HEALTHCARE:
Congressional Research Service: There’s No Magic Pot Of Obamacare Medicaid Expansion Money
“A recent report from the Congressional Research Service (CRS) confirms what many policy experts have known for some time: states that reject Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion aren’t sending that Medicaid expansion money to other states. Instead, that money is simply never spent. This revelation is important because numerous governors and state lawmakers from across the country have used this argument to justify their support for expanding Medicaid through Obamacare. However, as CRS succinctly explains, these arguments are entirely frivolous. There’s No Fixed Pot of Obamacare Medicaid Money – Politicians have made the case for Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion based on the false idea that rejecting Medicaid expansion will send their states’ shares of Obamacare money to other states. Governor John Kasich (R-OH), for example, has repeatedly claimed that rejecting Medicaid expansion would send Ohio’s ‘Medicaid expansion money’ to states like California. These false sentiments have been echoed repeatedly in Missouri, Tennessee, Utah and Wyoming– just to name a few. Obamacare advocates promise that Medicaid expansion won’t increase federal spending, but will instead simply ‘bring back’ their own federal tax dollars. The new CRS report explains that this claim is bogus: “If a state doesn’t implement the ACA Medicaid expansion, the federal funds that would have been used for that state’s expansion are not being sent to another state. There is not a set amount of federal funding for Medicaid. Each state gets the federal funding necessary for their Medicaid program.” This explanation is pretty straightforward: if a state rejects expansion, they don’t get any expansion money. If a state does expand, they get expansion money. But one state’s actions have no relation to how much another state receives from the federal government because there is no pot of funding that’s being divvied up in Washington….”
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2015/03/12/congressional-research-service-theres-no-magic-pot-of-obamacare-medicaid-expansion-money/
Washington State Obamacare Exchange Sign-Ups Fall Short (continuation of previous article)
“Washington state’s Obamacare exchange has fallen short of its signup goal by more than 50,000. Fox News reports that the state has only enrolled 160,000 paying customers to the exchange. This has led to an extension of the enrollment deadline, and prompted a request to the state legislature for $125 million in funding. When the exchange was established, it was projected that it would become self-sufficient by year’s end. Even Democrats who supported the Obamacare law are beginning to show signs of frustration with the lack of progress. Most of the money requested by the exchange would go to advertising, not to health care or rising operating costs. Democratic state Rep. Ross Hunter reacted to the advertising plans with skepticism…”
http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/12/washington-state-obamacare-exchange-sign-ups-fall-short/
Confusion reigns over Obamacare-related FDA menu rule
“Confusion reigns on a controversial rule that would require restaurants and delivery eateries to put calorie counts on menus, with businesses and even lawmakers unclear on how the new rule will affect them. Senators asked Thursday for the Food and Drug Administration to delay implementation of the rule, which is scheduled for Dec. 1. The agency issued a document Wednesday that gave advice to small businesses affected by the rule. “There is still considerable confusion about what is in the rule,” said outgoing FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg during a Senate Appropriations Subcommittee hearing. Case in point was an example proffered by Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kan., during the hearing. Under the rule, a restaurant must print the calorie count of every food item on the menu. However, businesses don’t know how this rule applies to more non-traditional eateries, he said. Take pizza deliveries, where a consumer doesn’t look at a menu but calls up a pizzeria for a quick pie. Moran asked if the pizzeria has to put the calorie count on the box, which can be difficult as the calorie count for a cheese pizza and a pepperoni pizza would be very different. Hamburg said that she wasn’t aware of that requirement for pizza boxes. Pizzerias do have to put calorie counts on pizza slices but not on whole pie, which are usually what is delivered to consumers. The rule was mandated by the Affordable Care Act, and intended to provide clear nutritional information. A separate rule affects calorie counts in vending machines. In addition to restaurants and delivery eateries, the rule affects food at movie theaters, bowling alleys, bookstore cafes and other similar establishments…”
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/confusion-reigns-over-obamacare-related-fda-menu-rule/article/2561423?custom_click=rss
Democrats: Allow pregnant women to enroll in Obamacare
“More than 50 House Democrats are askingthe Obama administration to add pregnancy to the limited list of reasons women may enroll year-round in coverage on the Obamacare exchanges. Once the second, extended enrollment period ends April 30, Americans may only sign up for marketplace coverage if they have experienced a major life event like a divorce or the birth of a child. As things stand now, pregnancy doesn’t qualify as a reason a woman could enroll in coverage outside the official signup season. Advocates for the health law, led by the group Young Invincibles, have been pushing the administration on that front for the last month, asking it to issue a rule making pregnancy a “qualifying life event.” They’ve convinced House members to join their cause, too, led by Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman, D-N.J. “The Affordable Care Act has made historic progress towards ending discrimination against women in the health insurance market by requiring plans to cover maternity care…however, many women are still vulnerable,” says a letter sent Thursday to Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Mathews Burwell by Coleman and 54 House members. “Special enrollment periods currently exist for qualifying life events like the birth of a child or the adoption of a child. We believe pregnancy should trigger a similar special enrollment period,” the letter says. Nearly three dozen health advocacy groups, including theAmerican Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists,also wrote to Burwell on Thursday asking for the change to be made. Young Invincibles says 50,000 people have signed a petition as well. The 2010 healthcare law requires insurance plans to cover certain benefits, including maternity care. But without making pregnancy a qualifying reason to enroll year round, uninsured women without access to employer-sponsored coverage won’t be able to access those benefits should they become pregnant, advocates say…”
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/democrats-allow-pregnant-women-to-enroll-in-obamacare/article/2561416?custom_click=rss
Dems seek Medicaid payment bump
“Two senior Senate Democrats introduced a bill Thursday that would boost payments to Medicaid doctors to equal those paid to Medicare doctors. Sens. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) are hoping to extend a provision of ObamaCare that expired last year that ensures equal payments to all providers. Physician groups have lobbied hard for higher payments for treating Medicaid patients, particularly given that millions of people have been added to the government’s low-income healthcare program since 2010. Doctors are paid as much as 60 percent less under most states’ Medicaid than they are under Medicare or private insurers. “We should be making it easier for providers to accept new Medicaid patients, not harder,” Brown wrote in a statement. The bill would also bump up payments for doctors and nurses who specifically treat women and children, such as OB-GYNs, nurse practitioners and physician assistants. The Medicaid bump alone would cost the federal government at least $11 billion, according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). The bill comes as House GOP leaders are quietly working on legislation that would permanently repeal payment cuts to Medicare providers. While the effort is expected to be bipartisan, Democrats are likely to push for some of their own programs during the deal-making…”
http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/235492-dems-seek-permanent-medicaid-payment-bump
Dems Want To Make Obamacare’s Boost To Medicaid Rates Permanent
“Two Democratic senators introduced a bill Thursday that would boost Medicaid provider reimbursement rates back to Medicare levels — part of an Obamacare provision that was supposed to be temporary. The health care law upped Medicaid reimbursement rates for primary care doctors to Medicare levels for 2013 and 2014 alone. The bump ended Dec. 31, bringing Medicaid back down to its typical level — putting traditional Medicaid patients, and the almost 10 million Medicaid expansion patients, at risk of losing their doctors. Because Medicaid pays health care providers some of the lowest rates around, many physicians opt not to accept the coverage at all. In 2012, before Obamacare temporarily hiked provider fees, health care staffing firm Jackson Healthcare reported that over a third of physicians were refusing to take to Medicaid patients due to falling reimbursements. Experts worry that the trend will continue now that the two-year boost has ended. The Urban Institute found in December that primary care providers were facing an effective pay cut of 43 percent for Medicaid patients come 2015, which could take a hit at the ability to access care for the millions of Americans have been put on Medicaid through Obamacare. Senators Patty Murray and Sherrod Brown want to boost the provider rates once again…”
http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/12/dems-want-to-make-obamacares-boost-to-medicaid-rates-permanent/
Study: Fewer plans cancelled under ObamaCare in 2014
“The flurry of media reports that said millions of people were losing their healthcare plans under ObamaCare in 2014 were likely overblown, according to a recent survey. Although a national survey from December 2013 found that one in five people had received a cancellation notice for their insurance, many of those customers were ble to keep their plans in 2014 after changes to the government’s policy, according to a new report from the nonpartisan Urban Institute. About 500,000 people who bought healthcare through their employers saw their plans cancelled last year – about 0.3 percent of all employer-sponsored plans, the Health Reform Monitoring Survey found. In the individual market, about 2.2 percent of people lost their plans, which amounts to 400,000 people, according to the survey. That same survey had previously found that nearly 19 percent of people who bought their insurance plans – or about 2.6 million people – had received cancellation notices. Facing intense political pressure, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) later walked back on some of the new coverage provisions and allowed many plans to be grandfathered in until 2017. Several outlets, included the Associated Press, reported that “millions of Americans who buy their own health insurance” were told that they would have to find new plans. But the survey shows that only 8 percent of people had received any form of notice from their insurance company in 2014…”
http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/235574-study-fewer-plans-cancelled-under-obamacare-in-2014
Why Not 50 Different Affordable Health-Care Plans?
An obscure provision in the ObamaCare law says states can enact more market-friendly reforms.
“If the Supreme Court in King v. Burwell strikes down subsidies to the buyers of health insurance on the federal exchange, President Obama will call on Congress to change the law to allow the subsidies. There also will be enormous pressure on elected officials to establish state exchanges in the 34 states that don’t have them. Instead, congressional Republicans should be laying the groundwork for market-friendly health reforms and devolving power to the states, meanwhile helping Americans who have difficulty purchasing coverage…”
http://www.wsj.com/articles/lanhee-chen-why-not-50-different-affordable-health-care-plans-1426205715?mod=rss_opinion_main
Governor touts Kentucky as ObamaCare model for red states
“Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear (D) is touting his state as an example of making ObamaCare work in a Republican stronghold. The state has drawn national attention for setting up its own ObamaCare marketplace and expanding Medicaid under the law. “Let me be clear: We welcome the attention, because we know we have boldly seized the opportunity to change the course of history in our state,” Beshear said in Washington Thursday at a conference of America’s Health Insurance Plans, an insurer trade group. In his address, he acknowledged the political mine field around the Affordable Care Act but insisted on forging ahead. “Look, I’m well aware of the so-called ‘politics’ of the ACA. President Obama didn’t get a lot of votes in Kentucky,” he said, according to prepared remarks. “We’re represented in the Senate by two high-profile Republicans who have no love for either the president or his signature program,” Beshear continued. “But there’s a huge disconnect between the rank partisanship of national politics and governors whose job it is to help beleaguered families, strengthen work forces, attract companies and build a balanced budget.” The state’s two Republican senators, Rand Paul, who is a likely presidential candidate, and Mitch McConnell, the Senate’s majority leader, are strongly opposed to the law. A Gallup poll last month found that Kentucky had the second-largest drop in its uninsured rate, after Arkansas, in 2014. The rate declined from around 20 percent to around 10 percent, a result Beshear cited as evidence of the law’s success. A recent analysis of Kentucky’s Medicaid expansion in its first year found that the program added 375,000 people. The study found that as providers expanded to provide the extra care, 12,000 jobs were created, he said. “In short, the first year was even better for Kentucky financially than predicted,” said Beshear.”
http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/235502-governor-touts-kentucky-as-red-state-obamacare-model
GOP governors scramble for answers on ObamaCare
“Republican governors are scrambling to come up with a response if the Supreme Court cripples ObamaCare, leading to a tangle of divergent views that could make it tougher for the GOP to rally around a single solution. Political pressure on Republican governors to act will be intense if the high court invalidates subsidies that help millions of their states’ citizens buy health insurance. “The Republicans potentially have a PR nightmare on their hands, because what’s going to happen when 8 million people are going to be denied subsidies?” said Ford O’Connell, a Republican strategist and member of The Hill’s Contributors Blog. The fight over King v. Burwell is further complicated by the fact that several GOP governors could be launching presidential campaigns near the time the court reveals its decision, expected in June. Responses from Republican governors are all over the map. In Louisiana, where around 160,000 people would lose subsidies, Gov. Bobby Jindal is rejecting any fix to the law, as he makes a play for conservative voters. Jindal wrote an op-ed in National Review this month arguing people would be better off with no subsidies because, without them, the mandate to buy insurance would no longer apply. “Some on the right want to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory,” he wrote. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, who has emerged in polls as a leading potential GOP White House contender, isn’t completely ruling out a fix but says it should come from Congress. About 180,000 people in his state would lose subsidies. “While we continue to monitor the federal court case and the pending outcome later this year, ultimately, the responsibility rests with the federal government to fix this federal law,” Walker spokeswoman Laurel Patrick said in a statement. “Following the issuance of a decision, we will continue to work with members of Wisconsin’s federal delegation to enact a solution.” In New Jersey, where 200,000 people could lose subsidies, Gov. Chris Christie has been silent on the issue. His office did not respond to a request for comment. “I wouldn’t say I’ve seen a distinct pattern,” said Stuart Butler, a conservative health policy expert at the Brookings Institution. “They go from outright rejectionist states like Bobby Jindal to those that are trying to figure out some way to say, ‘Can we get that money and use it in a more conservative way?’ ”Because the case centers on the interpretation of a single phrase in the law—“established by the state” — Democrats will be able to pressure Republicans with a politically advantageous argument. The lawsuit argues the phrase makes it illegal to distribute subsidies through the federal insurance marketplace. And Democrats can say it only takes a one-sentence bill to fix the phrasing and restore subsidies for the roughly 8 million people….”
http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/235450-gop-governors-scramble-for-answers-on-obamacare
Obama to visit Phoenix VA, claim progress on fixes
Critics, whistleblowers say little has changed
“President Obama will proclaim progress Friday on promised reforms in veterans’ health care at the Phoenix hospital where the scandal erupted last year, but critics and whistleblowers say little has changed at the ailing Department of Veterans Affairs. The president will set foot in the Phoenix VA for the first time since reports surfaced of secret waiting lists and delayed care for veterans. White House aides said Mr. Obama, whose trip includes a Democratic fundraiser and an appearance on ABC’s “Jimmy Kimmel Live,” will call attention to improved care at VA facilities and shorter waiting times nationwide under new embattled VA Secretary Bob McDonald.
But critics say Mr. Obama and his administration have shown a lack of seriousness and accountability in addressing what ails the VA. They say the administration has failed to discipline managers responsible for the crisis, has sought to cut funding that would give veterans more health care options, has looked the other way at retaliation against whistleblowers and delayed an investigation of the Phoenix hospital itself. “The employees are scared to come forward,” said Brandon Coleman, a therapist at the Phoenix VA who was suspended 45 days ago after complaining to a supervisor that suicidal veterans weren’t receiving emergency treatment. Mr. Coleman met one-on-one with Mr. McDonald in Phoenix on Thursday in an effort to be reinstated, and said the secretary agreed to hear a proposal from Mr. Coleman’s attorney on another “wait time” problem — the time it takes for the VA to resolve the employment status of whistleblowers who’ve been suspended….”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/12/obama-to-visit-phoenix-va-claim-progress-on-fixes/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS
IMMIGRATION:
Obama’s 2012 Amnesty Sidelined Americans’ Visa Requests
“Administration documents show that visa-related services to many American families were deliberately sidelined in 2012 because President Barack Obama’s deputies rushed to approve work permits for illegal immigrants and for companies trying to import guest workers. Americans — including many new immigrants — who were trying get visas for their foreign spouses or to bring in foreign relatives, did not get “special emphasis” amid the extra workload caused by Obama’s legally questionable award of work permits in 2012 to roughly 800,000 younger illegal immigrants, according to the documents. In contrast, officials fast-tracked visas to companies seeking to hire foreign blue-collar and white-collar temporary workers, foreign workers seeking approval to work in the United States, illegal immigrants who want to travel outside the country, and a few other categories. “Pretty much everybody got bumped to the bottom of the priority lists, except for employers and illegals,” Jessica Vaughan, the policy director at the Center for Immigration Studies, told The Daily Caller. Vaughan cited the case of Kevin Morgan, who filed in March, 2014, to get a renewal of his immigrant wife’s residency card. By March, the agency still had not delivered the card, according to a YouTube video posted by Morgan. The damage suffered by American families because of Obama’s legally questionable 2012 amnesty is not part of the Texas lawsuit that has temporarily blocked Obama new 2014 amnesty and his upgrade of the 2012 amnesty. It is nor part of the lawsuit because the damaged Americans have not taken their complaints to court. Many Americans who still waiting for family visas will be reluctant to join a lawsuit out of worry they will be secretly penalized by agency managers, she said. But that won’t be a worry once when the American eventually get their visas, she said. They’ll be free to sue the agencies without fear of punishment, she said. The impact of Obama’s policy was exposed by a February 2014, article in the New York Times. ”Over the past year, waits for approvals of those resident visas stretched to 15 months, and more than 500,000 applications became stuck in the pipeline, playing havoc with international moves and children’s schools and keeping families apart,” said the newspaper. Obama’s favoritism toward illegals caused harm to Americans, and that justifies a large-scale class-action suit against Obama’s immigration agencies, Vaughan said….”
http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/12/obamas-2012-amnesty-sidelined-americans-visa-requests/
Senators demand to know how many illegals got Social Security numbers
“The administration doled out about 90,000 Social Security numbers to illegal immigrants in the first months of President Obama’s first amnesty in 2012, according to two GOP senators who demanded Thursday to know how many since then have been granted, and whether any benefits are already being paid out. Mr. Obama’s 2012 amnesty applied to so-called Dreamers and was a test run for his broader amnesty announced last November, with more than 600,000 young adult illegal immigrants being granted a stay of deportation and work permits, which entitle them to Social Security numbers. Sens. Ben Sasse and Jeff Sessions say about 90,000 Dreamers got Social Security numbers between Aug. 15 2012, when the first applications rolled in, and Jan. 8, 2013. In a letter to Social Security Commissioner Carolyn W. Colvin, the senators asked how many more were granted after that. Social Security numbers are also the key to unlocking a number of benefits such as the Earned Income Tax Credit, Social Security disability payments or Social Security’s supplemental income program. The two senators asked Ms. Colvin to reveal how many Dreamers have been paid benefits under those last two programs. “Taxpayers have a right to know the full costs of President Obama’s unlawful executive amnesty,” Mr. Sasse said. “Every week we learn more about the hidden costs of the president’s actions and Congress has an obligation to hold the Administration accountable for every taxpayer dollar.” The 90,000 Social Security numbers issued in the first five months of the program suggests most of those approved under the amnesty will end up getting one. Publicly available data from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, which approves the applications, shows about 125,000 applications were approved through December 2012…”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/12/senators-demand-know-how-many-illegals-got-social-/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS
Benefits for Border Crossers?
“Federal handouts are the latest front in the war on Obama’s amnesty, and once again House and Senate Republicans are at odds over strategy. House and Senate Republicans are once again at odds over how to fight President Obama’s executive amnesty. After Republicans in Congress caved in the battle over funding the Department of Homeland Security last month, a new disagreement in the GOP now looms on how best to prevent illegal immigrants from receiving federal benefits under the president’s executive actions. When Representative Patrick McHenry (R., N.C.) learned that the IRS intends to pay the illegal-immigrant beneficiaries of the president’s executive actions via the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), he sprang into action. He introduced the “No Free Rides Act,” which blocks every illegal-immigrant beneficiary of the president’s executive actions from ever claiming the EITC. “I think when the average American taxpayer knows the president, through his executive order, grants illegal immigrants up to $24,000 from the American treasury, they’ll be outraged,” McHenry says. “This is such a glaring example of the problem with the president’s executive action, when you create a new class of individuals that can utilize something that’s intended for low-income Americans . . . something that seems, on its face, so unfair to the American taxpayer.” For now, the congressman’s staff says it has chosen to focus singularly on the EITC and not on other benefits the unlawful entrants may collect, such as the additional child tax credit or Social Security benefits due to kick in in 2017. While his office expects that future legislation may address other problems caused by the president’s actions, McHenry’s staff says it prefers to attack the Obama administration on one issue at a time with “single rifle shots.” Perhaps unsurprisingly, Republicans in the Senate aren’t willing to go as far as McHenry and his GOP colleagues in the House. If the No Free Rides Act is a “single rifle shot,” the bill introduced by Iowa senator Chuck Grassley and co-sponsored by ten of his Republican colleagues is a half-shot. Grassley’s bill, like McHenry’s, would prevent beneficiaries of the president’s November 2014 executive actions from retroactively claiming EITC payments for work they had done as illegal immigrants prior to Obama’s amnesty. This component of Grassley’s legislation would prevent approximately $1.7 billion in new payments via the EITC, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation…”
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/415312/benefits-border-crossers-ryan-lovelace
Senate Democrats Fight For More Illegals In Anti-Prostitution Bill
“Democratic senators say pro-life language is forcing them to block a bipartisan bill that would curb the smuggling of prostitutes into the United States. But the abortion debate is being used to mask Democrats’ back-room opposition to an amendment by Republican Sen. David Vitter that would deny citizenship to the U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants and tourists. “The bill will not come off this floor as long as that [pro-life] language is in the bill,” said Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid. GOP leaders are scoffing at the Democrats’ effort to blame the hold-up on the pro-life language in the bill, which is sponsored by 13 Democratic senators and has already been approved by a committee. The boilerplate language would bar the use of federal money to pay for abortions among detained child prostitutes. “Some of the suggestions being made now that there were provisions in the legislation that people didn’t know about are simply untrue,” GOP whip Sen. John Cornyn told reporters Tuesday. “That presupposes that none of their staff briefed the senators on what was in the legislation, that nobody read a 68-page bill and that senators would vote for a bill, much less co-sponsor it, without reading it and knowing what’s in it,” he said. “None of that strikes me as plausible.” “This bipartisan [pro-life] provision was on page four of this modest-sized bill, so Democrats obviously knew it was in there to begin with,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said in a March 12 floor speech. “Let’s not filibuster bipartisan help for vulnerable victims just to make a point for left-wing special interest groups.” Democrats have admitted they dislike the pending amendment by that would prevent foreigners from grabbing the hugely valuable prize of U.S. citizenship by birthing their children in the United States. Vitter’s amendment says that only the children of U.S. citizens or legal residents qualify for citizenship. That’s the norm in countries around the world, and is compatible with the U.S. Constitution’s text, Vitter said. Automatic citizenship for foreign children born in the United States is “a huge magnet for more and more illegal crossings, and my amendment would fix that,” Vitter said in a Senate floor speech. Vitter’s amendment is being backed by groups that want to reduce immigration, such as the Federation for American Immigration Reform, and is been jeered by groups that want to increase immigration, such as America’s Voice. Democrats oppose Vitter’s amendment because it would also deny citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants migrating from South America, Africa and Asia….”
http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/12/senate-democrats-no-prostitutes-please-but-more-illegals/
Immigrants’ birth rates tumble as effect on population growth debated
“Immigrants’ birth rates have fallen precipitously in recent years, according to a report being released Thursday by the Center for Immigration Studies, which says the numbers undercut the argument immigrants are critical to ensuring the U.S. maintains its generous social safety net programs such as Social Security and Medicare. The birth rate of immigrant women of reproductive age dropped from 76 births per 1,000 women in 2013 to 62 births per 1,000 in 2008. By contrast, native-born women’s birth rate dropped from 54 per 1,000 to 50 — a much smaller decline. Immigrant women still have a higher fertility rate, but their average of 2.22 children expected during their lifetime is well below immigrants’ peak of 2.75 in 2008, said the report, written by Steven A. Camarota and Karen Zeigler for the Center for Immigration Studies. By contrast, the native-born fertility rate was just 1.79 children per woman in 2013, for an average of 1.87 overall. The authors said the findings should give pause to those who believe immigrants’ fertility can help slow the aging of the population. “It is true that immigrants have more children on average than natives,” the authors said. “But the impact on the nation’s overall fertility rate is quite modest no matter how fertility is measured.” Birth and fertility rates are fairly volatile, with the foreign-born fertility rate going from an expected 2.49 children per woman in 2006 to 2.58 in 2007, peaking at 2.75 in 2008, then steadily dropping to 2.45 in 2011 and 2.22 in 2013. Asians had by far the lowest fertility rates among the native-born, at 1.59 children expected per Asian female in 2013. Among immigrant women, Asians and whites were nearly even, at 1.93 and 1.94, respectively…”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/12/immigrants-birth-rates-tumble-effect-population-gr/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS
US government asks for end to hold on immigration action
“The U.S. government is asking an appeals court to lift a temporary hold on President Barack Obama’s executive action to shield millions of immigrants from deportation. Obama’s plan – which could spare from deportation as many as 5 million people who are in the U.S. illegally – had been blocked last month by U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen in Brownsville, Texas, following a lawsuit filed by 26 states. The Justice Department asked Hanen to lift a preliminary injunction while the case was appealed. But Hanen put that on hold pending a hearing next week to review allegations the government misled him about part of the immigration plan. Justice Department attorneys Thursday filed an emergency motion with the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans to lift Hanen’s injunction…”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/12/us-government-asks-for-end-to-hold-on-immigration-/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS
Justice asks appeals court to lift hold on Obama immigration actions
“The Justice Department is asking a federal appeals court to lift a lower court’s hold on President Obama’s latest executive actions on immigration, upping its push to lift a court order blocking the controversial programs. Obama’s actions from late last year would shield millions of illegal immigrants from deportation, and provoked a standoff in February with the Republican Congress over funding the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The move shows that White House isn’t willing to wait for the lower court to act. And appealing to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals is the next step in the path towards the potentially landmark case ending up at the Supreme Court. “The district court’s order is unprecedented and wrong,” the Justice Department writes in its appeal to the Fifth Circuit. “The preliminary injunction is a sweeping order that extends beyond the parties before the court and irreparably harms the Government and the public interest by preventing DHS from marshalling its resources to protect border security, public safety and national security, while also addressing humanitarian interests.” The case has, until now, been dealt with in a federal district court in Texas. But this move elevates the case to Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, located in New Orleans. The district court blocked the president’s immigration actions, which seek to delay deportation for millions of illegal immigrants and provide them with access to work permits, back in February. Judge Andrew Hanen’s ruling halted the DHS from enacting the new policies until courts could rule on whether the measures are constitutional. The Justice Department’s latest filing seeks to bypass Hanen and get the Fifth Circuit to remove the court’s stay, a legal procedure that blocks future action until a later court ruling. The new appeal from the administration echoes previous court documents that have characterized the suit as infringing on the president’s power to prioritize deportations. It also slams Hanen for applying his ruling to the program as a whole, instead of limiting it to the areas where he has jurisdiction. But a group of 26 states, led by Texas, argues Obama is overreaching and rewriting federal laws from the Oval Office. Immigration groups immediately applauded the move, as many have encouraged the White House to aggressively push to implement the deportation relief program and have clashed with the White House in the past over immigration. “This filing rightly recognizes that our communities are robbed of the opportunity to live free from fear of deportation and our economy is deprived of much-needed fiscal benefits with each day that this injunction remains in place,” Marielena Hincapié, the National Immigration Law Center’s executive director, said in a statement. “The wheels of justice may turn slowly, but that’s no reason to allow people and our economy to suffer while this case makes its way through the courts. While the Justice Department immediately asked Hanen to lift his temporary delay, he said the court will not consider it until a hearing March 19. The administration is expected at that hearing to explain why it processed 100,000 extended work permit renewals for illegal immigrants under new policies announced by the president….”
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/235529-justice-asks-court-to-lift-hold-on-obama-immigration-actions
Obama administration asks judge to lift freeze on immigration actions
“The U.S. government is asking an appeals court to lift a temporary hold on President Obama’s executive action to shield millions of immigrants from deportation. Obama’s plan — which could spare from deportation as many as 5 million people who are in the U.S. illegally — had been blocked last month by U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen in Brownsville, Texas, following a lawsuit filed by 26 states. The Justice Department asked Hanen to lift a preliminary injunction while the case was appealed. But Hanen put that on hold pending a hearing next week to review allegations the government misled him about part of the immigration plan. Justice Department attorneys Thursday filed an emergency motion with the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans to lift Hanen’s injunction.”
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/12/obama-administration-asks-judge-to-lift-freeze-on-immigration-actions/
Obama asks appeals court to re-start amnesty
“The administration asked a federal appeals court Thursday to let President Obama’s amnesty go into effect immediately, calling a lower judge’s ruling halting the amnesty “unprecedented and wrong” and saying illegal immigrants will be hurt until the new policy can be implemented. Justice Department lawyers said Texas, which sued to stop the amnesty, had no basis to be in court, and said Judge Andrew S. Hanen, who issued an injunction last month halting the amnesty, went too far in halting the program nationwide, rather than just in Texas and its 25 fellow states that sued. “In short, the preliminary injunction is a sweeping order that extends beyond the parties before the court and irreparably harms the government and the public interest,” the lawyers said. Their request to the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which covers Texas, asking to stay Judge Hanen’s injunction was expected, but still amounts to a major escalation. Some immigrant-rights advocates have feared that a second loss in court could demoralize the illegal aliens hoping to apply for Mr. Obama’s amnesty. As many as 4 million illegal immigrants could qualify for the new policy, announced in December, that would grant tentative legal status, work permits and Social Security numbers to illegal immigrant parents whose children are either U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents. Hundreds of thousands of so-called Dreamers could qualify under a separate policy Mr. Obama announced in 2012 but expanded in November, which applies to illegal immigrants brought to the U.S. as children…”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/12/obama-asks-appeals-court-re-start-amnesty/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS
GOP wary of new immigration battle
“Senate GOP leadership is staying away from a proposal to ensure illegal immigrants don’t get tax break payouts from the government, with the party still smarting from a battle over Department of Homeland Security funding. Senior Republicans generally say they support the goals of the bill from Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) that seeks to keep immigrants protected from deportation by President Obama’s executive actions from claiming several years’ worth of earned income tax credits. But with the most recent immigration fight having just finished, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) has said he’s still examining the legislation, and even GOP leaders who openly back the measure say now is not the right time to push hard for the measure. “It’s more of a longer-term project,” said Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (Texas), one of the 10 GOP co-sponsors of the bill. Conservative lawmakers and outside groups are still angry that the GOP didn’t continue the fight to withhold Department of Homeland Security funding, which they viewed as the best avenue to combat Obama’s decision to shield millions of immigrants in the U.S. illegally from deportation. “I’m clearly one of those who thinks that we need to continue to push very aggressively and that we should have pushed harder earlier,” said Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), another co-sponsor on the tax credit bill. But with a federal court having blocked Obama’s executive actions, Senate Republicans have increased their focus on other issues, including an anti-human-trafficking bill and nuclear negotiations with Iran. Top Senate Republicans say lawmakers will have to deal with immigration again but now are less sure about when the matter will return as a central focus on Capitol Hill. The Senate is scheduled to deal with its budget at the end of March, and leadership aides have simply said Grassley’s measure is in the Finance Committee’s hands now. “It’s an issue that’s always going to be with us,” Sen. John Thune (S.D.), the third-ranking Republican in the Senate, said about immigration. Grassley’s bill would bar unauthorized immigrants shielded by Obama from claiming the earned income tax credit, a refundable tax break aimed at working families, for the years they worked in the U.S. illegally. Immigrants protected by Obama’s executive actions late last year could potentially receive work permits and a Social Security card, which also allows them to claim the tax credit. And the IRS has made it clear that those workers would be able to seek payments of the credit for up to three previous years, which Grassley calls a loophole that should be closed. Grassley said Wednesday that he had yet to press his case with leadership about his bill and that his first priority would be talking up the measure with Hatch. But the Iowa Republican also said that any reluctance GOP leaders might have about his bill might fade, when they’re trying to cobble together packages for Medicare’s “doc fix” and the Highway Trust Fund, both of which face deadlines in the coming months. “I don’t know very many people in the Republican Party that want to fritter away $1.7 billion,” Grassley said, pointing to how much congressional scorekeepers say his measure will raise over a decade. The proposal also underscores the challenges Republicans face heading into the 2016 election season, after support for the GOP among Hispanics continued to plummet in the last presidential election.”
http://thehill.com/policy/finance/235453-republicans-cast-a-wary-eye-at-new-round-in-immigration-fight
Chicago activist gets prison term for immigration crime
“A judge sentenced a Chicago activist to 18 months in federal prison Thursday for failing to disclose her convictions for bombings in Israel when she applied to be a U.S. citizen. Rasmieh Odeh, 67, also was stripped of her citizenship and eventually will be deported, likely to Jordan. But she will remain free while she appeals the case. Odeh helps run Chicago’s Arab American Action Network, an education and social services agency, and more than 100 supporters filled the courtroom or spilled over into another room to watch a video feed of the hearing. In 2004, she answered “no” on her U.S. citizenship application in Detroit when asked about any past criminal record. Odeh was convicted of two bombings in Jerusalem in 1969, including one that killed two people at a market. She insists that she believed the questions were related to U.S. crimes, although the form said “EVER.” Speaking to the judge in Arabic and English, Odeh said she’s not a “terrorist” or a “bad woman.” She recalled a tumultuous life overseas due to conflicts between Palestinians and Israelis and said it would be “torture” to the many Arabic women she has helped in the Chicago area if she was sent to prison…”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/12/chicago-activist-faces-sentence-for-immigration-cr/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS
15 immigrants protected from deportation arrested in sweep
“Federal agents in a sweep targeting the most dangerous criminal immigrants arrested 15 people who have been allowed to remain in the U.S. under President Barack Obama’s executive action intended to protect children who came to the U.S. years ago with their parents, The Associated Press has learned. Fourteen of the 15 had been convicted of a crime, the Homeland Security Department confirmed late Thursday. In at least one case, the Obama administration renewed the protective status for a young immigrant after that person’s conviction in a drug case, a U.S. official briefed on the arrests said. One of the eligibility requirements for the program is that immigrants not have a criminal history. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because this person was not authorized to discuss the matter by name. It was not immediately clear when 13 of the immigrants were convicted or what their crimes were. They were arrested by U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement. The answers to those questions could undermine the integrity of the government’s program, since eligibility is reserved for ambitious, young immigrants enrolled in school or who graduated and who would benefit American society…”
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/15-immigrants-protected-deportation-arrested-sweep
Obama clash with Venezuelan leader backfires, Latin Americans unite against U.S.
“President Obama largely shrugged off the provocations of Hugo Chavez, but a clash with the late Venezuelan leader’s hand-picked successor may be backfiring. Latin American leaders have rallied around embattled Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro as relations between Washington and Caracas have plunged to a new low. Governments from Havana to Buenos Aires have denounced Mr. Obama’s executive order labeling Venezuela as a national security threat as unwelcome U.S. meddling in regional affairs. Analysts say the move may do little to improve the volatile situation in Venezuela and could well worsen it. The Obama administration imposed sanctions against seven high-ranking Venezuelan officials Monday as it accused Mr. Maduro of human rights abuses. It demanded the release of “all political prisoners,” including opposition leader Leopoldo Lopez, detained since February 2014, and Caracas Mayor Antonio Ledezma, whom the government accuses of plotting a coup. Mr. Maduro, a former bus driver and union leader who succeeded the populist Chavez in 2013, fired back that the “U.S. imperialist elite” was trying topple his government. Venezuela’s allies across the Western Hemisphere have supported that view. Ecuador called the U.S. order an “unacceptable attack on Venezuela’s sovereignty,” and Cuba — in the midst of efforts to mend ties with the United States — assured Caracas of its “unconditional support.”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/12/obama-clash-with-venezuelas-nicolas-maduro-backfir/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS
SPENDING/BUDGET/ECONOMY:
Obama’s LA trip for TV show will cost you $2 million
“This is that time of year when millions of American families begin designing their humble summer vacation, that much-anticipated special week or perhaps 10 days of togetherness, fun and relaxation that generate the next two months of credit card bills. After the kids are in bed these evenings, Moms and Dads calculate which vacation nights on that trip will be Motel 6 and which one will be the splurge at a Holiday Inn with indoor pool. So, it may be some comfort for those middle-class families to know that their president, who professes such concern for middle-class families, doesn’t worry about such mundane things as travel costs. All thanks to the hard work of American taxpayers. In fact, get out your checkbook right now because the Democrat’s about to drop some $2 million of other peoples’ money for a few minutes on a late-night TV show. This president is good with spending a lot on travel. He took the entire family, including grandma, to Alabama last weekend. And according to latest figures, the Obamas’ last three Christmas vacations in Hawaii have cost taxpayers more than $15.5 million just in transportation expenses. The first family annually rents the same beachfront house in Kailua near Honolulu. It only has 13 bedrooms, but somehow they make do. The watchdog outfit, Judicial Watch, files regular Freedom of Information Act lawsuits to obtain Obama travel cost information from history’s most transparent administration. Judicial Watch reports, for example, that last December’s nine-hour-plus one-way Air Force One flight cost American workers $3,672,798.60 to get the Obama clan and staff to and from tropical sunshine. That’s about 802 times what the average American family spent on holiday season gifts last year.
By comparison, another Obama family vacation tradition, the annual August time-off on Martha’s Vineyard, was a real bargain, costing taxpayers only $400,666.30. Air Force One is a luxury 747 complete with soundproof bedroom, shower and window blinds run by a remote control, so no president need bother pulling cords to darken his room. It costs about $206,000 per flight hour for the Air Force to operate the jumbo craft. Thus, for instance, when Barack and Michelle zip up to New York of an evening for dinner and a show, that costs taxpayers almost a half-million dollars just for round-trip, fixed-wing air travel…”
http://news.investors.com/Politics-Andrew-Malcolm/031215-743090-obama-la-trip-jimmy-kimmel-show.htm?ven=rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+PoliticRss+%28Politic+RSS%29
Senate Democrats target sequesters, demand tax hikes, more spending
“Emboldened by winning the shutdown showdown over homeland security, and poised to triumph on raising the debt limit, Senate Democrats set their sights Thursday on the budget sequesters, demanding that Republicans hike taxes and raise spending. It was a shot across the bow for Republican budget writers, who are set to unveil their proposals next week, which are expected to further slash spending and balance the budget in 10 years — slowing the growth of runaway national debt that currently tops $18 trillion. Senate Democrats insisted that keeping the automatic spending cuts would jeopardize the economic recovery, hurt the middle class and weaken the U.S. military. And they warned Republicans that President Obama will reject any budget sent to him that does not increase spending on both defense and domestic programs. “The president has been very clear: He will not accept a budget that locks in sequester, and he will not accept a budget that severs that vital link between defense and nondefense spending,” said Shaun L.S. Donovan, the director of the president’s Office of Management and Budget, who joined Democrats at a Capitol Hill press conference to make the demands. Mr. Donovan boasted that the spending scheme supported by Mr. Obama and his Democrats makes investments in infrastructure, manufacturing and education. “These investments are more than paid for with smart spending cuts, program integrity measures and common-sense tax loophole closures,” he said…”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/12/senate-democrats-target-budget-sequesters-demand-r/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS
Senate Dems, Obama official call on GOP to lift spending limits
“Senate Democrats, along with a senior Obama official, are calling on Republicans to lift spending ceilings that are set to return in October. Office of Management and Budget Director Shaun Donovan made clear at a Capitol Hill press conference on Thursday that President Obama would not accept a budget that maintains those caps. “He will not accept a budget that locks in sequestration going forward,” said Donovan, who was later asked if Obama would sign appropriations bills that keep those levels in place. “We’re not in the business of making decisions until we see bills,” Donovan replied. Congressional budget blueprints don’t require a presidential signature, but provide benchmarks to appropriators who produce spending bills Obama would have to sign. Obama would also not accept a budget that “severs the vital link” between defense and non-defense spending, Donovan said. Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.) and Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) called on Republicans to work with Democrats to raise the spending levels for both the military and non-defense domestic programs equally.
Republicans want to “lop the top off programs that create jobs and grow the economy,” Schumer said. McCaskill said sequestration budget limits, set by the Budget Control Act of 2011, “handcuffs our ability” to fund the military and areas such as research and technology that are necessary to compete globally. The press conference came in advance of budget resolutions House and Senate Republicans are scheduled to unveil and mark up next week. Donovan and the Senate Democrats acknowledged that it would take a change in law to adjust the sequestration limits. Donovan said he hopes Congress can produce a budget deal similar to the one reached in December, 2013, that eased sequestration for two years. Asked if he’s had any serious conversations with congressional Republicans about a possible compromise, Donovan declined to comment…”
http://thehill.com/policy/finance/235510-senate-dems-obama-official-call-on-gop-to-lift-spending-limits
Obama budget projected to add $6T to deficit
President Obama’s fiscal 2016 budget request would add nearly $6 trillion to the deficit over the next 10 years, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) said Thursday. This is slightly more than the $5.7 trillion shortfall that the president’s budget projected for the 10-year window, but the CBO estimate is less than the $6.6 trillion it said the president’s previous budget would add to the deficit over 10 years. If Congress approved Obama’s budget request, submitted in early February, CBO says the deficit in 2016 would fall to $380 billion—much less than the $455 billion projected under current law. CBO said the president’s policies would achieve $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction over the next decade. The following components of the budget below would have the most significant effects on spending, taxes and the deficit, the agency said. Funding for military operations, including those in Afghanistan: Under current law, CBO estimates that average annual overseas contingency operations (OCO) funding would be $74 billion through 2025. Obama’s budget makes a request of $58 billion in funding for the next year, which CBO estimates would end up saving $532 billion over the next decade.
–Immigration reform: Obama asked Congress to pass the bipartisan immigration reform bill approved by the Senat in 2013. CBO and the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) estimate that the legislation would reduce the deficit by $158 billion.
–Increase in income tax receipts: Obama’s budget proposes to cap the reduction in tax liability that results from exclusions and deductions at 28 percent. That change would increase taxes by $526 billion over the next 10 years, CBO and JCT projected.
–Medicare spending decreases: Changes to Medicare requested in the budget would decrease federal spending by $240 billion over the next decade, CBO said.
Obama’s budget called on Congress to breach sequestration spending limits for at least the next fiscal year and to raise $320 billion in revenue by taxing large financial companies and the wealthy. Republicans declared his blueprint—the second-to-last of his presidency—dead on arrival because of the spending and tax hikes. GOP lawmakers in the House and Senate are scheduled to mark up separate budget blueprints next week and vote on them the last full week of March…”
http://thehill.com/policy/finance/235485-analysis-obamas-budget-would-add-6t-to-deficit-over-next-10-years
CBO: Obama budget to add $6T to deficit
http://thehill.com/policy/finance/overnights/235580-overnight-finance-obama-budget-to-add-6t-to-deficit
Obama budget would reduce deficits by $1.2 trillion: Budget office
“President Obama’s proposed fiscal 2016 budget would reduce deficits by $1.2 trillion over 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The budget office, which serves as Congress’ in-house budget accountant, on Thursday released its projections of the White House budget published in February. Its assessment of Obama’s plans for taxing and spending mostly followed the White House’s own projections. Over 10 years, annual deficits would total $5.98 trillion under Obama’s policies, the budget office projects, just $300 billion more than the White House’s own projections. The budget office sees the Obama proposal pushing the deficit below $400 billion next year, and then slowly expanding it the rest of the decade. In 2025, the federal debt would total 73 percent of U.S. economic output, roughly the same as where the White House pegged it. Under current law, the budget office would expect the debt to hit 77 percent of gross domestic product by then. The biggest savings to the Treasury in the Obama budget would come from tax increases, the biggest of which would be a limitation on the amount of deductions and exclusions taxpayers can claim. That would raise an additional $530 billion over 10 years. Tax increases on capital gains and dividends ($230 billion), corporate earnings held overseas ($210 billion), and estate taxes ($153 billion) would be among big revenue producers. The administration’s plans for reducing Medicare spending would spare the deficit $240 billion. Passing an immigration reform bill along the lines of the one that passed the Senate in 2013 also would be a net boost to the budget of $158 billion. Large-scale immigration reform would entail big increases in government spending but also in taxation, netting out to savings for the Treasury. Those savings would be offset by the president’s spending plans. Most notably, he would undo the spending caps negotiated between the White House and congressional Republicans, and introduce a number of new or expanded refundable tax credits for low-income families and children, as well as for college….”
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/obama-budget-would-reduce-deficits-by-1.2-trillion-budget-office/article/2561426?custom_click=rss
Senate Republicans blame Obama for Social Security crisis
“President Obama’s proposal for solving the Social Security crisis would only make the situation worse, according to the Senate Republican Policy Committee. The committee released a paper Thursday blaming the Obama administration for damaging the Social Security system, particularly the Disability Insurance Trust Fund. When the Disability Insurance Trust Fund is depleted in late 2016, payments to its 11 million beneficiaries will automatically be cut by 20 percent. “The finances of trust fund have worsened drastically in comparison with the agency’s 2007 projection of what would happen,” the paper said. “The number of program enrollees is up 21 percent during the Obama administration. …The condition of the trust fund has significantly worsened during the Obama administration, and the depletion of the trust fund is coming 10 years sooner than experts predicted in 2007.” Over the past 20 years, changing demographic factors are responsible for a third of the growth in disability insurance payments. The paper cites the poor economic recovery, relaxed eligibility rules, and mismanagement by the Social Security Administration as reasons for the rest of the growth. “This includes skewed agency pol