Republican Senators Just Agreed to Scrap New Work Requirements for Food Stamps

Here we go again. Congress needs to pass a five-year multi-billion dollar farm bill, and conservative reforms have been scrubbed from the legislation.

The Associated Press reports lawmakers in both parties have rejected a plan to add new work requirements to the nation’s food stamp program, killing a plan supported by President Donald Trump and conservative Republicans.

Democrats and many Senate Republicans opposed the work requirements, which became the biggest stumbling block to an agreement on the farm bill. The legislation sets federal agricultural and food policy for five years and provides more than $400 billion in farm subsidies, conservation programs and food aid for the poor.

In a statement Thursday, House and Senate agriculture committee leaders from both parties said they had reached an agreement in principle but were working to finalize the bill’s language and costs.

“We still have more work to do. We are committed to delivering a new farm bill to America as quickly as possible,” said the statement by Sens. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., and Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., and Reps. Mike Conaway, R-Texas, and Collin Peterson, D-Minn.

House Republicans passed a bill with these new work requirements for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) without Democratic support earlier this year, requiring that food stamp recipients between ages 18-59 work at least 20 hours a week and requiring parents with children older than 6 to work or participate in job training. But those conservative reforms died in the Senate, where Democrats in the minority will block legislation they don’t like and Republicans in the majority will kowtow to their demands to avoid a partial government shutdown.

“You have to have something that will pass the Senate,” was the excuse Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., gave. “We took a more comprehensive approach.”

With the Democrats ready to assume control of the House in January, conservative lawmakers will now be pressured to advance the bill without needed reforms in the lame-duck session.

Welfare reform was yet another promise Republicans made on the campaign trail that they have now abandoned in the majority. How much longer will conservatives tolerate the Senate’s obstruction of a conservative agenda? Why is it that for every conservative priority, the excuse given by Republican leadership is that there aren’t 60 votes, so we can’t pass the reforms? Is that not ridiculous? Does anybody actually believe the Founding Fathers envisioned a super-majority requirement in the Senate to advance even basic policy changes?

If Democrats refuse to cross over to support the majority agenda, the onus is on Senate Republican leaders like Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., to force their hand. Tell them it’s the conservative bill, or a government shutdown.

If conservatives don’t have leaders willing to do that, then we will never pass legislation out of Congress. And if we can’t legislate, if we can’t pass conservative policies, what’s the point of the conservative movement? (For more from the author of “Jeff Flake Holds Judicial Nominees Hostage to Mueller Protection Bill, Forces GOP to Drop Confirmation Votes” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Half-Baked ‘Low-Tax Socialism’ Is Getting Us a Whole Progressive Hell

It feels like only yesterday that I was writing policy statements for candidates running in the “tea party year” of 2010 stating the shocking fact that we had reached $13 trillion in debt as a nation so quickly. Republicans indeed succeeded in winning back the House at the end of the year, they won back the Senate in 2014, and they controlled the trifecta for the past two years. Now, the debt stands at $21.8 trillion, an increase of over $8 trillion in just eight years, and the trajectory is about to explode. Isn’t it time we finally ask what Republicans actually stand for other than low-tax socialism?

Not only do Republicans have a big decision to make on immigration in the final budget with control of the House, they also must confront the debt crisis they made worse rather than helped. The debt has grown $8 trillion since they took over the House, $3.8 trillion since they took over the Senate, and even $1.9 trillion just in the 22 months of trifecta control. Most of the growth (roughly 88 percent) in debt has come from the public share of the debt, not the so-called debt we owe ourselves. President Trump’s Office of Management and Budget introduced budgets cutting billions in spending, yet Congress went in reverse and increased spending in every category the president promised to cut. Sadly, the president’s veto pen is gathering dust.

Just for the first month of this fiscal year, the deficit topped $100 billion, on pace to easily bring back the trillion-dollar deficits of Obama’s first term. And to be fair, that was during a great recession. Now we have the most robust job growth since the late ’60s. Where’s the deficit coming from? Revenues were actually up $17 billion relative to last October. However, spending increased by $55 billion this October relative to October 2017. Annually, Republicans increased spending by $136 billion in FY 2017 over Obama’s last year in office and another $127 billion on top of that in FY 2018.

While the tax cuts obviously reduced some revenue that we would have received had rates remained the same, given the growth in the economy, we still took in more money last year than the year before. Even if you isolate the 10-month period since enactment of the tax cuts – January 2018 through October 2018 – and compare it to the equivalent 10-month period in calendar year 2017, we are actually $2 billion ahead on the revenue side. Again, revenues would have been higher on the corporate side if not for the tax cuts, but there is evidence that much of the increase in payroll tax revenue was due to job growth, which was fueled, in part, by the tax cuts themselves. The culprit is the spending, which has increased by $138 billion over the past 10 months.

We are now at the point where despite robust economic growth, the current dollar GDP of our entire economy is $20.66 trillion, almost $1.2 trillion smaller than the size our debt! Our debt will remain larger than our entire economy in perpetuity. According to some estimates, in 30 years from now, the debt will be over 175 percent of GDP, which is where Greece is now.

Yet rather than discuss any plan to cut spending and actually reduce the harmful footprint of government in the private economy, Republicans are talking about another tax package and more spending, totaling $54.7 billion. Tax cuts are good, but at some point, we’ve crossed the Rubicon where, if all Republicans do when in power is cut taxes, but at the same time they increase spending rather than cutting it, the tax cuts become counterproductive in many ways. Like many things in life, you can’t half-ass free market doctrine by having low taxes but keeping socialist programs and market interventions in place, because the mix of the two breeds crony capitalism/venture socialism at the corporate level and creates dependency among individuals without exposing them to the pain of higher taxes that are endemic of European socialism.

Until now, the low tax doctrine has been worthwhile, but any continued effort to only cut taxes while continuing to increase spending is counterproductive both policy-wise and politically.

In terms of policy, the debt is reaching a tipping point, because next year we will spend as much money just on interest as we spend on Medicaid. In five years, it will surpass military spending. The dead weight and misallocation of investment in the debt and treasury bonds is crowding out private investment and is ensuring that, despite the job growth, we are not realizing economic growth commensurate with the job market like we saw in the late 1990s and late 1960s. The more we are desperate to service the debt, the higher the interest rates will rise, which will attract even more investments into treasury bonds and away from private investment, creating a perpetual death spiral of more debt, higher interest rates, increased debt payments, and less private investment.

Which brings us to the political problems. Republicans are planning to lock in the spending levels of the FY 2018 omnibus, pass a massive $900 billion farm bill that has Obamacare-style market distortions of land and crop use and food stamps and more extra money on disaster spending – but all mixed together with a “tax extenders” package full of special interest credits for big businesses. This pattern of low-tax, high-spending socialism is creating the perfect climate for corporate bosses to use low taxes as their nourishment to then turn around and serve as the enforcers of cultural and economic Marxism for the Left on every other issue. The moral of the story is that you can’t half-bake free markets. It’s time to force Republicans to pick sides – either they support all of Coolidge’s free-market policies, or we will give them the full Bernie Sanders.

Corporate America has become the number one enforcer – even more effective than the media and academia – in promoting open borders, endless Middle East migration, weak-on-crime laws, anti-religious liberty policies, mindless multiculturalism, and the transgender agenda. Even on fiscal issues, they support the welfare state, Obamacare, and all the regulations that help them shut out competition. The one missing component from the Democrat portfolio is the tax issue. If the corporations empowered Democrats on that issue too, they couldn’t survive. Thus, they feast off the Republican lifeline against Democrats raising taxes so that they can promote the rest of the progressive agenda. And remember, government-run health care is the single biggest driver of our debt, and that is being fueled by big business.

The package of tax extenders Republicans plan to pass costs $54.7 billion together with more disaster spending. There are a number of handouts, such as the biofuels blending credit and handouts for electric cars, Big Wind, and NASCAR in the bill. Then there is the farm bill, which is the Obamacare of agriculture.

It’s time we promote free market reduction of government market interventions along with the tax cuts or no tax cuts at all. Trump needs to use his veto to enforce his budget proposals in addition to his immigration agenda. We need to plow forward with a holistic view of conservatism – fiscal, cultural, and security – as one unit. Split-the-baby conservatism leads to nothing but a perfect, holistic progressive hell. (For more from the author of “Half-Baked ‘Low-Tax Socialism’ Is Getting Us a Whole Progressive Hell” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The President Is Not in Any Kind of Legal Jeopardy

Thursday on the radio, LevinTV host Mark Levin lit into the leftist media for continuing to play up the phony Russia-collusion investigation after Trump’s former attorney, Michael Cohen, plead guilty Thursday of lying before Congress.

Levin explained that Cohen’s personal corruption is not indicative of the president himself.

“People keep saying, ‘What are the legal implications for Trump?’” Levin asked. “There are none. Zero. There’s no legal implication; there’s no legal jeopardy, period. Moreover, in all this so-called reporting and analysis by these phony experts, where did President Trump collude, coordinate, or conspire with the Russians during the election, to fix the result of the election? Where is this evidence? And since there’s not a scintilla of evidence, this should underscore the point that this entire investigation is bogus.”

Listen:

“Shouldn’t [the media] be cheering over the fact that so far, all the leaks show that Trump did nothing? Shouldn’t they be celebrating that, that in our republic, the president that we chose is guilty of nothing? That he didn’t collaborate, he didn’t coordinate, he didn’t conspire with the Russians? But they’re not. They keep bringing in these phony experts, who are utterly predictable. ‘You know, uh, if I were Don Jr., I’d be worried about now’ — the country should be worried about now, about what’s taking place. The country should be worried,” Levin said.

Levin explained that there has there never been a “substantive, underlying crime” to expose and reiterated that the president is not in legal danger, despite the media’s assertions.

“How many more damn times do I have to explain that it is the position of the United States Department of Justice that you cannot indict a sitting president? He’s not in any kind of legal jeopardy.” (For more from the author of “The President Is Not in Any Kind of Legal Jeopardy” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Democrats: It’s Time to Remove the 181-Year Ban on Religious Headwear on the House Floor

Democrats have drafted a proposal of rules for Congress once they take over the House of Representatives in January. One of the proposals is doing away with a 181-year ban on religious headwear, like hijabs, on the House floor. One of the first Muslim women who was just elected to the House, Ilhan Omar, is spearheading the policy change, ABC News reported.

Nancy Pelosi, who is expected to retake the Speakership, proposed the rule change last week. She’s working with Ranking Member Jim McGovern and Omar on making the proposal a reality. . .

According to Roll Call, Omar will have a number of “firsts.” She’ll be the first member of Congress to wear a religious headpiece on the floor of the House, the first Somali-American in Congress and the first woman of color to represent Minnesota in Washington, D.C. Omar and Michigan’s Rashida Tlaib are the first two Muslim women in Congress. (Read more from “Democrats: It’s Time to Remove the 181-Year Ban on Religious Headwear on the House Floor” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Here We Go: Gun Control Advocates in California Now Want to Tax Semi-Automatic Firearms

California Assemblyman Marc Levine (D) has proposed a new gun control measure: taxing the sale of semi-automatic firearms and using the money to support gun violence prevention programs, The Sacramento Bee reported. The proposal was a direct result of the shooting at the Borderline Bar and Grill in Thousand Oaks.

“The goal is fewer gun deaths,” Levine said in a statement. “The gun tax will support the kind of interventions that make gun violence less likely in the first place, which is exactly what we need to do.”

Should the bill pass, the money would go to the California Violence Intervention and Prevention Program, which is overseen by the Board of State and Community Corrections. The BSCC then uses the money to send various grants to cities and community-based organizations. . .

Right now, it’s unclear what the tax would look like but Levine’s chief-of-staff said they’re considering a $25 fee per firearm, which is similar to Chicago and Seattle’s tax. Although the tax amount is not set in stone, it’s estimated that it will bring in millions in additional revenue to the California Violence Intervention and Prevention Program.

(Read more from “Here We Go: Gun Control Advocates in California Now Want to Tax Semi-Automatic Firearms” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Harvard Landlord Tells Domestic Violence Survivor to Move out Over Her Firearms

This story is just infuriating. It also should remind all conservative that it’s best to stick with your tribe. Leyla Pirnie is a graduate student at Harvard, where her terrible roommates searched her room while she was away because they felt she might have firearms. What gave her away? Well, she wore a Make America Great Again hat, and she’s from Alabama. It may surprise some liberals, but Democrats do livein Alabama. Also, they searched her room, invaded her privacy, and then ratted her out to their landlord over he legally owned firearms, which she obtained after surviving an abusive relationship. How dare she take steps to ensure her safety? . . .

“Since it’s clear that Leyla wants to keep her firearms, it would be best for all parties if she finds another place to live,” Dave Lewis, president of Avid Management, said in an email to the household obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

The request that the student, Leyla Pirnie, move out came after her roommates searched her room while she was not home and found her firearms. That prompted one of the roommates to email Lewis requesting he verify that Pirnie was in compliance with applicable firearms laws.

“We discussed with Leyla that all of us are uncomfortable with having firearms in the house, and that their presence causes anxiety and deprives us of the quiet enjoyment of the premise to which we are entitled,” the roommate wrote to Lewis.

(Read more from “Harvard Landlord Tells Domestic Violence Survivor to Move out Over Her Firearms” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.