On being labeled 'racist'...

Addressing the increasingly desperate and shrill attacks against the Tea Party Patriots by the liberals & the NAACP who are now playing the race card, the below Op-Ed by Jenny Beth Martin & Mark Meckler, co-founders of the Tea Party Patriots, was printed in Politico.

From Politico --

A clear pattern of behavior has emerged over the last 16 months. According to liberals, if you disagree with their thinking, and if you disagree with the Obama administration, you are not only wrong, you are a “racist.”

The latest strike by the left comes from the NAACP, which has resolved that the tea party movement is inherently “racist.” At its most simple, this is a direct attack on the First Amendment rights of millions of Americans.

The NAACP has long history of liberalism and racism.

If you are a conservative — including a conservative African-American — there is no room for you at the NAACP. If you have opinions that differ from the NAACP and the liberal establishment, and if you are African-American, you are an “Uncle Tom,” a “negro,” “not black enough” and “against our people.”

In other words, the NAACP fancies itself the thought police for millions of black Americans. Disagree with them and you will be ostracized and attacked. You will be subjected to public humiliation and racist commentary from NAACP leadership. The message is clear: Tow the line or pay the price.

But the NAACP does not stand alone in this regard. The left has a long history of using the race card. It has been pulled on people across the political spectrum.

President Bill Clinton was smeared as a racist by the Obama campaign when Hillary Clinton was running for president. It seems that anyone who disagrees with the far left, socialist policies of Barack Obama and the current administration is subject to the heavy hand of the race card.

This card is generally played when all else has failed. It was inevitable that it would eventually be used aggressively against the tea party movement.

First, members of the tea party movement were called disgruntled voters, then House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said our movement was nothing more than "astroturf" and laughed us off as a flash in the pan that would disappear overnight.

Next the Democratic National Committee relased an ad calling us an “angry mob.” Now, we’re being called racist.

All these attacks have failed because they are untrue and the American people know it.

According to recent polling, more than 49 million people are active members of the tea party movement (Winston Group, April 1, 2010). More than 145 million people say that the tea party movement is a good thing for America (Rasmussen, June 2, 2010).

The Obama White House and liberal interest groups are hitting the panic button as they read weekly polls showing diminishing support for their radical big government issue agenda, and a weariness for the politics of division.

Like all movements, the tea party has its fringe. President Barack Obama’s domestic terrorist friends from the 1960’s anti-war past never represented the Americans of good conscience who opposed the Vietnam War. In a similar vein, the racist posters of a few at a Tea Party rally do not represent the feelings or behavior of Americans who believe in this movement.

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. would be proud of this movement. He dreamed of a colorblind society. The tea party is a truly post-racial movement. Based strictly around the three simple principles of fiscal responsibility, constitutionally limited government and free market capitalism, the movement is uninterested and uninvolved in the politics of race.

We are freedom loving Americans who have come together to express outrage against a government no longer of, for and by the people. Standing together as brothers and sisters in the fight to return America to its founding principles, skin color, religion, social status and even political party affiliation are irrelevant to the people involved in this movement.

These are the facts. And these facts have already withstood 16 months of liberal media scrutiny and bombardment.

Wednesday, the NAACP is again bringing up the completely falsified charges of racial epithets hurled at members of Congress during the debate leading up to the passage of Obamacare. Widely reported as fact by the liberal media, even an offered reward of $100,000 to anyone who could provide documentary evidence proving the charges could not coax videotape, audiotape or a single witness out of a crowd of thousands present on Capitol Hill that day.

The race card played again; and once again discarded by the American people.

When Kenneth Gladney, a black conservative activist was brutally beaten by SEIU thugs at a protest outside of Rep. Russ Carnahan’s (D-Mo.) office, the NAACP and the liberal left refused to intervene. To the contrary, at an NAACP press conference in St. Louis in May, Gladney was referred to as a “Negro,” an “Uncle Tom,” and someone not worthy of the protection of the NAACP, because he’s working for the “other side.”

The NAACP has defended the thugs who beat Gladney. At the press conference, money was raised for the defense of the “brothers.”

At Tea Party Patriots we will continue to condemn the fringe elements of the movement and any expression of racism or bigotry. We sincerely hope that the Obama While House, the NAACP, and the liberal left will follow our lead and do the same in their own ranks.

Mark Meckler and Jenny Beth Martin are co-founders of Tea Party Patriots.

Stop the Financial Regulation Bill

Patriots,

Congress has returned from their mini-recess and we need to burn up the phones, faxes & emails again! Harry Reid has stated the Senate WILL pass the compromise House/Senate version of the Financial Regulation Bill this week! If needed, Reid stated they will work through the weekend to get it passed.

Patriots -- you know what to do!

Financial Regulation Bill, S.3217

This bill cements into place the “too-big-to-fail” corporations that leave taxpayers on the hook yet again. It does nothing to rein in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and it allows unelected “regulators” to decide who wins and who fails.

It’s important to note that this bill has passed both the House and the Senate. The conference committee bill, which is the House/Senate compromise, will be going back to both chambers for an up-or-down vote. The House has the votes, so we must stop this in the Senate. Once the bill passes the two chambers, it gets signed into law by the President.

Reasons to reject S.3217

• Having permanent bailout authority
• Trusting the same regulators that failed last time
• Creating brand new innovation-killing regulations
• Micromanaging the market
• Having Fannie and Freddie forever (This is possibly the most egregious part – they refuse to protect taxpayers from Fannie and Freddie's "risky behavior.")
• Mandating that all regulatory agencies with economic jurisdiction hire employees based on gender and race

Information resources for S.3217

Heritage Foundation
“The Dodd-Frank Assault on Economic Recovery”:

http://bit.ly/9uPa1o
“Financial Reform in Congress: A Disorderly Failure”: http://bit.ly/cGm0Xz

FreedomWorks
“Wall St. plans payback for reg. reform”: http://bit.ly/csud4s

Real Clear Markets

"Race & Gender Quotas in Finance Bill": Click here to read

According to the New York Times, "The bill, completed early Friday and expected to come up for a final vote this week, is basically a 2,000-page missive to federal agencies, instructing regulators to address subjects ranging from derivatives trading to document retention. But it is notably short on specifics, giving regulators significant power to determine its impact.’ In other words, this law is going to be continually rewritten by federal bureaucrats for years to come. And the continued uncertainty it will create is just the beginning of its faults...”

Call these senators for the Financial Regulation Bill

As of yesterday, Senators Scott Brown, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins have said they will be voting YES for the Financial Regulation Bill. That puts the count at 59, so they're just waiting for Byrd's replacement.

Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA)
Phone: (202) 224-3441 / Fax: (202) 228-0514 / E-mail: maria_cantwell@cantwell.senate.gov
Reason: She recently changed her NO vote to a Yes.

Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI)
Phone: (202) 224-5323 / Fax: (202) 224-2725 / E-mail: http://feingold.senate.gov/contact_opinion.html
Reason: He says he’s voting NO, but may be pressured into voting YES.

Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA)
Phone: (202) 224-4543 / Fax: (202) 228-2646 / E-mail: http://scottbrown.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contactme

Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME)
Phone: (202) 224-5344 / Fax: (202) 224-1946 / Email: http://snowe.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactSenatorSnowe.Email

Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME)
Phone: (202) 224-2523 / Fax: (202) 224-2693 / E-mail: http://collins.senate.gov/public/continue.cfm?FuseAction=ContactSenatorCollins.EmailIssue&CFID=42880122&CFTOKEN=39747274

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA)
Phone: (202) 224-3744 / Fax: (202) 224-6020 / E-mail: http://grassley.senate.gov/contact.cfm

Sen. George Voinovich
DC Phone: (202) 224-3353
Cleveland Phone: (216) 522-7095 / Cleveland Fax: (216) 522-7097 / E-mail: http://voinovich.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.ContactForm

Sen. Sherrod Brown
DC Phone: (202) 224-2315 / DC Fax: (202) 228-6321
Cleveland Phone: (216) 522-7272 / Toll-Free: 888-896-6446 / Cleveland Fax: (216) 522-2239 / E-mail: http://brown.senate.gov/contact/

Did President Obama Condone Voter Intimidation in the Primary Too?

President Obama has shown he applies a double standard to almost everything he does. The below video shows he actually may have no standards, has no problem breaking the law and will let nothing get in the way of his agenda.

Found at the TPP Facebook Page...

WH Spokesman Gibbs fumbles question on Immigration

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs gets tongue tied on immigration question....

H/T Gordon Gekko at Taxmanblog

Gibbs sounds like a man without a teleprompter!

Should there be Race & Gender Quota's in the Finance Bill?

The below was found on the Tea Party Patriots Facebook Page...

While racial and gender quotas may or may not be a good idea, they really shouldn't be in a financial reform bill designed to prevent further financial decline.

From New Patriot Journal via Real Clear Markets --

What one finds when reading congressional legislation is invariably surprising. Take the Dodd-Frank financial regulation bill, for instance, which was created by merging Senate and House bills. When the Senate returns from recess one of its first actions will be to vote on the bill, which passed the House on June 30.

I was searching the bill for a provision about derivatives. What did I find but Section 342, which declares that race and gender employment ratios, if not quotas, must be observed by private financial institutions that do business with the government. In a major power grab, the new law inserts race and gender quotas into America's financial industry.

In addition to this bill's well-publicized plans to establish over a dozen new financial regulatory offices, Section 342 sets up at least 20 Offices of Minority and Women Inclusion. This has had no coverage by the news media and has large implications.

The Treasury, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, the 12 Federal Reserve regional banks, the Board of Governors of the Fed, the National Credit Union Administration, the Comptroller of the Currency, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau...all would get their own Office of Minority and Women Inclusion.

Each office would have its own director and staff to develop policies promoting equal employment opportunities and racial, ethnic, and gender diversity of not just the agency's workforce, but also the workforces of its contractors and sub-contractors.

What would be the mission of this new corps of Federal monitors? The Dodd-Frank bill sets it forth succinctly and simply - all too simply. The mission, it says, is to assure "to the maximum extent possible the fair inclusion" of women and minorities, individually and through businesses they own, in the activities of the agencies, including contracting.

How to define "fair" has bedeviled government administrators, university admissions officers, private employers, union shop stewards and all other supervisors since time immemorial - or at least since Congress first undertook to prohibit discrimination in employment... read more HERE.

The "Selective Powers" Clause

As many of us have now heard, under orders from President Obama, the Justice Dept. is suing AZ over SB 1070 which will allow the state to defend their state borders and enforce their new immigration laws.

The lawsuit against AZ, like the administrations push for "selective" free speech through the DISCLOSE ACT, "selecting" not to lift the Jones Act & save the Gulf, and their "selecting" not to prosecute the open & shut voter intimidation case of the recent club wielding Black Panthers, you will see is just another case of the current administration using the "Selective Powers" clause they believe is in our Constitution....

Since SB 1070 is a virtual clone of existing federal law, Arizona’s sin against THE ONE, has nothing to do with the letter of the law. The Obama Regime isn’t worried that Arizona’s SB 1070 will ‘supercede’ federal law. The Obama Regime has its Colonista knickers in a knot because - unlike Uncle Sam under Vicente Bush and Pancho Obama - Arizona intends to defend our national sovereignty by - GASP - enforcing America’s immigration laws.

It’s ironic that the Obama Regime is so hot and bothered over a new, as yet unimplemented, Arizona law, when law enforcement officials in RHODE ISLAND, have been doing what SB 1070 mandates, FOR YEARS....

[I]n Rhode Island, illegal immigrants face a far greater penalty: deportation.“There are police chiefs throughout New England who hide from the issue . . . and I’m not hiding from it,’’ said Colonel Brendan P. Doherty, the towering commander of the Rhode Island State Police. “I would feel that I’m derelict in my duties to look the other way.’’

From Woonsocket to Westerly, the troopers patrolling the nation’s smallest state are reporting all illegal immigrants they encounter, even on routine stops such as speeding, to US Immigration and Customs Enforcement, known as ICE. (Hot Air)

Why isn’t the Obama Regime suing Rhode Island? I can explain that in two words: BLUE STATE. If the stench of that selective outrage turd isn’t enough to suffocate you, let’s turn our attention to another glaring example: sanctuary cities.

If Uncle Sam really gave a damn about local governments which supercede federal law, they would paint a Justice Department bull’s-eye on sanctuary cities. Unlike SB 1070 which clones federal immigration law, sanctuary city laws do supercede federal immigration law. When will THE ONE nail any/all of them with a lawsuit? Never, because, he’s okey dokey with anyone who refuses to protect our national sovereignty. (H/T PIG)

As for those wondering what the "Selective Powers" clause is and where it is in our Constitution? There is no such clause as their is no such clause or power allowing the federal government or the President to strip individual states of their rights or enforcing laws they "select" not to like or that run counter to their desire of re-writing our Constitution.

Obama, NASA & Muslims on the Moon

Speaking at the American University in Cairo NASA Administrator Charles Bolden outlines his tasks regarding our future space programs as dictated by President Obama....

"When I became the NASA administrator -- or before I became the NASA administrator -- he charged me with three things. One was he wanted me to help re-inspire children to want to get into science and math, he wanted me to expand our international relationships, and third, and perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science ... and math and engineering," Bolden said in the interview.

"It is a matter of trying to reach out and get the best of all worlds, if you will, and there is much to be gained by drawing in the contributions that are possible from the Muslim (nations)," he said. He held up the International Space Station as a model, praising the contributions there from the Russians and the Chinese.

NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said in a recent interview that his "foremost" mission as the head of America's space exploration agency is to improve relations with the Muslim world. (Fox News)

Unfortunately, due to the dismantling of our space/shuttle program by President Obama any future trips to the International Space Station (ISS) by the U.S. will depend on us hitching a ride on a Russian, Chinese and now maybe rocket or shuttle from a Muslim nation.

As for contributions from Muslim nations, obviously Bolden thinks we should be thankful by the technology fromthe pin point accuracy offered by the ever-favorite muslim projectile -- the Scud missile. And of course how can we forget the technology offered by Iran's peaceful missile program with the help of Russia that brought us the Shabab 1, 2, 3 &4.

In his interview with Al-Jazeera, Bolden expands on how we can work together with Muslim nations on space technology....

Charles Bolden, the Nasa administrator, talks to Al Jazeera's Imran Garda about the US relationship with the Middle East after Obama's so-called Cairo initiative, reaching out to the Muslim world, international contribution to the space mission, the constellation project, Nasa's challenges, militarisation of space, the US leadership role in space, and life in space. (Click here to view Al Jazeera interview).

Injecting some common sense and reality into this "Fly me to the Moon" foolishness is former NASA Administrator Michael Griffin who offers up these insightful comments....

Griffin said Tuesday that collaboration with other countries, including Muslim nations, is welcome and should be encouraged -- but that it would be a mistake to prioritize that over NASA's "fundamental mission" of space exploration.

"If by doing great things, people are inspired, well then that's wonderful," Griffin said. "If you get it in the wrong order ... it becomes an empty shell."

Griffin added: "That is exactly what is in danger of happening." (NPJ)

Get it wrong? This Administration does nothing wrong, only George Bush did -- just ask them. But I'm sure Israel is just thrilled spitless that the U.S. will be helping Muslim nations expand and improve their peaceful "shoot things in the air" technology.

Court settlement calls for EPA to set emission standards for 28 industries

Here is another example of how the administration is using regulation over legislation as a means of forcefully enacting Cap & Trade.

Combined with another little know provision in the Clean Air Act -- the Integrated Urban Air Toxics Strategy -- in which small "Mom & Pop" businesses will also become a target of the EPA, the below "consent decree" will allow the ever growing power of the EPA to enact even more restrictions on private industries through regulation....

From Earth Justice -- (emphasis added)

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has now agreed to review and make all necessary updates to hazardous air pollution rules covering 28 types of industrial facilities, including pesticide production operations, lead smelters, aerospace facilities and pharmaceutical plants, among others. The proposed consent decree lodged today in federal court is the result of a Jan. 2009 lawsuit filed by Earthjustice on behalf of Sierra Club, which sought to end years of delay by the Bush administration in updating air pollution rules for industries that pollute neighborhoods with toxic emissions.

"For too many years, Americans have waited for the EPA to update and strengthen these standards. Now EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson is committing to act on a long list of air toxics standards to protect people from serious health problems caused by air pollution," said Jane Williams, Chair of the Sierra Club National Air Toxics Taskforce. "We applaud her decision to take action so that people exposed every day to toxic industrial pollution will finally have the chance to receive the basic health protections promised by the Clean Air Act."

The industries affected by this settlement emit hazardous air pollutants which are associated with cancer, birth defects, anemia, lung and respiratory harm, damage to the nervous system, and other health disorders as well as environmental damage like contamination of the natural food chain.

There will be a public comment period and final agency review for the proposed agreement before the EPA and Sierra Club submit the final agreement to the Court for approval later this year. The EPA will be scheduled to take the first action under the agreement by mid-September 2010, and additional rulemakings on toxic air pollution standards for various industries will follow regularly over the next few years.

The EPA is required by the Clean Air Act to set industry air pollution standards that are up-to-date. The EPA must ensure that the standards reflect newly available technology and provide ample protection for human health and the environment. The EPA missed the mandatory 8-year review deadline to evaluate the "residual risk," that is, the remaining risk to public health and to the environment that is not addressed by emission standards on the books created years ago. As a result, numerous standards may be too weak or too technologically outdated to provide the public protections that are legally required under the Clean Air Act.

Details of the proposed decree:

• The U.S. EPA will review and, as necessary, revise the national emission standards for hazardous air pollution to control toxic air emissions for 28 industrial sources, hold a public rulemaking and issue a final determination as required by law.

• The agency also will hold a rulemaking to set "residual risk" safety standards if required to protect public health and the environment.

• The U.S. EPA will begin taking action this September and will complete all rulemakings in the next few years.

• For each of the 28 industrial categories covered by the agreement, the public will have the ability to review the EPA's proposed rule or determination and offer comments to ensure that the agency hears fully from local communities.

• The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will soon publish a notice in the Federal Register and accept public comments regarding the proposed consent decree.

To review the decree visit: http://www.earthjustice.org/library/legal_docs/sierra-club-112-final-cdpdf.pdf

Contact:
Jane Williams, Sierra Club, (661) 256-2101
Emma Cheuse, Earthjustice, (202) 667-4500, ext. 220
Jim Pew, Earthjustice, (202) 667-4500, ext. 214
Raviya Ismail, Earthjustice, (202) 667-4500, ext. 221

Administration Refuses to Release 2010 Enrollment Data for Medicare Programs

One can only wonder why the Administration is guarding this information. Could an upcoming November election and the prospect of losing a Majority in the House & the Senate when the truth is revealed be causing them to drag their feet?

From the House Energy & Commerce Committee (emphasis added)

WASHINGTON – U.S. Reps. Joe Barton, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and Michael Burgess, R-Texas, ranking member of the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, today asked Marilyn Tavenner, acting administrator, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, to submit to Congress district-level 2010 enrollment data for Medicare Part D, Medicare Advantage and fee-for-service Medicare.

CMS traditionally provides this information to Congress but it has been 14 months since Congress last received information.

“With less than five months until open enrollment for 2011, we have serious concerns that you have not provided us with the 2010 enrollment data,” the lawmakers wrote. “We are particularly concerned by this lack of transparency since the health reform law, according to the CMS Office of the Actuary, will ultimately reduce enrollment in Medicare Advantage by 50 percent. Given this projected drastic shift in Medicare enrollment, it is important that members have the most current enrollment data for the beneficiaries in their districts in order to carefully monitor the impact of health reform on their constituents from year to year.”

A copy of the letter can be found here.

U.S. Rep. Joe Barton, ranking member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, has also released an implementation timeline on ObamaCare. Click here for a copy

Tea Party Patriots Boot Camp in Your Home

Dear Fellow Tea Party Patriots,

We hope you had a wonderful Independence Day! Yesterday, Tea Party Patriots and the Leadership Institute announced the launch of TeaPartyTraining.org. We think you are going to love this training program! It is online and you can get the training right in your home, as you have indicated to you us that you would like to be able to do. In the next week, you will see an email from us outlining webinars and forums you can participate in online to go along with the training. This will give you an online community, much like what you would have in an traditional classroom, to interact and bounce ideas off of one another.

Yesterday's launch included 12 online training videos geared toward grassroots activism. The training will constantly be updated according to your feedback. With the help of the Leadership Institute, we will add additional training videos in coming weeks and months. We are working to add Founding Principles training as well.

So, be sure to check out the training at www.TeaPartyTraining.org. The press release announcing the launch is below and a list of Frequently Asked Questions is below that.

Let us know what you think of the training. After each online video, you can give specific feedback so we know what is working and where we can improve. If you find the training informative and useful, be sure to forward this email and links to the training site to your own circle of influence.

(Please forgive any typos. They are the sole responsibility of Jenny Beth Martin. Thanks!)

Tea Party Patriots Step Beyond High-Profile Protests

and

Directly into Public Policy Battle

Online Training to Transform Passionate Tea Party Protesters

into Grassroots Leaders

Arlington, VA (July 4, 2010) - Jenny Beth Martin, Co-Founder and National Coordinator of Tea Party Patriots, in partnership with the Leadership Institute, today announces the launch of www.TeaPartyTraining.org, an online grassroots activist training initiative.

A growing number of Americans feel that their interests are no longer represented by those in public office. Tea Party Patriot members are ready to go beyond their participation in high-profile protests to become actively involved in shaping public policy.

Mark Meckler, Co-Founder and National Coordinator of Tea Party Patriots, says, "The training that the Leadership Institute now offers our members will accelerate the process of reclaiming this country according to our three core principles of fiscal responsibility, constitutionally limited government, and free markets."

Founded in 1979, the Leadership Institute is one of the nation's largest and most experienced political training organizations and is uniquely equipped to handle the challenge of offering training to the country's largest Tea Party group.

David Fenner, Vice President of Training Programs at Leadership Institute says, "The partnership between the two organizations is a natural fit. The Patriots bring fresh passion and dedication and the Leadership Institute offers over 30 years of political training experience."

For more information on Tea Party training powered by the Leadership Institute please visit www.TeaPartyTraining.org.

TeaPartyTraing.org FAQs

Is there a cost for this training?

While there is no cost to access www.TeaPartyTraining.org, your financial support of the Leadership Institute will enable many more conservative activists to be trained.

Please visit www.LeadershipInstitute.org/. Contribute to help train conservative activists to fight for the principles that made this country great.

How do I access the training?

Please visit www.TeaPartyTraining.org to sign in using your contact information.

Will I be able to ask questions during or after the online training?

At this time, you will not be able to ask the speakers questions during the online training. As The Leadership Institute continues to improve its online training program, this may be an option in the near future. However, please feel free to contact The Leadership Institute with any questions or comments you may have regarding the information presented in the training videos.

How are the Leadership Institute and Tea Party Patriots affiliated?

The Leadership Institute and Tea Party Patriots have partnered to offer online grassroots activist training to members of Tea Party Patriots.

Can I pause the training videos?

Yes, you will be able to pause and play the training videos at your convenience.

Who are the trainers?

Leadership Institute trainers are experts in their respective fields. They generously volunteer their time and expertise in order to assist the Leadership Institute in achieving the mission to increase the number and effectiveness of conservative activists in the public policy process.

What will I learn? What topics are covered?

By participating in the training at www.TeaPartyTraining.org you will learn from political experts practical skills that will enable you to shape public policy and reclaim this country's founding principles.

Currently, www.TeaPartyTraining.org gives you the tools you will need to raise money for your cause or candidate, impact your government through direct participation, sell your message and achieve buy-in from your supporters, and run a successful campaign for elected office.

A New Money Machine for Policy Makers: The Plastic Bag Tax

When first reading the headline about taxing plastic bags I thought what a novel idea. Surely we could support a tax that would promote limiting the "plastic faced bag" of the left -- Nancy Pelosi.

Upon further reading it was discovered this is really just another "money-grabbing" sin tax....

From ABC News --

Who knew the lightweight disposable sacks, which millions of shoppers use every day to lug home groceries and take-out, could help states bring in much needed revenue.

Starting next year, Seattle residents will pay for disposable bags at stores.

At least, that's what some policymakers have proposed. Only one US city – Washington, D.C. – has successful instituted a plastic bag tax, but at least 13 other states are considering one.

The plastic bag tax represents an expansion of so-called sin taxes, which have existed, in some form, since George Washington's whiskey tax.

This year, several states have increased sin taxes, especially cigarette taxes, to raise revenues. But more plastic bag taxes seem unlikely – two cities, Fairbanks, Alaska, and Seattle, Wash., have both repealed plastic bag taxes shortly after approving them in recent years. More...

We would still support a Anti-Pelosi Tax!

Butler County GOP Supports Immigration Reform for OH

It sure is nice to see a county Republican party from OH being proactive in the fight against illegal immigration....

From the Fairfield -Echo --

The Butler County GOP passed a resolution at its organizational meeting Wednesday, June 30, commending Sheriff Richard Jones and State Rep. Courtney Combs for their efforts regarding immigration reform.

In the resolution, party members praised Jones and Combs for their efforts to secure the nation’s border and added that “this part commits to assist them in that goal.”

Jones and Combs have vowed to bring immigration reform to Ohio by putting a citizens initiative before the Ohio General Assembly next year. If lawmakers don’t act on it, the issue could go to voters in November 2011.

Their goal is a bill in Ohio that “mirrors” the Arizona law that requires local law enforcement to question anyone detained in the enforcement of another law about his or her immigration status if there’s reasonable suspicion that person is in the country illegally.

If you are aware of another Republican or Democrat county party standing up for OH residents by combating illegal immigration please notify us so they too can be commended.

For Tea Party & 9.12 members that have recently joined Central and/or Executive Committee positions on a county party, ask that your county party do the same.

Locally, we will be asking the candidates running for Cuyahoga County Executive their position on illegal immigration -- Should the Federal Immigration Laws be enforced? Do they support the above initiative?

Seeing that some of the candidates for County Executive are either unkowns (Lanci & Voinovich), bought & paid for by the local unions (Fitzgerald) or a liberal in conservative clothing (Dolan), it is important we know where they stand on this important issue and what they will do about it if elected.

Happy 4th of July

How does Ohio Immigration Law Differ from AZ?

The answer -- prior to AZ passing a state law on immigration -- would be not much. Since OH does not have a state law on immigration we would be governed by the federal immigration laws as stated below by the Lake County Sheriff's Office.

You will see other than putting the power of enforcing immigration in the hands of the state, that even though OH does not have an immigration law on the books there is still not much difference between AZ's law and the federal law.

From the News Herald --

With so much attention focused on Arizona's new immigration law, some have asked how it differs from enforcement in Ohio.

Capt. Lonnie Sparkman of the Lake County Sheriff's Office said the laws are not that different because both mirror federal laws.

To be more specific, Ohio does not have a state immigration law. It operates under the federal law. Arizona recently passed a state law that is, in some ways, more stringent.

The Arizona law requires police to determine the immigration status of someone if that person has been stopped, detained or arrested on another crime and if a "reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien and is unlawfully present in the United States."

The law also requires that people have immigration papers with them. However, officers can only ask for immigration papers under the previously described conditions.

While Ohio law does not require officers to ask about immigration status, Sparkman said Ohio law officers can inquire about immigration status under the same circumstances.

Originally, the Arizona law said officers had to ask about immigration status if there was reasonable suspicion during any "lawful contact." The law was rephrased after a Phoenix police officer sued, saying that he would need to ask it of children on their way to and from school.

That unrevised law would have differed significantly from Ohio's.

Arizona lawmakers reworded it so people had to be stopped, detained or arrested for another crime before they could be asked of their immigration status.

Lake County Sheriff Daniel Dunlap stressed that his department does not make pretextual stops, meaning that deputies do not pull people over because they think the drivers are in the country illegally.

However, Dunlap said, if a person has been pulled over and they do not have identification, they may inquire as to legal status.

"If there's a traffic offense or a reasonable suspicion of a crime, we will stop you. And what is the first thing that authorities ask for when you're pulled over? Driver's license and registration," Dunlap said.

If the Lake County Sheriff's Office identifies someone as being in the country illegally, it will contact a federal enforcement agency, either Immigration and Customs Enforcement or U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

Dunlap said most people carry some identification with them, and it is rarely an issue.

"It's a pretty low percentage of people who get picked up and don't have papers, much smaller than you'd think," he said.

Support AZ by asking your City Council or Township Trustees to pass a Resolution supporting AZ and their right to protect their own borders. If you do, please email us at clevelandteaparty@gmail.com so we can help support your efforts.

Please click here for a template of a Resolution you can submit to your City Council or Township Trustees.

EPA will use Clean Air Act to Attack Small Business

Applauding the defeat of the Murkowski Resolution, EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson released a statement consistent with the White House's "just lie" policy....

The Murkowski resolution also undermines EPA's common sense strategy for cutting greenhouse gases. Our carefully constructed approach exempts small businesses, homes, farms, and other small sources from regulation. We know that the local coffee shop or the backyard grill is no place to look for meaningful CO2 reductions. We're tackling our largest polluters and calling on Congress to pass a comprehensive energy and climate law -- one that would extend the protection of small businesses. (Read complete statement here.)

Targeting the largest polluters? Really?

With the failure to pass the Murkowski Resolution, through the EPA & an over reaching use of the Clean Air Act, Cap & Trade has been effectively enacted through regulation over legislation. Besides killing the coal industry & causing utility prices to skyrocket, the EPA will be targeting small business' Jackson claims to be exempting from these draconian measures.

A little know provision of the Clean Air Act -- the Integrated Urban Air Toxics Strategy -- small businesses will also become a target of the Green Energy Goon's at the EPA & the administration's quest for control....

From NYT -- (emphasis added)

The Environmental Protection Agency is 10 years behind schedule in setting guidelines for a host of toxic air pollutants, according to a report from the agency’s inspector general.

The report, which was released last week, found that the agency had failed to develop emissions standards, due in 2000, for some sources of hazardous air pollutants. These included smaller sites often located in urban areas, like dry cleaners and gas stations, but also some chemical manufacturers.

The inspector general also found that the agency had not met targets outlined in a 1999 planning document, the Integrated Urban Air Toxics Strategy, including tracking urban dwellers’ risk of developing health problems from exposure to pollutants.

For example, the agency’s last assessment of the risk of toxic air pollutants is based on emissions data from 2002. That analysis found that 1 in 28,000 people, or 36 in 1 million, could develop cancer from lifetime exposure to air toxics from outdoor sources. That number is an average, however, and people living in densely populated cities may face a higher risk.

Jeffrey Holmstead, who was assistant administrator for air and radiation at the E.P.A. from 2001 to 2005, said that even though Congress increased the agency’s budget when it passed significant amendments to the Clean Air Act in 1990, the E.P.A. still did not have enough money to fulfill all its requirements.

Some evidence suggests that there is now more attention being paid to this category of air pollutants within the E.P.A. The agency noted in its response to the report that for the first time in a decade, funds are shifting to the air toxics program this year to meet regulatory deadlines.

Senator Sherrod Brown Supports Suppression of Free Speech

Patriots please find below the response of Senator Sherrod to one of members contacting him about the Free Speech killing DISCLOSE Act. (Click here to read more about the Disclose Act)

As many of us had already guessed, Senator Brown has no problem supporting measures limiting your right to Free Speech....

Dear Robert:

Thank you for sharing your views on the Democracy Is Strengthened by Casting Light On Spending in Elections (DISCLOSE) Act (S.3295). While you and I disagree on this issue, I appreciate hearing your thoughts.

On January 21, 2010, by a 5 to 4 vote, the Supreme Court overturned a long-standing precedent that prevented businesses from spending corporate dollars on campaigns. Large corporations can now use their near-unlimited treasuries to pump billions of dollars into the support or opposition of candidates.

I am extremely troubled that there will now be even more special interest money in the political system. Drug companies, insurance companies, and Wall Street banks will now be free to spend millions of dollars on campaigns to push their agendas. The Court's decision is not good for our political system, and it is not good for America.

S.3295 would protect American consumers by imposing disclosure requirements on businesses that choose to use corporate dollars in political races. These protections would make it easier for consumers to know if portions of their daily purchases are being used to fund political advertisements and campaigns. This legislation would also ban contributions by foreign-controlled corporations in order to protect the American democratic process from foreign interference and influence. Campaign spending by government contractors would also be banned as an additional measure to ensure that taxpayer money is not spent on political advertisements.

In addition to S. 3295, I have introduced the Citizens Right to Know Act, S. 3004, which would ensure the public knows when corporations are sponsoring campaign ads, prevent corporations from diverting dollars into campaign spending without the explicit approval of their shareholders, and further stop foreign-owned corporations from influencing U.S. elections.

S. 3004 is currently pending in the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. As a member of this committee, I will work with my colleagues to ensure that people, not corporations, hold the power in our democratic system.

Thank you again for getting in touch with me on this important issue.

Sincerely,

Sherrod Brown

Hmmm.... I wonder if the color of Senator Brown's shirt matches his last name?

Thomas Jefferson says...

From FSOP

Obama & Crew Miss Deadline for Creating High Risk Pools

From New Patriot Journal via Heritage Foundation

We’ve all heard it before — the age-old saying “Better late than never.” Well, get ready to hear it again, this time from Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, regarding the creation of high-risk pools under Obamacare.

The pools were supposed to provide coverage for individuals who cannot get health insurance due to chronic illness. Obamacare slated the establishment of the pools to occur no later than 90 days after the legislation passed on March 23. This past Monday marked day 90, and the pools remain nowhere to be found.

Covering the uninsured and those who need it most was advertised as one of the top priorities for the congressional majority’s health care agenda, so it’s hard to understand how Secretary Sebelius could have overlooked such an important deadline. After all, it’s her job to implement Obamacare.

It gets worse. Not only has the secretary failed to meet the high-risk pool deadline, but earlier this week the Congressional Budget Office found that the pools will be underfunded by $5 billion to $10 billion. This blunder could result in 500,000 individuals with pre-existing conditions not receiving the coverage they were promised.

According to the White House, as many as 12 million people are currently denied coverage due to pre-existing conditions. In its current design, the poorly-designed federal high-risk pool program will provide coverage to just a small fraction of these people. Richard Foster, Medicare’s chief actuary, claims it will be able to do so for only one or two years before exhausting its allocated funding. Armed with this information, at least 19 states are declining these new high-risk pools.

These mammoth mistakes have not gone unnoticed. Tuesday, Sen. Michael Enzi (R-WY) and 30 other Republicans sent a letter to Secretary Sebelius reminding her of the missed deadline.

The senators also had a few questions for the Secretary: When will the money for these high-risk pools be distributed to participating states? When will funding be provided for the 19 states that have refused to participate in the federal program? And how many individuals will covered by these pools each year?

Sebelius was asked to respond by June 30, but it’s unlikely she will have any more luck in meeting this deadline than she did the previous one. More likely, she will follow the “better late than never” mantra. And all the while, it’s becomes more and more clear that Americans would have been better off had Obamacare never passed.

SANTELLI TELLS GOVERNMENT: STOP SPENDING! STOP SPENDING! STOP SPENDING! 6-28-2010

From TPP Facebook page --

Marine Vets Denied Right to fly Gadsden Flag

Some Marine Vets have been denied the right to fly the Gadsden in CT because lawmakers say it's been adopted by the "tea party."

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: attorney.general@ct.gov.

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...

Tree Huggers vs Green Energy Goons

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 --

News Release

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.

###

Read the lawsuit
View the Inspector General report on Cape Wind
See the lack of safeguards for scientific integrity inside the Interior Department

Trampling Free Speech; Congress Passes Disclose Act

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 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.”

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:

"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

U.S. Congressman Dean Heller (R-NV) sent a letter to Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis questioning her recent public service announcement offering free legal advice to illegal immigrants. The text of Congressman Heller’s letter is below.

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.

Sincerely,

DEAN HELLER
Member of Congress

The Labor Secretary’s PSA can be seen at http://bit.ly/9nqcqe.

Tennessee becomes First State to Pass English-Only Law in Work Place

From US/English.Org --

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.

k

President Obama REFUSES to send more Oil Skimmers to the Gulf!

Simply amazing!

Secretary of Energy Steven Chu (2007): BP will help us save the World!

In 2007 Secretary of Energy Steven Chu shows his buddies at BP some love....

Heritage Foundation: Welfare Spending will Bankrupt U.S.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke has warned that the out of control spending & the ever increasing federal entitlement programs equal to $53 trillion in unfunded liabilities are "unsustainable" and has our country barreling down the path to an unrecoverable financial ruin.

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....