Pelosi’s Drug Plan: Ideology or Ignorance?

Nancy Pelosi

by Newt Gingrich and Joe Desantis: Nancy Pelosi’s long-awaited plan for Washington to negotiate drug prices fits in with her party’s accelerating rush toward left-wing government-domination in health care.

Pelosi’s plan would institute an up to 95 percent retroactive tax on gross drug sales if manufacturers don’t agree to Washington’s price demands. So, the US Department of Health and Human Services would “negotiate” drug prices much in the same way that Don Corleone, of The Godfather fame, “negotiated” with Jack Woltz to let Jonny Fontane star in his movie.

By allowing bureaucrats to dictate drug prices, Pelosi is laying the groundwork for Medicare for All – which would have bureaucrats dictate all health care prices.

Recall, Pelosi floated a plan in the Spring that was merely left-wing – instead of loony left-wing – and it received huge blowback from her party’s hard left. By caving to their demands now, she has effectively surrendered control of governing to “the Squad.”

But we want point out a more fundamental fact: Nancy Pelosi and the hard left have no idea how drugs are developed.

Their ignorance is revealed in documents the Speaker’s officer released yesterday outlining the Pelosi plan. It cites an analysis that claims that of the top 10 drug manufacturers, nine spend more on advertising than research. They use this misleading claim (industry-wide, three times as much is spent on research and development than marketing) to argue that taxing the biopharmaceutical industry into oblivion and dictating prices won’t hurt drug development.

They tried to further muddy the issue by promising to take the money that price controls would allegedly save Medicare (note: the government would pay less, not necessarily Medicare patients) and give it to the National Institutes of Health to conduct more medical research.

To be clear: At Gingrich 360, we are steadfast supporters of increasing funding at NIH. Here is a 2015 op-ed Speaker Gingrich wrote calling on Congress to double the NIH budget. Just yesterday, we publicly supported efforts to lobby Congress on behalf of increased NIH funding.

However, devastating the U.S. private biopharmaceutical sector while expecting to maintain the pace of drug innovation by giving NIH more money is fantasy. It is like a championship football team firing its star quarterback and running back but expecting to score as many points as last year because it has signed the best punt returner in the business.

NIH funding is critical, but it is just the first step in the drug development process. It generates the basic scientific research for which it is difficult to raise private capital. Like a good punt returner who can grab better field position, a robust NIH creates more opportunities to reach the end zone – in this case, the introduction of a new drug to market. But you still need the rest of the offense to score.

After NIH research makes a discovery that could inform the development of a new treatment, such as a molecular pathway or target, the private sector takes over. Oftentimes, it is a small biopharmaceutical firm that picks up the ball and raises money to fund the research and development needed to see if they can turn the NIH’s scientific discovery into a viable treatment for patients.

Even then, many – if not most – of these small firms fail. Translating basic scientific research into treatments which can work in humans is difficult. But if a drug or therapy is successful in early clinical trials, the firm will often try to partner with – or be acquired by – a larger firm with the know-how and resources needed to fund the most expensive stages of drug development. Then, if the drug is approved by the Food and Drug Administration, the company will manufacture and sell it in the marketplace.

So, when Pelosi and her left-wing allies claim that drug manufacturers spent more on advertising than research, they are being extremely deceptive. They ignore manufacturers’ considerable investments in R&D and fail to acknowledge the massive amount of private funding supplied by investors in the earlier, and much riskier, stages of drug development (not to mention the time and energy of the founding scientists who usually own stock and should rightfully be rewarded).

And since these investors make decisions by weighing the high risk of failure (only one in 10 drugs under development make it to market) with how much money the drug could generate if it is successfully approved, there is a direct relationship between the expected financial returns on a new drug and the amount of money available to invest in research and development.

This is not a theory. We know what Pelosi’s plan – and those like it – would lead to because we have already seen it happen in Europe. In 1986, European investment in biopharmaceutical research was 24 percent higher than in the U.S. Then Europe imposed price controls. Today, it is 40 percent lower. Price controls and single-payer systems have also led to significantly fewer breakthrough drugs available to European patients than in the U.S. It is the major reason why cancer survival rates are higher in the U.S. than in Europe.

Pelosi’s plan may artificially lower prices on new branded drugs, but it would come at a huge cost. The pace of biomedical innovation would be dramatically slowed and patient access to new drugs would be limited.

The only winners from Pelosi’s plan would be China and our other economic competitors – who would love to see us undermine our own domestic biopharmaceutical sector to their benefit. The quickest way for them to gain market share in this critical global marketplace is for us to sabotage ourselves. Pelosi and the Left would be their unwitting agents.

The losers would be patients hoping for new cures and the millions of scientists, researchers, and skilled workers who help to develop them. The American people should stand united against this disaster because it is their health which is being threatened.
----------------------
Newt Gingrich (@newtgingrich) is a former Georgia Congressman and Speaker of the U.S. House. He co-authored and was the chief architect of the "Contract with America" and a major leader in the Republican victory in the 1994 congressional elections. He is noted speaker and writer. This commentary was shared via Gingrich Productions.

---

Tags: Newt Gingrich, commentary, Nancy Pelosi, Drug Plan, Ideology or Ignorance? 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 Ends Justify the Ways and Means?

by Tony Perkins: Eight months into their control of the House, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) hasn't missed many opportunities to draw a stark contrast between the two parties' policies. From defending infanticide and trying to gut the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to the job-killing New Green Deal, hardly a day passes that the Left's radicalism isn't on display. But yesterday, liberals took their extremism to new heights -- demanding a tax on Bible-believing Americans.

Thursday's hearing in the House Ways and Means Committee wasn't the first time liberals have tried to use the IRS to do their dirty work -- but it might be the most revealing. At a Thursday event that was either unnoticed by the press (or intentionally sidestepped by it), Democrats spent almost three hours bloviating on "How the Tax Code Subsidizes Hate." Their solution? Strip mainstream Christian organizations -- and anyone else guilty of the Left's version of "hate" -- of their tax-exempt status.

"Our tax code," chairman Richard Neal (D-Mass.) insisted, "is no place for hate. Groups that propagate white supremacy, anti-Semitism, and hatred for the LGBTQ community, among others, do not deserve a government subsidy through tax exemption. Hate is not charitable..." Of course, it should come as no surprise that while the rest of society has written off the disgraced and discredited Southern Poverty Law Center, the Democratic Party still relies on the SPLC's reckless labeling to define "hate" for them. That's astounding, many would point out, since the one-time civil rights group was just revealed by its own staff to be one of the most bigoted organizations in the country. With its own leaders engulfed in decades of racist and sexist charges, only House liberals would continue using SPLC as a platform to launch their anti-conservative attacks.

When it was the Republican members' turn to speak, one after another condemned the idea of hate and hate-motivated violence. Congressman Mike Kelly (R-Pa.) was clear that both parties could unite around the true animus is "repulsive." He even understands the desire to "limit such offensive and disgusting views." But, as his colleague Rep. Darin LaHood (R-Ill.) pointed out, the IRS isn't the place to start.Our tax code, he argued, "should not be used as a political tool to discriminate against organizations that differ in viewpoints or ideologies... This country is the beacon of freedom because of our First Amendment rights. And the First Amendment applies to all speech -- not just speech we politically agree with. We can't use political disagreement as a metric to define 'hate.' This type of labeling can and has led to violent acts targeting groups..."LaHood brought up FRC, and how Floyd Lee Corkins walked into our headquarters with the intent to shoot and kill as many people as possible. Why? Because Corkins had seen us labeled as an "anti-gay hate group" on the SPLC website. Now, Democrats are willing to use that same bogus list -- the same politically-motivated definition of "hate" -- to single out Bible-believing Christians for punishment. Rep. Judy Chu (D-Calif.) admitted as much when she said her party got the names of these 60 targeted organizations (including FRC and American Family Association) from the SPLC. "Taxpayers are subsidizing the continued operation of these organizations," tweeted the Ways and Means Committee, quoting AFA's scriptural views on marriage, sexuality, and gender. "These remarks are vile and only work to perpetuate hate crimes and stir division."

This is exactly what conservatives warned about after Obergefell. Before the Supreme Court forced same-sex marriage on the country, President Obama's solicitor general admitted that faith-based organizations would be the single most vulnerable group in America. When Justice Samuel Alito asked Donald Verrilli point blank if Christian institutions could lose their tax-exempt status for holding biblical views on marriage, he was frighteningly honest. "It's certainly going to be an issue. I don't deny that. I don't deny that, Justice Alito. It is -- it is going to be an issue." If the Supreme Court found the invisible ink granting a "right" to same-sex marriage in the Constitution, we were told in advance: it will be a declaration of war on principled objectors. Any nonprofit that holds to a biblical view -- the same definition Barack Obama held -- would have a target on its back.

Now, Democrats want to weaponize the IRS against Christian nonprofits and others with whom they disagree. But don't think for a second that they'll stop with a list of 60. If they succeed in making the Bible "hate speech," they'll march on to America's churches -- and then to anyone with politically incorrect views. Imagine what's happening to Oregon bakers Aaron and Melissa Klein occurring on a national scale to Christians. We thought Lois Lerner's IRS was bad. But if the Left has its way, liberals will use the power of government to financially punish believers.
--------------
Tony Perkins (@tperkins) is President of the Family Research Council . This article was on Tony Perkin's Washington Update and written with the aid of FRC senior writers.

---

Tags: Tony Perkins, Family Research Center, FRC, Family Research Council, The Ends, Justify, Ways and Means 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 Deep State Strikes Again, Climate Strike, Values Voter Summit

by Gary Bauer, Contributing Author: The Deep State Strikes Again
When a president talks on the phone to a foreign leader, there are multiple people from intelligence agencies listening in. They make transcripts, which are circulated at the highest echelons of our security agencies so that everybody will know what the policy implications are of the conversation.

One individual from an intelligence agency, whom the left and its media allies are referring to as a "whistleblower," has alleged that President Trump made some sort of offer to a foreign leader that the individual claims was inappropriate.

(It's interesting that when leaks hurt the left, the leakers are jailed as criminals. But when a deep state leaker tries to hurt Trump, he's a "whistleblower.")

The leaker in this case reported his concerns about Trump's call. The Justice Department reviewed them and determined that they did not rise to the level that required disclosure with congressional intelligence committees.

Of course, the fake news media complex immediately went into a frenzy. I suspect they all believed that the country in question was Russia and that Trump had been talking to Vladimir Putin. Some even suggested, with no more information than I just presented, that this "scandal" was a "constitutional crisis" that could bring down Trump's presidency.

That's simply ridiculous. But that's been the mindset of our media for the past two and a half years.

Yesterday, President Trump attempted to tamp down the hysteria. He said it was "dumb" to suggest he would "say something inappropriate" while on a "heavily populated call," referring to all the people that he knows are listening in.

Further leaks this morning indicate that the controversial call was with the newly elected president of Ukraine, who, by the way, is a former comedian. It is quite possible that we may ultimately find out that the president simply made a joke that some denizen of the Deep State misinterpreted.

My Guess On The Call
I have no inside information, but here's something I could easily imagine.

There have been strong allegations that then-Vice President Joe Biden threatened senior Ukrainian officials with dour consequences (the loss of a $1 billion loan) unless a prosecutor investigating a company that employed Biden's son was fired -- and he was.

According to reports, Hunter Biden made at least $1.8 million as a board member of this Ukrainian natural gas company. But Big Media have largely ignored the allegations.

There have been reports that Rudy Giuliani has talked to Ukrainian officials to ask if there is any evidence of wrong doing by either Joe or Hunter Biden.

I could certainly imagine President Trump saying to the Ukrainian president-elect, "Congratulations on your victory. By the way, if there's anything to these Biden allegations, it could be to your benefit to share it."

Again, this is just a guess, and it could certainly be something entirely different.

You'd think more journalists would be interested in finding out how "Middle-Class Joe" and his family made their millions. But no. The media are only interested in taking Trump down.

Climate Strike
Today's the big global climate strike. You should check out how many students participated in your town by walking out of school and pushing the demands of this movement. It will give you a good indication of just how bad the indoctrination is in your local schools.

According to one recent survey, 57% of American teenagers said that news about climate change has made them "afraid," while 52% said they are "angry." This is what the left's propaganda has done to our kids. It has filled them with rage and anxiety.

Just to be clear, everyone is for clean air and clean water. But that's not the demand of this movement.

It is demanding a complete reordering of the American economy by using the power of big government to change what you eat, where you work, where you live, the temperature on your thermostat, what you drive (if you drive at all) and virtually everything else in your life.

Don't take my word for it.

Saikat Chakrabarti, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's former chief of staff, recently admitted that, telling a fellow progressive, "[The] Green New Deal . . . wasn't originally a climate thing at all. . . we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing."

Other progressives are more honest about their intentions, insisting that "If you take climate change seriously, you do have to throw out the free-market playbook."

I don't blame the children who are marching today. They have been indoctrinated with false propaganda. As Ronald Reagan used to say, "The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."

The irony is that if we didn't have the incredible miracle that is our carbon-based economy, none of these kids would be able to take and post selfies today so they can show their friends and family just how morally superior they are.

And that got me thinking how educational it would be if the million-plus people employed in the energy industry went on strike because they were sick and tired of being maligned by people who know so much that isn't so.

I think the polls would quickly find more teenagers a lot more fearful and angry as the lights started going out and their cellphone batteries started dying.

A "Shocking" Development
If you felt the earth tremble this morning it was probably caused by the news that Mayor Bill de Blasio dropped out of the presidential race, triggering a seismic shift among the other candidates all vying for his 0% in the polls.

Values Voter Summit
Join me in our nation's capital, October 11th - 13th, for the 2019 Values Voter Summit.

Vice President Mike Pence said, "The Values Voter Summit [is] the greatest gathering of conservative pro-family Americans in the nation." And he is absolutely right!

That's why American Values, my non-profit public policy organization, has been a proud sponsor of the Summit every year.

This year's Summit will feature an incredible lineup of top government officials, opinion makers and faith leaders, such as:

• Dr. Bill Bennett
• Ken Blackwell
• Ambassador Sam Brownback
• Brigitte Gabriel
• David Horowitz
• Dana Loesch
• Rep. Mark Meadows
• Lt. Col. Oliver North
• James O'Keefe
• Todd Starnes
• And many, many more!

There will be educational and informative breakout sessions on a range of topics, including:

Why Christians Should Support Israel
Engaging Millennials On Socialism, The Sanctity of Life And Gun Control
The Progressive Assault On Freedom Of Conscience
The Darkening Landscape Of American Education
In addition, there will be a gala celebration honoring Pastor Andrew Brunson.

American Values is hosting a special luncheon Saturday, October 12th.

Seats are going fast, so be certain to reserve yours now at valuesvotersummit.org.

I look forward to seeing you there!
-------------------
Gary Bauer (@GaryLBauer)  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, The Deep State Strikes Again, Climate Strike, Values Voter Summit To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Setting The Record Straight On Election Security

Setting The Record Straight On Election Security
Another $250 Million In Election Security Funding—Totaling $630 Million Over The Last Two Years—Is Just The Latest Example Of Significant Actions Taken Since 2016, Once Again Disproving The Partisan Myths
SENATE MAJORITY LEADER MITCH McCONNELL (R-KY): “I’m proud the Financial Services & General Government bill will include a bipartisan amendment providing another $250 million for the administration and security of their elections, to help states improve their defenses and shore up their voting systems. I am proud to have helped develop this amendment and to co-sponsor it in committee. That will bring our total allocation for election security to more than $600 million since fiscal 2018. It’s a crucial issue. The Trump administration has made enormous strides to help states secure their elections without giving Washington new power to push the states around. That’s how we continue the progress we saw in 2018 and that’s exactly what we’re doing.” (Sen. McConnell, Remarks, 9/19/2019)

• SEN. McCONNELL: “Here in Congress we appropriated hundreds of millions of dollars in additional aid for state governments to strengthen their systems. And our efforts continue. This year’s Defense and Intelligence Authorization bills include provisions that will help defend ourselves and our allies against Russian aggression. … In short, it is abundantly clear that the administration and Congress take this issue seriously. So I look forward to hearing more from the administration today about what steps have led to this greater success and what even further safeguards they are working on in advance of 2020. Of course, Congress will need to continue closely monitoring the progress and assess whether further legislative steps might be needed as well.” (Sen. McConnell, Remarks, 7/10/2019)

“The Senate Appropriations Committee on Thursday approved $250 million to help states improve election security as part of the annual 2020 financial services and general government funding bill. The funding was the result of a bipartisan amendment to the bill … The overall bill with the amendment included was approved unanimously by the committee. The election security funding amendment includes a clause that requires states to provide a 5 percent match to the federal funds within two years to increase election security. The funds will be given to the states by the Election Assistance Commission (EAC), which has 45 days after the overall funding bill is signed into law to distribute the money.” (“Senate Committee Approves $250 Million For State Election Security Efforts,” The Hill, 9/19/2019)

• “Congress last year appropriated $380 million for the EAC to give to states to bolster election security, with the majority of those funds used to replace outdated voting machines and increase cybersecurity.” (“Senate Committee Approves $250 Million For State Election Security Efforts,” The Hill, 9/19/2019)

The Senate Has Already Taken Significant Bipartisan Actions On Election Security

‘The Largest Distribution Of Funds From The Federal Government To States In The Area Of Election Security Since’ 2002 Was Agreed To In 2018
“Congress provided $380 million in election security funding as part of its massive spending bill, a move that reflects the growing consensus in Washington that more needs to be done to ensure the integrity of America’s elections…. It’s the largest distribution of funds from the federal government to states in the area of election security since Congress passed the Help America Vote Act in 2002 …” (“A Rare Bipartisan Effort In Congress Would Help States Fight Hackers Ahead Of The 2018 Midterms,” Business Insider, 3/22/2018)


The Senate Passed Bipartisan Bills To Strengthen Laws Against Hacking Election Systems And Block Individuals Who Meddle In U.S. Elections From Being Able To Enter The United States
“The Senate took another small step to improve election security Wednesday evening… [S]enators passed by unanimous consent a bipartisan bill out of the Senate Judiciary Committee designed to make sure that hacking election systems is actually a federal crime. The bill would amend current law on computer hacking to specify that hacking a computer designated as part of a voting system or for the administration of a federal election is a crime.” (“Senate Seeks To Make Sure That Hacking Election Systems Is A Federal Crime,” Roll Call, 7/18/2019)

• SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): “This legislation provides the Department of Justice the ability to investigate and prosecute those who seek to manipulate elections systems equipment …The House of Representatives should act quickly to pass this bill to help protect us from further attempts to interfere with the 2020 election.” (“Senate Seeks To Make Sure That Hacking Election Systems Is A Federal Crime,” Roll Call, 7/18/2019)
• SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL (D-CT): “Voting machines are a prime penetrable target, and laws remain woefully outdated. This bipartisan bill provides the Department of Justice with powerful tools to vigorously prosecute and stop malicious hackers … Its unanimous passage tells the world that securing our nation’s elections and cyber infrastructure is a bipartisan cause.” (“Senate Seeks To Make Sure That Hacking Election Systems Is A Federal Crime,” Roll Call, 7/18/2019)

“The Senate cleared legislation on Monday night to block individuals who meddle in U.S. elections from being able to enter the United States. The legislation, known as the Defending Elections against Trolls from Enemy Regimes Act (DETER Act), easily passed the Senate by unanimous consent … The bill, spearheaded by Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), would block individuals from being able to obtain a visa if they were attempting to or had engaged in ‘improper interference in U.S. elections.’ According to the legislation, that would include violating voting or campaign finance laws or trying to interfere in elections or a campaign while under the direction of a foreign government.” (“Senate Passes Bill To Deny Entry For Individuals Who Meddle In US Elections,” The Hill, 6/3/2019)

This Year’s Bipartisan Senate-Passed National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Includes Provisions From The Bipartisan Intelligence Authorization Act To Continue ‘Securing Our Elections From Foreign Meddling’
“The IAA for Fiscal Years 2018-2020 represents a bipartisan effort by the Senate Intelligence Committee to authorize the U.S. Intelligence Community’s funding, personnel, and activities, and to ensure continued Congressional oversight of critical programs. The bill improves our Intelligence Community’s ability to protect and defend our country, including in the following key areas: … Securing our elections from foreign meddling by requiring strategic assessments of Russian cyber threats and influence campaigns, and facilitating increased information sharing between state, local, and federal government officials.” U.S. Senate Select Committee On Intelligence, Press Release, 5/14/2019; U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee, Press Release, 6/27/2019

Strong election security provisions were included in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), including expediting security clearances for state elections officials (Sec. 10507), requiring the ODNI to review the intel community’s election security posture (Sec. 10502), mandating that the federal government develop a whole-of-government strategy to counter threat of Russian cyber-attacks (10504), improves Congressional reporting of active measures (Sec. 10508), and required the ODNI to establish an Intelligence Community Election Threats Executive (Sec. 10509), and also establishing the need for the ODNI, CIA, NSA, FBI, and DHS to report to Congress on threats facing federal elections 180 days before each election. (Sec. 10503) (S. 1790, 116^th Congress)

The Trump Administration Has Taken Action On Election Security
In 2018, The Departments Of Justice And Homeland Security Worked With ‘All 50 States And More Than 1400 Local Jurisdictions’ As Well As The Private Sector To ‘Secure Election Infrastructure And Limit Risk Posed By Foreign Interference’
DEPARTMENTS OF JUSTICE & HOMELAND SECURITY: “Throughout the 2018 midterm election cycle, the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security worked closely with federal, state, local, and private sector partners, including all 50 states and more than 1400 local jurisdictions, to support efforts to secure election infrastructure and limit risk posed by foreign interference.  Efforts to safeguard the 2020 elections are already underway.” (U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Press Release, 2/05/2019)

BIPARTISAN SENATE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE REPORT: “In the face of this threat and these security gaps, DHS has redoubled its efforts to build trust with states and deploy resources to assist in securing elections. Since 2016, DHS has made great strides in learning how election procedures vary across states and how federal entities can be of most help to states. The U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC), the National Association of Secretaries of State (NASS), the National Association of State Election Directors (NASED), and other groups have helped DHS in this effort. DHS’s work to bolster states’ cybersecurity has likely been effective, in particular for those states that have leveraged DHS’s cybersecurily assessments for election infrastructure, but much more needs to be done to coordinate state, local, and federal knowledge and efforts in order to harden states’ electoral infrastructure against foreign meddling.” (Report Of The Select Committee On Intelligence, United States Senate, On Russian Active Measures Campaigns And Interference In The 2016 U.S. Election, Volume 1: Russian Efforts Against Election Infrastructure With Additional Views, 7/25/2019)

“Facebook, Google, Twitter and Microsoft met with government officials in Silicon Valley [in September 2019] to discuss and coordinate on how best to help secure the 2020 American election, kicking off what is likely to be a marathon effort to prevent the kind of foreign interference that roiled the 2016 election. The daylong meeting, held at Facebook’s headquarters in Menlo Park, Calif., included security teams from the tech companies, as well as members of the F.B.I., the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Department of Homeland Security. The agenda was to build up discussions and strategic collaboration ahead of the November 2020 state, federal and presidential elections, according to Facebook. Tech company representatives and government officials talked about potential threats, as well as how to better share information and detect threats, the social network said.” (“Big Tech Companies Meeting With U.S. Officials on 2020 Election Security,” The New York Times, 9/04/2019)


The President ‘Signed A Sweeping Executive Order’ To Facilitate Intelligence Community Investigations Of Any Potential Election Meddling And ‘Authorizing U.S. Sanctions On Any Foreign Individual Or Country That Tries To Interfere’ In Elections
“President Donald Trump signed a sweeping executive order Wednesday authorizing U.S. sanctions on any foreign individual or country that tries to interfere in U.S. elections.” (“Trump Signs New Order To Sanction Countries That Meddle In U.S. Elections,” USA Today, 9/12/2018)

• “The order sets up a high-level process for the U.S. intelligence community and other law enforcement officials to investigate and evaluate possible election meddling. First, it requires the Director of National Intelligence to conduct regular assessments of possible election interference. And after each election, the intelligence community will have 45 days to investigate whether there was an attempt at interference, followed by a Justice Department review. If there is a consensus that a foreign country or other entity tried to meddle in the election, automatic sanctions would be triggered …” (“Trump Signs New Order To Sanction Countries That Meddle In U.S. Elections,” USA Today, 9/12/2018)

The Director Of National Intelligence Created A ‘Senior-Level Position Within The Intelligence Community Whose Focus Will Be On Coordinating Its Election Security Efforts’
“Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats announced on Friday the creation of a new, senior-level position within the intelligence community whose focus will be on coordinating its election security efforts. … The election threats executive (ETE), as the position will be known, will serve as the DNI’s main adviser ‘on threats to election security’ and will ‘coordinate and integrate all election security activities, initiatives, and programs’ across the intelligence community and other government agencies, according to a statement released by Coats. The ETE will also chair a board focused on election threats and composed of senior intelligence and government officials, the statement said.” (“Intel Chief Dan Coats Creates New Role To Coordinate Election Security Efforts,” CBS News, 7/19/2019)

Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Office ‘Indicted 26 Russians For Interfering With U.S. Elections And Breaking Into Democratic Party Computers’
“[Special Counsel Robert] Mueller’s … office indicted 26 Russians for interfering with U.S. elections and breaking into Democratic Party computers to obtain and release information … As Mueller said Wednesday, ‘The releases were designed and timed to interfere with our election and to damage a presidential candidate.’” (“Mueller Departs With Warning: Don’t Forget Russia’s Election Meddling,” Roll Call, 5/29/2019)

• “In February 2018, Mueller indicted 13 Russians and three Russian companies for interfering in the 2016 election. The indictment said 12 of those Russians worked for the St. Petersburg-based Internet Research Agency, an internet troll farm that employed hundreds of Russians who created fake social media accounts intended to mislead American voters. The company was funded and run by Putin ally Yevgeniy Prigozhin, who was also charged in the indictment. Prigozhin’s two other companies were also charged. Russians operated social media accounts on Facebook, Twitter and Google, pretending to be Americans and posted inflammatory messages on race, police shootings and other divisive issues.” (“Mueller Departs With Warning: Don’t Forget Russia’s Election Meddling,” Roll Call, 5/29/2019)
• “In July 2018, Mueller indicted 12 Russian military intelligence officers for breaking into the Democratic National Committee’s email servers, stealing information, and leaking it through affiliated websites as well as through WikiLeaks. The Justice Department said the Russian military officers also hacked the website of a state election board and stole information on 500,000 voters.”< (“Mueller Departs With Warning: Don’t Forget Russia’s Election Meddling,” Roll Call, 5/29/2019)

Thanks To These And Other Efforts, 2018 Was Different From 2016
The Departments Of Justice And Homeland Security And The Office Of The Director Of National Intelligence ‘Concluded There Is No Evidence To Date That Any’ Foreign Government Or Agent ‘Had A Material Impact On The Integrity Or Security’ Of The 2018 Congressional Elections
DEPARTMENTS OF JUSTICE & HOMELAND SECURITY: “[T]he Departments have concluded there is no evidence to date that any identified activities of a foreign government or foreign agent had a material impact on the integrity or security of election infrastructure or political/campaign infrastructure used in the 2018 midterm elections for the United States Congress. This finding was informed by a report prepared by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) pursuant to the same Executive Order and is consistent with what was indicated by the U.S. government after the 2018 elections.” (U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Press Release, 2/05/2019)

• DEPARTMENTS OF JUSTICE & HOMELAND SECURITY: “Efforts to safeguard the 2020 elections are already underway.” (U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Press Release, 2/05/2019)

SEN. McCONNELL: “Yesterday, the entire Senate had the opportunity to meet in classified session for a briefing on election security. We heard from the Director of National Intelligence, the FBI Director, the Acting Secretary for the Department of Homeland Security, and other key administration officials about our recent progress and ongoing work to protect our democratic process from interference. The takeaway was clear: After 2016, this new administration kicked into high gear. Alongside our efforts in Congress, all levels of government worked proactively to make sure that 2018 was not a repeat of 2016.” (Sen. McConnell, Remarks, 7/11/2019)

• SEN. McCONNELL: “Many of the details of yesterday’s briefing were obviously classified and should remain so. But much of what was discussed were the specific details and the full impacts of steps that are already public knowledge…. These and other actions have been part of a coordinated, government-wide, federal, state, and local campaign to shore up our defenses. I would anticipate that every member who attended the classified briefing likely came away feeling confident that big steps forward have taken place in the last two and a half years. Thanks in large part to these efforts, the 2018 elections went more smoothly than 2016.” (Sen. McConnell, Remarks, 7/11/2019)

AGENCY OFFICIALS INVOLVED IN CONGRESSIONAL ELECTION SECURITY BRIEFING: “Today we shared with Congress how we continue to bring the full strength, capabilities, and expertise of our departments and agencies to identity and defend against threats to the United States … Just like our successful, whole-of-government approach to securing the 2018 elections, we will work together with our Federal, state, local and private sector partners as well as our foreign allies to protect the 2020 elections and maintain transparency with the American public about our efforts.” (Politico’s Morning Cybersecurity, 7/11/2019)

Unfortunately Congressional Democrats Keep Advancing Partisan Proposals Designed To Consolidate Power In Washington And Take Control Of Elections Away From States
SEN. McCONNELL: “H.R. 1, House Democrats’ marquee bill for the new Congress … really adds up to one big, expensive partisan power grab. An effort to centralize more control over Americans’ speech and Americans’ voting here in Washington D.C…. Decision after decision that our Constitution properly leaves to the states just melts away in this proposal. Practically every variable of any consequence to American elections gets a top-down mandate, written by Democrats…. How many days of early voting should there be? Do polls need to be open on Sundays? What’s the best way to make absentee ballots available? When can early voting take place, and for how long? And where should those polling places be located? Different states and communities have come to different, legitimate judgments on all these questions. It’s a core part of our constitutional system. And the decentralization of our electoral process leads to a more democratic system — with more direct impact on the elections of those decisionmakers.” (Sen. McConnell, Remarks, 1/31/2019)

SEN. McCONNELL: “[W]hat my friend the Democratic leader is asking unanimous consent to pass is partisan legislation from the Democratic House of Representatives relating to American elections. This is the same Democratic House that made its first big priority in this Congress a sweeping partisan effort to rewrite all kinds of the rules of American politics—not to achieve greater fairness but to give themselves a one-sided political benefit. The particular bill the Democratic leader is asking to move by unanimous consent is so partisan that it received one—just one—Republican vote over in the House. Clearly, this request is not a serious effort to make a law. Clearly, something so partisan that it only received one single solitary Republican vote in the House is not going to travel through the Senate by unanimous consent. It is very important that we maintain the integrity and security of our elections in our country. Any Washington involvement in that task needs to be undertaken with extreme care and on a thoroughly bipartisan basis. Obviously, this legislation is not that. It is just a highly partisan bill from the same folks who spent 2 years hyping up a conspiracy theory about President Trump and Russia and who continue to ignore this administration’s progress in correcting the Obama administration’s failures on this subject in the 2018 election….” (Sen. McConnell, Congressional Record, S. 5080, 7/25/2019)


House Democrats Agree That Removing Election Control From States And Giving It To Washington, D.C. Is ‘Really What This Bill [H.R.1] Is About’
SEN. McCONNELL: “Perhaps most worrisome of all is the unprecedented proposal to federalize our nation’s elections, giving Washington D.C. politicians even more control over who gets to come here in the first place. Hundreds of pages are dedicated to telling states how to run their elections, from when and where they must take place, to the procedures they have to follow, to the machines they have to use.” (Sen. McConnell, Remarks, 1/29/2019)

REP. ZOE LOFGREN (D-CA), House Administration Committee Chair: “I would just note that I understand the gentleman's objection to federalizing federal election eligibility, but that’s really what this bill is about.”  (U.S. House of Representatives Administration Committee, Markup, 2/26/2019)

Sen. McConnell Has Long Insisted On ‘The Primary Role Of The States And Localities In Election Administration’
SEN. MITCH McCONNELL (R-KY), 2001: “Election reform is an issue upon which there is much consensus. Everyone agrees we should provide resources to States and localities to improve their systems and election administration. The differences are primarily in approach. One aspect in dispute is the suitable role for the Federal Government in this process, whether it should mandate specific technologies and administrative practices which traditionally are the 50 States' prerogative. The McConnell-Schumer-Torricelli-Brownback bill, as Senator Schumer has stated, takes a carrot rather than a stick approach. Our bill recognizes that the conduct of elections in New York City varies dramatically from that in Paducah, Kentucky. Their needs are different, so their processes have evolved differently over the years…. Rather than dictate from Washington, we should empower the States and localities with essential data from a centralized source, as well as provide financial resources overseen by experts in this area.” (U.S. Senate Rules and Administration Committee Hearing, 6/27/2001)

• SEN. McCONNELL, 2002: “The Dodd-McConnell bill before the Senate incorporates three key principles contained within the original McConnell-Torricelli bill put together over a year ago. No. 1, Respect for the primary role of the States and localities in election administration. The Constitution's 10th amendment too often get short-shrift around here, but we tried mightily in this compromise to respect it. I will say this bill treads more than I would like on state prerogative but it does so a good deal less than with some of the interest groups out there would like and which some other bills have proposed.” (Sen. McConnell, Congressional Record, S. 712, 2/13/2002)
• SEN. McCONNELL, 2002: “This conference report will help make all elections more accurate, more accessible, and more honest, while respecting the primacy of States and localities in the administration of elections. For the first time ever, the Federal Government will invest significant resources to improve the process, roughly $3.9 billion. Every State will receive funds under this legislation, and the smaller States are guaranteed a share of the pot. The funds will be used by the States in a manner they determine best suits their needs, rather than the Federal Government prescribing a one-size-fits-all system. Whether it is by replacing a punchcard or a lever voting system or educating and training poll workers, States are provided the flexibility to address their specific needs.” (Sen. McConnell, Congressional Record, S.10419, 10/15/2002)

There Had Been Bipartisan Agreement That ‘States Should Be Firmly In The Lead For Running Elections’
Bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee Report: ‘States Should Be Firmly In The Lead For Running Elections. The Country’s Decentralized Election System Can Be A Strength From A Cybersecurity Perspective’
BIPARTISAN SENATE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE REPORT: “DHS and other federal government entities remain respectful of the limits of federal involvement in state election systems. States should be firmly in the lead for running elections. The country’s decentralized election system can be a strength from a cybersecurity perspective, but each operator should be keenly aware of the limitations of their cybersecurity capabilities and know how to quickly and properly obtain assistance.” (Report Of The Select Committee On Intelligence, United States Senate, On Russian Active Measures Campaigns And Interference In The 2016 U.S. Election, Volume 1: Russian Efforts Against Election Infrastructure With Additional Views, 7/25/2019)

Back In 2016, Even Nancy Pelosi And Harry Reid Said They ‘Would Oppose Any Effort By The Federal Government To Exercise Any Degree Of Control Over The States’ Administration Of Elections’
SPEAKER RYAN, LEADER McCONNELL, LEADER NANCY PELOSI, AND LEADER REID: “[T]he Department of Homeland Security stands ready to provide cybersecurity assistance to those states that choose to request it. Such assistance does not entail federal regulation or binding federal directives of any kind, and we would oppose any effort by the federal government to exercise any degree of control over the states’ administration of elections by designating these systems as critical infrastructure.” (Speaker Ryan, Rep. Pelosi, Sens. McConnell and Reid, Letter to Todd Valentine, President, National Association of State Election Directors, 9/28/2016)

---

Tags: Setting The Record Straight, On Election Security To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Spygate Was An Act of War . . .

. . . and if its perpetrators are not held accountable, it will happen again.

by Rick Manning: Spygate was an act of war. Russia hacked the DNC and John Podesta and had the emails published on Wikileaks. That surely was viewed by the Obama administration as an act of war and it responded in kind. It was called a digital Pearl Harbor.

However, their first response was not to sanction Russia. No, that would not come until Dec. 2016 — after the election.

Before the election, the first response was to obtain surveillance against the Trump campaign and the GOP, first by targeting George Papadopoulos via foreign agency efforts beginning in mid-2016, and then the FISA warrant applications, assuming there weren’t more, on Carter Page beginning in Oct. 2016, fueled by the DNC-Steele dossier falsely accusing President Donald Trump, Page and Paul Manafort of being Russian agents, that was renewed after the election and then finally the fateful strike on Michael Flynn in Jan. 2017, spying on his phone call with the Russian ambassador, leaking it to the Washington Post on Jan. 12, 2017, sending the FBI to ask about it on Jan. 24, 2017 — all encompassing the bedrock of a three-year-long Justice Department investigation, undertaken under the mistaken belief that the nation had just elected the Manchurian Candidate.

Now, Washington, D.C. and the American people patiently await the publication of Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz’ report on abuses of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act in 2016 and beyond, wherein the Trump campaign, the opposition party at the time, was unjustly surveilled by the Obama administration, the incumbent party, in an election year.

The surveillance gave intelligence agencies unprecedented access to the operations of one of the major parties’ presidential campaigns. They had Page’s contacts, including telephone, email, text, documents and more, his contacts’ contacts, at least, throughout the campaign, Trump’s sphere and the Republican National Committee, certainly.

The surveillance carried over into the Trump administration in 2017, and the investigation persisted until 2019, when Special Counsel Robert Mueller finally concluded it, finding in his report that, after all, there was no criminal conspiracy between President Donald Trump or his campaign and Russia to steal emails from the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and John Podesta and have them put on Wikileaks.

The Mueller report stated, “[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities,” and “the evidence does not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference.”

So, if it was not true, then what made intelligence agencies and the Justice Department come to believe in what amounted to a hare-brained conspiracy theory that tore the country in half for three years?

Intelligence and surveillance powers are war powers. They are designed to identify targets, usually military, for purposes of eliminating threats to national security in the event of war. Their use, therefore, is itself an act of war, including when it is used domestically.

The American people are told that these powers are essential to defending national security. But used wrongly, as they were in spygate, they become themselves the greatest threat to national security and the Constitution.

The fact that it was used politically and in a partisan context, and wrongly at that to identify fictitious threats to national security, does not ameliorate and only compounds concerns about how these powers were used and how they may be used again in the future.

To create accountability when this sort of thing happens, there must be an accounting of how these powers were wrongly deployed in the first place, highlighting the need for oversight by Horowitz, but it must be followed up by action by Attorney General William Barr. Why did the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court repeatedly rubber stamp the warrant applications against the Trump campaign that found no conspiracy? Why did judges keep renewing it if it wasn’t true?

What was the extent of the surveillance? Who did it net? Were they in the White House? It seems hard to believe they weren’t.

Moreover, what laws (if any) were violated and who will be held accountable so the American people can have certainty that these powers are not abused again in the future?

The worst possible outcome of the Horowitz report would be if it found that, yes, the FBI and Justice Department were given bad, concocted intelligence by political actors, including the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign who hired former British spy Christopher Steele to produce the bogus allegations that President Trump was a Russian agent, used in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to violate their constitutional rights, but that doing so violated no laws.

This dilemma, more than anything, will come to define Barr’s tenure in office as well as determine whether the national rift caused by the abuse of surveillance powers can ever be mended.

This was a blow on democracy itself, an effort to overturn a decisive electoral outcome in 2016. A place the Justice Department and intelligence agencies have little role in interfering. What we did to ourselves pales in comparison to anything Russia was accused of.

The whole reason the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 was adopted was prevent unconstitutional domestic spying. A select committee headed by Sen. Frank Church (D-Idaho) convened in 1975 to get to the bottom of revelations by Seymour Hersh’s explosive report to the New York Times on Dec. 22, 1974 that the CIA had been engaged a mass, domestic surveillance program against anti-war protestors, members of Congress and other political figures.

On NBC’s Meet the Press on Aug. 17, 1975, Church who had led the committee warned, “If this government ever became a tyranny, if a dictator ever took charge in this country, the technological capacity that the intelligence community has given the government could enable it to impose total tyranny, and there would be no way to fight back because the most careful effort to combine together in resistance to the government, no matter how privately it was done, is within the reach of the government to know. Such is the capability of this technology…”


Church added, “I don’t want to see this country ever go across the bridge. I know the capacity that is there to make tyranny total in America, and we must see to it that this agency and all agencies that possess this technology operate within the law and under proper supervision so that we never cross over that abyss. That is the abyss from which there is no return.”

The committee led to the adoption of the law, which sought to reform how intelligence is gathered and the limited circumstances it can be used in the U.S. If 40 years later, the Justice Department concludes an internal review into the gravest abuses of this law ever seen, where surveillance was used to yield partisan political advantage and even to unseat a sitting president on made-up allegations of treason, that it violated no laws, it will discredit the very rule of law FISA sought to engender.

The real dilemma Attorney General Barr faces is the reality that if the perpetrators of spygate are not held accountable now, and the mass surveillance powers reined in, this will happen again. This was one of the most terrible things that ever happened to our country. How do we put the genie back in the bottle?
-----------------------
Rick Manning is the President of Americans for Limited Government.

---

Tags: Rick Manning, Americans for Limited government, Spygate, Was An Act of War, if its perpetrators, are not held accountable, it will happen again 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 A Trip . . .

. . . California under Democrat rule is in a serious state of decline with rampant homelessness, Drugs, illegal immigration. Not to mention cities like San Francisco and L.A. littered with needles and feces.

Editorial Cartoon by AF "Tony" Branco

---

Tags: Editorial Cartoon, AF Branco, What A Trip, California, under Democrat rule, serious state of decline. with rampant homelessness, Drugs, illegal immigration. Not to mention. cities, like San Francisco and L.A., littered with needles, feces To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

End is near: Climate warning outcomes since 1967

Al Gore in 2008 said, 'the entire
North ‘polarized’ cap will disappear in 5 years."

by Free Press International: Dire famine. Devastating acid rain. “Great peril” from a depleted ozone layer. An ice-free Arctic by 2013. A new ice age.

Environmental doomsday predictions as a result of climate change have been trotted out since the 1960s and continue to this day.

The Competitive Enterprise Institute in a Sept. 18 report chronicled 52 years of “failed eco-pocalyptic predictions.”

The report comes ahead of what environmental activists say is a planned global climate strike set to begin on Sept. 20 and last for a week. According to the organizers, “Our house is on fire — let’s act like it. We demand climate justice for everyone.”

The Competitive Enterprise Institute’s report showed “that the makers of failed apocalyptic predictions often are individuals holding respected positions in government and science. While such predictions have been and continue to be enthusiastically reported by a media eager for sensational headlines, the failures are typically not revisited.”

Among the failed predictions:

1967: ‘Dire famine by 1975’
A Los Angeles Times report quoted Stanford University biologist Paul Ehrlich saying the “time of famines” is upon us and would be at its worst and most disastrous by 1975. Ehrlich suggested putting sterilizing agents into staple foods and drinking water as a means of population control.

1969: ‘Everyone will disappear in a cloud of blue steam by 1989’
A New York Times report quoted Ehrlich as saying that “the trouble with almost all environmental problems is that by the time we have enough evidence to convince people, you’re dead.”

Ehrlich added: “We must realize that unless we are extremely lucky, everybody will disappear in a cloud of blue steam in 20 years.”

1970: Ice age by 2000
A Boston Globe report titled “Scientist predicts a new ice age by 21st century” states that “air pollution may obliterate the sun and cause a new ice age in the first third of the next century.”

The report added: “The demands for cooling water will boil dry the entire flow of the rivers and streams of continental United States.”

1970: Water rationing by 1974 and food rationing by 1980 in U.S.
A report in the Redlands (California) Daily Facts cited Ehrlich, saying “the oceans will be as dead as Lake Erie in less than a decade. America will be subject to water rationing by 1974 and food rationing by 1980.”

1974: Ozone Depletion a ‘great peril to life’
A UPI report cites professor T.M. Donahue of the University of Michigan as telling Congress that the Earth appears to be “on the verge of a period of great peril to life” due to threats to the ozone layer from modern technology.

The Competitive Enterprise Institute noted that “no such ‘great peril to life’ has been observed as the so-called ‘ozone hole’ remains.”

1980: ‘Acid rain kills life in lakes’
A UPI report, citing Canadian and U.S. environmental agencies, said that acid raid was wiping out life in lakes in Canada and the U.S.

But, 10 years later, The Associated Press, citing a U.S. government program, reported, “Acid rain no environmental crisis, study concludes”.

1978: ‘No end in sight’ to 30-year cooling trend
The New York Times reported that an international team of specialists had found there was “no end in sight to 30-year cooling trend in Northern Hemisphere”.

According to NASA satellite data, there is a slight warming trend since 1979.

1988: Washington, D.C. days over 90 degrees from 35 to 85
A Gannett News Service report cited NASA scientist James Hansen as saying greenhouse gas warming would lead to routine record high temperatures in the nation’s capital in the 1990s.

RealClimateScience.com notes that the number of hot days in the D.C. area peaked in 1911 and have been declining ever since.

1989: New York City’s West Side Highway underwater by 2019
An October 2001 Salon article on the greenhouse effect recalls a conversation the writer had with Hansen in 1989. Asked in 1989 to look out on Broadway in New York City and see if there was anything that would look different in 20 years, Hansen replied: “The West Side Highway [which runs along the Hudson River] will be under water.”

There are still more than 3 months left in 2019, but the West Side Highway is not under water.

2000: ‘Children won’t know what snow is’
In a report on global warming, The Independent cited Dr. David Viner, a climate researcher at the University of East Anglia, as saying, within a few years, winter snowfall would become a “rare and exciting event. Children just aren’t going to know what snow is.”

2008: Al Gore warns of ice-free Arctic by 2013
Former Vice President Al Gore said at the COP15 Climate Conference that the North Polar Ice Cap would be completely ice free by 2013. “The entire North ‘polarized’ cap will disappear in 5 years,” Gore warned the audience.

The North Polar Ice Cap is still there.

2013: Only 500 days before ‘climate chaos’
The Washington Examiner reported that French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, in a meeting with Secretary of State John Kerry in Washington, had warned that the Earth had just 500 days to avoid “climate chaos.”

In a report 500 days after the French minister’s warning, the Examiner reported that the planet was “still standing.”

View the institute’s full report here.
-------------------------
Free Press International News Service, aka: Free Pressers (@FreePressers).

---

Tags: Free Press International, News Service, Free Pressers, End is near, Climate warning outcomes, since 1967 To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Opposed & Embarrassed

by John Porter, Contributing Author: A few days ago I again overheard an argument between a couple of my friends (One a Democrat and one Republican) concerning President Trump. One of the men said, "I'm opposed to him and I want him gone, he is an embarrassment with all those d_ _ n tweets."

I have heard others use those words when referring to the president. I realize it is quite a challenge to write about this without coming across as politically motivated, but I'm going to honestly try.

I am addressing it from the "opposed" perspective, because some things which embarrass one may not embarrass another. Besides, embarrassment has little if anything to do with what is good or bad for a nation and the well being of its people. Where, on the other hand, his actions (policy wise) can and do have a profound effect on the nation and the people, presently and into the future.

With that in mind, let's together examine some results, effecting the well being of the nation, of some of President Trump's policies, and the results of his leadership efforts pertaining to his work (actions) on those policies over a period of two plus years since November, 2016. Please, for a few minutes let's lay aside any differences in political party affiliation that may exist and the bias they bring out and ask ourselves only as American citizens, except for that which embarrasses me, considering only records of fact, "just what is it that I am opposed to"?

Am I opposed to?1. An economy which, by all measurements officially used, especially GDP is growing at an astounding rate?
2. Americans unemployed, 3.7% lowest in 51 years?
3. Number of Americans employed (working) as of August, 2019: 157,878,000, highest number ever in our history?
Almost 500,000 new jobs in the manufacturing industry alone?
4. Black Americans unemployed 5.7% lowest in nation's history?
5. Hispanic and Asian Americans unemployed 4.2% lowest in history?
6. American women unemployed 4.1% lowest in 65 years?
7. Lowest unemployment of America's war Veterans in 18 years at 3.4%?
8. Presently more jobs available than workers to fill them?
9. 3,600,000 Americans leave the food stamp rolls for living wage jobs?
10. Most American citizens taking home more money because of the reduction of personal and corporate income taxes and higher paying jobs? Median Household Annual Income has risen by 4.2% to $65,084?
11. The return of American soldiers lost in Korea?
12. Appointing of Federal judges who will uphold our Constitution, including the Supreme Court? 162 as of today? (Sept 17, 2019)
13. The fact that in dealings with all foreign nations, friend and foe alike, he puts the interests of the American people first?
14. Keeping us safe from foreign enemies by building our military complex, (those who protect and defend our freedom and sovereignty) to the most powerful on the planet?
15. Trying to secure our nations borders from uninvited intruders, just as we all do our homes and businesses?
16. New and improved trade agreements with Japan, Mexico, Canada and South Korea?
17. Erasing hundreds of stifling government regulations on business and individuals?
18. NATO allies now paying their agreed to share for their defense instead of the U.S. paying the defense bill?Now place these results (there are many more) on one side of a pair of scales of what's best for America, and his tweets and the other things he does which embarrass you on the other, and see which way it tips. Be perfectly honest with yourself.

Ask yourself again, "just what is it I am opposed to?" I could have listed more, but for now sit quietly somewhere alone and consider for yourself one at a time which of the above actions and policy results of President Trump's would you change or reverse and how would you do it and why would you do it and when. If we elect a Democrat congress and president in 2020 all you have just read will be wiped out completely. That is precisely the how and when. The why will be for your own conscience to live with.

Love him or hate him, President Trump, through his work, is keeping us safe and is increasing the opportunities for the American people to improve their lives.

We need to hire him again next year, along with help in the House and Senate, so he may finish his work.
------------------
John Porter is an Americans first, constitutional conservatives second. His allegiance is to the Constitution. He seeks to help save America from the grips of socialism and an all powerful, intrusive government, and from the evil of Islam. He is a contributing author to the ARRA News Service.

---

Tags: John Porter, Opposed & Embarrassed, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Poll on Voting

by Kerby Anderson, Contributing Author: Voters need to trust in the integrity of the ballot box. That is why we should enact common sense protections. But in our age of political division, even common-sense provisions are sometimes attacked as an attempt at voter suppression and voter intimidation.

Fortunately, a new poll found that most Americans (at least in Texas) agree with attempts to ensure the integrity of the vote. The Dallas Morning News provided a summary of the Texas Lyceum poll and found that Republicans and Democrats alike expressed greater than 70 percent support for four key ideas.

First, require electronic voting machines to print a paper backup of the ballot. Both Republicans (82%) and Democrats (84%) supported this provision.

Second, automatically remove inaccurate and duplicate registrations from voter lists. In this case, 86 percent of Republicans and 77 percent of Democrats agreed with this provision.

Third, require voters to show a government-issued photo identification to vote. This is where there was the biggest split. Nearly all (90%) Republicans approved of this measure, while only 72 percent of Democrats agreed. Fourth, there should be automatic updating of voter registrations when people move.

To its credit, the editorial board of the Dallas Morning News approved of each of these provisions. They understand that having a printed backup of voting machines makes sense. They also agree that we should be cleaning out bad registration information.

And they acknowledge that requiring a voter ID has been controversial. But they add that “nearly everything in our lives requires an ID, from renting a home to cashing a paycheck to getting medical care.” All of us can add many other activities that require an ID. This should not be seen as a major burden.

This recent poll reminds us that most Americans endorse common-sense provisions in order to have voter integrity.
----------------
Kerby Anderson (@kerbyanderson) is a radio talk show host heard on numerous stations via the Point of View Network (@PointofViewRTS) and is endorsed by Dr. Bill Smith, Editor, ARRA News Service.

---

Tags: Kerby Anderson, Viewpoints, Point of View, Poll on Voting To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Listen to the Warm

Greta Thunberg

by Paul Jacob, Contributing Author: I like publicity stunts as much as the next activist. But haven’t we had enough of the whole Greta Thunberg bit yet?

On Wednesday, the 16-year-old Swede provided testimony on an apt stage, let us grant her that — the U.S. House of Representatives’ foreign affairs subcommittee joint hearing on the global youth climate change movement.

She didn’t prepare any remarks, though. She merely “attached” the IPCC Special Report on Global Warming “as her testimony.” Her rationale? “I don’t want you to listen to me, I want you to listen to the scientists.” And “to unite behind science.”

You know, for “real action.”

It was what happened right after she demanded “real action,” though, where the stark reality of the situation became clear: a grown man in a suit, elected to Congress, asked, “Could you expand on why it’s so important to listen to the science?”

And then the non-scientist spoke . . . not very expansively.

Forget that science qua science isn’t to be “listened to,” it is to be engaged in, with conjectures, research and refutations. (There was nothing like that at the hearing.) Forget also that the science is increasingly less clear on the severity of what warming we see. Remember only that an elected official used a girl to imbue a text (the IPCC report) with moral legitimacy, dubbing it “best available ‘united science’” — the better to push an unargued-for massive coercive government intervention into the life of our civilization.

Is no adult in the room ashamed of what they are doing . . . exploiting a cute youngster to subvert rationality?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
------------------
Paul Jacob (@Common_Sense_PJ ) 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. Jacob is a contributing author on the ARRA News Service.

---

Tags: Paul Jacob, Common Sense, Listen to the Warm, Greta Thunberg To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!