Fast-tracking the TPP, meaning its passage through Congress without having its contents available for debate or amendments, was only possible after lots of corporate money exchanged hands with senators. The US Senate passed Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) – the fast-tracking bill – by a 65-33 margin on 14 May. Last Thursday, the Senate voted 62-38 to bring the debate on TPA to a close.
Those impressive majorities follow months of behind-the-scenes wheeling and dealing by the world’s most well-heeled multinational corporations with just a handful of holdouts. (Read more from “Here’s How Much Corporations Paid US Senators to Fast-Track the TPP”
Using data from the Federal Election Commission, this chart shows all donations that corporate members of the US Business Coalition for TPP made to US Senate campaigns between January and March 2015, when fast-tracking the TPP was being debated in the Senate:
•Out of the total $1,148,971 given, an average of $17,676.48 was donated to each of the 65 “yea” votes.
•The average Republican member received $19,673.28 from corporate TPP The average Democrat received $9,689.23 from those same donors.
The amounts given rise dramatically when looking at how much each senator running for re-election received.HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-06-25 02:24:052016-04-11 10:59:39Here’s How Much Corporations Paid US Senators to Pass the Sovereign-Killing Trade Bills
By Al Weaver. Conservative commentator Ann Coulter dismissed the “completely moronic” debate going on about the Confederate flag Tuesday, arguing that the Democratic Party should be banned in order to help African-Americans . . .
“I think it’s completely moronic,” Coulter said. “I mean, this is an awful thing that happened in Charleston. Luckily, it’s quite rare. But to jump on this and go back to a litany of liberal talking points that make Republicans look bad, how about banning the Democratic Party?”
“They were the ones who supported — who were on the Confederate side of the Civil War. They were the ones that supported segregation for a hundred years,” Coulter said. “If we want to do something nice for black people, how about ending immigration which is dumping millions of low-wage workers on the country, taking jobs from African-Americans, as enumerable studies have shown.” (Read more from “Coulter: Forget ‘Moronic’ Confederate Flag Talk, Ban ‘Democratic Party’ to Help Blacks” HERE)
Whoa: This Is How the Slain Pastor Felt About the Confederate Flag…
By Michele Hickford. Matthew 5:9 says “Blessed are the peacemakers” and it would appear Pastor Clementa Pinckney was definitely one of those.
While the mainstream media is decrying the fact that the Charleston shooting victim’s body was carried past a Confederate flag today, the good pastor may not have found it all that offensive.
In 2000, during his first term in the South Carolina State Senate, Pinckney actually voted in favor of H5028, the May 2000 compromise which placed the flag at its current location.
H5028 related to THE PERMANENT PLACEMENT OF THE UNITED STATES FLAG, THE SOUTH CAROLINA STATE FLAG, AND THE SOUTH CAROLINA INFANTRY BATTLE FLAG OF THE CONFEDERATE STATES OF AMERICA.
You can see here that Pinckney’s name is among the “93 yeas.” (Read more from this story HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-06-25 02:23:582016-04-11 10:59:39Coulter: Forget ‘Moronic’ Confederate Flag Talk, Ban ‘Democratic Party’ to Help Blacks [+video]
As Republican lawmakers brace for the U.S. Supreme Court’s King v. Burwell decision, a conservative plan has emerged that would eliminate the subsidies awarded under the Affordable Care Act, popularly known as Obamacare.
In anticipation of the King v. Burwell decision, Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., introduced the Premium Reduction and Insurance Market Reform Act. The bill would end Obamacare’s subsidies and eliminate the law’s age rating restrictions, benefit mandates and minimum actuarial value requirement—addressing the issue if the Supreme Court rules against the Obama administration. A decision could come as early as Monday.
The Supreme Court is examining the legality of subsidies awarded to consumers purchasing health insurance on the federal exchange. As it was written, the law limits the availability of subsidies to states operating their own exchanges. Just 16 states and the District of Columbia originally established their own exchanges.
However, the administration extended the tax credits to include the remaining 34 states using the federal exchange, HealthCare.gov.
If the court rules against the Obama administration, striking down federal subsidies, Republicans are expected to roll out a response to the decision that would still provide a safety net for the approximately 6.4 million Americans at risk of losing their tax credits.
GOP lawmakers in both chambers gathered Wednesday night to discuss legislative options.
A plan from Ways and Means Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., being discussed in the House allows for the allocation of block grants to states wanting them. Those states would be able to determine how to best spend the block grants to cover consumers. States that do not want the block grants would be able to keep the subsidies offered under Obamacare.
“It block-grants the money to states that opt into our state program, and then they can set up their own exchange; they can give tax credits; they can set up health savings accounts; they can do whatever they want,” Rep. John Fleming, R-La., told The Hill.
In the Senate, Republicans are discussing options that include extending Obamacare’s subsidies through 2017.
“We’re going to be prepared,” Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, told Politico. “We wouldn’t call them subsidies. But we’d certainly keep people whole so that they wouldn’t suffer because of this interim time.”
Republicans are also looking into aspects of legislation introduced separately by Sens. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., and Ben Sasse, R-Neb.
Though GOP senators appear to be uniting behind a plan that extends subsidies to those living in states on the federal exchange, conservatives like Gosar are pushing for the elimination of them.
In a statement, Michael Needham, chief executive of Heritage Action for America, praised Gosar’s legislation for getting rid of the subsidies. The group touted the plan as the “conservative” response to King v. Burwell.
“A continuation of illegal subsidies will simply cover up the law’s costs while giving the impression Republicans believe subsidies are necessary for Americans to afford health insurance,” he said. (“House Republican Unveils Conservative Response to King v. Burwell”, originally posted HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-06-25 02:21:562016-04-11 10:59:39House Republican Unveils Conservative Response to King v. Burwell [+video]
Rep. Ken Buck (R-CO) is nothing if not a team player. Having narrowly lost his first bid for the U.S. Senate, Buck ran again for the Senate in 2014. But Buck graciously stepped aside for Congressman Sen. Cory Gardner (R-CO) and, instead, ran for a congressional seat . . .
That has all come to a head now. The Republican Leadership in Congress has decided to rapidly, and without due process, strip Buck of his status as Freshman class President. The honor was given to Buck not by Leadership, but by his incoming House freshman colleagues.
Buck dared to stand up to the House Leadership on the trade promotion authority legislation. He voted against the rule. Just as Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) was stripped of his subcommittee chairmanship, Buck must be stripped of his title . . .
It does not matter to the House GOP Leadership though. They are rushing a meeting in the next 24 hours. Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) 31% and Rep. Mimi Walters (R-CA), who are the go to freshman congresswoman for Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) and leadership, has set the meeting for at 8:30 am tomorrow in room HC-8. (Read more from “House Republican Leaders Targeting Congressman Ken Buck for Retribution” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-06-25 02:21:252016-04-11 10:59:40RINO House Republican Leaders Targeting Congressman Ken Buck for Retribution
Top presidential adviser Valerie Jarret is well known for being a far-left liberal, but FBI files obtained by the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch show she comes from a family even further left than most Democrats would want to admit.
Jarrett’s father, her father-in-law and her maternal grandfather were all under investigation by the FBI for deep Communist ties during the 1950s, Judicial Watch reports.
According to Judicial Watch:
Jarrett’s dad, pathologist and geneticist Dr. James Bowman, had extensive ties to Communist associations and individuals, his lengthy FBI file shows. In 1950 Bowman was in communication with a paid Soviet agent named Alfred Stern, who fled to Prague after getting charged with espionage. Bowman was also a member of a Communist-sympathizing group called the Association of Internes and Medical Students. After his discharge from the Army Medical Corps in 1955, Bowman moved to Iran to work, the FBI records show …
The Jarrett family Communist ties also include a business partnership between Jarrett’s maternal grandpa, Robert Rochon Taylor, and Stern, the Soviet agent associated with her dad.
(Read more from “FBI Files Reveal Obama Adviser Valerie Jarrett’s Deep Family Ties to Communist Activities” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-06-24 03:48:252016-04-11 10:59:40FBI Files Reveal Obama Adviser Valerie Jarrett’s Deep Family Ties to Communist Activities [+video]
Charged with discriminating against a gay couple, the owners of another Christian family-run business are being forced to shut their doors.
“We can’t pretend it’s going to get better,” Betty Odgaard told The Daily Signal in an exclusive interview. “There wasn’t enough business.”
Betty and her husband, Richard, are the owners of Görtz Haus Gallery in Grimes, Iowa. In 2002, they purchased the 77-year-old stone church and transformed it into a bistro, flower shop, art gallery and wedding venue.
On August 3, 2013, a gay couple from Des Moines asked to rent Görtz Haus for their wedding.
Because of their Mennonite faith, the Odgaards told the couple they could not host their wedding.
Within 24 hours, the couple filed a discrimination complaint through the Iowa Civil Rights Commission.
“We knew that the business was going to be in trouble almost immediately,” Richard, 69, said. “We had to get rid of the wedding business to avoid another complaint and possibly a higher penalty.”
The Odgaards never admitted to any discrimination, but agreed to a $5,000 settlement.
They also returned two non-refundable deposits for couples who, after hearing media reports, didn’t want to use their space for their weddings anymore.
“It was just the right thing to do,” Richard said.
Going On Life Support
After leaving the wedding business, Görtz Haus went on life support.
If they continued to offer wedding-related services, the Odgaards knew they could be subject to another discrimination complaint.
“We didn’t have a choice,” Betty, 63 said. “We would be targets.”
Around town, Görtz Haus became known as the business that refuses to serve gays.
If a group of ladies went to lunch and one disagreed with their opinion not to host same-sex weddings, the entire group boycotted the bistro, the Odgaards explained.
“They didn’t come in because the people who are against us are more vocal than the people who are in our court,” Richard said.
Betty said the situation drove her into a “really dark depression”—so bad, that she had to seek the help of professionals.
“I’m a melancholy artist and no stranger to depression, but this took me down to the darkest I’ve ever been before,” she said.
The case was the first of its kind in Iowa, but it didn’t receive the same sort of media attention as the bakers in Oregon, the photographers in New Mexico or the farmers in New York.
The couple says that’s because pending litigation prevented them from being able to speak out, further isolating them from their community.
“We didn’t get the Chick-fil-A response,” Richard half-heartedly joked.
Iowa’s Involvement
The Odgaards don’t blame the gay community for shutting them down, but rather, the state of Iowa.
“I think if people in Iowa would have had a chance to vote on this, it would have never have been this way. People in Iowa are pretty conservative,” Betty said.
“With the discrimination laws and the legality of same-sex marriage in this state, now you have to prove that you didn’t discriminate,” added Richard.
The Odgaards also feel they never got their day in court, and had the case turned out differently, they might not have been driven out of business.
“This was all administrative judgement,” Richard said. “The [gay couple] had a platform to file their case and we didn’t get our day in court with a jury of our peers.”
Like the other lawsuits involving charges of discrimination, complaints are filed—and judged—in the Iowa Civil Rights Commission.
“We knew what the outcome was going to be, the judge knew what the outcome was going to be, but we had to go through it,” Richard said.
Originally, the gay couple asked for $10,000, but lawyers for the Odgaards at The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty were able to negotiate a settlement for half that amount.
“Now the precedent has been set,” Richard said. “The administrative process has demonstrated what it will do if this happens, so it’s a matter of setting somebody up and collecting money. It’s that simple. It’s all they have to do.”
Moving On
Yesterday, the Odgaards spent the day calling vendors and sharing the news that by the end of August, they’ll be closed completely.
“We have to look on the positive side, but just telling our family what we are doing, telling vendors the decision that we’ve made, it’s been very tough,” Betty said.
The couple has decided to take their story and use it to advocate for Christian teachings by creating God’s Original Design Ministry.
With the ministry, they hope to promote the importance of religious liberty, “regardless of what your religion is,” Richard said.
They received their nonprofit status earlier than expected, which they took as a sign from God.
As for the future of Görtz Haus, the Odgaards hope that it will return to its original function: a church.
“That would be the most wonderful option,” Betty said. (“Fearing Another Lawsuit, Christian Business Owners Stopped Hosting All Weddings. Now Their Business Is Dead”, originally posted HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-06-24 03:44:512016-04-11 10:59:40Fearing Another Lawsuit, Christian Business Owners Stopped Hosting All Weddings, Now Their Business Is Dead
Fox News has learned that the number of victims of a pair of massive cyberattacks on U.S. government personnel files has soared to at least 18 million — but the head of the hacked Office of Personnel Management refuses to blame anyone in her agency.
“I don’t believe anyone is personally responsible,” OPM Director Katherine Archuleta said Tuesday.
The statement came during tense Capitol Hill testimony on a breach that seems to be growing wider by the day. Archuleta, who faced tough questioning at a House hearing last week, likewise faced angry senators on Tuesday before a Senate appropriations subcommittee.
Grilled on whether anyone takes responsibility, Archuleta said only the perpetrators should be blamed — she said current failures result from decades of meager investment in security systems, but said changes are being made and in fact helped detect the latest breaches.
Still, the assurances are unlikely to ease concerns on Capitol Hill and among those who may have been affected. The web has expanded to include not just current and former government workers, but also those who may have applied for a government job. (Read more from “Who’s at Fault? 18 Million Government Workers Exposed and No One to Blame” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-06-24 03:43:472016-04-11 10:59:41Who’s at Fault? 18 Million Government Workers Exposed and No One to Blame
The federal government will stop threatening families with criminal prosecution for attempting to pay ransom for loved ones taken hostage by terrorist groups, President Barack Obama will announce Wednesday in an executive order clarifying and changing the way the government handles hostage situations. The sweeping new policy is due to “an idiot” at the Department of State, an official close to the review process told The Daily Caller News Foundation– and “it’s going to encourage more kidnappings of U.S. service members and U.S. diplomats stationed abroad, and it’s going to make Americans targets.”
The changes are the result of an extensive review of federal policy regarding hostages abroad. Obama ordered the review in December after frustrated family members of current and former hostages complained about the process, and in light of changing national security realities, such as the rise of ISIS, since the policy was written in 2000.
The official told TheDCNF that the Justice Department has not wanted to issue blanket immunity because there are times when a duress defense would not hold up in court, such as if the a family crowd-sourced for ransom money. That, the officials said, is because providing material support to terrorists is a blatant violation of U.S. law. Other agencies also opposed the change.
It’s long been an unofficial policy to turn the other way if a family tries to pay a ransom, but making that policy official could prove problematic if non-family members try to get financially involved or if family members try to solicit the public for the money they need to pay a ransom.
“This is really media-driven,” the official told TheDCNF. “The White House wants this issue to go away.” (Read more from “Report: Sweeping New Hostage Policy Due to ‘Idiot’ at State Dept, WILL Harm Americans” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-06-24 03:43:142016-04-11 10:59:41Report: Sweeping New Hostage Policy Due to ‘Idiot’ at State Dept, WILL Harm Americans
It’s been a decade since the city of New London, Conn. forcibly took the Fort Trumbull neighborhood for what became private-development, and now all that remains is an empty lot.
In 1998, the area surrounding the waterfront neighborhood saw an increased surge of economic development. This prompted city officials to decide the Fort Trumbull could be better used for other purposes.
According to the Institute for Justice, the plan was to take the land from the residents and give it to the New London Development Corporation (NLDC), a private body. Eminent domain allows the government to take land for the purposes of the public good so long as property owners are offered just compensation.
Residents, however, did not like the idea. In an effort to protect their homes, Susette Kelo and her neighbors took their city to court. After years of fighting, Kelo v. City of New London went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. To the dismay of the residents, however, the court ruled in 2005 in favor of New London.
“When I first started this battle, it was about me and this little pink house,” Kelo told The Daily Signal. “But it grew into something much bigger than that. It turned into a nationwide battle to save the Fort Trumbull neighborhood.” (Read more from “10 Years After This City Seized a Woman’s Land: An Empty Lot” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-06-24 03:42:442016-04-11 10:59:4110 Years After This City Seized a Woman’s Land: An Empty Lot
