Posts

Washington Makes It Illegal for Therapists to Help Kids With Unwanted Gay Attractions

. . .Democratic Gov. Jay Inslee signed SB 5722 into law Wednesday, the Spokesman-Review reports. It declares the state has a “compelling interest” in “protecting” the physical and mental health of anyone under 18 from the “serious harms caused by conversion therapy.”

Under the law, “conversion therapy” is defined as any counseling or treatment by a licensed medical professional intended to “change an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity,” or “eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attractions or feelings toward individuals of the same sex.”

Conversion therapy, also known as reparative therapy, is controversial in large part because it challenges the notion that sexual attraction is biologically rooted and unchangeable. Prominent medical organizations such as the World Psychiatric Association have condemned the practice, but many former homosexuals attest to the treatment’s effectiveness.

Supporters of therapists helping people overcome unwanted attractions point out that therapy is about helping clients achieve their goals – and some seeking therapy want to cease or not act on same-sex attractions.

Now classified as “unprofessional conduct” in Washington, conversion therapy is grounds for suspending or revoking a medical license regardless of whether a minor seeks it out, and the law contains no exception for parental request or approval of the treatment. (Read more from “Washington Makes It Illegal for Therapists to Help Kids With Unwanted Gay Attractions” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Mueller Files First Charges

By Pamela Brown, Evan Perez and Shimon Prokupecz. A federal grand jury in Washington on Friday approved the first charges in the investigation led by special counsel Robert Mueller, according to sources briefed on the matter.

The charges are still sealed under orders from a federal judge. Plans were prepared Friday for anyone charged to be taken into custody as soon as Monday, the sources said. It is unclear what the charges are.

A spokesman for the special counsel’s office declined to comment.

Mueller was appointed in May to lead the investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election. (Read more from “Mueller Files First Charges” HERE)

_______________________________________

First Charges Approved in Robert Mueller’s Russia Probe With Plans to Take People Involved Into Custody

By Ginger Adams Otis. The first round of charges in special counsel Robert Mueller’s ongoing investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election were approved Friday – but it’s still not known what they are or who they target . . .

The special counsel has been digging into allegations of Russian involvement in the 2016 presidential campaign since May.

Mueller has been focusing on potential collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

The President is also part of the probe for possible obstruction of justice for his alleged efforts to impede the investigation . . .

In addition to Mueller’s probe, three committees on Capitol Hill are conducting their own investigations. (Read more from “First Charges Approved in Robert Mueller’s Russia Probe With Plans to Take People Involved Into Custody” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Vatican Recalls U.S. Diplomat in Child Porn Investigation

A senior member of the Vatican U.S. embassy staff in Washington was recalled after a request from U.S. prosecutors for him to be charged and tried in a child pornography case, Vatican and U.S. officials said.

The diplomat, a priest, is suspected of possessing, though not producing or disseminating, child pornography, including images of prepubescent children, the Associated Press reported, citing a U.S. source who is familiar with the investigation and speaking on the condition of anonymity.

The Vatican said in a statement on Friday that U.S. State Department notified the Vatican Secretariat of State of “a possible violation of laws relating to child pornography images.”

The Holy See said it recalled the priest in keeping with the practice of sovereign states, and that he is currently in Vatican City. (Read more from “Vatican Recalls U.S. Diplomat in Child Porn Investigation” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

‘The Oversight Man’ Explains Why Washington Doesn’t Change

Just a couple of months ago, investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson profiled Rep. Jason Chaffetz, the Republican chairman of the powerful House Oversight Committee which was poised to dig deep on wide-ranging investigations into government mischief, waste, fraud, and abuse.

A few weeks later, Chaffetz abruptly announced he would resign from Congress. We asked the Oversight Man what changed his mind about being a lead watchdog with not only a GOP majority in Congress, but also a Republican in the White House. He told me it’s more a matter of what hasn’t changed. We started the interview with me asking how he told party leaders he was quitting.

The following is Attkisson’s Full Measure interview with Chaffetz.

Sharyl Attkisson: Some people might think this is a great time to be a Republican Chairman of an important committee because Republicans control the House, they’re the majority in the Senate, and they hold the president’s office. That means, you would think, that federal agencies can’t stonewall investigations of spending, waste, fraud, and abuse.

Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah: The reality is, sadly, I don’t see much difference between the Trump administration and the Obama administration. I thought there would be this, these floodgates would open up with all the documents we wanted from the Department of State, the Department of Justice, the Pentagon.

In many ways, it’s almost worse because we’re getting nothing, and that’s terribly frustrating. And with all due respect, the Attorney General has not changed at all. I find him to be worse than what I saw with Loretta Lynch in terms of releasing documents and making things available. I just, that’s my experience, and that’s not what I expected.

Attkisson: What were some of the investigations that this committee was stalled on that you hoped could be picked up now, that’s not been able to happen in terms of documents not provided by federal agencies?

Chaffetz: We have everything from the Hillary Clinton email investigation, which is really one of the critical things. There was the investigation into the IRS. And one that was more than seven years old is “Fast and Furious.” I mean, we have been in court trying to pry those documents out of the Department of Justice and still to this day, they will not give us those documents. And at the State Department, nothing. Stone cold silence.

Attkisson: To what do you attribute that?

Chaffetz: I think if we went to the senior most people, even the president himself, they would be pulling their hair out and they would hate to hear that but within the bowels of the organization, they just seem to circle the wagons and think, oh we just, we can just wait you out. We can just wait you out.

Attkisson: Republicans were very upset in the last few years over the IRS Commissioner, John Koskinen, who they said allowed destruction of documents and investigations and other things. This committee, I believe, even called for him to be impeached. He’s still IRS Commissioner even though Republicans are now in charge of pretty much everything. Why is that?

Chaffetz: Now look, you have more than 50 Republicans pleading with President Trump to release him, to let him go, fire him. Or at least encourage him to retire. No, he’s still there. No changes. Nobody was fired. Nobody was prosecuted. Nobody was held accountable. We tried to issue subpoenas, we tried to hold people in contempt and the Obama administration said, no, and the Trump administration came in and did zero. Nothing. Nothing changed.

Attkisson: Do Republican leaders have an appetite to do the kind of oversight that needs to be done?

Chaffetz: No, no. No, I mean the reality is, there aren’t very many people that want to play offense. There aren’t many people who say, look, we have a duty and an obligation to fulfill the oversight responsibility that was put in place at the very founding of our country. (For more from the author of “‘The Oversight Man’ Explains Why Washington Doesn’t Change” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

This Bill Finally Frees Main Street From the Grip of Washington

America’s current financial regulatory system, begotten by some of the most liberal minds in this country, has consistently limited the ability of banks to serve their customers.

It has forced community banks to bend to the will of an ever-expanding bureaucracy in Washington, D.C., for nearly a decade.

What was this financial regulatory system that has been so destructive?

The Dodd-Frank Act—a bill passed by Democrats in 2010 that radically increased Washington’s grip on local financial institutions.

In order to encourage the jumpstart of our economy, it is absolutely critical that capital is available to small and medium-sized businesses, something that is not currently possible under Dodd-Frank.

Through outrageous and ill-thought regulations, Democrats created a financial framework that promoted “too big too fail” instead of banishing it to the pages of history forever.

The CHOICE Act that the House of Representatives will take under consideration this week combats this very problem. For the first time in years, small community banks will be able to serve their communities as they once did—without excessive burdens from regulators that stifle growth and restrict the access to capital.

Finally, the American people can take a deep breath knowing that the right legislation has been introduced at the right time.

The CHOICE Act will hold Washington accountable.

For too long, faceless and unelected bureaucrats have maintained a sense of privilege and arrogance that stems from their belief that they know not only what is best for themselves, but what is best for the American people.

In Washington, part of the obligation for those of us who are sent here to represent our communities is to protect economic liberty for those back home.

The American dream is still alive and yet, it has not thrived as it should due to the environment created by the disaster that is Dodd-Frank.

Because a strong and stable financial marketplace is the backbone of our economy, it is necessary that small businesses getting started in a garage and even those businesses expanding to new locations have access to resources, capital, and support that helps turn these dreams into reality.

At some level, legislation like the Financial CHOICE Act is the very reason why hardworking Americans sent their representatives to Washington.

Now, we have a responsibility and an obligation to uphold that trust and work tirelessly to ensure that Americans remain in control of their financial future, not bureaucrats hundreds of miles away. (For more from the author of “This Bill Finally Frees Main Street From the Grip of Washington” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Bringing Accountability to ‘Zombie’ Appropriations, a Key Driver of Federal Waste

A key driver of wasteful spending in Washington is what some call “zombie” appropriations.

This refers to spending on programs that either have never been authorized, or are operating under an expired authorization. According to the Congressional Budget Office, these programs accounted for nearly one-third of all discretionary spending in fiscal year 2016, receiving more than $310 billion.

Under both House and Senate rules, a program that does not have an up-to-date authorization is not supposed to be able to receive an appropriation. Unfortunately, these rules are almost always ignored, and “zombie” programs continue to receive funding.

Some may wonder, why does it matter if zombie programs continue to receive funding?

One of Congress’ core constitutional authorities is to maintain the power of the purse. Authorization legislation, budget resolutions, and appropriations bills (collectively known as regular order) are key components of Congress’ oversight function.

By authorizing agencies and programs on a regular basis, Congress is able to examine the activities that receive taxpayer dollars. This also allows Congress to consider the usefulness of government programs and make sometimes tough decisions about what the nation’s spending priorities should be. With the gross federal debt now approaching $20 trillion, it is clear that Congress has a spending problem.

Lack of oversight has at least in part contributed to this problem. Congress should be working toward reducing wasteful spending and finding ways to put spending and debt on a sustainable path.

Yet at the very least, it should perform its oversight function and fully account for exactly how scarce taxpayer resources are being spent.

This week, Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash., introduced the Unauthorized Spending Accountability (USA) Act of 2017.

Rodgers’ bill makes a strong push to begin the return to regular order, forcing Congress to do its job and regularly authorize agencies and programs. Under her USA Act, programs would be put on a three-year track to being sunset if they are not reauthorized.

The first year after their expiration, appropriations would be reduced by 10 percent of the total value of their unauthorized spending. In the remaining two years, this cut would deepen to 15 percent.

The Heritage Foundation’s “Blueprint for Balance” calls for a similar penalty to be applied to unauthorized accounts, but would withhold any funding until after reauthorization.

Spending reductions would be enforced by an automatic sequester each year, and the only way for Congress to avoid these reductions for unauthorized activities would be to enact offsetting reductions in mandatory spending.

Enforcement through sequestration gives Congress a strong incentive to either authorize programs or make targeted cuts to other parts of the budget and avoid arbitrary across-the-board cuts.

The USA Act would also create a commission to establish a three-year schedule by which all discretionary programs would be authorized. This commission would also review all mandatory spending programs and identify mandatory offsets that could be used to restore budget authority to unauthorized accounts.

Hopefully, the bill would also bolster Congress’ oversight ability and provide an opportunity to identify programs and activities that could be consolidated or eliminated entirely, saving taxpayers billions of dollars.

Zombie appropriations continue to be a major problem and threaten the nation’s fiscal health. It is going to require backbone and decisive action from Congress to stop this practice and return accountability to the budget process.

This bill is a first step in the right direction. (For more from the author of “Bringing Accountability to ‘Zombie’ Appropriations, a Key Driver of Federal Waste” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

‘Blueprint for Reform’ Gives Desperately Needed Guidance to Washington

The barbaric attack in Nice, the slaughter of police officers in Dallas and Baton Rouge, and Hillary Clinton’s umpteenth legal cakewalk leave many Americans feeling angry and powerless—and understandably so. The social contract seems to have been shredded by the mayhem that envelops us.

But the upcoming election and change of administration offer Americans an opportunity to demand a return to principles that can keep the nation free and strong—if embraced.

These principles—free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense—underlie the dozens of policy recommendations detailed in The Heritage Foundation’s new “Blueprint for Reform: A Comprehensive Policy Agenda.” Released last week, the publication is the latest in a series of “Mandate for Leadership” books that debuted in 1981 to guide the incoming Reagan administration.

Washington desperately needs the guidance, of course.

As noted in “Blueprint for Reform,” excessive spending has nearly doubled the federal debt in recent years, from $9.9 trillion at the close of 2008 to $19.2 trillion in May 2016. There also has been an unparalleled expansion of regulation, with some 20,000 rules issued by the Obama administration and an increase in annual regulatory costs of more than $108 billion (according to the regulatory agencies’ own numbers). The loss of individual freedom is incalculable.

Meanwhile, the $1 trillion that Americans spend each year on means-tested welfare programs isn’t buying much self-sufficiency for the needy among us. And U.S. military capabilities have languished.

In its first six chapters, “Blueprint for Reform” summarizes the state of the economy; taxes; entitlements; regulation; energy and natural resources; and foreign policy and defense. The second half features analyses by Heritage experts of the missions, operations, and budgets of 15 Cabinet departments and eight other agencies, along with a detailed policy agenda “to allow Americans to build for themselves a stronger economy, a stronger society, and a stronger defense.”

On taxes, for example, the plan reveals that the federal government expects to collect $42.1 trillion in revenues between 2017 and 2026, and spend $51.4 trillion. Doing so will increase the total gross debt from $19.2 trillion in May 2016 to an estimated $29.1 trillion by September 2026.

As noted by Heritage Foundation experts, a more rational tax system would feature a low, flat rate applied on a base of wages, salaries, and limited number of other forms of income. And the rate would be set to collect no more revenue than is necessary to fund government’s core constitutional functions.

Exercising Power of the Purse

“Blueprint for Reform” also prescribes a variety of regulatory reforms to curtail the vast administrative state that has eroded the fundamental character of America. Chief among them is returning accountability to Congress by requiring lawmakers to approve all major regulations before they are allowed to take effect.

The plan calls on Congress to exercise the power of the purse by withholding appropriations from ruinous regulations such as the Obama administration’s so-called Clean Power Plan, among others.

Indeed, President Barack Obama’s crackdown on coal and petroleum has been particularly punishing by prohibiting access to natural resource exploration, subsidizing politically preferred energy sources, and implementing burdensome regulations that distort markets and provide little environmental benefit.

“Blueprint for Reform” recommends greater access to resource development and trade in energy resources, the elimination of subsidies, favoritism, and shifting more regulatory authority to the states. As noted by Heritage analysts:

Freely importing and exporting energy and energy technologies would yield tremendous economic benefits, providing Americans with more opportunities to sell products to more customers and to buy cheaper goods and services from abroad. Free trade in energy also bolsters national security by increasing supply diversity and providing choices for allies; it will have beneficial geopolitical implications for every region of the world.

Reducing Regulations and Entitlements

The hundreds of regulations imposed on the financial sector under the Dodd-Frank Act likewise have increased costs, reduced access to credit, and inhibited economic growth. Advocates evidently fail to grasp that banks and other financial institutions actually promote prosperity by allocating capital.

But as Heritage experts point out, Dodd-Frank actually has eroded financial stability by inciting industry concentration, which harms investors and consumers. To reverse this trend, “Blueprint for Reform” recommends repeal of Dodd-Frank and a return to regulation focused on deterring and punishing fraud and fostering reasonable, scaled disclosure of material information.

Major reforms also are necessary to rationalize America’s entitlement programs, including Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Obamacare, which accounted for more than half of all tax revenues in 2015.

“Blueprint for Reform” eliminates any excuse for hand-wringing among members of Congress by providing specific reforms, such as:

Raising the Social Security and Medicare retirement ages to account for increased life expectancies and work capacities.

Transitioning to a flat, anti-poverty benefit for Social Security and Disability Insurance.

Reducing the payroll tax to allow individuals to save more for retirement and disability.

Defending the Nation

And then there is defense. It is all too apparent that America is unprepared and ill-equipped to confront Russian adventurism in Eastern Europe, Chinese expansion in the South China Sea, and Islamist terrorists streaming across swaths of Asia, the Middle East, and North Africa.

“Blueprint for Reform” recommends reprioritizing defense spending while maintaining the aggregate spending levels for discretionary programs under the Budget Control Act. Resources should be shifted to restoring capacity, particularly of U.S. ground forces; accelerating readiness; and updating nuclear weapons and missile defense systems, among other changes.

Improving the efficiency of the Defense Department also should be a priority, according to Heritage experts, including cutting excessive bureaucracy and modernizing acquisition system.

A great many other policy corrections fill the 152-page “Blueprint for Reform” that should be required reading for every policymaker and elected official—in Washington and beyond. It also offers citizens an inside look at the inner workings of the executive branch and experts’ guidance on making America once again the land of the free and the home of the brave. (For more from the author of “‘Blueprint for Reform’ Gives Desperately Needed Guidance to Washington” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

How Washington Politicians Wasted Billions Trying to ‘Invest in Our Future’

The federal government has wasted billions on energy projects promising to usher in a new energy future.

Why? Because revolutions don’t come from the government—they come from the people, and the same holds true for energy.

Despite many attempts to force it, the next energy revolution won’t come from Washington. All Washington can do is play favorites when picking energy options (think Solyndra).

It does this through providing grants, loans, loan guarantees, mandates (like the use of biofuels), and tax subsidies to specific energy technologies—to only name of a few.

Another way in which the government intervenes in the energy market is the annual budget of the Department of Energy. Programs within the Department of Energy supposedly recognize that there’s great potential for wind, solar, fusion, geothermal, biofuels, carbon capturing technology for coal, and much more. These energy sources and technologies themselves may very well be worthy of investment, but that’s not the point. The problem is the government meddling in what is clearly not its role.

The mantra from proponents of government spending on energy is generally the same. To borrow from President Barack Obama, “Rather than subsidize the past, we should invest in the future.”

Half of that statement is correct. Taxpayers shouldn’t subsidize the past. Nor should they “invest” (read: subsidize) in the future. In fact, that’s why the market has investors: to take chances, using their own money, on promising new endeavors. From basic research to full-scale commercialization for any energy technology, every step of the way should be driven by the private sector.

Free enterprise will spur the next energy revolution, just as it has the latest oil and gas revolution that’s lowering the cost of living for Americans. Competition will provide incremental improvements in energy, for conventional natural resources and for renewable technologies.

As energy prices rise and fall, markets respond accordingly. Higher prices at the pump, for instance, incentivize companies to extract more oil and invest in technologies to produce the oil more cheaply and efficiently. Higher prices encourage exploration into alternative power sources for vehicles, whether it is biofuels, batteries, natural gas, or something entirely different.

Markets shift to more efficient and cost-competitive technologies when they make economic sense and meet consumer preferences. In the 1800s, wood was the dominant energy source for families because it was abundant and convenient. Over time, coal replaced wood because it provided more heat per pound and was easier to store and to transport.

Furthermore, the evolution of rail power from steam to diesel occurred even faster because the transition significantly reduced costs and increased productivity. Though legislation encouraged the use of diesel locomotives on a small scale, the dramatic shift mostly happened because of market forces. The cost-effectiveness and increased productivity of diesel-powered trains largely eradicated the use of steam locomotives in just over two decades.

The reality is that Washington isn’t needed to drive energy innovation, which is a difficult pill to swallow for some politicians and special interests. Because those are the folks who want to keep the money flowing to their preferred energy sources because they stand to benefit.

It’s more difficult for politicians to take credit for the successes guided by the invisible hand. But the free market will actually trigger successful investments and reward disruptive technologies, providing more choice and better options for families.

On the surface, their reasons for government funding energy projects may sound appealing to the public. For years, policymakers stressed the need to develop alternative energy sources to reduce dependence on foreign energy sources. Lately, the justification for Department of Energy spending is that America needs to combat global warming, reduce greenhouse gas emission, and be a leader in green tech.

But intentions and results are two very different things. Decades of the federal government trying to commercialize specific energy technologies have left Americans with nothing more than empty promises and squandered money.

Instead of continuing to fund energy programs almost without hesitation, policymakers should trust that the market will determine the true value of potentially innovative technologies. We know what works and what doesn’t. It’s time for Congress to stop dumping money into failed programs and expecting different results. Instead, they should live by this mantra:

A penny saved is a penny earned and a taxpayer dollar spent on energy is a taxpayer dollar wasted.

(For more from the author of “How Washington Politicians Wasted Billions Trying to ‘Invest in Our Future'” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Washington State May Abolish Rule Forcing Businesses to Let Men Into Women’s Bathrooms

A Republican-led Senate committee narrowly passed a bill that would repeal Washington State’s new law requiring public buildings and most businesses to let people with gender dysphoria use the restroom, locker room, and other facilities of their choice.

On Wednesday, the Senate’s Commerce and Labor Committee heard from 300 people on both sides of the issue. While transgender activists said the law prevents discrimination, parents and others said they were concerned about the potential of sexual assaults. Some noted that the Human Rights Commission, which approved the so-called “non-discrimination” law, is not a legislative body.

One business owner, Thrive Community Fitness’s Paul MacLurg, told legislators that “now I have no good choices” when it comes to protecting women from men who would harass them. He has assigned a private restroom and locker room for transgender people.

Bill sponsor Senator Doug Ericksen described the measure as a “compromise” effort that would allow local jurisdictions to handle the issue on a case-by-case basis. “The state shouldn’t have a mandate on men using the women’s locker room,” he said.

Ramona Calquhoun told The Associated Press that, in addition to opening possibilities for sexual predators, “[e]ven mentioning anything puts you in a legally bad position to get sued.” (Read more from “Washington State May Abolish Rule Forcing Businesses to Let Men Into Women’s Bathrooms” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Uncle Sam’s $8 Trillion Annual Debt Churn: Why Washington Is Pertrified Of Honest Interest Rates

Photo Credit: NewscomI know that headline sounds completely outrageous. But it is actually true. The U.S. government is borrowing about 8 trillion dollars a year, and you are about to see the hard numbers that prove this. When discussing the national debt, most people tend to only focus on the amount that it increases each 12 months. And as I wrote about recently, the U.S. national debt has increased by more than a trillion dollars in fiscal year 2014.

But that does not count the huge amounts of U.S. Treasury securities that the federal government must redeem each year. When these debt instruments hit their maturity date, the U.S. government must pay them off. This is done by borrowing more money to pay off the previous debts. In fiscal year 2013, redemptions of U.S. Treasury securities totaled $7,546,726,000,000 and new debt totaling $8,323,949,000,000 was issued. The final numbers for fiscal year 2014 are likely to be significantly higher than that.

So why does so much government debt come due each year?

Well, in recent years government officials figured out that they could save a lot of money on interest payments by borrowing over shorter time frames. For example, it costs the government far more to borrow money for 10 years than it does for 1 year. So a strategy was hatched to borrow money for very short periods of time and to keep “rolling it over” again and again and again.

This strategy has indeed saved the federal government hundreds of billions of dollars in interest payments, but it has also created a situation where the federal government must borrow about 8 trillion dollars a year just to keep up with the game.

Read more from this story HERE.