Tuesday, June 29, 2010
It's now up to Richard Blumenthal, the CT Attorney General who lied about his service in Vietnam.
Let AG Blumenthal know how you feel -- Ph: (860) 808-5318 / Fax: (860) 808-5387 / Email: email@example.com.
From TPP Facebook page via Fox News --
A group of retired Marines is asking Connecticut's attorney general to allow the "Don't Tread on Me" Gadsden flag to fly over the state Capitol on July 4 after Capitol Police refused the request saying it doesn’t fall within the state’s flag flying parameters.
The group says the yellow banner, which sports a coiled rattlesnake and its trademark motto, is the original flag of the U.S. Marine Corps and clearly fits into the section of the policy which states that the Connecticut State Capitol can fly “flags of recognized military organizations of the U.S.A.”
But Capitol Police have denied several requests to fly the flag -- More...
Saturday, June 26, 2010
Already starting to get upset over the impact on the environment by illegal immigrants, the tree-huggers have now set their sights on the green energy goons.
From Public Employees for Enviromental Responsibility --
For Immediate Release:
June 25, 2010
Contact: Kirsten Stade (202) 265-7337
HEAVY TOLL ON WILDLIFE PROMPTS LAWSUIT AGAINST CAPE WIND — Scientific Reviews of Impact on Endangered and Threatened Birds Skewed
Washington, DC — A coalition of groups filed suit today against federal agencies responsible for approving the proposed Cape Wind turbine farm on the grounds that the project will exact a terrible toll on federally protected migratory birds. The suit contends that required scientific studies were not done and that mandated protective measures were ignored in approving the controversial 130-turbine project slated for Nantucket Sound, a principal bird migration corridor off the Massachusetts coast.
The lawsuit filed today in federal district court in Washington, D.C. contends that the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement (until recently known as the Minerals Management Service) and Fish and Wildlife Service violated the Endangered Species Act, Migratory Bird Treat Act, and National Environmental Policy Act in green-lighting the offshore wind farm. Plaintiffs include Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), Cetacean Society International, Lower Laguna Madre Foundation, Californians for Renewable Energy (CARE), Three Bays Preservation and the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound, as well as Cindy Lowry, Barbara Durkin, and Martha Powers. They are represented by the Washington, D.C. public interest law firm Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal.
Among the issues raised by the suit are the –
- Refusal to adopt recommended protective measures for the endangered Roseate Tern and the threatened Piping Plover, such as shutting turbines down during peak migration periods;
- Refusal to collect or submit acoustic, radar, infrared, or observational data on bird migration; and
- Failure to prepare a supplemental environmental impact statement when new information came to light that a large aggregation of the highly imperiled North Atlantic Right Whale was present in the project area.
As a result of these failures, there is no reliable information on how many birds will perish in the huge turbine blades despite requirements that the best scientific information must be used. In addition, there are questions about whether the project will harm, harass, or kill critically endangered Right Whales.
“We are in this lawsuit because science was manipulated and suppressed for political reasons to which the Obama administration turned a blind eye,” stated PEER New England Director Kyla Bennett, a biologist and lawyer formerly with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, noting the role of the (now former) Minerals Management Service and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar. “Condemning rare birds to extinction is not required for offshore wind development.”
A January 2010 Interior Inspector General report found that the agencies reviewing the project’s environmental impact study were unnecessarily rushed in their reviews because of the applicant’s desire to complete the environmental review prior to the exodus of the Bush Administration. Moreover, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service biologists protested that the lack of data that made it impossible to adequately assess the project’s impacts on birds. The agency then reassigned the lead biologist.
“After years of personally witnessing the destruction of precious coastal habitat to wind industrial complexes, I am disturbed to see the federal agencies entrusted with the protection of our public waters act so recklessly in approving the Cape Wind project,” concluded Walt Kittelberger, Chairman of the Lower Laguna Madre Foundation.
In almost everything President Obama says or does, he himself labels or qualifies it as "unprecedented." These days things simple as sharpening a pencil has become monumental and of course, "unprecedented," for our President. Boy, aren't we lucky!?!
Our "unprecedented & unpresidential" POTUS, through his Democrat controlled Congress, delivered another "unprecedented" kick in the teeth of Lady Liberty and the voice of freedom she so beautifully sings on our behalf by breaking her pencil of Free Speech in two!
By passing the Democracy is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in Elections (DISCLOSE) bill (H.R. 5175) & defying the Supreme Court ruling on Citizens United that they were unhappy with, Congress has officially redefined our 1st Amendment right of Free Speech to a Selective Right to Free Speech.
They, Congress, being the ones who "selects" what should be allowed as Free Speech. Do you start to hear the rhythmical cadence of goose-stepping off in the distance?
Masquerading behind the as-advertised intent of bringing transparency to the political & campaign process, the backroom politiking of special deals & the cloaking of transparency used by Congress to pass this bill is equivalent to hypocrisy in unprecedented levels....From National Review Online --
According to the Center for Competitive Politics, they sent one of their staffers to attend the hearing, but she was barred from entry. Apparently, as CCP pointedly said, “their version of democracy wasn’t strong enough to allow regular folks to attend their rubber-stamp hearing for the bill.”The ACLU & conservatives agreeing? Yep, the mouth piece of the progressive left is even unhappy that a brown shirt type gag will be placed on the American public. The following can be attributed to Laura W. Murphy, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office:
The Rules Committee decided to allow only one hour of debate before a vote, which will probably occur either Thursday or Friday. All GOP motions, including one to extend the debate to four hours, were rejected. The Democrats believe that only one hour of free speech is needed before voting on a bill that will severely restrict free speech.
An effort to allow a vote on eliminating the NRA exemption was defeated, thus guaranteeing a two-tiered system of First Amendment rules for political speech. The Democratic leadership will only allow floor votes on five amendments. The first would require covered organizations to report required disclosures to shareholders, members, and donors in a “clear and conspicuous manner.” The second would prohibit any company with leases on the Outer Continental Shelf from making campaign-related expenditures. In other words, Congress would silence companies that are in favor of oil and gas drilling, but not the critics of offshore drilling. One could not find a starker example of how this bill is intended to silence those whose political views the liberals don’t like.
A third amendment covers corporations with significant ownership by foreign governments or foreign nationals; a fourth amendment would force disclaimers on advertisements to include the city and state of the funder’s residence or principle office. This will lengthen the required disclaimers even more — even the ACLU says that these new disclaimer requirements are so burdensome that “they would either drown out the intended message or discourage groups from speaking out at all.”
"Our Constitution embraces public discussion of matters that are important to our nation's future, and it respects the right of individuals to support those conversations without being exposed to unnecessary risks of harassment or embarrassment. Only reforms that promote speech, rather than limit it, and apply evenhandedly, rather than selectively, will bring positive change to our elections."
Regardless of partisan leanings, color, creed, underwear size, hairstyle, etc... every U.S. citizen has the right to Free Speech. We may not like what someone has to say.... but this inherent right was one of the basic building blocks for the founding of our country and to ensure our freedom must be protected.For a Roll Call of the vote Click Here.
Rep. Dean Heller (R-NV) Questions Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis about PSA offering Free Legal Advice to Illegal Immigrants
June 24, 2010
The Honorable Hilda Solis
Secretary of Labor
U.S. Department of Labor
200 Constitution Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20210
Dear Secretary Solis,
I am very concerned by the public service announcement you recorded which was recently released by the U.S. Department of Labor. In the announcement, you stated that “every worker in America has the right to be paid fairly, whether documented or not,” and invited individuals to make a “free and confidential” call if they believe their employer is engaging in unfair pay practices.
Many of my constituents understandably object to the Department of Labor providing taxpayer-funded legal advice to illegal immigrants. Businesses should not hire undocumented workers in the first place. As you know, U.S. law requires employees to present documents establishing their identity and authorization to work at the time they are hired. An employer must check those documents and cannot knowingly hire someone who is not authorized to work in this country. Companies that hire undocumented workers should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
Furthermore, the provision of taxpayer-funded assistance to undocumented workers raises serious legal questions. In the past, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the enforcement of certain labor laws on behalf of undocumented workers would conflict with policies under U.S. immigration laws (Hoffman Plastic Compounds, Inc. v. NLRB, No. 00-1595 (S. Ct. 2002)).
For these reasons, I ask that the Department of Labor consider changing and reissuing the “fair pay” public service announcement. I believe verbiage clarifying the responsibilities of both employers and workers under the law is important. In addition, I respectfully request a response in writing from you describing why, in light of the potential conflicts in law, the Department of Labor believes that offering taxpayer-funded legal assistance to undocumented workers is appropriate. These resources could be more appropriately directed toward employers that knowingly hire illegal immigrants.
While I share your support for ensuring that workers receive every cent they earn, I also believe all branches of government must work together to uphold the rule of law in our nation. Only an orderly and equitable system of legal immigration can ensure that both the security and labor needs of our nation are met, and the Department of Labor should play a key role in this process.
Member of Congress
The Labor Secretary’s PSA can be seen at http://bit.ly/9nqcqe.
Friday, June 25, 2010
With the signature of Democratic Governor Phil Bredesen, Tennessee became the first state today to protect the rights of businesses to have English-in-the-workplace policies where there is a “legitimate business necessity.”
The bill, which passed overwhelmingly with bipartisan support in the state House and Senate, was designed to comply with rules set by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and to protect businesses from lawsuits. Federal courts have affirmed that businesses can require their employees to speak English during business operations and for safety reasons.
Mauro E. Mujica, Chairman of the Board/CEO of U.S. English, Inc. issued the following statement following the governor’s signature:Today, the rights of thousands of business owners in Tennessee are protected from frivolous lawsuits because they require their employees to speak English in the workplace. This law not only protects the rights of businesses to make the decisions that best suit their company, it reaffirms the important role that English plays in our country and economy.
It is my hope that other states will look to Tennessee and take up such important and necessary legislation. I extend my congratulations and thanks to the governor and legislature for taking this important step and passing the nation’s first-ever English-in-the-workplace law.
The Tennessee law mirrors federal legislation introduced by Rep. Tom Price (GA-6) that would guarantee the freedom for businesses to implement English-in-the-workplace policies. Known as the Common Sense English Act, H.R. 1588 has sixty-five co-sponsors and is currently pending in Congress.
In 2007 Secretary of Energy Steven Chu shows his buddies at BP some love....
As we see, President Spend-A-Lot & his merry band of congressional misfits have ignored these warnings.
The below report stresses the same concerns - STOP spending us into oblivion....
From The Heritage Foundation --
Over $10 trillion in welfare spending will drive the nation to bankruptcy unless Congress puts on the brakes and passes reforms that hold increases to inflation, tie government assistance to work and encourage other responsible behavior, a new report from The Heritage Foundation concludes.
“Careful policy reforms focused on fiscal restraint, strong work requirements, the promotion of marriage and personal responsibility can transform the federal welfare system,” the report states, “reducing dependence on government and increasing the well-being of families and children.”
The Heritage study, co-authored by welfare experts Robert Rector and Katherine (Kiki) Bradley, arrives as President Obama and congressional leaders seek to push through $2.5 billion more in “emergency” welfare spending.
Using the recession as cover, liberals continue to undo the welfare reforms – including work requirements for able-bodied adults – passed by Congress in 1996 and signed into law by President Clinton. Taxpayers would be better served if lawmakers instead looked to common-sense controls on the nation’s six dozen welfare programs as part of the solution to runaway federal spending and resulting budget crisis, Heritage argues.
Welfare spending totals $953 billion in Obama’s fiscal 2011 budget request – a jump of 42 percent from fiscal 2008, the final complete budget year of George W. Bush’s presidency. The Obama administration plans to spend more than $10.3 trillion on means-tested welfare – or about $100,000 for everyone in the poorest third of the population.
Hear podcast: Heritage’s Katherine (Kiki) Bradley on welfare spending.
Rather than continue to allow unrestrained growth in the more than 70 anti-poverty programs, Bradley and Rector recommend that, once the current recession ends, Congress should roll back welfare spending to pre-recession levels and limit future increases to the rate of inflation. This cap would save $1.4 trillion in 10 years.
Today only one welfare program, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), effectively promotes self-reliance. Reforms that created TANF in 1996 – largely inspired by Rector’s research and writing for Heritage – moved 2.8 million families off the welfare rolls and into jobs. Those gains are being reversed as the Obama administration and congressional leadership undo the signature employment and training requirements enacted 14 years ago. Click to read more....
Thursday, June 24, 2010
The EPA is taking public comments and suggestions on the draft of their Strategic Plan for FY 2011-2015. The EPA Draft Plan includes "strategic measures, the specific measurable environmental and human health outcomes the Agency will achieve over the next five years."
The EPA Draft Plan "introduces five cross-cutting fundamental strategies which set explicit expectations for changing the way EPA does business in achieving its mission results.
The five "cross-cutting fundemental strategies" include;
- Taking action on climate change and improving air quality
- Protecting America’s waters
- Cleaning up our communities
- Ensuring the safety of chemicals and preventing pollution
- Enforcing environmental laws
From the EPA --
Release date: 06/18/2010
Contact Information: Enesta Jones, firstname.lastname@example.org, 202-564-7873, 202-564-4355;
Contacto en español: Lina Younes, email@example.com, 202-564-9924, 202-564-4355
WASHINGTON - The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is seeking public comment on its draft FY 2011-2015 strategic plan, which helps advance Administrator Lisa P. Jackson’s priorities and the mission to protect human health and the environment. Administrator Jackson’s seven priorities are; taking action on climate change, improving air quality, protecting America’s waters, cleaning up our communities, assuring the safety of chemicals, expanding the conversation on environmentalism and working for environmental justice, and building strong state and tribal partnerships.
The draft plan identifies the measurable environmental and human health benefits the public can expect over the next five years and describes how EPA intends to achieve those results. The draft plan proposes five strategic goals and five cross-cutting fundamental strategies that aim to foster a renewed commitment to accountability, transparency and inclusion. The plan is prepared in accordance with the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993.
The public comment period begins June 18 and closes July 30. EPA will use stakeholder feedback to prepare the final strategic plan, which will be released by September 30. Comments on the draft strategic plan may be submitted through http://www.regulations.gov. The Docket ID number is EPA-HQ-OA-2010-0486.
For the first time, EPA is using a discussion forum to solicit ideas and feedback on the cross-cutting fundamental strategies, a new element of EPA’s strategic plan. The agency will use the feedback provided through https://blog.epa.gov/strategicplan as it implements the cross-cutting fundamental strategies and takes actions to change the way EPA does its work.
Information about the draft plan: http://www.epa.gov/ocfo/plan/plan.htm
Let your voices be heard!
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
From New Patriot Journal via RedState
It doesn’t matter that nearly all House Republicans are against it, and a good number of Democrats besides. It doesn’t matter that ATR is against it, CNBC warns it could “kill the Internet,” or that we just don’t need it.
The FCC has gone ahead and put out a Notice of Inquiry to go ahead with Deem and Pass reclassification of ISPs away from being “information services” under the law, which was the plainly obvious intent of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. You see, in Comcast v. FCC, the courts have strictly limited how much regulation the FCC can do of information services. So, the FCC is going to declare that ISPs are now phone companies, and regulate accordingly.
I’m sure for some of us I’m sounding horribly repetitive on this. I know myself I’ve typed variations on the above sentences more times than I can count. But those were just the warnings. It is now beginning to happen. They’re just calling it the “third way” and not “deem and pass” as I do.
But make no mistake: It’s the same thing, and the neo-Marxists behind it are overjoyed. For Free Press, “Third Way”/”Deem and Pass”/Title II reclassification is a step toward not just “Net Neutrality,” but the broader “media reform” they’re after. Media reform of course is what Free Press calls state run media in America. Think of it as single payer socialized medicine, only for news reporting.
Oddly enough though, as Jon Henke points out they’re giving FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski very little credit for this, instead showering praise on their pet commissioner Michael Copps along with commissioner Mignon Clyburn. Is there a split here we need to exploit? Let’s watch for that.
Because this plan must be defeated, either by preventing its passage at the FCC or by passing a law to forbid it or (should it be accomplished first) passing a law to reverse it. Look, even the AFL-CIO, Communications Workers of America, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, League of United Latin American Citizens, Minority Media and Telecom Council, NAACP, National Urban League, and Sierra Club want the Congress to act on this, not the runaway FCC.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Call & Fax Your Members of Congress NOW, Urging them to Voice their Opposition to an Executive-Order Amnesty
Yesterday, several Senators led by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) learned of a possible plan by the White House to provide an Amnesty to the nation's estimated 11-18 million illegal aliens through an executive order. The move would take immigration enforcement out of the hands of Congress and place it in the hands of the Executive Branch. Read this letter, send this fax to your Members of Congress, send this fax to Pres. Obama, and call your Members of Congress at (202) 224-3121 to express your outrage at Pres. Obama's plan to provide Amnesty through Executive Order.
Saturday, June 19, 2010
This was pretty much expected....
From CBS News --
As Hotsheet reported yesterday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in a television interview in Ecuador this month that the Obama Justice Department "will be bringing a lawsuit" against the controversial Arizona immigration measure signed into law earlier this year.
The comment was striking because both President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder had said only that the administration was considering a suit. Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, who signed the law, called Clinton's comments stunning and added that "to learn of this lawsuit through an Ecuadorean interview with the secretary of state is just outrageous." She has said in the past she is prepared for a court fight.
It was unclear yesterday whether Clinton's comments were simply a prediction or mistake or whether instead she was getting ahead of a planned announcement by the administration.
Now a senior administration official tells CBS News that the federal government will indeed formally challenge the law when Justice Department lawyers are finished building the case. The official said Justice is still working on building the case.
Even though the federal government refuses to do their job and enforce the federal immigration laws, they have no problem launching a full-frontal assault on the rule of law in Arizona -- that being the State of AZ Constitution.
It because of these types of over-reaching, unconstitutional, state sovereignty smashing & complete disregard for the rule of law tactics we see coming out of D.C. that the citizens in the State of OH must prepare and arm ourselves with lawful measures protecting our state sovereignty.
PCCOH) get the State Sovereignty Amendment to the OH Constitution on the ballot you can help protect the rights afforded to us as citizens in the State of Ohio and hopefully stop the onslaught of unconstitutional authorization, legislation and regulation being mandated & passed by this administration.
Go to the PCCOH website (click here) & sign up to sign or help circulate petitions.
We are also encouraging member to ask their local City Council or Township Trustee's to pass a resolution in support of Arizona's new immigration law. For a copy of the Resolution Supporting AZ's Immigration Law click here.
Friday, June 18, 2010
Dear Fellow Tea Party Patriots,
We have received information from Capitol Hill regarding the "Disclose Act" and we must work to defeat this bill. The vote was expected to take place today. But after complaints from the conservative Blue Dogs and the Congressional Black Caucus, Pelosi was forced to pull the bill on Thursday night. Democratic leadership aides said the vote would be rescheduled for next week.
On April 29, 2010, Congressman Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) introduced H.R. 5175, the Democracy is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in Elections (DISCLOSE) Act. The bill is a direct response to Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (McCain- Feingold) - a First Amendment victory in which the Supreme Court overturned the prohibition on corporations and unions using treasury funds for independent expenditures supporting or opposing political candidates at any time of the year. Simply put, the DISCLOSE Act will limit the political speech that was protected and encouraged by Citizens United.
Speaker Pelosi and the House Majority Leadership are making it a priority to pass this bill. This bill is designed to take away the influence of Tea Party and other conservative groups in the upcoming November election. We feel like this bill will be successfully challenged in the courts, but the ruling will not come before the November election.
An exemption has been carved out for the Labor Unions and other leftist advocacy groups. The NRA was also exempted so they would not oppose it.
Roll Call Magazine reports today that they have carved out even deeper exemptions in order to assure passage and we believe it clearly shows the intent of the bill is to diminish the effectiveness of Tea Party groups and other newer conservative advocacy groups.
"Facing wide-ranging blowback from an exemption tailored for the National Rifle Association, House Democratic leaders have decided to expand the carve-out from disclosure requirements in a campaign finance measure they are trying to pass this week.
The new standard lowers the membership requirement for outside groups from 1 million members to 500,000. Those groups would still need to have members in 50 states, have existed for 10 years and can accept no more than 15 percent of their funding from corporate or union sources. The broader bill, called the DISCLOSE Act, comes in response to the controversial Supreme Court decision in January that struck down limits on corporate and union spending in elections. The bill would force groups participating in elections to name their top donors, among other changes."
We need you to make phone calls, send emails and faxes and urge the Congressmen listed below to vote no on this bill. If you are a NRA member, we urge that you email the NRA and ask them to oppose this bill.
Together, we can make a difference!
NRA - CCox@NRAHQ.org and KeeneD@CarmenGroup.com
Blue Dog Co-Chair for Administration
Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (SD)
202-225-2801 / 202-225-5823
Blue Dog Co-Chair for Policy
Rep. Baron Hill (IN-09)
202-225-5315 / 202-226-6866
Blue Dog Co-Chair for Communications
Rep. Jim Matheson (UT-02)
202-225-3011 / 202 225-5638
Space, Zack (OH-18) 202-225-6265 / 202-225-3394
Altmire, Jason (PA-04) 202-225-2565 / 202-226-2274
Baca, Joe (CA-43) 202-225-6161 / 202-225-8671
Barrow, John (GA-12) 202-225-2823 / 202-225-3377
Berry, Marion (AR-01) 202-225-4076 / 202-225-5602
Bishop, Sanford (GA-02) 202-225-3631 / 202-225-2203
Boren, Dan (OK-02) 202-225-2701 / 202-225-3038
Boyd, Allen (FL-02) 202-225-5235 / 202-225-5615
Bright, Bobby (AL-02) 202-225-2901 / 202-225-8913
Cardoza, Dennis (CA-18) 202-225-6131
Carney, Christopher (PA-10) 202-225-3731
Childers, Travis (MS-01) 202-225-4306 / 202-225-3549
Cooper, Jim (TN-05) 202-225-4311 / 202-226-1035
Costa, Jim (CA-20) 202-225-3341 / 202-225-9308
Cuellar, Henry (TX-28) 202-225-1640 / 202-225-1641
Dahlkemper, Kathy (PA-03) 202-225-5406 / 202-225-3103
Davis, Lincoln (TN-04) 202-225-6831 / 202-226-5172
Donnelly, Joe (IN-02) 202-225-3915 / 202-225-6798
Gordon, Bart (TN-06) 202-225-4231
Holden, Tim (PA-17) 202-225-5546 / 202-226-0996
Kratovil, Jr., Frank (MD-01) 202- 225-5311 / 202-225-0254
McIntyre, Mike (NC-07) 202-225-2731 / 202-225-5773
Markey, Betsy (CO-04) 202-225.4676 / 202-225-5870
Marshall, Jim (GA-08) 202-225-6531 / 202-225-3013
Matheson, Jim (UT-02) 202-225-3011 / 202-225-5638
Melancon, Charlie (LA-03) 202-225-4031 / 202-226-3944
Michaud, Mike (ME-02) 202-225-6306 / 202-225-2943
Minnick, Walt (ID-01) 202-225-6611 / 202-225-3029
Mitchell, Harry (AZ-05) 202-225-2190
Moore, Dennis (KS-03) 202-225-2865 / 202) 225-2807
Murphy, Scott (NY-20) 202-225-5614 / 202-225-1168
Nye, Glenn (VA-02) 202-225-4215 / 202-225-4218
Peterson, Collin (MN-07) 202-225-2165 / 202-225-1593
Salazar, John (CO-03) 202-225-4761 / 202-226-9669
Scott, David (GA-13) 202-225-2939 / 202-225-4628
Tanner, John (TN-08) 202-225-4714 / 202-225-1765
Taylor, Gene (MS-04) 202-225-5772 / 202.225.7074
You are the heart and soul of the Tea Party Movement. Thank you for promoting the causes of fiscal responsibility, constitutionally limited government, and free markets with us!
Immigration Law Watchdog Group Asks OH Inspector General to Investigate Illegal Lobbying by Ohio Latino Commission
From PRNewswire-USNewswire --
WASHINGTON, June 16 / -- The Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI) has filed a complaint with the Ohio Inspector General against the Ohio Commission on Hispanic Latino Affairs (OCHLA). The complaint, filed on behalf of eight Ohio citizens alleges that OCHLA violated Ohio law by actively lobbying the state legislature to provide favorable treatment for illegal aliens and ignore their unlawful immigration status.
OCHLA is an Ohio state agency created in 1977 to advise the Governor, General Assembly and other state agencies on the needs of Spanish-speaking citizens, especially in the fields of "education, employment, energy, health, housing, welfare and recreation." OCHLA also works to improve access for Spanish speakers to the state legislature and local governments in Ohio. As a state agency, OCHLA is required to carry out its taxpayer-funded mandate in a strictly non-partisan and lawful manner.
"There is enough information to reasonably believe that a violation has occurred. We urge the Ohio Inspector General to launch a full investigation on behalf of the taxpayers," said Trista Chaney, the IRLI staff attorney who assisted the citizens to prepare the complaint.
In their complaint, the citizens identify multiple occasions where OCHLA commissioners allegedly engaged in unauthorized lobbying on behalf of illegal aliens. Lobbying Activity Center reports for 2009 show that OCHLA Public Policy Director Florentina Staigers did not engage in any advocacy on behalf of Spanish-speaking citizens that year, but instead repeatedly lobbied on behalf of illegal alien causes. The complaint also identifies February 2010 testimony by Lupe Williams, an OCHLA board member, which contained no advice for the General Assembly on how proposed legislation would affect Spanish-speaking citizens, but instead urged lawmakers to show illegal aliens special consideration.
According to the citizens, OCHLA's 2010 Latino Community Report on Global Diversity for the 128th General Assembly contains various false or distorted statements, such as "being in the U.S. without papers is not a crime," which the citizens contend were intended to persuade legislators to ignore federal immigration laws and provide illegal aliens the public benefits and privileges available to Spanish-speaking citizens.
In a statement explaining why she approached IRLI for assistance in preparing the complaint, grassroots immigration activist, Julie Aldrich said: "As citizens opposed to state encouragement of illegal immigration, we just got fed up with seeing taxpayer-funded lobbyists from OCHLA showing up at hearings and issuing statements that undermine the rule of law in our state."
The Office of the Inspector General is currently reviewing the complaint and will decide whether to take action with a full investigation into the alleged violations.
The Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI) is a Washington DC-based public interest law group that assists citizens to take legal action to fight the problems of illegal immigration at the state and local levels.
For further information about the complaint, please contract IRLI at firstname.lastname@example.org or 202-232-5590.
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
But are the really helping?
Last years Stimulus put $1.2 Billion towards creating jobs for youths, as we can see, like most of the break the bank spending coming out of D.C. -- it didn't work....
From ABC News --
The "American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act," sponsored by Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.), comes during high levels of youth unemployment. In July 2009, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported the national youth unemployment rate between ages 16 and 24 was 18.5 percent, the highest since the statistics were first recorded in 1948.
"I hope logic will prevail," New York State Labor Commissioner Colleen Gardner, pushing for its passage, told ABCNews.com. "We can't just look at it as a billion dollars, we're looking at the future of young people and an economic development tool because the money goes to economies in our United States."
Gardner hopes logic will prevail out of this shell game? Exactly what logic is that -- Teach children that it is our government that is supposed to create jobs? It sounds more like indoctrinating children with the thoughts that it is the purpose of our government to be the almighty creator of jobs. This is nothing more than buying future votes for socialist "of the state, by the state" policies.
This money being taken out of our economy NOT going into it. If teens were hired by businesses needing summer help or filling part time positions because of increased consumer spending -- it would be money going into the economy.
It also appears Gardner is using the same failed math calculations created for the current & often incorrect estimates of the Administration for current adult job creation which would be the same math President Obama used to get 57 States (48+2=57) for the amount of teen jobs created if this bill passes....
If the bill passes, Gardner said it could create 20,000 summer jobs in New York, where unemployment between ages 16 and 24 is at 17.9 percent with a statewide general rate of 8.6 percent. Apart from good habits, Gardner added that summer jobs were also important for the local economy because many teens often quickly turn around to spend that money in their own community, showing what's called "high-velocity dollars."
Jobs for teenagers and young adults are being swept away now by a perfect storm of dwindling stimulus money for youth employment and slim state revenues. "It's a combination of factors that's hitting at the same time," said Jonathan Larsen, policy associate at the National Youth Employment Coalition, noting that last year's stimulus tapped $1.2 billion for youth jobs.
The perfect storm Larsen refers to is a man-made disaster -- a perfect $53 trillion & growing man-made storm of disastrous proportions created by unsustainable entitlement spending & bankrupting the future of the "blinded by bailout dollars" teens they are supposed to be helping. In effect they are creating a generation of how will the government help me now teens that will be like indentured servants to the same government that supposedly helped them get a job!
Monday, June 14, 2010
From ABC News --
While a possible increase in taxes on the "carried interest" of hedge fund and private equity money managers is getting all the attention, in the same bill Congress is also creating a tax mess for small-business owners in the form of an $11 billion tax hike over the next 10 years.
The tax increase was included in H.R. 4213, a peddler's wagon of legislation (new spending, physicians' reimbursement, extensions of expired tax breaks, etc.) that was passed by the House in a narrow vote just before Memorial Day and is now being considered by the Senate. The Democratic-backed Senate version of the bill includes the same tax on small business.
The tax hit affects the owners of small S corporations (a common way many small businesses are organized) in "professional service businesses"--doctors, lawyers, accountants, engineers, architects and so on. An S corp pays no taxes but passes through all its profits to its owners' tax returns, even when those profits or "distributions" are reinvested in the business.
So what is a professional service business? Lawyers, accountants, doctors, dentists, architects, athletes, performing artists, consultants all will be included, according to the statute.
Note this new tax is imposed regardless of the dollars involved; it doesn't matter if, as an S corporation owner, you had $300,000 or $30,000 in nonwage profits--this tax will hit you.
Why is Congress raising taxes now on small-business owners? It is to offset other items in this same bill that the House wants--not just the extension of tax breaks but spending such as the Build America Bonds provision, which provides $28 billion in highly subsidized bond authority to state and local governments (with getting millions in fees). Read More....
And our current Congress claims they are for the little guy!
Please let Congressman Etheridge know how you feel about his disgraceful & criminal actions!
Rep. Bob Etheridge
1533 Longworth House Office Bldg
Washington, D.C. 20515
Sunday, June 13, 2010
In a late Friday afternoon blog post followed by a fuller early evening report, David Hogberg and Sean Higgins at Investors Business Daily confirmed that Obama’s never-credible core promise is on the brink of being shattered, and that the employer-related calculations by Cato’s Cannon were essentially correct (graphically illustrated by IBD at the top right):
Earlier this year, in his “Can we lose health coverage? Yes we can” column, syndicated columnist Deroy Murdock made a point asserted in dozens if not hundreds of columns and reports during the hide-and-seek legistlative process that ultimately led to the passage of what is commonly known as ObamaCare: The President’s core promise relating to the statist health care legislation that ultimately became law in March — namely that “If you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan. Period. No one will take it away. No matter what” — could not and would not be kept.
In that column, Murdock quoted Cato Institute analyst Michael Cannon as follows:“Obama’s definition of ‘meaningful’ coverage could eliminate the health plans that now cover as many as half of the 159 million Americans with employer-sponsored insurance, plus more than half of the roughly 18 million Americans in the individual market. … This could compel close to 90 million Americans to switch to more comprehensive health plans with higher premiums, whether they value the added coverage or not.”
Internal administration documents reveal that up to 51% of employers may have to relinquish their current health care coverage because of ObamaCare.
Small firms will be even likelier to lose existing plans.
The “midrange estimate is that 66% of small employer plans and 45% of large employer plans will relinquish their grandfathered status by the end of 2013,” according to the document.
In the worst-case scenario, 69% of employers — 80% of smaller firms — would lose that status, exposing them to far more provisions under the new health law.
…. The 83-page document, a joint project of the departments of Health and Human Services, Labor and the IRS, examines the effects that ObamaCare’s regulations would have on existing, or “grandfathered,” employer-based health care plans.
Draft copies of the document were reportedly leaked to House Republicans during the week and began circulating Friday morning. Rep. Bill Posey, R-Fla., posted it on his Web site Friday afternoon.
… In a statement, Posey said the document showed that the arguments in favor of ObamaCare were a “bait and switch.”
… (A White House) source conceded: “It is difficult to predict how plans and employers will behave in the coming years, but if plans make changes that negatively impact consumers, then they will lose their grandfather status.”
… In total, 66% of small businesses and 47% of large businesses made a change in their health care plans last year that would have forfeited their grandfathered status.
When one looks at the list of what would cause a plan to get de-grandfathered compiled by Hogberg and Higgins, it’s easy to see why the percentages are so large.
The referenced Treasury document (an 83-page PDF) lays out how employers might react to the new law on Page 36:
Plan sponsors and issuers can decide to:
- Continue offering the plan or coverage in effect on March 23, 2010 with limited changes, and thereby retain grandfathered status;
- Significantly change the terms of the plan or coverage and comply with Affordable Care Act provisions from which grandfathered health plans are excepted; or
- In the case of a plan sponsor, cease to offer any plan.
Option 1 would be nice, but as the IBD reporters noted in the bolded paragraph in the excerpt above, most employers would have run afoul of it during the past year. This means that they would have been forced into Options 2 or 3. Employers choosing Option 2 would have to buy pre-designed and very expensive coverage through the bill’s health insurance exchanges. Employers choosing Option 3 would force their employees to buy pre-designed and very expensive coverage through those same exchanges.
If the legislation stands, the end result over a not very long time will be that the large majority of employers and employees will be stuck in the exchanges, the roach motels of health care — Once you go in, you can’t come out. Statist mission accomplished.
The Associated Press has noticed the story too, but with the weakest of headlines: “Health overhaul to force changes in employer plans.” The content isn’t much better. Earth to AP reporter Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar: ObamaCare, as predicted by so many during the previous year by experts most of the establishment press willfully ignored, will cause many employers to drop their insurance entirely.
Democratic and Republican leadership in both the House and Senate have named 43 individuals to a conference committee tasked with hammering out the final version of the Congress' financial regulatory reform legislation.
Since 1989, all political action committees and individual employees of companies classified by the Center as part of the finance, insurance and real estate sector (FIRE) have contributed more than $695 million to the campaign committees and leadership PACs of current members of the 111th Congress.
More than $112 million from these interests has benefited the Democrats and Republicans named to the conference committee, which will reconcile differences between the Wall Street reform measures passed by the House and Senate.
Among specific interest groups within the FIRE sector, commercial banks were found to have given about $18 to a member of the conference committee out of every $100 donated to all current members of Congress.
The median amount of contributions from Wall Street interests received by the committee's 16 House and Senate Republicans ($1.75 million) is 81 percent larger than the median amount received by the committee's 27 Democrats ($969,600) -- although the parties have received nearly the same amount when one compares averages.
The conferees who have received the most from the FIRE sector since 1989 are Sens. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd (D-Conn.). Schumer has received more than $17.5 million, while Dodd has received more than $15.1 million.
The next highest recipient of contributions from Wall Street interests has received less than half as much as either Schumer or Dodd. Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.), the
ranking Republican member of the Senate Banking Committee, has collected more than $7.5 million.
The eight-figure sums collected by Schumer and Dodd increase the Democrats' average as a whole.
Thanks in large part to their hauls from Wall Street, Senate Democrats on the conference committee have received an average of 72 percent more from the FIRE sector than Senate Republican on the conference committee. More...
Saturday, June 12, 2010
The Examiner --
Looking to capitalize on the growing remittance industry, largely fueled by illegal aliens sending money earned through illegal employment in this country, back home, the U.S. Post Office now offers a wire transfer service, but only to countries in Latin America.
The service, called Dinero Seguro (Sure Money) is being advertised in local post offices with posters showing a Latino family, along with the caption “for your wire transfer of funds back home.” More....
Spreading around money that we don't have, President Mo' Money has pledged $124 Million for the new Caribbean Basin Security Initiative (CBSI). These funds will be used to combat illegal drug trafficking, strengthen regional defense and provide employment training & educational opportunities for the general public and at-risk youth in Caribbean states.
Even more alarming than this is that in ignoring our sky-rocketing unemployment rates, our national security & the regional defense of our one friend in the Middle East, BHO is giving $400 Million of our money that we don't have to a known terrorist group!
From the Washington Times --
Calling the situation in the Gaza Strip "unsustainable," President Obama on Wednesday said the Israeli blockade of the area should be curbed to focus only on weapons and separately announced a new $400 million aid package to help the Palestinian people there and in the West Bank.Besides his presidency being consistent with a full frontal assault on our Constitution & is "unsustainable" to us keeping our rights protected within this contract, BHO is ignoring warnings from Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke that his out of control spending & the ever increasing federal entitlement programs equal to $53 trillion in unfunded liabilities are also "unsustainable" and has our country barreling down the path to an unrecoverable financial ruin.
Mr. Obama made the comments after meeting with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas in the Oval Office, where the two said they discussed how to allow more goods and services into the region, which has been the target of an airtight blockade by Israel aimed at preventing arms shipments.
Mr. Obama faulted the blockade for barring basic supplies from flowing into Gaza, though he acknowledged Israel's interest in keeping rockets out of the hands of the militant Hamas movement. He said that "there should be ways of focusing narrowly on arms shipments, rather than focusing in a blanket way on stopping everything."
Implying Isreal's blockade has the poor residents of Gaza fighting for food scraps with rats in the street is nothing more than state-sponsored propaganda. Gazan market shelves filled with food, children's toys, Olympic sized-swimming pools and 5-star like restaurants can hardly be considered an airtight blockade.
By clicking here, you can see pictures that show this is hardly the humanitarian crisis as being portrayed by President Obama -- our Fabricator in Chief.
Even some of Obama's supporters are questioning the truthfulness of his claims and are taking issue with his giving away our money to a known terrorist group that has sworn the destruction of Israel.....
It is one thing to send aid to a country. But it's another to pledge aid to an area run by known terrorists. That is exactly what President Barack Obama has done. (Kentucky Democrat Blog)
Agreeing with Rep. Mike Pence, one has to question exactly who's side this guy is on!
Thursday, June 10, 2010
From Dick Morris (via New Patriot Journal) --
The drop in the stock market (now about 1,000 pts on the Dow) is a graphic indication of the stark fact that we are entering the infamous double dip of the recession, long feared and predicted.
The economy is not in a V after all (down and then up) but in a W (down, up, down again, and then, finally, up). And the cause of the second dip is not the recession itself, but the cure administered to it by President Obama and the Democratic Congress.
Consider the indications (data provided by New America Foundation, analysis by Sherle R. Schwanninger and Samuel Sherraden):
- GDP growth has only been 2.2%, 5.6%, and 3.2% for each of the last three quarters, well below the rebounds typical in past recessions.
- Total civilian employment has rebounded by only 1% since the depth of the unemployment five months ago. In 1973, at a comparable point, it had rebounded by 7%. In 1981 by 8%. In 1990 by 4%. And in 2001 by 3%. U-6, the broadest measure of unemployment stands at 17.1% and we need 12.8 million new jobs.
- Housing prices have dropped by 30% since 2006 and “many economists expect housing prices to decline at least another 10%” according to Schwanninger and Sherraden.
- While corporate profits are 30.6% higher than one year ago, wages are up by only 1.6%, less than half their rate of increase two years ago.
- Financial sector profits make up 35.7% of all domestic corporate profits. These gains are driven by trading revenue which does not reflect real economic growth. Schwanninger and Sherraden report that “In the first quarter of 2010, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and Bank of America earned 72%, 45%, and 16% of their net revenue [respectively] from trading profits.”
- Personal savings dropped from a high of almost 6% to 2.7% in March, 2010 so households have cut their debt by just $300 billion since it peaked in 2008. So household debt, which rose from 60% of GDP in 1990 to almost 100% in 2008, has only dropped to 97%. It has a long, long way to go before it goes down enough to free consumers to spend more.
- Meanwhile, retail sales have averaged only a 1.7% increase over the past three quarters, half of which was merely to restock inventories. Schwanninger and Sherraden note that “in a typical recovery, the rebound is closer to 3.5%.” And most of that increase is due to expanding government cash transfer payments which now make up 18.3% of personal income. “Excluding transfer payments, personal income increased just 0.3% since the third quarter of 2009.”
- And stimulus spending, which has failed to generate private sector growth, is now winding down. Only 43% of the tax benefits and entitlement spending remain to be doled out as does 63% of the contracts, grants and loans in the stimulus package.
- The strengthening of the dollar due to the collapse of the Euro will dry upp US export trade. Exports to EU nations account for 21% of American and 20% of Chinese exports. Schwanninger and Sherraden note that “A European slowdown will reduce demand for the two primary engines of world economic growth.”
But this second downturn in the economy will be accompanied by inflation, making it worse than the first recession. With interest rates set to rise (because the fed is no longer massively purchasing securities to keep them down), taxes set to go up (because of Obama’s ideology), and global energy use about to increase sending prices higher (because the rest of the world is recovering), prices have to go up. But with no growth in real personal income and household credit close to all time highs, there is not enough demand to pay the higher prices, so a deeper slump will ensue.
The solution? Cut – don’t raise – taxes. And bring down the deficit through massive spending cuts. Reduce our borrowing needs by slashing our spending. Free up capital to feed job growth.
It should be evident to all that Obamanomics is a disaster. It reminds one of nothing so much as the Medieval practice of bleeding the patient to make him well by expelling the evil spirits that dwelt within. When the patient did not recover, they just bled him more and, when he died, they just said that the spirits killed him. The practice of spending, borrowing, and then taxing to fuel job growth is the modern analogy.
TO GET ALL OF DICK MORRIS' COLUMNS (FREE) , GO TO DICKMORRIS.COM AND SIGN UP.
The Grassroots Rally Team of Ohio is asking everyone join us in calling and faxing Senator Voinovich's Columbus office on Thursday June 10th at 3:00 P.M. We need to let him know there are Ohioans that oppose amnesty. We need the phones ringing while Reform Immigration For America is in his office demanding amnesty.
Senator George Voinovich
Phone Number: 614-469-6697
Fax Number: 614-469-7733
Below is the event being planned by Reform Immigration for America --
We can all agree that our current immigration system is broken. Families and communities are being torn apart by raids, fear, and hatred.
The longer Senator Voinovich and others wait to act on immigration reform, the more people suffer and the more the American dream is deferred for millions of people.
This Thursday is your chance to tell Senator Voinovich that the time to end the suffering is now. Supporters will rally by High Street at the Ohio Statehouse at 3 PM this Thursday. Then we’ll march to Senator George Voinovich’s office to demand his support for real immigration reform.
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
Monday, June 7, 2010
In July, Arizona will begin enforcing a new law that requires law enforcement officers to check someone’s immigration status if they have reason to suspect that he or she is in the country illegally. Do you think this is a good idea? Click here to take poll.
At the time of this posting there were 639,804 votes. Out of these votes, 95.7% voted yes they support AZ's new immigration law.
Saturday, June 5, 2010
- As the Supreme Court nomination of Elena Kagan is upon us, Tea Party Patriots has adopted the following set of principles to consider when evaluating any Supreme Court nominee. We invite you to encourage the Senate to use these principles as they are making decisions regarding the current and future Supreme Court nominees.
- Judges must interpret the Constitution of the United States as written and not attempt to modify it, either by inventing new rights or by ignoring or diluting rights already there. The Constitution already provides an amendment process that gives that power to the people and their elected officials.
- Judges must not use their positions to replace the text of the law and Constitution of the United States with their own personal feelings or agenda or "life experiences." Nor should they allow empathy, political favor, or political identification to affect their legal decisions. To do so is to engage in judicial activism.
- Judges must understand that the Federal government has no power if the Constitution does not explicitly provide it. The Founders did this to maximize personal and economic liberty. The Constitution reserves all other rights to the states and to the people.
- Judges must respect the delicate checks and balances and the separation of powers among the branches of government, refusing to become a tool of either the Legislative or Executive branches, and they must be prepared to invalidate efforts of either branch to overstep its constitutionally delegated powers.
The Constitution is an American document, and declares that it shall be "the supreme Law of the Land." Foreign law has no place as precedent or authority in the interpretation of the Constitution.
“Keep out Kagan” day
Based on the principles created by the Tea Party Patriots listed above, we are joining various organizations including Eagle Forum and the Young Conservatives Coalition in asking concerned citizens to participate in the "Keep out Kagan" call campaign.
As the Senate decides whether to confirm Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court, we want to send a clear message to Senators Voinovich and Brown that we deserve an experienced judge who believes in free speech and capitalism.
On Tuesday, June 8th, Please take the time to call the Congressional switchboard at (202) 224-3121 and tell our Senators to “Keep out Kagan.”