Why Is The U.S. Reluctant To Bomb ISIS Oil Fields?

by Ryan Opsal: There has been some revealing new information coming out recently regarding the strategy against ISIS. One aspect many find troubling is the apparent failure of U.S. and coalition forces to sufficiently target and destroy oil infrastructure located in ISIS territory, which accounts for a significant portion of the terror group’s annual income. The argument goes, if we want to impact their operations, we should target their primary sources of income, and choke off their operational funds. So, why does ISIS oil infrastructure still stand? Is this the result of an intelligence failure? Negligence? Or, is there a more purposeful reason?

Using data from the Department of Defense, we can see the targeting of oil infrastructure has indeed been a relatively low priority. Buildings and military positions receive the bulk of coalition attention, and only 260 oil-related targets have been destroyed since operations began, out of 16,075 targets damaged or destroyed. And, we now know just how many of these oil-related targets remain. So, what reason could coalition forces have for holding off?

We now know with a high degree of certainty that ISIS receives the majority of its oil income selling unrefined crude, at the pump. There was some idea this was the case, but now it is more certain. This means the ISIS oil trade goes as far as pumping oil from the ground, and then selling it to a long line of waiting tanker trucks that are typically not affiliated with the group. And, while ISIS used to run some marginal refining operations, that appears to no longer be the case. Additionally, we now know the organization’s largest market is not from exports, but through sales to its local, monopolized market in northern Syria. The fact that most of the income is local, and not from exports is even more fascinating when you learn that not only does this oil find its way to local civilians that need fuel for power generation, but that much of the fuel finds its way to Assad’s government forces and the various rebel groups that are arrayed against ISIS itself.

We also now have a better understanding of the extent of ISIS’ diverse revenue stream outside of oil. For instance, last year, in the midst of the chaos in northern Iraq, the terror group turned to robbery, and stole well over $500 million from Iraqi banks. They also onerously tax the locals that are unfortunate enough to live under their rule. And, most surprising are the large revenues garnered from farming on very fertile Syrian and Iraqi land. These sources are far more important than the oft-reported revenues from hostage taking and the selling of sex slaves. This tells us oil is important, but not a silver bullet to disrupt operations.

So, a possible reason for not decisively interrupting oil operations could include preservation of infrastructure for rebuilding after the conflict. This certainly has precedent, since coalition forces have tried this in Iraq and Afghanistan most recently, and territorial shifts occur rapidly in this current conflict. Consider this a lesson learned from Kuwait in 1991.

Another possibility is the US does not want to cause any environmental damage in the surrounding region, having learned another hard lesson from the First Gulf War. This is possible, but highly unlikely. In the face of open war and killing enemies, it is extremely difficult to imagine any government placing environmental concerns over decisive strikes against an enemy. This approach does not have precedent.

Another scenario, which may be the be most plausible, is a play for local fighters to turn on ISIS, prevent further humanitarian issues in the region, and to maintain supplies to rebel groups fighting both ISIS and Assad. A loss of fuel in this region would be extremely detrimental to the local population, which relies overwhelmingly on generators for power, fueled by ISIS oil. The same goes for all the groups fighting ISIS – they all receive fuel from their enemies’ oil pumps. Without fuel, this could hamper the war effort on the ground, and even draw the local population into further compliance with ISIS. Since oil provides the lifeline for many civilians under ISIS rule, this must be taken into account for any long-term strategy in the region.

Some might mock the fact that the U.S. Air Force, before a recent strike, dropped pamphlets on the oil transport vehicles giving the occupants 45 minutes to vacate their tankers before air attacks would commence. This is simply a recognition of how crucial a local population is to combatting insurgencies and terrorist groups. We know the tanker drivers are most likely not affiliated with ISIS in any way, and might even despise the terror organization. They might even be retrieving fuel to be delivered to the very forces that are fighting against ISIS.

It’s incredibly important to keep in mind the limits of military power when waging counter-terror and counter-insurgency operations, a fact not lost on top military officials in Washington. Our understanding as to how to effectively combat terror groups has grown immensely in recent years, and key aspects of this are to allow for the creation of divisions in the territory and the terror organization itself and to ultimately draw in the local population to your side. The former involves containing the group and allowing those divisions to bubble to the surface over time.

This is a key point by terrorism expert Daniel Byman, where he makes the case for “containment” and “de-legitimation” in a scholarly work from 2007. In a sense, this was U.S. counterterrorism strategy globally before 2001. The other component is key, and was effectively used in Iraq in 2006-2007, when the Sunni Awakening went into effect after local tribal groups cut deals with U.S. forces, and turned on al Qaeda. This was a vital juncture in the campaign in Iraq ushering in relative calm in a turbulent part of the world.

It’s important to note that the available information provides a conflicting picture and we can’t be entirely clear on motives at this point. However, the evidence does plausibly point toward forcing realignment of local tribal groups against ISIS, and the maintenance of crucial supplies to resistance groups throughout the region, both corroborated with past actions by U.S. and coalition forces, and counterterrorism strategy. It also remains to be seen if the United States is forced to abandon this strategy given recent attacks and Russian involvement in the region. It may now simply be untenable, for any reason, to forgo attacks on oil infrastructure in the region.
-----------------
Ryan Opsal, an adjunct Lecturer and PhD Candidate in International Relations at Florida International University, authored this article contributed by James Stafford the editor of OilPrice.com, the leading online energy news site, to the ARRA News Service.

---

Tags: ISIS uses oil, sponser, terrorism, why, U.S., Reluctant to bomb, ISIS Oil Fiels, Ryan Opsal, James Stafford, Oilprice.com To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Enumerated Wrongs

by Paul Jacob, Contributing Author: Will the government soon quarter troops in your home?

The Third Amendment prohibits that, sure — but if prominent and powerful Democrats are so anxious to toss out the First and Second Amendments to the Constitution, who’s to say they wouldn’t jettison the Third?

Last year, every Democratic U.S. Senator voted to repeal the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of speech and replace it with new, broad powers for them to regulate campaign spending, thereby speech.

Luckily, those 54 senators lacked the two-thirds margin needed for their amendment.

Now, in the face of “gun violence” and (pssst) terrorism, President Obama, presidential aspirant Hillary Clinton, and true-blue MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough, want to scrap the Second Amendment. How? By first scrapping the Fifth, which guarantees that “No person shall be … deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” They demand that Americans on the so-called “terrorist no-fly list” be denied the Second Amendment right to a firearm, despite the fact that the bureaucratically created no-fly list offers not a scintilla of due process: no charge, jury, trial.

Would this new regulation have prevented the San Bernardino murderers from getting guns? No — they had recently flown across the world.

The frequent-flying Boston Marathon bombers didn’t make the list, either.

But the list did label an 18-month-old girl a terrorist, snatching her rights like taking candy from a . . . toddler.

“Just what will it take for Congress to overcome the intimidation of the gun lobby and do something as sensible as making sure people on the terrorist watch list can’t buy weapons?” Mrs. Clinton asked rhetorically at a campaign event.

Answer: an illegal abrogation of the most fundamental and cherished rights in human history.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
------------------
Paul Jacobs is author of Common Sense which provides daily commentary about the issues impacting America and about the citizens who are doing something about them. He is also President of the Liberty Initiative Fund (LIFe) as well as Citizens in Charge Foundation. Jacobs is a contributing author on the ARRA News Service.

---

Tags: Paul Jacob, Common Sense, enumerated wrongs, Bill of Rights,  To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

1.8 Million Able-Bodied Young Americans Gave Up Looking for Work In November 2015

Arlington, VA – The Patrice Lee for the month of November finds that 13.1 percent of 18-29 years olds are unemployed. The data is non-seasonally adjusted (NSA) and is specific to 18-29 year olds.

Millennial Jobs Report findings:

• The effective (U-6) unemployment rate for 18-29 year olds, which adjusts for labor force participation by including those who have given up looking for work, is 13.1 percent (NSA). The (U-3) unemployment rate for 18-29 year olds is 8 percent (NSA).
• The declining labor force participation rate has created an additional 1.855 million young adults that are not counted as “unemployed” by the U.S. Department of Labor because they are not in the labor force, meaning that those young people have given up looking for work due to the lack of jobs.
• The effective (U-6) unemployment rate for 18-29 year old African Americans is 16.5 percent (NSA); the (U-3) unemployment rate is 14.6 percent (NSA).
• The effective (U-6) unemployment rate for 18-29 year old Hispanics is 13.8 percent (NSA); the (U-3) unemployment rate is 9.3 percent (NSA).
• The effective (U-6) unemployment rate for 18-29 year old women is 10.9 percent (NSA); the (U-3) unemployment rate is 7.2 percent (NSA).

Generation Opportunity National Spokeswoman Patrice Lee issued the following statement:“Youth unemployment is stalled at 13.1 percent for the third month in a row. According to the Kauffman Foundation, ‘new businesses account for nearly all net new job creation’ and ‘companies less than one year old have created an average of 1.5 million jobs per year over the past three decades.’ Our generation is looking for fresh ideas that remove barriers to opportunity and make it easier for startups and entrepreneurs to create jobs."-------------
Generation Opportunity is a national, non-partisan organization advocating for economic opportunity for young people through less government and more freedom.

---

Tags: Generation Opportunity, Patrice Lee, Patrice Lee, November, 2015, 1.8 Million able-bodies, young Americans, gave up looking for work To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

No, Mr. President, the NRA is Not to Blame

California has the strictest gun control in the nation, so Obama's politicization of San Bernardino rings sickeningly hollow.

by Chris Cox: Just when we think that politics can’t sink any lower, President Obama once again proves us wrong by politicizing the tragedy in San Bernardino before the facts were even known. What we do know is that the American people are heartbroken by these horrific crimes — and despite what the president would have us believe — America’s law-abiding gun owners are heartbroken by these horrific crimes as well. At the same time, we are sick and tired of this president suggesting the men and women of the National Rifle Association are somehow to blame.

The National Rifle Association is not to blame. Neither is our Second Amendment freedom. An act of evil unfolded in California. President Obama used it not as a moment to inform or calm the American people; rather, he exploited it to push his gun control agenda. Policy discussions should be intellectually honest and based on facts, not politics. And the fact remains that California has already adopted President Obama’s gun control wish list: "universal" background checks, registration, waiting periods, gun bans, magazine bans and an expansion of prohibited gun categories. But those laws did nothing to prevent this horrific crime from taking place. Nothing.

Here's another fact: the president’s failed foreign policy has made us less safe. And his domestic gun control agenda would jeopardize our safety even further. In California, President Obama had what he wanted — the strictest gun control in the country — and it did not prevent this evil act. The plain truth is that the president cannot keep us safe. And his policies would leave us defenseless. That's why our Second Amendment right to defend ourselves must be protected. It’s not just a constitutionally guaranteed freedom. It’s a natural, God-given, human right.

Unlike the president, regular citizens are not surrounded by armed secret service agents wherever they go. When we find ourselves under attack, no one is there to protect us. That responsibility is ours and ours alone. The American people — including law-abiding gun owners — are scared these days, and for good reason. As a nation, we sit helpless and watch as innocent and defenseless people are slaughtered. President Obama's response is not one of unity, but rather a condescending lecture that we need more laws to restrict us from defending ourselves. Enough is enough with the self-righteous and self-serving demagoguery.

The NRA is calling on the president to stop exploiting tragedies to push his failed political agenda. It's shameful. Given the reality that he's unlikely to listen, however, we will continue to stand and fight for law-abiding gun owners who are both disgusted and heartbroken by these heinous acts — whether committed by madmen, gang members or terrorists. The NRA will neither accept the blame for the acts of murderers, nor apologize for fighting for our right to defend ourselves against them.
--------------
Chris Cox is the executive director of the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action. He article was first shared on USA Today before he sent our his NRA-ILA Alert to NRA members.

---

Tags: IChris Cox, NRA--ILA, Mr, President, NRA not to blame, San Bernardino, terrorist shootings/b> To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Senate Holds the Line on Second Amendment Rights

by NRA-ILA: On Thursday, December 3, the U.S. Senate took up H.R. 3762, the Restoring Americans’ Healthcare Freedom Reconciliation Act. Despite the seemingly innocuous title, the bill set up a dramatic showdown over Second Amendment rights.

The bill was brought under budget reconciliation, an expedited legislative procedure for a budget resolution to meet fiscal targets. Under this procedure, the bill required only 51 votes to pass the Senate and was limited to 20 hours of debate. It was also subject to a rule which prohibits non-budget related provisions from being added.

Anti-gun Democrats were nevertheless determined to exploit both the bill and recent tragedies to attach as many gun control amendments as possible. To proceed to debate on these out-of-order amendments, however, they had to reach a supermajority of 60 votes to suspend the rules. The pro-gun Senate you elected held the line. Every anti-gun amendment was defeated.

Long-time Second Amendment opponent Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) offered a far-reaching amendment that would have given the U.S. Attorney General what amounted to a discretionary veto on gun sales to anyone “appropriately suspected” of having some connection to “terrorism.” Anti-gun bureaucrats would have been empowered to deny Second Amendment rights based merely on their own “reasonable belief” concerning someone’s present or future intentions.

Gun control advocates have made clear, however, that they don’t trust anybody with a gun, and they have slandered pro-Second Amendment Americans as dangerous “rightwing extremists” and worse. Equally clear is that many supporters of this amendment have no stomach for effective measures to keep America safe from terrorists, chief among them ensuring that foreign nationals involved in or supportive of terrorist groups are kept out of America in the first place. Feinstein’s Amendment failed by a vote of 45-54.

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) also dredged up his ill-fated ban on private firearm transfers between friends and many family members. That was defeated by a vote of 47-50 – receiving seven votes less than it got two years ago. Manchin’s background check bill has been a rallying cry for anti-gun activists since its historic defeat in 2013. Fortunately, that cry once again fell on deaf ears as reason prevailed over hyperbole and opportunism.

In the days leading to the vote, gun prohibitionists and their allies in the media had whipped themselves up to a veritable frenzy. The pressure they brought to bear on the Senate was intense. Nevertheless, cooler heads prevailed, backed by sound research and empirical evidence.

No doubt the defeated anti-gunners will be venting their displeasure over yet another round of clear defeats. Please make sure to let your Senators know in the days ahead how you felt about their votes. In particular, those who stood on the side of freedom deserve to hear a hearty thanks and well-done!

---

Tags: NRA-ILA, Anti-gun Democrats, Manchin-Toomey, Joe Manchin, Dianne Feinstein, Background Checks, Nics Terrorist Watchlist To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Five Middle Eastern Men With Steel Cylinders Arrested in Arizona

by Judicial Watch: Five young Middle Eastern men were apprehended by the U.S. Border Patrol this week in an Arizona town situated about 30 miles from the Mexican border, law enforcement and other sources told Judicial Watch.

Border Patrol agents spotted the men crossing a ranch property in the vicinity of Amado, which is located about 35 miles south of Tucson and has a population of 275. Two of the Middle Eastern men were carrying stainless steel cylinders in backpacks, JW’s sources say, alarming Border Patrol officials enough to call the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for backup. A multitude of federal agents descended on the property and the two men carrying the cylinders were believed to be taken into custody by the FBI.

Only three of the men’s names were entered in the Border Patrol’s E3 reporting system, which is used by the agency to track apprehensions, detention hearings and removals of illegal immigrants. E3 also collects and transmits biographic and biometric data including fingerprints for identification and verification of individuals encountered at the border. The other two men were listed as “unknown subjects,” which is unheard of, according to a JW federal law enforcement source. “In all my years I’ve never seen that before,” a veteran federal law enforcement agent told JW.

The disturbing incident comes just days after six men—one from Afghanistan, five from Pakistan—were arrested in nearby Patagonia, a quaint ranch town that sits 20 miles north of the Mexican border city of Nogales. Federal authorities have confirmed the November 17 arrests and a local news outlet published a story that includes an official statement from the Border Patrol. Special Agent Kurt Remus in the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) Phoenix headquarters told JW that the agency’s Joint Terrorism Task Forces vetted and interviewed the six men and determined that there were “no obvious signs of terrorism” so they were returned to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) custody.

However, Special Agent Remus told JW that there is no record of this week’s incident in Amado and that he knew nothing about it. JW also put in a call to DHS headquarters, but received no response. In the last year JW has broken a number of stories involving serious terrorist threats on the southern border that were disputed on the record by various Obama administration officials. Among these is an April report—confirmed by high-level Mexican authorities—about ISIS operating camps near the U.S. border in areas known as Anapra and Puerto Palomas west of Ciudad Juárez in the Mexican state of Chihuahua.

Last fall JW was the first to report on an Islamic State of Iraq and Greater Syria (ISIS) plot orchestrated from Ciudad Juárez to attack the U.S. with car bombs or other vehicle borne improvised explosive devices (VBIED). As a result of JW’s reporting Ft. Bliss, the U.S. Army base in El Paso, increased security. The threat was imminent enough to place agents across a number of Homeland Security, Justice and Defense agencies on alert. A few weeks later JW reported thatfour ISIS terrorists were arrested by federal authorities and the Texas Department of Public Safety in McAllen and Pharr.

---

Tags:  arrests, Middle Eastern men, Arizona, near border, former arrests,Afghanistan, Pakistan, FBI, Border Patrol, DHS, Judicial Watch To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

New State Dept Emails Reveal Hillary Slept Past Staff Efforts to Set Up Intelligence Briefing

Editorial Cartoons by AF Branco

by Bill Murphy: Judicial Watch today released a new batch of emails of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton connected to the Benghazi attack.

• Included is an email chain showing that Clinton slept late the Saturday after the Benghazi attack and missed a meeting that her staff had been trying to set up about sensitive intelligence issues, including the Presidential Daily Brief, on a day she was to make a slew of phone calls to foreign leaders.
• Also included in the documents is an email from Clinton advisor Sidney Blumenthal, sent three days after the attack, describing then-Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney as “contemptible on a level not seen in past contemptible political figures” and a “mixture of greedy ambition and hollowness.”
• The documents contain an email passed to Clinton in the days following the Benghazi attack in which the father of alleged Army deserter Bowe Bergdahl anguishes over the “‘Crusade’ paradigm” which he says “will never be forgotten in this part of the world.”
• An email from former Ambassador Joe Wilson to Clinton expresses his concern about “Christian Dominionists who seek to turn [the military] into an instrument of their religious zealotry.”
• Other emails show approval of an effort to blame an Internet video on the Benghazi attack that aired on the Al Jazeera network.

Read these emails and more details at Judicial Watch: New State Department Emails Reveal Hillary Clinton Slept Past Staff Efforts to Set Up Intelligence Briefing

---

Tags: IState Department, emails,, Hillary Clinton, slept late, Benghazi attack, missed meeting, sensitive intelligence, Sidney Blumenthal, Ambassador Joe Wilson, Christian Dominionists, approval, to blame, Internet video To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Another Case of SJS, The Left's Agenda

Gary Bauer

by Gary Bauer, Contributing Author: In the aftermath of the mass shooting in San Bernardino, California, which left 14 people dead and at least 20 wounded, the FBI, most of the media and local law enforcement are warning us not to jump to any conclusions. This could be work place violence, or perhaps someone offended the shooters, Syed Rizwan Farook and his wife, Tashfeen Malik.

Really? Here's what we know:

• Farook seemed to become more religiously devout in recent months. He recently grew his beard out. His father described his son this way, "He was very religious. He would go to work, come back, go to pray, come back. He's Muslim."
• The Wall Street Journal reports that Farook traveled to Saudi Arabia last year. Authorities believe he went for religious reasons, perhaps to make the Hajj -- a pilgrimage to Mecca.
• According to the Los Angeles Times, a co-worker claims that "Farook recently traveled to Saudi Arabia to meet a woman he met online and returned with a new wife."
• Neighbors say Farook often worked in his garage late into the evening. A man who worked in Farook's neighborhood said he saw "a half-dozen Middle Eastern men in the area in recent weeks," but said nothing because "he did not wish to racially profile" anyone.
• The attack was clearly premeditated. The couple reportedly left their six month-old daughter with Farook's mother in the morning, claiming they had doctor's appointments.
• Yet Farook went to the holiday party at the Inland Regional Center, where there was supposedly some kind of disturbance. He left and returned about 20 minutes later, this time with his wife, heavily armed and wearing body armor. That's not the usual response of someone who gets into an argument at a holiday work party. Perhaps it was another mysterious case of "sudden jihad syndrome."
• Authorities report that they found multiple pipe bombs and other explosives at the scene, in their vehicle and at Farook's house, which they described as an "IED factory." This strongly suggests premeditation, as does the fact that the attack took place at a holiday party just before Chanukah and Christmas.

Yet with all of this information, the entire left is wagging its finger at the American public, warning about "jumping to any conclusions." As one FBI official sadly put it, terrorism "is a possibility, but . . . we're not willing to go down that road yet."

What exactly would it take for our politically correct elites to "go down that road"? The fact that ISIS extremists immediately began celebrating the attack with the disgusting hashtag "#America_burning" should have tipped them off.

This just in. . . Authorities now say that Farook had been in contact "with more than one international terrorism subject." Maybe now the politically correct media will admit the obvious. Maybe.

The Left's Agenda - The left's ideologically-driven agenda was impossible to miss yesterday.

Within moments of the first reports of shots fired, the media rushed to locate the nearest Planned Parenthood facility. Talk about jumping to conclusions!

Meanwhile, as people inside the Inland Regional Center were being gunned down by jihadis, the media were quick to tell us that workers at a nearby abortion facility were safe. (What about the babies at that facility?)

Just days ago, the very same left-wing media and political establishment took two words -- "baby parts" -- and rushed to smear the entire pro-life community because of the actions of one deranged man.

Left-wing reporters were eager to "go there" again yesterday. But no one in the media was calling on imams and other Muslim leaders to stop their outrageous rhetoric and calls for jihad against infidels.

Unbelievably, the only thing the left can get angry about in the aftermath of this attack is gun ownership and God.

President Obama, Geraldo Rivera and other left-wing politicians and pundits immediately attacked the Second Amendment yesterday -- even though all the guns used were legally purchased.

Just what law is the president proposing that would have prevented yesterday's attack? Is Obama suggesting that no Muslim man between the ages of 18 and 50 be allowed to buy guns? I seriously doubt it.

But the attack on faith is even more disgusting -- and very telling about the left's growing intolerance. The cover page of the New York Daily News mocks the tweets of prominent Republicans offering their prayers for the victims with this headline: "God Isn't Fixing This."

One left-wing senator got in on the act too, tweeting, "Your 'prayers' should be for forgiveness if you do nothing -- again."

This should be a wake-up call for men and women of faith. The culture war in America is real and only one side can prevail.

I believe a culture with greater faith in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob -- a culture that values the sanctity of life, all life, including unborn children -- CAN fix this.

America will not become a better nation by marginalizing faith and mocking God. Unless America rededicates itself to the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Jesus, it is very doubtful whether we will survive the increasing danger we face at home and abroad.

This is the God Judeo-Christian civilization is built upon. This is the God who is mentioned in the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence as the author of our liberties.

Continued efforts to mock that God and the values that made this nation are why so many Americans feel they no longer recognize the country they are living in.
-------------
Gary Bauer is a conservative family values advocate and serves as president of American Values and chairman of the Campaign for Working Families

---

Tags: Gary Bauer, Campaign for Working Families, San Bernardino, Jihad, mass shooting, California To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Rep. Babin on Clinton Emails: 'Everything Is Pointing to the Lady's Guilt'

Rep. Brian Babin, R-TX

by Todd Beamon, Newsmax: Texas Rep. Brian Babin told Newsmax TV on Tuesday "it would not be surprising" if Hillary Clinton was indicted in the Benghazi email scandal because "everything is pointing to the lady's guilt."

FBI Director James Comey is continuing his investigation into the Democratic front-runner's use of a private email server during her four years as secretary of state.

Comey's decision on whether Clinton had classified information on the server is expected to have strong implications in the 2016 presidential race.

So far, as many as 1,000 emails have been determined to have contained classified information.

"I've met Mr. Comey one time," Babin told "Newsmax Prime" host John Bachman. "I don't know the man well, but understand that he's an honest fellow and wants to do his job."

The 2012 attacks in Libya killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens and four other Americans, including two former Navy SEALs.

"We want to see justice done — and we've got four dead great Americans and we want to have that.

"We want to find out about the truth," Babin added, "and these emails will lead us to that truth."

He said that Clinton faced a strong possibility of criminal charges because "she dribbles these things out over and over again and tells us one thing — and we find out it's not true.

When asked whether the GOP would support an indictment, Babin said that "all I can tell you is if the evidence points to that in that direction, the Republican Party would definitely support that.

---

Tags: Rep. Brian Babin, Hillary Clinton, emails, builty, Newsmax To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

‘Promise Kept’ By Senate Republicans

The First Significant Repeal Of Obama’s Signature Health Care Law To Land On His Desk’

‘A Major Event In The Senate,’ ‘Fulfilled A Longtime Pledge To Voters’
“Republicans on Thursday night achieved something of a milestone in their five-year battle against the Affordable Care Act: They finally passed a bill repealing the law through the United States Senate. …passage in the Senate means that after dozens of failed tries by Republicans in the House, President Obama will get the opportunity to stamp his veto on a bill eviscerating the law that, in the popular parlance if not in text, bears his name.” (“Promise Kept’: The Senate Finally Votes to Repeal Obamacare,” The Atlantic, 12/4/15)

• “…delivering on the promise of the Senate majority they won last fall to put a bill on Obama’s desk. It will frame the choice in 2016 clearer than ever before: Elect a Republican president, and you can be rid of this abomination once and for all.” (“Promise Kept’: The Senate Finally Votes to Repeal Obamacare,” The Atlantic, 12/4/15)

“…the grandaddy of all conservative wins — passage of a bill that would deliver a ‘mortal wound’ to Obamacare. … fulfills a promise they made to voters who handed them control of Capitol Hill in last year’s mid-term elections.” (“GOP Set To Pass Obamacare Repeal For First Time,” Washington Times, 12/1/15)

“The leader got two major accomplishments on President Barack Obama’s desk, including a five-year quest to repeal Obamacare and a five-year transportation bill that really no one thought was going to happen six months ago. Now the argument on the Hill from Republicans will boil down to this: Obama signed our transportation bill, but the only way to get repeal signed is with a [Republican president].” < (Politico’s “Huddle,” 12/4/2015)

“The Senate voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act and defund Planned Parenthood Thursday evening, clearing a nearly six-year hurdle that kept previous attempts to undo the health care law from reaching President Obama’s desk.” (“Senate OKs Obamacare Repeal Despite Veto Threat,” RealClearPolitics, 12/4/2015)

• “Republicans have been vowing to repeal and replace Obamacare for more than five years, voting dozens of times to dismantle key aspects of the law. This marks the first time Obama will actually have to bring out his veto pen to save the landmark law, as congressional Republicans used a budget procedure known as reconciliation to bypass the 60-vote threshold in the Senate.” (“Senate OKs Obamacare Repeal Despite Veto Threat,” RealClearPolitics, 12/4/2015)

“By voting to nullify Obamacare -- the signature domestic accomplishment of the Obama administration -- GOP congressional leaders fulfilled a longtime pledge to voters and rank-and-file members to get a repeal to President Barack Obama's desk, even though he will veto it.” (“Senate passes budget bill repealing Obamacare, defunding Planned Parenthood,” CNN, 12/4/2015)

“Thursday’s vote was a major event in the Senate, as Democrats never allowed a standalone vote on an ObamaCare repeal bill when they controlled the chamber. Democrats were also unable to block the GOP measure, which was brought to the floor under budget reconciliation rules that prevented a filibuster.” (“Senate Approves Bill Repealing Much Of Obamacare,” The Hill, 12/3/2015)

• “The measure guts the law by repealing authority for the federal government to run healthcare exchanges, and scrapping subsidies to help people afford plans bought through those exchanges. It zeros out the penalties on individuals who do not buy insurance and employers who do not offer health insurance.” (“Senate Approves Bill Repealing Much Of Obamacare,” The Hill, 12/3/2015)
• “It repeals the expansion of Medicaid adopted by 30 states as well as many of the law’s tax increases, which the House bill left in place.” (“Senate Approves Bill Repealing Much Of Obamacare,” The Hill, 12/3/2015)
• “It cuts funding for the Prevention and Public Health Fund and eliminates risk adjustment programs from insurance companies that lose money because of the law.” (“Senate Approves Bill Repealing Much Of Obamacare,” The Hill, 12/3/2015)

“The overall GOP bill headed to the Senate would effectively defang the health law's requirements for individual and employer-provided coverage by annulling the fines that enforce them.” (“Senate Set To OK Republican Bill Unraveling Health Care Law," Associated Press, 12/3/15)

“…McConnell and Senate Republicans are on the verge of clearing legislation shredding some of the most controversial aspects of Obamacare — the first significant repeal of Obama’s signature health care law to land on his desk since Obamacare passed more than five years ago.” (“Behind McConnell's Campaign To Win Over Cruz,” Politico, 12/3/15)

SEN. McCONNELL: ‘We Will … Fulfill The Promise We Made To Our Constituents’
SEN. MITCH McCONNELL (R-KY): “Earlier this year, Senate Republicans passed a balanced budget, and with it the necessary procedural tools - via the budget reconciliation process - to bring an end to the nightmare of Obamacare. Americans have faced skyrocketing health care costs, rampant fraud and more government between them and their doctors. And Republicans are united in working to repeal the broken promises of Obamacare and allow our country to start over fresh with real health reform that Americans deserve.  We will continue our effort to use reconciliation - as the budget makes clear - to fulfill the promise we made to our constituents.” (Sen. Lee, Press Release, 7/28/15)

SEN. MIKE ENZI (R-WY): “‘With approval of this budget reconciliation bill, the Senate today has passed the most comprehensive and far-reaching repeal of Obamacare that will actually reach the president’s desk.’ Said Chairman Enzi. ‘Most Americans are still opposed to this unprecedented expansion of government intrusion into health care because it represents nothing more than broken promises, higher costs and fewer choices. … The bill the Senate has approved today is the first step in building a bridge from Obamacare’s broken promises to  better access to high-quality health care for each and every American.’” (“Senate Approves Far-Reaching Obamacare Repeal,” Press Release, 12/3/15)

SEN. ORRIN HATCH (R-UT): “Today, Senate Republicans fulfilled our promise to end the negative consequences of Obamacare by repealing the President’s unaffordable health law.  It’s now time the Obama Administration and Democrats own up to the law’s failures, reverse course, and work with Republicans to forge patient-centered reforms that reduce costs and improve care for the American people.” (Sen. Hatch, Press Release, 12/3/15)

SEN. LAMAR ALEXANDER (R-TN): “I extend [this invitation] to our next president: Forget about party, forget about this side or that side, and side with the American people whose premiums went up, who lost plans they liked, whose Medicare has been raided, whose state budgets have been destroyed, and whose jobs have been lost. Work with Republicans in Congress to fix the damage Obamacare has done to health care in America. Work with us to replace Obamacare with real reforms that lower costs so more Americans can afford to buy insurance.” (Sen. Alexander, Press Release, 12/1/15)

---

Tags: Promise Kept, Senate Republicans, Repeal, Obamacare, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Promise Kept: Senate Passes Obamacare Repeal Legislation

Today in Washington, D.C. - Dec. 4, 2015:
The House is not in session today and will reconvene on Monday at 12:00 PM.
The Hose voted 359-65 to pass the conference report for H.R. 22, the five year highway and transportation bill. The compromise in the conference report was easy for 181 Democrats to join 178 Republicans in passing the revised bill. Those voting NO were 65 Republican, most principled conservatives.

The House also passed along party lines with only 9 Democrats with Republicans on H.R. 8 (249-174) — "To modernize energy infrastructure, build a 21st century energy and manufacturing workforce, bolster America's energy security and diplomacy, and promote energy efficiency and government accountability, and for other purposes."

House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) issued the following statement after the House of Representatives passed the conference report for H.R. 22, the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act: “Today, we passed the first long-term transportation legislation in a decade. This five-year, fully-funded bill will help sustain and improve our highways, bridges, railroads, and other vital transit systems. These infrastructure projects are some of the most important investments we make as a country. ...”

The Senate is not in session today and will reconvene on Monday at 2 PM.

Yesterday, the Senate voted 52-47 to pass H.R. 3762, the Restoring Americans' Healthcare Freedom Reconciliation Act, which repeals Obamacare. All Republican Senators voted to repeal, all Democrats voted to keep Obamacare, and Independent socialist Sanders did not vote. Prior to final passage, the Senate voted on 18 amendments to H.R. 3762 in an open amendment process

The bill now goes back to the House for approval of the Senate’s changes.

Following that vote, the Senate voted 83-16 to pass the conference report for H.R. 22, the five year highway and transportation bill. With both houses of congress passing the conference bill on H.R. 22, it goes with strong bipartisan support to the President for signature.

Just before the final vote, Leader McConnell said, “For years, the American people have been calling on Washington to build a bridge away from Obamacare. For years, Democrats prevented the Senate from passing legislation to do so. But in just a moment, that will change.

“It will be a victory for the Middle Class families who’ve endured this law’s pain for too long. On their medical choices. On the affordability of their care. On the availability of their doctors and hospitals. On the insurance they liked and wanted to keep.

“A new Senate that’s back on the side of the American people will vote to move beyond all the broken promises, all the higher costs, and all the failures. We will vote to build a bridge away from Obamacare and toward better care. We will vote for a new beginning.

“We hope the House will again do the same.

“And then, President Obama will have a choice. He can defend a status quo that’s failed the Middle Class by vetoing the bill, or he can work toward a new beginning and better care by signing it.”

After the Senate passed the "Repeal of Obamacare,the media noted:
RealClearPolitics noted, “Republicans have been vowing to repeal and replace Obamacare for more than five years, voting dozens of times to dismantle key aspects of the law. This marks the first time Obama will actually have to bring out his veto pen to save the landmark law, as congressional Republicans used a budget procedure known as reconciliation to bypass the 60-vote threshold in the Senate.”

As CNN put it, “By voting to nullify Obamacare -- the signature domestic accomplishment of the Obama administration -- GOP congressional leaders fulfilled a longtime pledge to voters and rank-and-file members to get a repeal to President Barack Obama's desk, even though he will veto it.”

Even The Atlantic acknowledges that passage of the repeal bill was a milestone achievement: “Republicans on Thursday night achieved something of a milestone in their five-year battle against the Affordable Care Act: They finally passed a bill repealing the law through the United States Senate. . . . [P]assage in the Senate means that after dozens of failed tries by Republicans in the House, President Obama will get the opportunity to stamp his veto on a bill eviscerating the law that, in the popular parlance if not in text, bears his name. . . . It will frame the choice in 2016 clearer than ever before: Elect a Republican president, and you can be rid of this abomination once and for all.”

---

Tags: Senate, Repeal Obamacare, House, Highway Bill To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

A Resurgence of Intolerance

by Dr. Thomas Sowell: Storm trooper tactics by bands of college students making ideological demands across the country, and immediate preemptive surrender by college administrators — such as at the University of Missouri recently — bring back memories of the 1960s, for those of us old enough to remember what it was like being there, and seeing first-hand how painful events unfolded.

At Harvard, back in 1969, students seized control of the administration building and began releasing to the media information from confidential personnel files of professors. But, when university president Nathan Pusey called in the police to evict the students, the faculty turned against him, and he resigned.

At least equally disgraceful things happened at Cornell, at Columbia, and on other campuses across the country. But there was one major university that stood up to the campus storm troopers — the University of Chicago.

After student mobs seized control of a campus building, the University of Chicago expelled 42 students and suspended 81 other students. Seizing buildings was not nearly as much fun there, nor were outrageous demands met.

Clearly it was not inevitable that academic institutions would follow the path of least resistance. Most of the leading academic institutions have multiple applications for every place available in the student body. Students who are expelled for campus disruptions can easily be replaced by others on the waiting lists.

Why then do so many colleges and universities not only tolerate storm trooper tactics on campus but surrender immediately to them? That is just one of a number of questions that are hard to answer.

Why do parents pay big money, often at a considerable sacrifice, to send their children to places where small groups of other students can disrupt their education and poison the whole atmosphere with obligatory conformity to political correctness?

Why do donors continue to contribute millions of dollars to institutions that have become indoctrination centers, tearing down America, stifling dissent and turning group against group?

There is no compelling reason for either parents or donors to keep shelling out money to colleges and universities where intolerant professors and student activists impose their ideology on academic institutions. Too often these are campuses with virtually no diversity of viewpoints, despite however much they may be obsessed with demographic diversity.

It is not hard to tell which campuses are strongholds of ideological intolerance, where individual students dare not express an opinion different from the opinion of their professors or different from the opinions of student activists. There are sources of information about such places, systematically collected and evaluated.

One outstanding source of such information is a college guide which rates colleges and universities on their ideological intolerance, giving a red light rating to institutions where such abuses are rampant, a green light where there is freedom of speech and a yellow light for places in between.

That college guide is "Choosing the Right College," which is by far the best of the college guides for other reasons as well. It gave the University of Missouri a red light rating, and spelled out its problems, two years before Mizzou made headlines this year as a symbol of academic cowardice and moral bankruptcy.

The University of Chicago gets a green light rating as a place where both conservative and liberal students are allowed free rein. Some engineering schools like M.I.T. get green light ratings because their students are too engrossed in their studies to have much time for politics, though Georgia Tech gets a red light rating.

Other red light ratings go to Duke, Vassar, Vanderbilt, Rutgers, Wesleyan and many others. More important, the reasons are spelled out. There is also another source of information and ratings of colleges and universities on their degree of freedom of speech. This is a watchdog organization called the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE).

If parents and donors start checking out intolerant colleges and universities before deciding where to send their money, the caving in to indoctrinating professors and storm trooper students will no longer be the path of least resistance for academic administrators.
--------------
Thomas Sowell is an American economist, social commentator, and author of dozens of books. He has a Ph.D. in Economics from the University of Chicago and degrees from Columbia University and Harvard University. He is a retired professor of Economic and presently is a Rose and Milton Friedman Senior Fellow, The Hoover Institution, Stanford University. Visit his website: tsowell.com and view a list of other articles.

---

Tags: Thomas Sowell, commentary, resurgence of intolerance, intolerance, storm trooper tactics, college students,  FIRE. Foundation for Individual Rights in Education To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Progress vs Progressive . . .

. . . The Liberal agenda is stopping progress and holding it to ransom.

Editorial Cartoon by AF "Tony" Branco

---

Tags: Editorial Cartoon, AF Branco, Progress, Progressive, liberal agenda To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

What Conservatives Want Included In The $1.1 Trillion Spending Bill

Reps. Jim Jordan, R-OH, & Raúl Labrador, R-ID, expect to
see policy riders addressing Syrian refugees & pro-life issues
included in the $1.1 trillion omnibus spending package.
owever, the House Freedom Caucus, of which they are
members of, will oppose a campaign finance measure
floated by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell &
another funding Obamacare's risk corridor program.
(Daily Signal article Photo via Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call/Newscom).

by Melissa Quinn: In order for House GOP leadership to earn conservatives’ support on the omnibus spending bill, conservative lawmakers are pushing for several policy riders to be included in the package, with their first priority centered on strengthening the system that allows Syrian refugees to resettle in the United States.

At the monthly Capitol Hill event Conversations with Conservatives, a panel of lawmakers laid out their demands for policy riders — measures that create new policy or limit how government funds can be spent—they want to see attached to the $1.1-trillion omnibus spending bill.

Congress has until Dec. 11 to pass the package, and conservatives warned that a lack of conservative policy riders could prevent them from supporting the spending bill.

“We’re looking to see if there are going to be actual conservative policies in the bill,” Rep. Raúl Labrador, R-Idaho, told reporters Wednesday. “… If those riders on Syria and pro-life issues and other issues like that are not in the bill, it’s just not even worth considering the bill.”

Last week, the House passed legislation with a veto-proof majority requiring the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, the secretary of the FBI, and the director of National Intelligence to certify that each Syrian and Iraqi refugee coming to the U.S. through the refugee program doesn’t pose a security threat.

The bill, called the America SAFE Act of 2015, also temporarily pauses the refugee program until screening procedures for Syrian and Iraqi refugees are implemented.

In 2016, the federal government plans to admit 10,000 Syrian refugees into the U.S.

Speaking to reporters, Labrador stressed that the omnibus spending package should include a policy rider with the America SAFE Act’s language.

“At a minimum, it should have the language that passed last week. What I’m worried about is that our leadership is going to try to weaken even the language from last week,” Labrador said.

“If we can’t even get that on the bill, then we’re going to have a pretty big fight,” he continued. “I imagine we’re going to have a robust discussion.”

Labrador said that he would like to see the spending bill also include language from a proposal floated by Rep. Brian Babin, R-Texas, that would block federal funding to resettle Syrian refugees until the Obama administration strengthens the vetting process.

More than 70 Republicans signed onto a letter sent to House GOP leadership asking them to include the language in the spending bill.

“It’s an important [issue], maybe the most important one, especially as we find ourselves in the context we do and focus on security,” Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, told reporters Wednesday. “There will be a few folks who hear our position and probably speak out for more at the conference in support of Mr. Babin’s position.”

In addition to addressing Syrian refugees, conservatives on the panel today said they plan to offer a number of pro-life policy riders. Though the lawmakers did not specify on the language of the policy riders, one could strip Planned Parenthood of its federal funding.

“The pro-life issues, protecting Americans, whether the unborn or the rest of our citizenry in terms of protecting ourselves from radical jihadists who are posing as refugees—we must address that,” said Rep. Tim Huelskamp, R-Kans. “That’s a demand of my constituents, I believe constituents all across America.”

Though Republican lawmakers are looking to add conservative policy riders to the omnibus spending package, Jordan said the House Freedom Caucus, made up of around 40 conservatives, would oppose two specific proposals that may be added to the bill.

Jordan, who chairs the Freedom Caucus, said the group would oppose a campaign finance measure floated by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell eliminating caps that govern how much political parties can spend in coordination with candidates.

“We think it’s not the direction we need to go unless you’re going to free up the restrictions on everyone,” the Ohio Republican said.

Jordan also said the Freedom Caucus would oppose any measure that provides additional money to insurers through Obamacare’s risk corridor program—a stance that was echoed by fellow conservative lawmakers.

The risk corridor program, in place until 2017 and called an insurer “bailout” by some Republicans, was created to provide stability in the health insurance market. Through the program, insurers that profit above a specified threshold share a portion of their profit with the government. Those that lose more than a specified threshold receive financial assistance from the government.

“We certainly don’t want to bail out Obamacare and bailing out big insurance companies,” Rep. Tim Huelskamp said, referencing the risk corridors. He continued:If we back down as a Republican majority with the new speaker now, we’re essentially shedding the next 10 months of being able to do anything. … Here’s where we have to take our first stand, or we have an inability to take any more stands while Obama’s still in the White House.-----------------
Melissa Quinn (@MelissaQuinn97 ) is a news reporter for .

---

Tags: Reps. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, Raúl Labrador, R-Idaho, policy riders, addressing, Syrian refugees, pro-life issues, Melissa Quinn, The Daily Signal To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

The Sanders/Obama/Nye Conjecture

by Paul Jacob, Contributing Author: When some of America's most illustrious public figures -- Senator Bernie Sanders, President Barack Obama, and Bill Nye the Science Guy -- proclaim global climate change as the "obvious" cause of the rise of ISIS (and recent rounds of terrorism), it's time to consider:

Is it climate change that is responsible for the recent rash of mass shootings in the U.S., most recently in San Bernardino?

There is a drought in California -- a water shortage, anyway.

But that is caused more by overuse and underpricing of water resources -- itself the result of public, not private, water resource management -- than climate change.

Isn't it more likely that people on the margin of stability -- call them "crazy" or just evil -- take cues from other shooters in the news, draw inspiration and then draw guns?

And fire.

America's non-Muslim, home-grown mass murderers don't seem to be making a clear point. Syrian refugee and European ISIS-sympathizing Muslim radicals do seem to be making a point -- but one quite tangential to Bill Nye's nifty causal chain: man-made global warming leads to droughts; farmers leave the country for the city; over-strapped cities lack water and jobs; frustrat-ed male (and female) refugees go postal.

Hey Bill, don't war and drone strikes, not to mention tyranny, also cause instability?

But then, so would cutting back on fossil fuels: the whole mid-east region runs on fuel sold to the West. If we fight ISIS by combating CO2 emissions, and if the Sanders/Obama/Nye Theory is correct, we'll just get more ISIS.

Copy-cattery and ideology explain this evil better. Not climate change.

This is Common Sense. I'm Paul Jacob.
------------------
Paul Jacobs is author of Common Sense which provides daily commentary about the issues impacting America and about the citizens who are doing something about them. He is also President of the Liberty Initiative Fund (LIFe) as well as Citizens in Charge Foundation. Jacobs is a contributing author on the ARRA News Service.

---

Tags: Paul Jacob, Common Sense, Senator Bernie Sanders, President Barack Obama, Bill Nye, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Senate Cuts 5 Times More Spending Than House in Reconciliation Bill

by Paul Winfree: The Senate will vote this week on a reconciliation bill that repeals the budgetary heart of Obamacare and restricts funding for Planned Parenthood. This is a vast improvement over the House-passed bill, which restricts Medicaid funding for abortion providers but neglects to repeal the core provisions in Obamacare.

The Senate bill repeals most of the new spending programs, including the premium subsidies and Medicaid expansion, and most of the taxes. The bill also eliminates the individual and employer mandate penalties, repeals the Obamacare risk corridor and reinsurance programs that can be used to bailout private insurers, and sets up a transition period for Congress and the next president to replace the health care law with a proposal that reduces costs for families and the federal government. Finally, the bill restricts Medicaid funding for abortion providers affiliated with Planned Parenthood Federation of America.

The House’s anemic opening bid was blamed on a procedural hurdle unique to the Senate known as the “Byrd rule,” which prohibits provisions that are extraneous to the budget process from being included in reconciliation bills. Before the House passed their bill, we warned that their assumptions about what can be accomplished using reconciliation in the Senate were incorrect.

While we know that the Senate can go farther on repeal, this bill is a strong down payment toward that goal and toward stopping funding for Planned Parenthood.
-------------
Paul Winfree (@paulwinfree)is the director of the Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Studies at The Heritage Foundation.

---

Tags: IPaul Winfree, Heritage Foundation, CBO, reconciliation, Senate, House, December, 2015 To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Obamacare: ‘I Was Lied To’

It’s Scary,’ ‘Really A Panicked Experience’
OBAMA PROMISE: “If you have health insurance and you like it, and you have a doctor that you like, then you can keep it. Period.” (President Obama, Conference Call With Liberal Bloggers, 7/20/09)

• POLITIFACT’s 2013 Lie of the Year: 'If you like your health care plan, you can keep it' (Politifact, 12/12/13)

RHETORIC : ‘If You Like What You Have, You Can Keep It,’ ‘We Guarantee It’
SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV): “In fact, one of our core principles is that if you like the health care you have, you can keep it.” (Sen. Reid, Congressional Record, S.8642, 8/3/09)

• REID: “It not only means making sure you can keep your family's doctor or keep your health care plan if you like it but also that you can afford to do so.” (Sen. Reid, Congressional Record, S.8150, 7/28/09)

SEN. DICK DURBIN (D-IL): “Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (Ill.) made the same promise… ‘Many people say: “I like my health insurance right now. I don’t want to change. I don’t want to go into Medicare or Medicaid. I like what I have. Would you please leave people alone?”’ Durbin said. ‘The answer is yes,’ he added. ‘In fact, we guarantee it. We are going to put in any legislation considered by the House and Senate the protection that you, as an individual, keep the health insurance you have, if that is what you want.’” (“Top Dems Made Same Promises,” The Hill, 10/31/13)

SEN. PATTY MURRAY (D-WA): “Again, if you like what you have, you will be able to keep it. Let me say this again: If you like what you have, when our legislation is passed and signed by the President, you will be able to keep it.” (Sen. Murray, Congressional Record, S.6400, 6/10/09)

SEN. SHERROD BROWN (D-OH): “Our bill says if you have health insurance and you like it, you can keep it…” (Sen. Brown, Congressional Record, S.12612, 12/7/09)

SEN. JACK REED (D-RI): “If you like the insurance you have, you can choose to keep it.” (Sen. Reed, Town Hall Event, 6/25/09)

SEN. CHRIS COONS (D-DE): “If you have job-based health insurance you like, you can keep it.” (Sen. Coons, “FAQ For Individuals And Families,” Accessed 10/31/13)

REALITY: ‘Five Million Cancellations,’ ‘I’m Infuriated Because I Was Lied To’
2013 Flashback: “In the market for individually-purchased health insurance, more than 4.8 million Americans have received notices that their preexisting plans are soon to be illegal, and will be cancelled.” (“The Obamacare Exchange Scorecard: Around 100,000 Enrollees And Five Million Cancellations,” Forbes, 11/12/13)

KY Woman: “Our President lied to us. Not only are we going to lose our insurance but when go to a different policy-we have to pay more. We will never be able to retire-we are 58 & 56 years old-we will have to work the rest of our [lives] just to pay for our insurance.” (Sen. McConnell, Constituent Mail)

CA Woman: ‘The health plan she’s paid for through the Affordable Care Act keeps sending her to doctors who say they can’t treat her because they won’t take her insurance’ REPORTER: “Beth Kramer says she’s running out of options.” PHONE: “The expected wait time is approximately one hour.” REPORTER: “And out of time. The disabled mother of two says she’s out of medication for an auto-immune disease, she’s run out of antibiotics for a painful internal infection, and the health plan she’s paid for through the Affordable Care Act keeps sending her to doctors who say they can’t treat her because they won’t take her insurance.” KRAMER: “I’m out of medication.  I’m sitting here with an infection that I’m out of antibiotics [for] and symptoms are coming back and I have no idea when I can go to a doctor or where.” REPORTER: “Kramer signed up for healthcare under the Affordable Care Act through Covered California…” (KCBS-CA, 1/22/14)

CA Resident: “All we've been hearing the last three years is if you like your policy you can keep it… I’m infuriated because I was lied to.” (“Some Health Insurance Gets Pricier As Obamacare Rolls Out,” Los Angeles Times, 10/26/13)

NY Woman: Insurance plan canceled under Obamacare, ‘I’m dead in the dirt, I can’t do anything.  I can’t go to the doctor.’ REPORTER: “Many people in the Rochester area lost their healthcare insurance January 1.  They’re among the millions across the country who saw their plans canceled under the Affordable Care Act.  Nancy Miller is one of them.  The self-employed hairdresser says she began doing research in September to make sure she’d be covered this year, but she then learned the health plan that she’d had for years was no longer available. She says other options were too expensive.  Miller has some health issues that require medication, treatments and tests – treatments she’s delayed because of the lack of insurance.” MILLER: “I’m not going to lose my house because I don’t have health insurance and I need medical assistance, so I’m dead in the dirt, I can’t do anything.  I can’t go to the doctor, I can’t have my tests run, I can’t go for an MRI.” (YNN-NY, 1/7/14)

KY Man: “Dentist Aaron McLemore of Louisville, Ky... The 31-year-old's current policy is being canceled. A new policy from the exchange will more than double his monthly premium and nearly double his yearly out-of-pocket maximum.” (“How The Affordable Care Act Pays For Insurance Subsidies,” NPR, 11/7/13)

AL Woman: ‘It’s scary. … oh no, I didn’t get to get my insurance plan … it went up!’ Casey Heaps: ‘This is not affordable at all, this is a very unaffordable care act’ Reporter: ‘That’s Gainesville medial assistant Casey Heaps.’ Heaps: ‘I don’t know what this world’s coming to.  It’s scary. … oh no, I didn’t get to get my insurance plan I had. I had the one I liked, the one that worked for me, the one I could afford, but no I didn’t get to keep it, it went up!’ (WAAY-AL, 11/26/13)

CA Woman: “57 year old stay-at-home mom; insurance cancelled Dec. 31; new plan 59.6% higher premiums, $2,000 higher deductible; higher co-pay; at least $2466.24 more than last year.” (“Obamacare's Harmful Impact,” GOP.gov, 12/11/13)

CA Woman: “‘So, in a nutshell,’ Holroyd said in an e-mail, ‘we are now, once again, being forced into a lower coverage plan, for more money.’ …her situation has been miserable. ‘I'm losing faith in our administration.’” (“Four Stories: After Obamacare 'Fix,' Many Are Still Left Out,” CNN, 12/11/13)

• “Holroyd supported the Affordable Care Act when it was passed in 2009. ... Everything changed in October, when Holroyd was notified by her insurer that her plan could not be renewed in 2014. The comparable plans offered to Holroyd featured a 29% increase in premiums and higher co-pays, as well as significantly higher prescription costs. … ‘we had no idea that the premiums were going to be what they are.’” (“Four Stories: After Obamacare 'Fix,' Many Are Still Left Out,” CNN, 12/11/13)
  

IL Family: ‘Washington, you’re killing us out here’ “IL family of 4. Both parents & a 23 yr. old canceled. We’re scrambling to replace coverage by Jan. 1st at a 80% increase in premiums. Washington, you’re killing us out here.” (“YOUR STORIES: Insurance Plans Cancelled Due to Obamacare,” Heritage.org, 10/30/13) NC Woman: “It’s been aggravating to have to see the policy that you were perfectly happy with doesn’t exist anymore and you can’t keep it.” Reporter: “For the past three years, Ruth-Anne Grimes says the health insurance plan that cost her $381 a month served her well.  Then this letter…” Grimes: “It says you’ll no longer – the plan will no longer be offered in 2014.” Reporter: “Because it does not meet the qualifications of the Affordable Care Act.  But there’s another plan available: for $562 a month.”  … Grimes: “It’s been aggravating to have to see the policy that you were perfectly happy with doesn’t exist anymore and you can’t keep it, you have to go on another plan. … the Affordable Care Act did not make it very affordable for me.” (WRAL-NC, 11/7/13)

‘I Lost Coverage With Doctors In My Area. It's Not Right And It's Not Fair’
Hundreds In OH: ‘Hundreds of people in the Mahoning Valley can no longer go to their trusted doctors… the Affordable Care Act is to blame’ ANCHOR: “With the passage of the Affordable Care Act, some area medical facilities saying, they're no longer able to use some insurance companies.” … REPORTER: “Hundreds of people in the Mahoning Valley can no longer go to their trusted doctors, and local officials say the Affordable Care Act is to blame.” … DOCTOR: “Now they’re facing the choice of switching to another doctor.  They’re really scared. Really scared.” (WKBN-OH, 1/21/14)

AZ Man: “My son is 1-1/2 and he has a preexisting condition. It's a heart defect.  My wife and I received a letter this week that his cardiologist group is getting dropped from our health care provider on November 1st … being forced upon them by Obamacare.” (“Victim of Obamacare Loses His Doctor,” The Rush Limbaugh Show, 10/31/13)

KY Woman: I’ve ‘had really a panicked experience lately trying to figure out how my 10-year-old son can continue with his specialists’ “Rebecca Stewart had a chance to take her concerns about Obamacare directly to the top. … ‘I'm probably not the only one who has had really a panicked experience lately trying to figure out how my 10-year-old son can continue with his specialists,’ Stewart said. ‘I know I can't keep my plan, which I liked, but as I'm trying to decide what to do going forward, I've spent weeks, with days on the phone getting confidently delivered wrong answers, conflicting information, it's becoming quite obvious to me a lot of agencies, almost everyone I talk to, is having a lot of trouble figuring out the new rules.’” (“Covington Mother Grills Obama On Health Care,” The Cincinnati Enquirer, 2/4/14)

MA Woman: ‘I lost coverage with doctors in my area. It's not right and it's not fair…The current federal government and their policies are detrimental to the health of my business and my family’ “Introducing Tisei was Erin Calvo Bacci, a Reading chocolatier and small business owner. Originally crippled by the cost of healthcare, Calvo Bacci obtained a plan with $80 monthly premiums for her family of five under the Massachusetts Health Care Reform Law. When the Affordable Care Act went into effect last year, her family was switched to a different plan with the same cost, but different doctors. ‘I lost coverage with doctors in my area. It's not right and it's not fair,’ Calvo Bacci said. ‘The current federal government and their policies are detrimental to the health of my business and my family.’” ("Tisei Renews Congressional Battle,” Wicked Local News [MA], 1/23/14)

NY Woman: Insurance plan canceled under Obamacare, ‘I’m dead in the dirt, I can’t do anything.  I can’t go to the doctor.’ REPORTER: “Many people in the Rochester area lost their healthcare insurance January 1.  They’re among the millions across the country who saw their plans canceled under the Affordable Care Act.  Nancy Miller is one of them.  The self-employed hairdresser says she began doing research in September to make sure she’d be covered this year, but she then learned the health plan that she’d had for years was no longer available. She says other options were too expensive.  Miller has some health issues that require medication, treatments and tests – treatments she’s delayed because of the lack of insurance.” MILLER: “I’m not going to lose my house because I don’t have health insurance and I need medical assistance, so I’m dead in the dirt, I can’t do anything.  I can’t go to the doctor, I can’t have my tests run, I can’t go for an MRI.” (YNN-NY, 1/7/14)

NY Senior: ‘Obama had said I could keep my doctor. Now they’re doing away with my doctor. They kicked him out! After 20 years, that’s not right.’ “ObamaCare is making seniors sick. Elderly New Yorkers are in a panic after getting notices that insurance companies are booting their doctors from the Medicare Advantage program as a result of the shifting medical landscape under ObamaCare… [Dr. Jonathan] Leibowitz’s patients are furious. Alfred Gargiulio, who has cerebral palsy with a seizure disorder, has been seeing Leibowitz since 1993. ‘Obama had said I could keep my doctor. Now they’re doing away with my doctor. They kicked him out! After 20 years, that’s not right. We love Dr. Leibowitz,’ said Gargiulio.” (“Elderly Patients Sick Over Losing Doctors Under Obamacare,” New York Post, 10/25/13)

FL Senior: “The AARP managed care network [George Smith] had relied on for years will drop all eight of his and his wife's doctors as of Jan. 1. ‘I couldn't believe it. I have my house and car and everything insured through AARP,’ said Smith, 73. ‘I thought, “They are not going to drop me. I've been a member for years.”’ … Patients have received letters telling them to seek new physicians if they want to stay on the plan. Doctors … have learned that AARP plans will stop paying for their services next year.” (“Patients Scramble After AARP Medicare Advantage Plans Drop Providers,” Tampa Bay Times, 10/21/13)

IL Woman: “The cost /threat of Obamacare has cost our family more than $1000 in increased cost of the above listed insurances. I had to go to the doctor last month and paid $725 out of pocket expenses because my doctor no longer accepts our insurance.” (“Obamacare's Harmful Impact,” GOP.gov, 12/11/13) NM Resident: “I am one of the previously happy insured who is going to lose my existing policy at the end of the year, lose my primary care physician and pay substantially more for comparable coverage.” (“Losing Policy, Longtime Doctor, Cancer Specialists,” Albuquerque Journal, 11/22/13)

SC Woman: Doctor ‘absolutely would not take’ Obamacare insurance Host: “Have you applied for insurance under the [Patient Protection and] Affordable Care Act? Your local provider may not accept your coverage.” … Lisa Bentley-Long: “I do not know what I’m going to do. I really don’t.” … Reporter: “Being self-employed she jumped at the change to sign up for an insurance plan on the healthcare.gov marketplace, a website created under the recent Affordable Care Act. She said she enrolled in the consumer’s choice plan. According to the website she qualified for it and it was available in the Spartanburg County area.  But she says that her doctor and a local county hospital wouldn’t accept the plan.” Long: “They absolutely would not take it, and there are several other doctors in Spartanburg that are the same way.” (WSPA-SC, 2/5/14)

---

Tags: Obamacare, Scary, Panicked Experience, people, lied to To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!