordable Care Act.’ 10 full time employees and 5 part time employees will be laid off permanently. The staff cut is expected to save the hospital $1 million annually.” (KTKA-KS, 4/2/14)
KY: Hospital cutting ‘between 39 and 49 employees’ “T.J. Samson Community Hospital today announced that it will cut between 39 and 49 employees. … Interim CEO Henry Royse said the difficult decisions were based on a couple of factors, including a costly roll out of a inadequate financial software program and the impact of the Affordable Care Act.” (“T.J. Samson Cutting Jobs,” Bowling Green Daily News, 4/16/14)
NC:Hundreds of substitute teachers see hours cut. TEACHER: “I need the money. I need to work. I’m willing and able to work and now they’re telling me you can only work for so long.”ANCHOR: “Substitute teachers are trying to find ways to substitute their incomes after recent cuts.” CO-ANCHOR: “Yes, it’s been a month since we first told you the school districts would limit work days for subs to under 30 hours a week, all because of the affordable healthcare act. So what is the impact it’s having? One sub is now wondering how she will continue to survive and make ends meet without that income. Spending time at home with her dog and cat is what Jordan Banjo of Rainville has more time to do lately. Although she has two jobs, one at a local coffee shop and the other as a Pitt County substitute teacher.” ... BANJO: “I need the money. I need to work. I’m willing and able to work and now they’re telling me you can only work for so long.” CO-ANCHOR: “Pitt County school spokesman Brock Letchworth says it’s because of the affordable healthcare act.” LETCHWORTH: “The cost for us would be to provide health insurance for everyone, we’re looking at just over one million dollars, is what I’m told, and that’s the lowest [possible] cost to this school system.” CO-ANCHOR: “He says there are about 400 subs in the district.”(WITN-NC, 3/25/14)
GA: ‘Roughly 130 county workers’ face ‘smaller paychecks’ “Many supporters of Obamacare failed to acknowledge the negative aspects of the president’s signature legislation. One of the harsh consequences is smaller paychecks for some working people. Last Friday, some government employees for Chatham County learned that their wages will shrink as the County Commission approved changes to the county’s personnel policies to hold down the cost of health insurance. Commissioners voted to cut the work hours of part-time, seasonal and temporary workers … The reason? To make sure no one works more than 30 hours a week. ... Roughly 130 county workers — lifeguards, summertime employees in the recreation programs, Board of Registrars and Board of Equalization employees — apparently work more than 30 hours weekly, but less than 32 hours and aren’t eligible for benefits.” (Editorial, “Obamacare Shrinks Chatham County Paychecks,” Savannah Morning News, 4/28/14)
NC: ‘more than 100 CaroMont health nurses learn this week they’re going to lose a portion of their pay ... the change was made to comply with the Affordable Care Act’s employer mandate’ ANCHOR: “Well more than 100 CaroMont health nurses learn this week they’re going to lose a portion of their pay. The hospital said it is stopping a policy that gives some nurses additional pay instead of health insurance and other benefits. CareMont said the change was made to comply with the Affordable Care Act’s employer mandate requiring businesses to offer medical coverage to employees who work 30 or more hours per week.” (WSOC-NC, 4/19/14)
MI: Hospital ‘will lay off 15 employees and eight others will see reduced hours’ ANCHOR: “The Mackinac Straits health system has become the third northern Michigan hospital in the last four weeks to announce layoffs and cuts to balance their budget. The hospital CEO says these moves are necessary to keep up with state and federal healthcare reform standards.” ... REPORTER: “The hospital announced it will lay off 15 employees and eight others will see reduced hours.” (WBPN-MI, 3/27/14)
NJ Professor: ‘The Affordable Care Act, rather than making health care affordable … is making it more unaffordable… our hours are being cut, which means our income is being cut’ “William J. Lipkin, an adjunct professor of American history and political science at Union County College in Cranford, N.J., said: ‘The Affordable Care Act, rather than making health care affordable for adjunct faculty members, is making it more unaffordable. Colleges are not giving us access to health care, and our hours are being cut, which means our income is being cut. We are losing on both ends.’” (“Public Sector Cuts Part-Time Shifts To Bypass Insurance Law,” The New YorkTimes, 2/20/14)
OH:“The University of Akron, in Ohio, has cut back the hours of 400 part-time faculty members who were teaching more than 29 hours a week, said Eileen Korey, a spokeswoman for the school. ‘We have more than 1,000 part-time faculty,’ Ms. Korey said. ‘Four hundred would have qualified for health insurance. That would add costs that we cannot afford.’” (“Public Sector Cuts Part-Time Shifts To Bypass Insurance Law,” The New YorkTimes, 2/20/14)
MD Business Owner: ‘Keeping the number of full time employees here to 49 ... The reason? The affordable healthcare law’ANCHOR: “Taxes because of Obamacare on the minds of many small business owners. Our national correspondent Kristine Frazao takes a look at what companies will need to do to pay them or avoid them.” FRAZAO: “Step into Snider’s grocery store and you may feel like you’ve stepped back in time. Family owned and operated since 1946, it continues to thrive. Now the owner of the store would not speak to me on camera but he did tell me over the phone that like so many other small businesses around the country he’s keeping the number of full time employees here to 49. Manager Terry Sweet is one of them, and says that number will not be getting any bigger. The reason? The affordable healthcare law’s provision requiring businesses with 50 or more full time employees to provide health coverage.” (WBFF-MD, 4/12/14)
PA: Part-time ‘cuts affectedprison guards and emergency service personnel’ “Lawrence County, in western Pennsylvania, reduced the limit for part-time employees to 28 hours a week, from 32. Dan Vogler, the Republican chairman of the county Board of Commissioners, said the cuts affected prison guards and emergency service personnel at the county’s 911 call center.” (“Public Sector Cuts Part-Time Shifts To Bypass Insurance Law,” The New YorkTimes, 2/20/14)
OH: City limited hours for ‘office clerks, sanitation workers, park inspectors and police dispatchers’ and their ‘wages were reduced accordingly’ “In Medina, Ohio, about 30 miles south of Cleveland, Mayor Dennis Hanwell said the city had lowered the limit for part-time employees to 29 hours a week, from 35. Workers’ wages were reduced accordingly, he said. ‘Our choice was to cut the hours or give them health care, and we could not afford the latter,’ Mr. Hanwell, a Republican, said. The city’s 120 part-time employees include office clerks, sanitation workers, park inspectors and police dispatchers.” (“Public Sector Cuts Part-Time Shifts To Bypass Insurance Law,” The New YorkTimes, 2/20/14) Tags:Obamacare, suts paychecks, smaller paychecks, less hoursTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Editor, ARRA News Service: "While the State Dept
has attempted to explain away John Kerry’s ‘apartheid’ comment, in truth, Kerry is the same
idiot his fellow vets recall from the Vietnam War."
Gary Bauer, Contributing Author: As we reported yesterday, while Israelis were in the midst of somber observances for Holocaust Remembrance Day, news broke that Secretary of State John Kerry had said that Israel was at risk of becoming an "apartheid state" unless it acquiesced to the creation of a Palestinian state.
That was is an incredibly offensive comment given the historical background of the modern state of Israel. The modern Jewish state emerged in 1948 out of the ashes of the Holocaust -- the horrific consequences of Adolf Hitler's "apartheid state" in Nazi Germany.
For America's chief diplomat, whose every word is parsed for meaning, to suggest that the administration fears Israel is heading down the path of apartheid South Africa is beyond obscene.
If Kerry is so concerned about the creation of apartheid states in the Middle East, he should direct his comments to Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and Al Qaeda. A future Palestinian state is virtually guaranteed to be an "apartheid state," meaning "Jew free."
Leading pro-Israel groups from the right and left blasted Kerry. Abraham Foxman, director of the Anti-Defamation League, said Kerry's apartheid comment was "startling and deeply disappointing." The American Israel Public Affairs Committee said, "Any suggestion that Israel is, or is at risk of becoming, an apartheid state is offensive and inappropriate."
The Emergency Committee for Israel, led by my friend Bill Kristol, issued a statement saying in part, "It is no longer enough for the White House to clean up after the messes John Kerry has made. It is time for John Kerry to step down as Secretary of State, or for President Obama to fire him." On Capitol Hill the condemnation of Kerry's comment was immediate and bi-partisan. California Senator Barbara Boxer (D) called the remark "nonsensical and ridiculous." Rep. Nita Lowey (D-NY) tweeted, "Inflammatory rhetoric comparing Israel's democracy to repugnant apartheid policy is irresponsible, inaccurate and counterproductive."
Alaska Senator Mark Begich (D) said, "…it's not productive to express his frustration in this way…" Referring to the recent "unity agreement" between Fatah and Hamas, Begich added, "Last time I checked, the U.S. didn't negotiate with terrorist organizations and we shouldn't expect the Israeli government to either."
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) said, "Reports that Secretary Kerry has suggested Israel is becoming an apartheid state are extremely disappointing. ... I hope that President Obama will … call on Secretary Kerry to apologize to the Israeli government and people."
Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) demanded Kerry's resignation. In a speech on the Senate floor, Cruz said, "Secretary Kerry has thus proven himself unsuitable for his position and that before any further harm is done to our alliance with Israel, he should offer President Obama his resignation and the president should accept it."
From the State Department, Kerry issued a press release doubling down on a two-state solution and pushing back against his critics. Kerry said:"I will not allow my commitment to Israel to be questioned by anyone, particularly for partisan, political purposes… I have been around long enough to also know the power of words to create a misimpression, even when unintentional, and if I could rewind the tape, I would have chosen a different word…"Unfortunately, you cannot "rewind the tape," and this is not the first time that Kerry's remarks have undermined the U.S./Israeli alliance. Senator Cruz is right -- Kerry is unsuitable for his position and should step down before he does any more damage.
More Bad News For Barack
If John Kerry had not created enough indigestion at the Obama White House, today's ABC News/Washington Post poll will surely have them reaching for the Maalox. Here are some highlights of the results:
Obama's approval rating has fallen five points in the past three months. Just 41% of registered voters approve of Obama's job performance, a record low for the ABC/Post poll, while 55% disapprove.
In spite of claims about high enrollment, the American people are less than impressed with Obamacare -- 59% of registered voters disapprove of Obama's implementation of the so-called "Affordable Care Act," while only 36% of voters approve.
69% of voters feel the country is on the wrong track, while just 28% say it is on the right track. Democrats have tried to console themselves by arguing that Obama remains more popular than Congress. But, when asked whether it was better to have Democrats control Congress in order to support Obama's agenda or to have Republicans in control of Congress to check his agenda, voters preferred a GOP Congress by a whopping 14-point margin. By the way, these were the results from a poll that oversampled Democrat voters by nine points (32% Democrat, 23% Republican, 38% Independent). In 2012, Democrats had only a six-point advantage.
Nevertheless, we cannot afford to take anything for granted. Democrat committees are outraising their GOP counterparts. Left-wing special interest groups will stop at nothing to maintain their hold on power.
On April 28, hundreds of Unkrainians in Llov on mark the
of the formation of the Ukrainian SS division which
fought for the Nazis against the Soviet Union in WWII
by Alan Caruba, Contributing Author: Events in the Ukraine are now big headlines and the topic of a torrent of commentaries by experts on Russia, the European Union, NATO and related subjects. The whole thing began after protests forced its president to flee to Russia, followed by the Russian Federation’s annexation of Crimea as disputes between Eastern and Western Ukraine broke out.
At the time and still now I thought it was a predictable action and one that did not involve “invading” the Crimea since Russia has for many years had several thousand troops already stationed there to service and protect its military and naval facilities. Rather than wait around for the Ukrainians to resolve their conflict, the Russians took the reasonable, rational action of annexation. Crimea had been a part of Russia for hundreds of years and the Ukraine was as well. The national language there is Russian.
The problems the Ukraine has encountered began with public rejection of its president, Victor Yanukovycha, a fellow who preferred alignment with Russia than the West. Many Ukrainians thought this was a bad idea, but it seems now that many others had no objections. The main objections appear to have been the dismal governance of the nation, replete with major corruption.
The problem Vladimir Putin poses today is the problem that Russia has always posed for any nation on its borders. From the czars to the commissars, it has a long history of imposing control on its neighbors. They were regarded as a buffer zone. Russia had been unsuccessfully invaded by Napoleon and, after being betrayed by the Nazis with whom they signed a deal to split Poland, they wanted territory between them and Europe. When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, those satellite nations declared their sovereignty once again, happy to be free and to embrace Western Europe.
NATO, a European mutual defense organization, was created to respond to what was seen as the potential for Russian aggression. As a member, the U.S. is committed to join in their defense. World War Two was followed by over forty years of “containment” by the West. When in 1992 the U.S. Senate ratified NATO expansion to include nations that bordered the former Soviet Union, it set up the present tense situation. Ukraine, however, is not a member of NATO.
Interviewed in 1998, George Kennan, the U.S. diplomat who was ambassador to Moscow in 1952 and who authored the “containment” policy adopted by the U.S., said the expansion of NATO was a very bad decision.
Presciently, he said, “I think the Russians will gradually react quite adversely and it will affect their policies,” adding “It shows so little understanding of Russian history and Soviet history. Of course there is going to be a bad reaction from Russia and then (the NATO expanders) will say that we always told you that is how the Russians are—but this is just wrong.”
On April 28, the Associated Press reported that President Obama said of increased sanctions on Russia, “We don’t yet know whether it’s going to work.”
Nothing else in the Obama foreign policy regarding Russia has worked since the famed “reset” in his first term so he’s probably right. On a personal level, not just Putin, but most leaders of foreign nations have concluded Obama is too weak and too incompetent to be treated with anything other than the courtesy his office requires.
Thomas Graham, a former senior director for Russia on the U.S. National Security Council staff from 2004 to 2007, recently expressed his view of the current situation in the April 28 edition of the Financial Times. He dismissed a new version of “containment” saying “It will not work. Nor will it advance U.S. interests. Economically, Russian is impossible to isolate.”
That’s true, but its economy is primarily dependent on oil and natural gas sales. If the prices of either were to fall, its economy would go with it. As it is, money is fleeing Russia, investment has halted, and its present threatening posture toward Ukraine may make Putin a hometown hero, but in the rest of the world, he is trouble with a capital T. As for Ukraine, its economy it’s even worse. But Russian pipelines runs through it to Europe. That is reason enough for Russia to show some concern for events there.
Whatever Russia does, the West can be counted upon to wimp out, doing little or nothing. In this case, staying out of the internal dispute in Ukraine may be the wisest course of action.
At home we have watched the influence of the United States decline from the day Obama took office. He has made matters worse by engaging in the reduction of our military capabilities. Until Obama leaves office, there is little that can be done to reverse this lamentable trend.
As the White House and the rest of us watch from the sidelines, we will hear a lot of empty rhetoric. Putin will be called a war monger, but he just wanted to protect Crimea. If he can covertly subvert Ukraine enough to gain more influence over its eastern half, he will try.
I cannot weep much for a nation with historic ties to the Nazis and one in which anti-Semitism is still virulent. This is hardly a nation to which the U.S. should be lending millions with loan guarantees for billions.
What happens to the Ukraine is a matter for the Ukrainians to address, not us.
-------------------- Alan Caruba 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:Ukraine, anti-Semitism, Alan Caruba, warning signsTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Phil Kerpen, Contributing Author: While the national media is mostly focused on the Federal Communications Commission’s latest net neutrality follies (still a regulatory solution in search of a problem), the far bigger policy challenge the Commission faces is executing the most complex spectrum auction in the agency’s history. Unfortunately, the FCC seems more concerned with picking winners and losers than managing the auction effectively.
In this auction, the FCC will attempt to convince broadcasters to voluntarily relinquish their valuable spectrum in exchange for a portion of the auction proceeds paid by mobile wireless providers. And as if this isn’t a big enough challenge, Congress also expects the auction to raise enough revenue to pay for both a new national public-safety network and to provide cash for deficit reduction that was crucial to a recent budget deal.
It would be a major challenge under the best of circumstances, but is headed for disaster because special interests have badly compromised the process. It now looks likely the largest domestic players, AT&T and Verizon, will be effectively excluded from the auctions – contrary to Congress’s express statutory intent – to the benefit of their deep-pocketed foreign-owned competitors, Sprint and T-Mobile. If the FCC doesn’t reverse course, the results will be disastrous for consumers, taxpayers, broadcasters, and public safety.
“The legislation makes clear that any party that is able to meet specific, traditional qualifications to hold a spectrum license is entitled to participate in the auction, and cannot be excluded,” Reps. Fred Upton and Greg Walden said when the spectrum auctions were included in the fiscal deal they negotiated in early 2012. “Recent history has shown the Commission meddling in auctions and trying to ‘shape’ the market not only reduces federal revenue, it harms competition and spectrum policy. The new law puts a stop to this subjective and arbitrary practice. Congress sets the policy, not independent agencies.”
It’s certainly not because Sprint and T-Mobile deserve the help. Their lack of low-band spectrum (below 1 GHz) is the result of a deliberate business decision not to step up in the last major spectrum auction or seek spectrum deals in the secondary market, not a lack of deep pockets. T-Mobile is owned by German telecom heavyweight Deutsche Telekom. Sprint is owned by Japanese heavyweight SoftBank – which is poised for a massive liquidity event in the pending Alibaba IPO. But why should they outbid their competitors when they can rig the rules instead?
That appears to be precisely what these companies have done. As Larry Spiwak of the Phoenix Center observed, William J. Baer, Assistant Attorney General for Antitrust at the Department of Justice, has admitted under oath before the Senate Judiciary Committee to “working very cooperatively—quietly—with the Federal Communications Commission” to develop these de facto bidder exclusion rules.
While that may be great news for shareholders of foreign telecom titans Deutsche Telekom and SoftBank, U.S. workers will be among the losers. An economic analysis conducted by a former top adviser to President Clinton, Robert J. Shapiro, for the Georgetown Center for Business and Public Policy found that, denied needed spectrum, AT&T and Verizon would be forced to manage capacity in less-effective, more expensive ways that would destroy more than 118,000 jobs by 2017.
All the major telecom players have the financial wherewithal to compete on a level playing field. Structuring the auction to ensure AT&T and Verizon have an equal opportunity to bid is necessary to yield maximum revenue for taxpayers and create a process the public can have confidence in.
The FCC should scrap the special deals and hold an honest auction.
------------------ Phil Kerpen is president of American Commitment. He is on Twitter and on Facebook and a a contributing author for the ARRA News Service. Tags:FCC Cronyism, Cronyism, Federal Communications Commission, special interest, auction, stiffs taxpayers, destroys jobs, Phil Kerpen, American CommitmentTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
It would seem the media don’t want you to think so.
President Obama said just a couple of weeks ago that “the repeal debate is and should be over.” We’re now seeing that mirrored in media coverage of Congress.
After her local newspaper reported that Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) said repeal was “unlikely,” her office fired back that she never said that. “She will continue fighting to repeal Obamacare at every opportunity moving forward and replace it with patient-centered reforms,” her spokesman said.
Meanwhile, media outlets have gone crazy over a comment from House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), which they are reporting as: “(To) repeal Obamacare … isn’t the answer.” The next part of the quote, however, is: “The answer is repeal and replace.”
The president’s approved narrative is that Obamacare is the law of the land and therefore, we’re stuck with it. Of course, he continues to say things like “I don’t think there’s been any hesitation on our part to consider ideas that would actually improve the legislation.”
A few things to keep in mind.
It’s been done. There is precedent for repealing a major health care law. It happened in 1989. The law was the Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act of 1988. Once it took effect, Americans didn’t like it one bit. Does this sound familiar? Heritage expert Robert Moffit recalls:…public hostility to the health care legislation was stimulated by the mass disruptions, or threatened disruption, of existing health care coverage; the rapid and excessive cost increases that were initially ignored or unanticipated; and the metastasizing federal bureaucracy, issuing or threatening to issue costly, cumbersome, and intrusive rules and regulations to control Americans’ health care decisions.Obamacare is hardly “settled” law. We can’t forget that “Whole provisions of the law have been nullified, modified, delayed, or suspended,” Moffit reminds us. “Indeed, over the past four years, there have been a total of 40 changes to the law, including various administrative, legislative, and judicial actions.”
These aren’t mysteries. Americans are seeing Obamacare’s effects. And conservatives have alternatives that would restore choice to health care, giving people better value and more personalized care. Members of Congress shouldn’t be shy in advocating the repeal of Obamacare. Tags:Health Care, health reform, Cathy McMorris Rodgers, John Boehner, President Obama, Obamacare, wreaked havoc, Robert Moffit, Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act of 1988, Repeal Obamacare, conservatives, alternatives, Amy Payne, Heritage FoundationTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Dems' Pandering To The Far Left | Extremist Minimum Wage Bill Could Cost Up To 1 Million Jobs
Today in Washington, D.C. - April 29, 2014 The Senate reconvened at 10 AM today. The Senate began a series of cloture votes on six district judge nominees for Tennessee, Washington, Illinois, Kansas, California, and Maine. Majority Democrats are again using the precedent they established after they used the nuclear option to break Senate rules, so that these nominees can achieve cloture with only a simple majority vote, instead of the 60 votes it requires for cloture under the Senate rules. This is a method to pack the current court system with liberal judges to fend off cases by the American people in the future against the arbitrary and capricious overreach of the current administration and to rule against conservative positions in the future.
Yesterday, the Senate voted 51-40 to confirm Michelle Friedland to be United States Circuit Judge for the 9th Circuit. Then, again using the procedure Democrats created via the nuclear option, the Senate voted 51-42 to invoke cloture on the controversial nomination of David Weil to be the administrator of the wage and hour division at the Department of Labor. The Weil nomination was then confirmed by a vote of 51-42.
Also yesterday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) filed cloture on S. 2223, Democrats’ minimum wage bill, which the CBO says could cost up to 1 million jobs. A cloture vote on the bill is expected tomorrow.
The House reconvened at 10 AM today. They will consider today: H.R. 4488 — "To make technical corrections to two bills enabling the presentation of congressional gold medals, and for other purposes." H.R. 627 — "To provide for the issuance of coins to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the establishment of the National Park Service, and for other purposes." H.R. 4167 — "To amend section 13 of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, known as the Volcker Rule, to exclude certain debt securities of collateralized loan obligations from the prohibition against acquiring or retaining an ownership interest in a hedge fund or private equity fund." H.R. 4414 - "To clarify the treatment under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of health plans in which expatriates are the primary enrollees, and for other purposes."
Yesterday the House passed the following bills: H.R. 1501 (Voice Vote) — "To direct the Secretary of the Interior to study the suitability and feasibility of designating the Prison Ship Martyrs' Monument in Fort Greene Park, in the New York City borough of Brooklyn, as a unit of the National Park System." H.R. 298 (Voice Vote)— "To direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special resource study to evaluate the significance of the Mill Springs Battlefield located in Pulaski and Wayne Counties, Kentucky, and the feasibility of its inclusion in the National Park System, and for other purposes." H.R. 3110 (Voice Vote) — "To allow for the harvest of gull eggs by the Huna Tlingit people within Glacier Bay National Park in the State of Alaska." H.R. 4032 (Voice Vote)— "To exempt from Lacey Act Amendments of 1981 certain water transfers by the North Texas Municipal Water District and the Greater Texoma Utility Authority, and for other purposes." H.R. 4120 (384 - 0) — "To amend the National Law Enforcement Museum Act to extend the termination date." H.R. 4192 (367 - 16) — "To amend the Act entitled "An Act to regulate the height of buildings in the District of Columbia" to clarify the rules of the District of Columbia regarding human occupancy of penthouses above the top story of the building upon which the penthouse is placed." H.R. 4194 (Voice Vote) — "To provide for the elimination or modification of Federal reporting requirements." H.R. 930 (Voice Vote) — "To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special resource study of the archeological site and surrounding land of the New Philadelphia town site in the State of Illinois, and for other purposes." S. 994 (Voice Vote) — "To expand the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 to increase accountability and transparency in Federal spending, and for other purposes."
On the Senate floor this morning, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell discussed Democrats’ latest minimum wage proposal: “The American people want Congress to focus on one thing above all else: jobs. So you’d think the Democrats who control the Senate would want to help us advance bipartisan ideas to boost job creation. You’d think they’d actually work with us to address the concerns and anxieties of our constituents. But instead, Senate Democrats are pushing legislation this week that could actually cost — not create — up to a million American jobs. It’s completely tone deaf. Their bill could cost up to 17,000 jobs in Kentucky alone. And apparently, this is what Senate Democrats have made their top priority. It’s not much of a surprise though. As I’ve said many times, Washington Democrats often seem to hurt the very people they claim to be fighting for. When it comes to so many of their proposals, Washington Democrats appear to prioritize the desires of the Far Left over the needs of the Middle Class.”
According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), Democrats’ poll-tested plan to increase the minimum wage to $10.10 per hour “would reduce total employment by about 500,000 workers” by the time it was fully implemented and “[t]he overall reduction in employment could be... 1.0 million workers.” Janet Yellen, the head of the Federal Reserve, said earlier this year that “[t]here would be some amount of negative impact on employment as a consequence” of raising the minimum wage and that she “wouldn't argue with” CBO’s assessment on potential job losses. In a letter to policy makers, a huge list of economists that included Donald Boudreaux and Tyler Cowen, wrote, “One of the serious consequences of raising the minimum wage is that business owners saddled with a higher cost of labor will need to cut costs, or pass the increase to their consumers in order to make ends meet.”
And yet Democrats persist with this job-killing policy. Why? For political purposes, of course. The New York Times wrote last month, “The votes will be timed to coincide with campaign-style trips by President Obama, with the first planned around the time of the minimum-wage vote. The proposals have little chance of passing. But Democrats concede that making new laws is not really the point. . . . Privately, White House officials say they have no intention of searching for any grand bargain with Republicans on any of these issues. ‘The point isn’t to compromise,’ a senior White House official said, speaking anonymously to divulge strategy. . . . Part of the goal is to energize the Democratic base, which will be crucial to turnout in the more conservative states where the party needs to win this year.”
National Journal noted yesterday, “Republicans are greeting the news of a long-awaited vote with skepticism, saying that Majority Leader Harry Reid wants to push the measure as a campaign issue for as long as he can, providing a counterweight to the Republican attacks on Obamacare. . . . Privately, Republicans also wonder whether the reason the bill has languished—Democrats first began talking about hiking the wage before Thanksgiving—is because Reid does not have his caucus in line. Democrats, including Mark Pryor of Arkansas, who also faces a close race, and Tom Carper of Delaware, have balked at the $10.10 rate. Some have suggested lowering the upper limit. But Reid, an original cosponsor of Sen. Tom Harkin's bill, is not open to compromise. ‘I'm wedded to $10.10,’ he has said publically.”
As Leader McConnell said, “Of course, the one big loser in all of this is the American Middle Class. The Moms and Dads and sisters and brothers whose primary concern is paying the bills and putting food on the table. The kind of people who’ve had it worst in the Obama Economy. The very people Washington Democrats should be doing everything to help.” Addressing Senate Democrats, he said, “[I]f you’re ready to get serious about job creation, then there are some easy ways to demonstrate that to the American people. For starters, you can stop pushing legislation that would cut, rather than create, jobs. And you can stop blocking projects like Keystone – things that everyone knows will create jobs. Americans want jobs, not symbolism.” Tags:Democrats, minimum wage proposal, CBO Study, eliminated jobs, survey, economists, more unemployment, unemployment,To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Personal Tweets by the editor: Dr. Bill - OzarkGuru - @arra
#Christian Conservative; Retired USAF & Grad Professor. Constitution NRA ProLife schoolchoice fairtax - Editor ARRA NEWS SERVICE. THANKS FOR FOLLOWING!
To Exchange Links - Email: editor@arranewsservice.com!
Comments by contributing authors or other sources do not necessarily reflect the position the editor, other contributing authors, sources, readers, or commenters. No contributors, or editors are paid for articles, images, cartoons, etc. While having reported on and promoting principles & beleifs beliefs of other organizations, this blog/site is soley controlled and supported by the editor. This site/blog does not advertise for money or services nor does it solicit funding for its support.
Fair Use: This site/blog may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as provided for in section Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 of the US Copyright Law. Per said section, the material on this site/blog is distributed without profit to readers to view for the expressed purpose of viewing the included information for research, educational, or satirical purposes. Any person/entity seeking to use copyrighted material shared on this site/blog for purposes that go beyond "fair use," must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
by Sean Hackbarth, Contributing Author: In a speech filled with more straw men than a corn field in the fall, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy fired back at critics, like the U.S. Chamber, who have called out the agency for its lack of transparency and openness involving scientific data and analysis that it uses to impose costly air pollutions regulations on the economy.
