President Donald Trump on Friday pledged America’s “lasting support” to the U.S.’ historic “special relationship” with Britain after he emerged from his first meeting with British Prime Minister Theresa May, leader of an ally who seeks to nudge the populist president toward the political mainstream.
May, who said the meeting was the start to building their relationship, announced that Trump had accepted an invitation from Queen Elizabeth II for a state visit later this year with his wife, first lady Melania Trump.
Trump sought to charm May, noting during his first news conference as president that, “by the way, my mother was born in Scotland.” (Read more from “Trump Pledges ‘Lasting Support’ to US Relations With Britain” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/21119130686_a59b187e82_b.jpg6831024Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2017-01-27 20:19:552017-01-27 20:19:55Trump Pledges ‘Lasting Support’ to US Relations With Britain
Some Republican lawmakers are beginning to have doubts about the GOP’s plans to repeal and replace Obamacare, they revealed in a closed-door gathering Thursday in Philadelphia.
But those lawmakers find themselves at odds with conservatives who have for years pushed for repeal of the Affordable Care Act—as well as the top Republican in the House.
“We have to repeal it,” Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, said of Obamacare in an interview with The Daily Signal. “That’s what we told voters we’re going to do, and we have to repeal all of it. Every mandate. Every regulation.”
The Washington Post reported Friday that some Republicans appeared to be wavering over how to follow through on their long-held promise to repeal and replace Obamacare.
The Post obtained a recording of a session on health care held Thursday at House and Senate Republicans’ joint retreat at the Loews Philadelphia Hotel.
Some lawmakers in the meeting expressed concerns over tackling major issues accompanying repeal of the health care law, including how to craft a replacement plan in a timely manner and whether to include a measure to defund Planned Parenthood in the repeal legislation.
Reps. Tom McClintock of California, John Faso of New York, and Tom MacArthur of New Jersey were among those The Post identified on the recording.
Despite their hesitations, however, House Speaker Paul Ryan reaffirmed the GOP’s commitment to rolling back the health care law this year.
“We have to move quickly because we’re in the midst of collapse [of the health care law],” Ryan said during an event Friday organized by Politico.
“We have a moral obligation to fix this problem. Period,” he said.
#Obamacare has been a spectacular failure. We're going to replace it with a more affordable, patient-centered system. pic.twitter.com/HBiMeAucBj
In a meeting with fellow Republicans in Philadelphia, Ryan mapped out a timeline for repealing and replacing the health care law. He told lawmakers that Congress would pass the bill repealing Obamacare by March or April.
Republicans initially planned to pass a repeal bill shortly after President Donald Trump’s Jan. 20 inauguration.
That legislation—passed through a budget tool called reconciliation—also would include parts of a replacement.
For years, conservatives such as Jordan, who previously chaired the roughly 40-member House Freedom Caucus, have made a target of Obamacare—which Congress passed in 2010 without a single Republican vote.
Now that Republicans have the numbers to successfully repeal the health care law, Jordan is calling for Congress to move quickly.
“I want to do it as soon as we possibly can, because I start from the very fundamental premise that health care will be better and cost less when Obamacare is gone,” the Ohio Republican said. “So let’s get rid of it as quickly as we can.”
Despite a commitment to repealing Obamacare in coming weeks, some Republicans are skeptical that ending taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider, should be included in that action.
That provision was part of the bill Republicans sent to President Barack Obama’s desk early last year to roll back major provisions of Obamacare.
Obama vetoed that bill. But with Republican control of both chambers of Congress and the White House, conservatives are pushing for the new repeal bill to at a minimum mirror the legislation passed last year.
Ryan said earlier this month that the House will include Planned Parenthood’s defunding in the budget reconciliation bill the chamber takes up this year.
And conservative lawmakers are urging the House speaker to follow through on that pledge.
“The repeal should include the Planned Parenthood defund language as well because, for goodness sake, that was in the bill we put on President Obama’s desk,” Jordan told The Daily Signal. “Are we going to put something less on President Trump’s desk than what we put on President Obama’s desk?”
“Of course the Planned Parenthood funding should be dealt with in that bill,” he said. (For more from the author of “Republicans Express Doubts over Obamacare ‘Repeal and Replace’ Plan” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/8136434824_49ffae8505_b-1-1.jpg6851024Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2017-01-27 20:06:052017-01-27 20:06:05Republicans Express Doubts over Obamacare ‘Repeal and Replace’ Plan
Federal officials have launched an investigation into why the Department of Homeland Security hacked into the Georgia state governmental network, including its election system, The Daily Caller News Foundation’s Investigative Group has learned.
John Roth, inspector general for DHS, wants to know why the agency broke protocol on its way to 10 unprecedented attacks on the system overseen by Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp — who is also one of the most vocal critics about the Obama administration’s attempt to designate local and state election machinery as part of federal “critical infrastructure.”
A Jan. 17 letter from Roth notified Kemp his office was officially “investigating a series of ten alleged scanning events of the Georgia Secretary of State’s network that may have originated from DHS-affiliated IP addresses.” A firewall in Georgia’s system thwarted each attempt.
Former DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson and Kemp have clashed over a federal government designation of election systems as “critical infrastructure.” Kemp called it “political power play to federalize elections.”
The “scans” are attacks to test security weaknesses in a network. It’s called the electronic equivalent of “rattling doorknobs” to see if they’re unlocked — or on a darker side, to send a message to a recipient. (Read more from “Feds Investigating Obama Administration for Illegally Hacking Georgia’s Election System” HERE)
After President Donald Trump issued an executive order to build a wall on the Mexican border, the House Hispanic Caucus released a lengthy press release condemning Trump’s actions. And congressional Democrats joined suit on Twitter, raging against Trump’s “wall of hate.”
Hispanic Caucus members called Trump’s border wall “ignorant,” “lazy,” “antiquated,” a “waste of everyone’s time and money,” and proof that “Donald Trump is taking this country back to the dark ages.” Every caucus member who attached their name to the press release is a Democrat.
Hispanic Caucus members were joined in their condemnation of the border wall by other House Democrats, including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Ca. (F, 10%), who claimed that “we will not bow to Donald Trump’s radical xenophobia.”
They tweeted their disdain using the hashtag #WallofHate.
Can’t allow DC families to be torn apart. We will defend our law-abiding undocumented immigrants from new executive order. #WallOfHate
As Trump noted Wednesday, “a nation without borders is not a nation,” and the purpose of a border wall is for “the United States of America…[to] get back its borders.”
Pres. Trump also said the wall is about safety and saving lives. “As I have said repeatedly to the country, we are going to get the bad ones out. The criminals, and the drug dealers, and gangs and gang members and cartel leaders — the day is over when they can stay in our country and wreak havoc.”
For Democrats to claim that a border wall is a “waste of money” is laughable, considering they don’t bat an eye at the towering national debt and our bankrupt entitlement system. It is also ridiculous for Democrats like Nancy Pelosi to complain about Trump’s border project and policy change for sanctuary cities, by saying “we will fight for the right of any community to choose humane and effective law enforcement strategies that work to protect and serve, not deport and intimidate.”
Just two years ago, in Rep. Pelosi’s congressional district in San Francisco, Kate Steinle was shot to death by an illegal alien who had been deported five times but was still was able to roam free in the sanctuary city. What about protecting American citizens like Steinle?
Democrats are near apoplectic about the president’s border wall and immigration policies. But their rhetoric about fiscal responsibility and safety falls laughably flat. (For more from the author of “Congressional Democrats Lose Their Minds over Trump’s ‘Wall of Hate'” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/27662206392_da0bb78eca_b-1-1.jpg6831024Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2017-01-26 18:31:232017-01-26 18:31:23Congressional Democrats Lose Their Minds over Trump’s ‘Wall of Hate’
Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky. (A, 92%) has been nothing if not vocal about his belief that a new set of health care reforms should be voted on at the same time as a repeal of Obamacare. This week, Sen. Paul has revealed his proposal to replace Obamacare, by introducing S. 222, the Obamacare Replacement Act.
His bill is obviously designed to work in tandem with the partial repeal that was passed by Congress last year, in that it sweeps away the parts of Obamacare that the other bill leaves behind, particularly the regulations. While the bill being passed via the budget reconciliation process repeals only the taxation and spending portions of Obamacare, if Paul’s plan were advanced at the same time, the two bills would add to up to a fairly complete repeal of Obama’s health care takeover.
More so than other GOP proposals for life after Obamacare, Paul’s plan focuses much of its effort on removing barriers to competition in the health insurance market that existed well before 2010. First and foremost, it puts individuals on an equal footing with employers with respect to tax treatment for health insurance costs. He does this by allowing the full tax deductibility of health insurance premiums. He allows the deductions to apply not only to income taxes, but also to payroll taxes, meaning that even lower-income individuals benefit.
In addition, a tax credit of up to $5,000 per individual is allowed for contributions to a health savings account. This allows employers to make the choice whether to continue directly purchasing insurance to offer to employees or simply to contribute an equivalent sum to an employee’s health savings account.
HSAs are then greatly expanded to allow individuals to use their funds for many products and services that are currently not allowed, including health insurance itself as well as over-the-counter medications, physical fitness programs, and nutritional supplements.
Another major drawback of the individual insurance market has been that larger companies are able purchase health insurance in bulk and thus reduce the cost per plan. Paul’s plan creates the framework for individuals and small businesses to be able to easily band together into a larger purchasing pool. While Obamacare attempted to do this for small businesses with its SHOP program, the law increased premiums and regulated the market so much across the board that it hasn’t worked well. This new framework leaves wide open space for innovation in health insurance pools.
One consistent talking point for health care reformers on the Right has been allowing health insurance to be sold across state lines. Specifics of how to accomplish in a way that doesn’t violate federalism have generally been in short supply, but Paul’s plan appears to do a pretty good job of squaring that circle. It allows insurers from one state to offer their products in other states while acknowledging certain constraints imposed by secondary states.
Allowing cross-state sales further boosts insurance pools by increasing the ability to pool together by trade or organizational ties, rather than just by geography. Unions and other professional associations have had some ability to do this through association health plans for years, but Paul’s plan greatly loosens the restrictions on these plans.
Of all the new problems created by Obamacare, the Medicaid expansion is the most difficult to deal with politically. Although Medicaid generally provides poor quality coverage and Medicaid enrollees are rejected by a huge (and increasing) percentage of physicians, millions of Americans have now been brought into the program via Obamacare. Paul’s plan addresses the Medicaid issue in a way that would benefit both states and the covered individuals regardless of whether or not the expansion is fully repealed in the accompanying reconciliation bill.
He does this by granting states the ability to change how they deliver coverage under Medicaid. Previously, states have had to request a waiver from the Department of Health and Human Services to get permission to experiment with better ways to administer their Medicaid programs. Paul’s bill eliminates the need to request the waivers, allowing states to follow in the steps of states like Florida, where reforms carried out under waivers have been very successful in improving the quality of care that Medicaid provides.
Overall, Sen. Paul’s plan focuses reform where it ought to be — breaking down barriers in the marketplace and allowing innovation and competition to increase access to affordable health care. From a free market perspective, it stands head and shoulders above any other plan yet offered to reform health care in the wake of Obamacare’s repeal. (For more from the author of “FINALLY! Sen. Rand Paul Offers Worthy Obamacare Alternative GOP Can Get Behind” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/Rand_Paul_by_Gage_Skidmore_8.jpg6831024Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2017-01-26 18:26:432017-01-28 21:42:36FINALLY! Sen. Rand Paul Offers Worthy Obamacare Alternative GOP Can Get Behind
In a major departure from the previous administration, President Donald Trump has directed the Department of Homeland Security to get serious on tackling crimes committed by illegal immigrants.
The executive order instructs the Homeland Security Secretary General John F. Kelly, to “utilize the Declined Detainer Outcome Report or its equivalent and, on a weekly basis, make public a comprehensive list of criminal actions committed by aliens and any jurisdiction that ignored or otherwise failed to honor any detainers with respect to such aliens.”
The purpose of this order is “to better inform the public regarding the public safety threats associated with sanctuary jurisdictions.”
In other words, President Trump has taken his first steps towards ending sanctuary city policies.
He is, of course, going to meet resistance from the Left. California Governor Jerry Brown, in what Politico described as an “anti-Trump manifesto,” proudly declared that despite the supremacy of federal immigration laws, California would take measures to protect its sanctuary policies from the president.
“We may be called to defend those laws, and defend them we will,” Brown said.
So, here’s where Trump’s executive order is brilliant. By publishing the statistics of crimes committed by illegal immigrants in areas of the country with sanctuary city policies, Trump is essentially telling the public “your Democratic politicians are protecting crime in your cities with their sanctuary city policies.” The president is handing ammunition the political opponents of big-city Democratic politicians everywhere in the country.
Sanctuary city policies are already vastly unpopular with the American people. Even as Gov. Brown delivered his amnesty ultimatum, 74 percent of California residents want to see an end to sanctuary city policies.
That opposition crosses party lines. It is unifying. And President Trump’s national policies can be used to rally that opposition at the ballot box and kick out the bums at the state level.
This is the kind of strategic thinking that has been woefully lacking from Washington Republicans for far too long. It is the style of anti-establishment governance the president’s most ardent backers promised Trump would bring to the nation’s capital.
If Trump brings the same action and bully pulpit he displayed today on immigration to repeal of O-Care insurance regs, we're in business!
Let’s hope the president applies a similar strategy to the other items on his agenda. (For more from the author of “Bye Bye Sanctuary Cities? Trump Gets Tough on Havens for Illegal Aliens” please click HERE)
President Donald Trump’s Justice Department will likely find numerous offenses to warrant launching a broad investigation into voter fraud, legal experts and watchdog groups say.
Trump has said that more than 3 million to 5 million illegal votes were cast during the 2016 election, causing him to receive a lower popular vote total than his vanquished opponent, Hillary Clinton, whom he defeated in the Electoral College.
On Wednesday, Trump said:
I will be asking for a major investigation into VOTER FRAUD, including those registered to vote in two states, those who are illegal and….
One legal organization took action on preventing voter fraud this week. The Public Interest Legal Foundation, a voter integrity group, reached a consent decree with Noxubee County, Mississippi, which has had voter registration that exceeds the number of county residents since 2011, according to the group. A consent decree is a legal agreement between two parties without an acknowledgment of guilt.
The decree includes requiring the county to identify dead voters on the rolls, clear voter rolls of former county residents, and mail all registered voters who have been inactive since January 2011.
“They know the jig is up,” @TomFitton says.
The Public Interest Legal Foundation this week is also seeking to pry the release of information about noncitizens registered to vote in Manassas, Virginia.
Logan Churchwell, spokesman for the Public Interest Legal Foundation, said it is good that the Justice Department won’t just leave it to the nonprofit groups to weed out fraud.
“We need to know how many noncitizens are voting and know the unknowns,” Churchwell told The Daily Signal. “Trump could just enforce the law. The giant research project he tweeted about, or had a series of tweets about, is worthwhile and only something the federal government could do.”
It’s likely that 800,000 noncitizens illegally voted in the last presidential election, according to Jesse Richman, an associate professor of political science at Old Dominion University, who extrapolated on a 2014 study that examined illegal voting in the 2008 and 2010 elections.
Before the 2016 election, there were several documented cases of voter fraud. These included an FBI probe that found 19 dead people were registered to vote in Harrisonburg, Virginia; a woman arrested in Des Moines, Iowa, for voting twice for Trump; and a CBS News investigation that found multiple cases of dead voters and double voting in Colorado.
Churchwell asserted Trump’s 3 million or more projection couldn’t be proven or disproven, but regardless of whether this is an overstatement, President Barack Obama’s Justice Department ignored Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act, better known as the “motor voter” law. This provision requires local governments to maintain and keep voter rolls current.
The Obama administration has not enforced this provision of the motor voter law, and in Florida, Wisconsin, and Ohio, even took action to prevent maintaining the voter registration rolls.
Still others, such as Michael Waldman, president of the Brennan Center for Justice, a liberal legal group at the New York University School of Law, insisted voter fraud is a myth and opposed an investigation.
“An expensive investigation of imaginary voter fraud is not needed. It could easily devolve into a witch hunt,” Waldman said in a public statement. “Worse, it could be used to justify sweeping voting restrictions. There is no need for another investigation that is not independent, rigorous, and fact-based.”
Waldman continued:
There is a great deal of evidence that our voting system locks out far too many eligible citizens from voting. The voter registration system needs an upgrade, and that is something that should unite all Americans. Errors on the voter rolls are emphatically not signs of fraud — they are signs that we need to improve the system.
An investigation into voter fraud would not be complicated, said Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, a government watchdog group.
“You can see the numbers we are talking about by looking at public voter registration lists and cross-checking that against a list of noncitizens,” Fitton told The Daily Signal. “The federal government could coordinate with state and local governments and determine who registered to vote illegally. It’s a simple process. That’s why the left is so upset. They know the jig is up.”
Enforcing the law is long overdue, said Hans von Spakovsky, manager of the Election Law Reform Initiative at The Heritage Foundation.
“We don’t need [to create] a commission. The Justice Department can enforce the law and work with the Department of Homeland Security, and its records for citizenship and change of status to get an idea of who is illegally registered to vote,” von Spakovsky told The Daily Signal.
Regardless of the investigation’s outcome, von Spakovsky expects critics will dismiss anything that falls short of Trump’s 3 to 5 million illegal voter estimate.
“They may try to dismiss this, but the American people don’t believe what the media say about voter fraud not being real,” von Spakovsky said. “Polling solidifies that.” (For more from the author of “Trump DOJ Likely to Find Many Offenses in Voter Fraud Probe, Experts Say” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/5139407571_1c81d07a8c_b-4.jpg7651024Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2017-01-26 18:05:062017-01-26 18:08:14Trump DOJ Likely to Find Many Offenses in Voter Fraud Probe, Experts Say
Congress is poised to unravel one of the Obama administration’s midnight regulations that could prevent certain Social Security disability beneficiaries from buying guns.
The Social Security Administration finalized a rule just before Christmas 2016 in which it would send information of recipients of disability insurance and Supplemental Security Income to the Justice Department’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System, or NICS.
This is triggered if the agency determines someone else is managing a recipient’s finances because the recipient isn’t mentally fit to manage their own affairs.
Rep. Ralph Abraham, R-La., helped advocate possible elimination of the gun control rule under the Congressional Review Act, which allows Congress to overturn regulations imposed in the last six months of an outgoing administration.
“This issue really can be boiled down to one point: No American should be denied their constitutional rights because someone else handles their finances,” Abraham told The Daily Signal in a statement.
“Allowing bureaucrats at the Social Security Administration to determine whether or not beneficiaries are fit to exercise their Second Amendment rights is a clear violation of due process, and I’m pleased the Congressional Review Act will give us the opportunity to right this wrong with passage of this joint resolution,” Abraham added.
Under the rule finalized on Dec. 19, the Social Security Administration would first have to determine if someone else is handling a beneficiary’s affairs. The rule states:
At the commencement of the adjudication process we will also notify individuals, both orally and in writing, of their possible federal prohibition on possessing or receiving firearms, the consequences of such prohibition, the criminal penalties for violating the Gun Control Act, and the availability of relief from the prohibition on the receipt or possession of firearms imposed by federal law.
Former President Barack Obama’s White House announced a package of executive actions in January 2016 that said:
The Social Security Administration has indicated that it will begin the rulemaking process to include information in the background check system about beneficiaries who are prohibited from possessing a firearm for mental health reasons.
The National Rifle Association credited Abraham, Rep. Sam Johnson, R-Texas, and House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., for pushing the rule into the Congressional Review Act.
“Protecting Americans’ fundamental rights is a top priority for Whip Scalise, and that includes undoing this Obama-era power grab against our Second Amendment rights,” Scalise spokesman Chris Bond told The Daily Signal in an email. “After eight years of an Obama administration that showed disrespect for our constitution, this unified Republican government is going to take power away from unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats and work hard to restore Americans’ liberties.”
The regulation has the backing of gun control groups.
Elizabeth Avore, legal director for Everytown for Gun Safety, a gun control group created by former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, argued in July, as part of the public comment period, the rule was needed to keep guns away from the mentally ill. Her comment said:
As is required for a finding to be prohibiting, [Social Security Administration] officials have determined in these cases that the person “lacks the mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs,” and, under the proposed language, these incapacity findings will only be prohibiting if they are made due to mental illness. … The rule does not reach any beneficiaries who are assigned a representative payee due to physical incapability or for reasons other than legal or mental incompetence.
A spokeswoman for Everytown for Gun Safety had nothing to add to the matter when reached by The Daily Signal.
Johnson said he has been dedicated to defending the Constitution from his time in the military through Congress.
“Former President Obama’s last-ditch effort on gun control that would harm Social Security beneficiaries with disabilities is wrong,” Johnson told The Daily Signal in a statement. “I opposed it from the get-go, fought to stop it, and am encouraged by the support of the National Rifle Association, the Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities Rights Task Force, and the National Council on Disability on this issue. I look forward to overturning the rule soon.”
Denial of a constitutional right is not something that should ever be decided administratively, said Hans von Spakovsky, a senior fellow at The Heritage Foundation.
“No administrative process and no administrative law judge should be able to take away a constitutional right,” von Spakovsky said. “This should exclusively be a regular court of law to determine if someone is disabled enough to pose a hazard with a gun, not a federal bureaucrat.”
The National Rifle Association celebrated the congressional review as a victory.
“Congress’s decision to review the Obama administration’s backdoor gun grab is a significant step forward in protecting a fundamental constitutional right for law-abiding gun owners,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director of the NRA Institute for Legislative Action, in a public statement. “The NRA has been fighting this unconstitutional government overreach since it was first discussed and we look forward to swift congressional action.” (For more from the author of “Congress Set to Overturn Obama Gun Control Rule” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/pistol-1434021_960_720.jpg640960Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2017-01-26 17:52:082017-01-26 17:52:08Congress Set to Overturn Obama Gun Control Rule
Many Obamacare supporters claim the law has expanded health coverage to upwards of 20 million Americans, but new data shows that isn’t accurate.
As part of Congress’ continued push to repeal Obamacare, the House Budget Committee held a hearing this week titled “The Failures of Obamacare: Harmful Effects and Broken Promises.”
Heritage Foundation expert Ed Haislmaier was one of four expert witnesses who testified.
Haislmaier presented new data regarding gains in health coverage since the full implementation of Obamacare began in 2014.
Most of the reports on coverage gains, such as the Obama administration’s, are typically based on government or private survey data rather than actually counting the change in private insurance or Medicaid program enrollments.
Haislmaier’s testimony highlighted his previous findings that only about 14 million people had gained coverage during the first two years of Obamacare’s full implementation (2014-2015). In addition, he reported preliminary findings for 2016.
Data is not yet available for the full year, but based on the first three quarters of 2016, Haislmaier finds a net total increase in coverage of about another 2.5 million people.
He explains:
The preliminary data show that during that period, enrollment in the individual market grew by 842,028 individuals, enrollment in fully insured employer plans declined by 1,128,597 individuals, enrollment in self-insured employer plans increased by 776,780 individuals, and Medicaid and CHIP [Children’s Health Insurance Program] enrollment increased by 2,044,809 individuals.
In sum, Medicaid coverage accounts for 81 percent of the total gain in coverage for the first three quarters of 2016. This is consistent with Haislmaier’s previous findings that the bulk of the coverage gains since Obamacare’s full implementation have been in the Medicaid program, not private insurance.
Adding the 2016 preliminary data to the coverage gains from 2014 and 2015, there has been a total net gain in coverage of 16.5 million individuals from Obamacare’s launch through the first three quarters of 2016.
Medicaid coverage has increased by 13.8 million individuals and private coverage has had a net increase of 2.7 million individuals.
Once again, the data confirm that Obamacare’s principle coverage effect has been to expand Medicaid. (For more from the author of “New Data Show Obamacare Insures Less Than 20 Million, Most on Medicaid” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/obama-356133_960_720-2-1.jpg638960Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2017-01-26 17:44:102017-01-26 17:44:10New Data Show Obamacare Insures Less Than 20 Million, Most on Medicaid
Moving swiftly to fulfill his campaign promise to get the nation’s illegal immigration problem under control, President Donald Trump signed two executive orders on Jan. 25 that constitute an almost complete reversal of the Obama administration’s nonenforcement and open borders policy.
From improving the physical barrier at our southern border to finally moving against sanctuary cities, these two executive orders put into effect a comprehensive program designed to secure our borders, implement interior enforcement, and reintegrate the assistance of state and local governments into federal efforts to enforce our immigration laws.
It has been a long time coming, but it seems to be finally happening: The federal government is actually enforcing our immigration laws.
As the first order, “Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements,” correctly sets out in its preamble, “border security is critically important to the national security of the United States” and “aliens who illegally enter… without inspection or admission present a significant threat to national security and public safety.”
The president orders the Department of Homeland Security to immediately take the following steps:
Plan, design, and construct a physical wall, using appropriate materials and technology to most effectively achieve complete operational control of the southern border.
End the “catch and release” policy of the Obama administration, which Border Patrol agents sarcastically referred to as “catch and run” that flooded the country with illegal aliens, as well as dramatically increase the capacity of detention facilities to handle this change and the number of immigration judges needed to handle alien cases.
Return illegal aliens “to the territory from which they came pending a formal removal proceeding,” expedite determinations of apprehended aliens’ claims of eligibility to remain in the U.S., and make federal prosecutions of immigration offenses “with a nexus to the southern border” a priority.
Hire an additional 5,000 Border Patrol agents.
Bring state and local law enforcement agencies back into immigration enforcement to get their assistance in the “investigation, apprehension, or detention of aliens,” including through the 287(g) program, something the Obama administration did everything it could to end.
Stop the “abuse of parole and asylum provisions currently used to prevent the lawful removal of removable aliens” by doing what the Obama administration refused to do: Apply the plain language of the provisions in immigration law that set out strict standards for asylum and parole.
Authorize immigration agents and even state officials who are helping federal authorities to enter all federal lands in pursuit of illegal aliens—again something that the Obama Interior Department refused to allow in areas where national parks and other lands were along our borders.
The second, complementary order, “Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States,” aims at enhancing interior enforcement of our immigration laws, particularly for “aliens who engage in criminal conduct in the United States.”
This order outlines that executive branch officials are directed to:
Put a priority on removing aliens who have committed criminal offenses; that includes not just violent criminals, but also aliens who engage in fraud in connection with the government or public benefits.
Hire an additional 10,000 immigration officers.
Enter into agreements with as many state and local governments as possible to aid the federal government in enforcing federal immigration laws.
Cut off funding from the Department of Homeland Security and the Justice Department to sanctuary cities, as well as take appropriate action in court against any such sanctuary cities whose policies violate federal immigration law.
Review all previous immigration actions and policies to rescind or revise any that are inconsistent with federal immigration law or this executive order.
Implement a comprehensive program to prosecute illegal aliens for criminal violations of the law.
Implement sanctions against all “recalcitrant” countries that refuse to take back their nationals who are deported from the U.S.
Establish an office within the Department of Homeland Security to help the victims of crimes committed by illegal aliens.
There is no question that all of these actions, taken together, will be a major step in getting our illegal alien population under control, securing our border, and deterring and reducing the huge influx of illegal aliens into the U.S. that was spurred by the Obama administration’s lax policies.
It would seem that the political will to enforce our immigration laws and take a tough line on the illegal aliens that have been flooding into the country for many years has finally appeared in Washington in the form of Donald Trump, the 45th president of the United States.
It is about time. (For more from the author of “Trump’s Immigration Actions Reverse Obama’s Open Borders Policy” please click HERE)
