TEA PARTY PATRIOTS:
Martin Schram: How the GOP endangered its own security (Quote by Jenny Beth)
“Jenny Beth Martin, founder of the Tea Party Patriots, was applauded and cheered after she derided Obama’s immigration executive actions (where reforms weren’t attempted) and especially when she said of Obamacare, “We still have the opportunity to repeal that!”
http://www.knoxnews.com/opinion/columnists/martin-schram-how-the-gop-endangered-its-own-security_35821404
HEALTHCARE:
Huntley: Only legal gymnastics can save Obamacare
“…It’s hard to argue that politics — and a desire to protect the high court’s reputation and standing — didn’t figure in the 2012 ruling. A decision striking down the law as unconstitutional would have been vilified by President Barack Obama, Democrats and liberal mainstream media heavy hitters. Roberts decided that penalties to force people to sign up for insurance could be construed as a tax, and thus the law was constitutional under the government’s taxing authority. That was contrary to the vigorous protests of Obama and Democrats when the law was being written that penalties were not taxes. The issue now similarly comes down to the plain language in the law, this time over subsidies to low-income Americans buying Obamacare insurance. The health-care act says such subsidies go to those who buy insurance off an exchange “established by the state.” The problem for the law’s backers is that only 13 states and the District of Columbia established exchanges. Most states opted out because the law has been unpopular thanks to the way it was muscled through Congress with only Democratic votes and the falsehoods that got it passed — if you like your insurance, you can keep your insurance, if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. How could the justices save Obamacare this time? An obvious way is to declare that the language in question would defeat the purpose of the law, to extend medical coverage to the uninsured. Denying aid would make insurance unaffordable to the more than 6 million Americans who get the subsidies. But Justice Antonin Scalia pointed out the unambiguous language, saying the law “means what it says.” What’s more, there’s evidence that the language was written to lure states into establishing exchanges. Liberals couldn’t envision that states might not accept free (to them) money from Washington. All this arguing over language — a penalty becomes a tax and a federal exchange should be no different from a state exchange — might make you wonder: Is the purpose of the high court to determine if a disputed law is legal or to find a way to make a challenged law legal? Clearly, liberals and Democrats believe the latter to be the case regarding Obamacare…”
http://chicago.suntimes.com/opinion/7/71/420658/huntley-legal-gymnastics-can-save-obamacare
GOP braces for ObamaCare win
“Republicans are under pressure to prove they can avert a massive healthcare meltdown if the party wins its latest ObamaCare battle in the Supreme Court this spring. Some of that pressure is being brought to bear, at least implicitly, by the justices themselves, who appear concerned over whether Congress can create a fully baked alternative plan if the court strikes down ObamaCare subsidies for 8 million people. Skepticism has also been growing within the GOP itself. “This is just going to be ugly no matter what we do,” GOP strategist Rick Wilson said. Conservative justices made it clear during arguments this week that they would be counting on Congress to limit the fallout in the event of a plaintiff victory in King v Burwell, an outcome that would erase billions of dollars worth of healthcare subsidies. “If the consequences are as disastrous as you say, then yes, I think this Congress will act,” Associate Justice Antonin Scalia told the Obama administration’s lawyer, Donald Verrilli Jr., during Wednesday’s arguments. The conservative justice’s nod to Congress sends a strong signal that the court will be paying attention to the GOP’s moves before June, raising the stakes for action. While top Republicans in the House and Senate said this week that they are nearing a consensus on their efforts to create a back-up plan for the subsidies, almost no details have been shared about the half-dozen plans unveiled in the last two weeks. Most of the proposals are drawing criticism from their fellow conservatives behind the scenes. “It’s a couple lines in an op-ed. Who knows what it really means? In some of those, they may not know, frankly,” said one conservative strategist and former Hill healthcare staffer. Creating even a temporary solution for ObamaCare subsidies is a huge dilemma for the GOP-controlled Congress. Some Republicans have even said, albeit quietly, that the party could be better off if the administration’s policy survives the Supreme Court challenge. “Then we won’t be put into a really difficult spot and can move on. There is something really appealing about that,” one GOP Senate aide said. As a matter of political reality, no GOP fallback plan can appear to extend — or even sign off on — ObamaCare in any way. Any bill that would put Republicans on the record upholding the Affordable Care Act would be untenable…”
http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/234941-even-if-scotus-rules-its-way-gop-faces-obamacare-dilemma
Supreme Court Will Likely Uphold Affordable Care Act, Law Profs Say
http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2015/3/9/aca-likely-upheld-hls/
7 Reasons Why Obamacare ‘Federalism’ Won’t Lead Anthony Kennedy To Join The Supreme Court’s Left In King v. Burwell
“Today, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in King v. Burwell, a case with significant implications for the future of Obamacare. Most of the justices’ questions proceeded along expected lines. Most notable was a series of questions by Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy, who questioned whether it would be constitutional for Obamacare to induce states to set up exchanges. If Kennedy’s fears are right—that federal subsidies for state-based exchanges are “coercive”—then he might side with the Obama administration in the case. But if you understand how Obamacare’s insurance markets work, it’s clear that Kennedy should side with Obama’s challengers…”
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2015/03/04/7-reasons-why-obamacare-federalism-wont-lead-anthony-kennedy-to-join-the-supreme-courts-left-in-king-v-burwell/
Indiana has a lot at stake in health care subsidy lawsuit
“Nearly 200,000 Indiana residents who purchased health insurance through a federal health exchange could lose the subsidies that help them afford the coverage under a case before the U.S. Supreme Court. The case argued Wednesday contends the Affordable Care Act allows subsidies only in states that set up their own insurance exchanges. Indiana is using an exchange operated by the federal government. The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and Urban Institute says about 225,000 Indiana residents use an average of $4,110 in tax credits annually to buy coverage through the marketplace. The (Munster) Times reports (http://bit.ly/1G2uEfj ) an estimated 195,000 could become uninsured if the court rules for the plaintiffs. States without exchanges could establish them to continue receiving subsidies. But Gov. Mike Pence opposes a state-based exchange.”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/7/indiana-has-a-lot-at-stake-in-health-care-subsidy-/
ObamaCare Hail Mary
Liberals roll out more faux federalism to sway Justice Kennedy.
“Liberals must be nervous about the Supreme Court’s big ObamaCare subsidy case because last week they decided to throw one last Hail Mary pass to Justice Anthony Kennedy. We hope he or Chief Justice John Roberts don’t fall for it. During a week they hear oral arguments, the Justices typically hold a private conference on Friday morning in which they declare where they are leaning on the cases. Just in time for last week’s Friday conference, liberal scholar Abbe Gluck tried one more state’s rights gambit to pull Justice…”
http://www.wsj.com/articles/obamacare-hail-mary-1425856540?mod=rss_opinion_main
GOP newbie Sasse driving Obamacare off-ramp
“Freshman Sen. Ben Sasse insists he’s not a leading man in the GOP’s script to replace Obamacare, but he’s playing a key set-up role just three months into his tenure on Capitol Hill. The Nebraska Republican filed legislation last week — the plainly titled “Winding Down Obamacare Act” — that would fill the gap should the U.S. Supreme Court rule the Obama administration is wrongly paying billions of dollars in tax subsidies to health care insurance customers in two-thirds of the states. Along the way he’s run into the problem the GOP will face: The Affordable Care Act is now so entrenched that undoing it, even if it comes through a court decision, could kick millions of Americans out of their coverage and leave Republicans in political danger. But trying to bridge the gap opens Republicans up to criticism from their right flank, which views it as propping up Obamacare. “Nothing that I’m proposing is a continuation of Obamacare, expansion or extension or fix,” Mr. Sasse said. “It’s transitional assistance for 6 million disrupted people, but the assistance comes entirely outside of Obamacare so that we can then have the big national conversation we need in 2016.” The court last week heard oral arguments in the case, with challengers saying the administration is breaking the law by paying tax subsidies to customers in states that rely on the federal HealthCare.gov exchange. The law says subsidies can be paid to customers in exchanges “established by the state.” The Obama administration says it cannot fix the “massive damage” that a loss before the court would cause, as an estimated 6 million people would drop coverage that’s no longer affordable, particularly healthy people who keep rates in check…”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/8/ben-sasse-driving-republican-obamacare-fix/
Will it be IRS to the rescue for Obamacare?
“The taxman typically taketh, but he soon could be giving millions of Americans quite a bit—at least temporarily—if the Supreme Court kills a major feature of Obamacare. A leading tax expert says the Internal Revenue Service can, and likely will, let HealthCare.gov customers keep their Obamacare subsidies through the end of this year if the high court rules in June that those subsidies are illegal. And that six-month grace period in turn could ratchet up political pressure on Republican opponents of Obamacare to develop a plan to replace the valuable subsidies, which would be expiring right on the eve of the 2016 presidential primary season, instead of this summer. About 7.5 million HealthCare.gov customers are at risk of losing those subsidies, which help them pay monthly premiums for health insurance plans purchased through that federally run marketplace that serves 37 states. Experts predict that more than 8 million people would become uninsured next year after finding their plans too expensive without the subsidies, and after plan prices rise to compensate for the loss of customers. Plaintiffs in a case known as King v. Burwell argued at the Supreme Court on Wednesday that only customers of state-run Obamacare exchanges are eligible to receive such financial assistance, which comes in the form of federal tax credits. But the Obama administration argues that an IRS regulation that explicitly authorizes subsidies for HealthCare.gov customers is legal under the Affordable Care Act. The subsides are available to people with low and moderate incomes. Don Susswein, a principal in the national tax practice of the consulting firm McGladrey, said that the IRS has a long-standing practice of giving grace periods to people affected by court rulings that say an IRS rule or regulation is illegal…”
http://www.cnbc.com/id/102484488
To avoid possible Affordable Care Act fines, Ascension Parish school system turns to Kelly services to hire its substitute teachers
“This school year, the Ascension Parish School Board turned the work of hiring substitute teachers to Kelly Educational Staffing, a division of the national employment agency. The motivation for the School Board was the difficulty — both financially and time-wise — of meeting requirements of the Affordable Care Act, which calls for providing health insurance for employees who work more than 30 hours a week, which substitute teachers sometimes do. The move is saving the School Board $358,000 a year, with other benefits being the recruitment and training of substitute teachers that Kelly Services provides. “They could provide us with better-trained substitutes and provide those substitutes with benefits relative to the Affordable Care Act,” said Randy Watts, director of human resources for the school district. Watts estimates the district employs anywhere from 200 to 300 substitutes on a monthly basis, filling in for those of the 1,470 regular teachers who can’t come to work for one reason or another. With payroll costs, worker’s compensation claims, payroll taxes and insurance costs to meet ACA requirements — an expense by itself estimated at $799,000 — the district was looking at an annual cost for substitute teachers of approximately $3.36 million, said Diane Allison, director of business services for the Ascension Parish school district. The agreement with Kelly is for $3,009,000 annually, she said. “We’re not going to do it if we don’t save money,” Allison said. And there were the logistical challenges of meeting ACA requirements as well, she said. “In our system, we didn’t have a way to track that easily,” Allison said of those substitute teachers who, over a certain time period, would work 30 hours or more a week. A department at Kelly Services’ headquarters in Troy, Michigan, handles that chore for more than 5,400 schools in 35 states, said Sandra Grant, district manager of Kelly Services in Baton Rouge, which works with the Ascension Parish School System. She points out that Kelly Services “never caps the hours of our employees.” “That’s beneficial (in a school setting) when the substitute can be there every day, so the kids can get to know them,” said Jennifer Williams, a senior staff support employee with Kelly in Baton Rouge.”
http://theadvocate.com/news/11760092-123/to-avoid-possible-affordable-care
IMMIGRATION:
TOTAL NET EMPLOYMENT GAINS IN THE U.S. — SINCE THE RECESSION — STILL WENT TO FOREIGN-BORN
“The most recent jobs data released Friday continues the trend of net employment growth in the U.S. since the beginning of the recession going to foreign-born workers. Since the beginning of the recession in December of 2007 — it is believed to have ended in June 2009 — while the native-born population of Americans has experienced a net job loss, the foreign born population has seen net job growth. New, not seasonally adjusted figures, from the Bureau of Labor Statistics updated on Friday reveal that in December 2007 the number of foreign-born workers was 22,810,000. By last month, February, the number had increased to 24,741,000. The new data mean that overall, since the start of the recession, foreign-born workers have gained more than 1.9 million jobs. Meanwhile, in that same time frame, the native-born employed population decreased from 123,524,000 to 122,378,000 in February 2015, for a total employment reduction of more than 1.1 million. To be sure, however, native-born Americans experienced more job growth last month than their foreign born counterparts. While the foreign born employed population increased 188,000 the native-born employed population increased by 379,000. Both the native and foreign-born populations have increased since December 2007.”
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/03/06/total-net-employment-gains-in-the-u-s-since-the-recession-still-went-to-foreign-born/
Hispanics gaining jobs faster than other groups
Construction’s rebound seen as a big factor
http://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2015/03/08/job-growth-for-hispanics-outpacing-other-groups/DxhEM8EMsckga10a6F3ngL/story.html
AMNESTY ADVOCATES LOOKING TO CO-OPT ‘BLOODY SUNDAY’ SELMA COMMEMORATION
“Pro-amnesty advocates will try to co-opt Sunday’s commemoration of the “Bloody Sunday” march in Selma–one of the most seminal moments in the civil rights movement and the history of the country–to again push the false narrative that amnesty for illegal immigrants is the new civil rights movement.The Alabama Coalition for Immigration Justice is mobilizing and will bus amnesty advocates for the march, which will commemorate the 50th anniversary of the seminal march for voting rights for black American citizens. According to AL.com, the group reportedly declared that, “throughout the weekend, immigrants will stand with thousands of others converging in Selma at this historic moment to affirm their role in the struggle against racism and oppression.” As Breitbart News has emphasized, “the civil rights movement of the 1960s was about ensuring that black Americans received all of the rights they were due as citizens of the United States while today’s pro-amnesty movement is about demanding full rights for non-citizens who entered the country illegally.” But that has not stopped amnesty advocates, like gay activists have tried to do with their movement, from trying to tie the amnesty movement to the black civil rights movement. Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL), for instance, has declared that the amnesty movement is “our Selma.” “This is our Selma and we will walk, we will march, we will be arrested, we will do anything and everything it takes to make sure families are protected in this nation,” Gutierrez recently said. Rep. Kurt Schrader (D-OR) recently invoked the voting rights and civil rights marches and said at an “Immigration Day Action” event that the amnesty movement is the civil rights battle for millennials. He also bluntly admitted that the amnesty movement “will decide who is in charge of this country for the next 20 or 30 years.” Even Rep. John Lewis (D-GA), who was beaten on that fateful Sunday while heroically marching for voting rights that were being denied to U.S. citizens, has tried to tie the amnesty movement to the civil rights movement. He again did so again at a February 25 event at the Washington D.C. on the civil rights movement that left a Democrat in attendance dismayed. Donald A. Collins, a Democrat who lives in Washington, D.C., was disheartened that someone he considered a “true hero” was pushing comprehensive amnesty legislation. He pointed out that “not all African-Americans share this delusion” that the amnesty movement is the new civil rights movement…”
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/03/06/amnesty-advocates-looking-to-co-opt-bloody-sunday-selma-commemoration/
Immigration ruling shows lawyers playing venue shopping odds
“A federal judge’s ruling last month blocking President Barack Obama’s immigration executive action lays bare a pervasive practice in federal district courts: venue shopping. It is a game of odds in which lawyers pick a court to file their case where a judge or case law is likely to be more favorable. Law experts say venue shopping is commonplace in politically-sensitive cases as a way to advance a case toward the ultimate goal of a hearing before the U.S. Supreme Court. “Everybody does this to the extent they can,” said Stephen Yale-Loehr, an immigration professor at Cornell Law School in Ithaca, New York. When lawyers for Texas filed suit in Brownsville to block the president’s executive action on immigration, they knew they had a 50 percent chance the case would be given to U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen, an appointee of George W. Bush who had previously spoken scathingly of Obama’s immigration policies. Hanen, who was assigned the case through an automated system, is one of only two judges in that division of the Southern District of Texas, so he hears half of all civil cases. The other is U.S. District Judge Hilda Tagle, an appointee of Democratic President Bill Clinton. Not all district courts have just two judges. “They knew they would strike gold if they got in front of Judge Hanen,” said Kica Matos, spokeswoman for Fair Immigration Reform Movement, a national advocacy organization for immigrants. “This is a judge who has gone out of his way to express his anti-immigrant sentiments.”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/8/immigration-ruling-shows-lawyers-playing-venue-sho/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS
New Zealander: Amnesty Is Obama’s Trump Card To Transform America
“Libertarian New Zealander, author and founder of the popular website, KeyWiki.org, Trevor Loudon is spending a lot of time lately telling Americans that “amnesty is the trump card” for President Obama to permanently transform America. Citing a speech in 2010 by White House consultant and radical leftist, Eliseo Medina, Loudon implores Americans to wake up before it is too late in this video interview. He says, with Mitt Romney losing to Obama in 2012 by 2 and ½ million votes, if Obama can succeed in legalizing “10, 15 or 20 million more votes, almost all of whom will vote Democrat,” Obama can lock in progressive electoral victories for the foreseeable future and “make it practically impossible for the Republicans to ever elect another president.” As for the Republican consultants who promote Hispanic outreach and the need for amnesty for future Republican victories, Loudon asks why would anyone listen to Karl Rove, “when he has lost so many elections.” Dismissing Rove as “a fool” who “spits on his base,” Loudon believes these consultants and Republicans are doing the bidding of the business community who want cheap labor. Loudon reminds viewers of what Lenin said, “the capitalists will sell us the rope with which to hang them.” Asking why new Latinos would be of higher value to Karl Rove and the political consultants than the 20 million conservative Christians currently not registered to vote, Loudon says Rove is demonstrating a “lack of understanding of political realities in his own country.” Deriding those Republicans or conservatives who still write off President Obama as “incompetent,” he says this is a “power play for control with no viable opposition” reminiscent of what happened in South Africa, Venezuela and Czechoslovakia, with public deception covering up the true nature of regime change…”
http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/08/new-zealander-amnesty-is-obamas-trump-card-to-transform-america/
Analysis: Divided GOP empowers Dems in political minority
“Winners in a bruising struggle with Republicans over homeland security funding and immigration, minority Democrats had unity on their side, along with a politician’s understandable fear of terrorist attacks and the Constitution’s separation of powers. The tea party-aligned, bitter-end Republican losers had outrage, and in the House, an unbending unwillingness to compromise that some of their own rank and file judged counterproductive. The result was a rout that some Republicans say – and Democrats no doubt hope – portends poorly for their party. Republicans “have got to find a level of cohesion where we can at least pass legislation that we get to the president’s desk,” said Rep. Dennis Ross of Florida as the party’s attempt to roll back President Barack Obama’s immigration directives flamed out. “If we can’t do that, we fail to govern and we lose 2016.” Whatever the long-term implications of Republican divisions, the lessons of this one episode seem simple. In the current version of divided government, Republicans must avoid significant divisions of their own and have enough Democratic votes in the Senate to assure passage of legislation they favor. They hold the biggest majority in decades in the House. Yet on the pivotal vote of the struggle, an attempt by their own leadership to pass a three-week stand-alone funding bill, more than 50 defected, empowering Democrats…”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/7/analysis-divided-gop-empowers-dems-in-political-mi/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS
EXCHANGE: Agency helping immigrants with deferral program
“Expansion of a federal program that defers deportation for parents who are in the country illegally is expected to keep lawyers with the local Immigration Project busy this year. Executive Director Jasmine McGee said efforts are under way to help people understand changes in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program that could affect some of the estimated 2,500 McLean County residents in the U.S. illegally. “The interest and demand for help with paperwork will definitely be there,” said McGee, who took over as executive director several months ago. McGee works with three other staff attorneys to assist a population of 53,000 residents in the country illegally who live outside the Cook and surrounding counties. The new provision of the DACA program defers deportation for qualified parents of youths who are U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents. Parents must pass a criminal background check and have lived in the U.S. since Jan. 1, 2010, for the deferral, which is renewable every three years. The meetings hosted by The Immigration Project in six Illinois cities will give people guidance on what documents they need for the deferrals. Lawyers also will advise against scams by lawyers and others who take advantage of immigrants who are in the country illegally, said McGee…”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/7/exchange-agency-helping-immigrants-with-deferral-p/
Iowa agriculture summit splits GOP 2016 field on subsidies, immigration
“A day-long forum on agriculture here, where likely Republican presidential candidates courted Iowa’s farming industry, revealed sharp policy differences among the contenders, from immigration to energy subsidies. The nine White House aspirants used their turns on stage Saturday at the Iowa State Fairgrounds to blast President Obama and his administration as being heavy-handed and indecisive, arguing that a change in leadership is necessary to stimulate agricultural growth. Calling the Environmental Protection Agency “a pig in slop,” Jeb Bush said, “We have to begin to rein in this top-down driven regulatory system.” Asked how to achieve that, the former Florida governor said, “The first thing you do is you change presidents.” The industry-sponsored summit — in which each hopeful answered questions on energy, the environment, immigration and food safety in solo sessions with agriculture businessman Bruce Rastetter — highlighted the demands that Iowans place on candidates to pay attention to the state that hosts the first presidential caucuses. Saturday’s forum was one of a series of events on Iowa’s political calendar this spring and summer designed to draw the candidates to the state and take positions on its pet issues. Iowa has long pushed for federal support for its ethanol industry, and many people have argued that without the high-profile caucuses, the subsidies would have been harder to sustain. Fuel subsidies became a point of contention as Rastetter tried to draw support from a new generation of presidential hopefuls. While many of the prospective candidates said they backed the subsidies, the event was notable for the number of dissenters, with Sen. Ted Cruz (Tex.) being the most explicit, saying the Renewable Fuel Standard should be repealed. “The answer you’d like me to give is, ‘I’m for the RFS, darnit,’ ” Cruz said. “But I’ll tell you, people are pretty fed up, I think, with politicians who run around telling one group one thing, another group another thing, and then go to Washington and they don’t do anything they said they’d do.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/iowa-agriculture-summit-splits-gop-2016-field-on-subsidies-immigration/2015/03/07/a5f12300-c4f4-11e4-ad5c-3b8ce89f1b89_story.html
Quotes from 2016 hopefuls at Iowa agriculture forum
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/7/quotes-from-2016-hopefuls-at-iowa-agriculture-foru/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS
Top 2016 GOP presidential hopefuls return to Iowa to hone messages
“Potential 2016 GOP presidential candidates gathered Saturday in Iowa, polishing their messages on foreign policy and domestic issues such as immigration — even positioning themselves for a potential general election race. Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush said that immigrants living in the country illegally must have an opportunity to legalize their status, a position largely at odds with his potential Republican presidential rivals. “This is the only serious, thoughtful way to deal with this,” Bush said at the Iowa Agricultural Summit in Des Moines. “No one I know has a plan to round up illegal immigrants and send them back.” He said “immigrants here need a path to legalized immigration” but that they must first clear such hurdles as learning English and paying fines. Bush has said a larger workforce based on legal immigrant labor is key to his goal of achieving 4 percent economic growth. He also proposes restricting family-based immigration to accommodate more workers. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, themselves potential 2016 GOP contenders, also spoke at the event at the Iowa State Fairgrounds but are calling for enforcement of existing immigration laws. In January, top GOP candidates were in the state, which holds the first caucus in the presidential voting cycle, for the Iowa Freedom Summit. Texas Sen. Ted Cruz said the Justice Department should investigate Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email account to conduct official business while she was secretary of state. Cruz said the agency should “absolutely” start an investigation to determine whether Clinton violated any laws, adding that it has an “obligation to do so.” Clinton is considered the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination, though she has yet to announce her plans. Her extensive use of her own email account and private server has raised questions about whether she adhered to accountability rules. She has asked that her work correspondence be made public. Eight potential Republican candidates were scheduled to speak Saturday at the forum, hosted by Iowa Republican businessman Bruce Rastetter…”
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/07/top-2016-gop-presidential-hopefuls-return-to-iowa-to-hone-message-including/?intcmp=latestnews
In Iowa, GOP hopefuls share views on energy, Cuba, immigration
http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/stateroundup/in-iowa-gop-hopefuls-share-views-on-energy-cuba-immigration/2220481
Iowa ag forum displays GOP rift on immigration reform
“The rift over immigration in the emerging Republican presidential field opened up publicly Saturday, as several potential candidates called for enforcement of existing laws while former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and South Carolina Sen. Lindsay Graham said those living in the U.S. illegally should have a path to legal status. The policy difference played out at a forum focused on agricultural policy, and will likely remain a key point of debate as the race for the 2016 Republican nomination unfolds. Immigrants are an important part of the workforce in agriculture and food processing in the early caucus state and around the country. Bush, Graham and seven other presidential prospects, including New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, were asked about their views on immigration and other topics by the host of the daylong public forum, Bruce Rastetter, an agribusiness magnate and GOP donor. “Immigrants that are here need to have a path to legalized status,” Bush said. “No one I know has a plan to round up illegal immigrants and send them back.” Graham, who helped craft bipartisan immigration legislation that passed the Senate in 2013 but died in the House, said he favored letting some of the estimated 11 million immigrants living in the country illegally stay, if they met certain conditions, like learning English and paying taxes…”
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/iowa-ag-forum-displays-gop-rift-immigration-reform
Where corn is king: Jeb Bush, White House hopefuls address hot topic
http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/07/politics/iowa-ag-summit/
Bush Outlines ‘Only Serious, Thoughtful Way’ To Deal With Illegal Immigration
“Former Governor Jeb Bush (R., Fla.) described providing a legal status to illegal immigrants in the country as “the only serious, thoughtful way” to conclude an immigration law reform that begins with securing the border. “Immigrants that are here need to have a path to legalized status,” Bush said when asked how he would overhaul immigration laws as president during the Iowa Ag Summit. “No one I know has a plan to deal with illegal immigrants, to say that they are going to be rounded up and taken away. There isn’t a specific plan. What we need to do is to make sure people pay fines, that they learn English, that they work, that they don’t receive government assistance, that they earn legalized status over the long haul, that they come out from the shadows so that they can be productive with a provisional work permit. This is the only serious, thoughtful way, I think, to deal with this.” Bush prefaced that statement by explaining his preference for tightening enforcement of immigration laws in the country. “It starts with recognizing that the rule of law is a sacred value in our country, that we need to enforce our border, we need deal with the fact that forty percent of our illegal immigrants come with a legal visa and they overstay their bounds; great countries ought to know where those folks are,” he said. “It has an e-verify system that is truly verifiable, that is something that businesses can take to the bank; and that we get that done first so that there is confidence moving forward that legal immigration will be easier than illegal immigration, because today I think a lot of people have big doubts about that.” Although Bush mentioned the need to track people who overstay their visas, it was former Governor Rick Perry (R., Texas) who received applause by stating explicitly that when someone’s visa expires “your time is up; you’re out of here.” Bush also said that the U.S. should change its policy of allowing people to immigrate based on who has extended family members already in the country, saying instead that the government should “dramatically expand, based on economic need, economic immigrants.”
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/415052/bush-outlines-only-serious-thoughtful-way-deal-illegal-immigration-joel-gehrke
GOP’s Bush touts outlier immigration vision in leadoff Iowa
“Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush says that immigrants living in the country illegally must have an opportunity to legalize their status, a position at odds with his potential Republican presidential rivals. At an agricultural policy forum in Des Moines on Saturday, the likely GOP presidential contender says: “This is the only serious, thoughtful way to deal with this. No one I know has a plan to round up illegal immigrants and send them back.” Bush has said a larger workforce based on legal immigrant labor is key to his goal of achieving 4 percent economic growth. He also proposes restricting family-based immigration to accommodate more workers. Speaking at the Iowa State Fairgrounds, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee are calling for enforcement of existing law…”
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/gops-bush-touts-outlier-immigration-vision-leadoff-iowa
Jeb Bush on fixing the broken immigration system
“At the 2015 Iowa Agriculture Summit, Jeb Bush says undocumented immigrants “need to have a path to legalized status.”
http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/jeb-bush-on-fixing-the-broken-immigration-system/
Jeb Bush: ‘No,’ I Won’t Take Away DACA Benefits
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/415057/jeb-bush-no-i-wont-take-away-daca-benefits-joel-gehrke
Jeb: No, I wouldn’t end DACA. Why do you ask?
http://hotair.com/archives/2015/03/08/jeb-no-i-wouldnt-end-daca-why-do-you-ask/
JEB TO IOWANS: ‘NOTHING IN MY RECORD’ SUGGESTS I’M A MODERATE
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/03/06/jeb-to-iowans-nothing-in-my-record-suggests-im-a-moderate/
Huckabee calls for tougher immigration oversight
“Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee says the United States should better restrict illegal immigration and seek to gauge why people want to move here. During an agricultural forum for 2016 presidential hopefuls in Des Moines on Saturday, Huckabee said the United States was not asking people seeking to immigrate here if they “love America.” Huckabee also offered support for maintaining the level of biofuels, such as ethanol, blended into gasoline. He said ethanol production helped support energy independence for the United States. The forum was hosted by Iowa Republican businessman Bruce Rastetter. Nine Republican presidential prospects were on the program, including former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker.”
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/huckabee-calls-tougher-immigration-oversight
Santorum says US immigration system is not working
“Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum says the immigration system in the United States is not working. Santorum spoke Saturday at a forum in Des Moines that focused on agricultural issues. It drew nearly a dozen Republicans considering a presidential campaign in 2016. Santorum says the country must better secure the border and create legal programs for workers with different skills. Santorum also is repeating his support for maintaining the amount of biofuels blended into gasoline. A 2007 law increases the volume of renewables blended into transportation fuel to 36 billion gallons by 2022. The federal Environmental Protection Agency in 2013 proposed reducing the increase. Leaders in Iowa say that would hurt the state’s economy…”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/7/santorum-says-us-immigration-system-is-not-working/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS
Walker: ‘I’m Not a Supporter Of Amnesty’
“Governor Scott Walker (R., Wis.) signaled a willingness to challenge potential presidential rivals over immigration policy, saying that, unlike some, he opposes amnesty, “I’m not a supporter of amnesty — I know there’s some out there [who do], and I respect their views on that — but I’m not a supporter of amnesty,” Walker said. “What I do believe going forward is that we’ve got to have a legal immigration system to this country that works.” Walker said that that the H2A visa program for foreign agricultural workers needs to be simplified and Walker made that comments following appearances from several other presidential hopefuls, including Senator Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.), who defended the policies he helped negotiate in in the Senate’s Gang of Eight immigration bill, and former Governor Jeb Bush (R., Fla.). “Immigrants that are here need to have a path to legalized status,” Bush said when asked about what immigration policies he would support as president. “What we need to do is to make sure people pay fines, that they learn English, that they work, that they don’t receive government assistance, that they earn legalized status over the long haul, that they come out from the shadows so that they can be productive with a provisional work permit. This is the only serious, thoughtful way, I think, to deal with this.”
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/415056/walker-im-not-supporter-amnesty-joel-gehrke
Parting gifts: Tough choices on immigration, Islamic State loom for Obama’s successor
“On his way out of Washington, President Obama will leave his successor a number of politically perilous parting gifts and force the next White House occupant to make highly controversial moves quickly on immigration, the fight against terrorism and other key issues. Two of Mr. Obama’s most notable recent steps — executive action on immigration and requesting new, formal authorization to wage war on the Islamic State — come with three-year time frames, meaning the next president, in the first 12 months of his or her tenure, will have to decide what to do with divisive leftover policies. Mr. Obama’s request for authorization for use of military force (AUMF) against the Islamic State would expire three years after it is passed by Congress, while the November 2014 immigration move grants a reprieve from deportation and legal work permits to illegal immigrants for 36 months. Other Obama policies, such as extensions of the Department of Education’s waiver program to states, freeing them from the No Child Left Behind school law, also are set to expire early in the successive administration, meaning the next president will be faced with a consequential decision on education within a year of taking office. With each of those policies, and the time frames associated with them, political specialists say Mr. Obama is trying to appear as if he’s getting things done while simultaneously putting pressure on Congress to do what he wants, such as on immigration. But with Congress deadlocked on immigration and struggling to pass Mr. Obama’s war authorization, much of the real pressure will fall to the 45th president, said Brandon Rottinghaus, a political science professor at the University of Houston who has written on presidential leadership…”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/8/obama-amnesty-islamic-state-education-actions-crea/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS
UC IRVINE STUDENT: US FLAG BANNED TO AVOID ‘TRIGGERING’ HURT FEELINGS AMONG ILLEGALS
“Students at the University of California Irvine (UCI) spoke to Breitbart News Sunday, sharing their shock and disappointment at recent legislation by six members of UCI’s Associated Students (ASUCI) to remove an American flag from their building’s lobby this past Thursday. A student who spoke with Breitbart News on condition of anonymity that she heard a member of the ASUCI discussing “the [American] flag and how it triggered people.” She then said she believed a major line of reasoning behind the legislation to remove the flag could have been a “precautionary step” to prevent a trigger situation where if someone is an “illegal citizen or [they] have citizenship issues, it makes them feel bad. “But me and my friends were like, ‘Dude, you’re in America. It’s the American flag,’” she added. The issue, according to her, was that the flag was placed in a common space, and she felt that if it were placed in a private area like a personal office, it would not have been a big deal. “And then there were people who were like ‘the flag triggers me’ — that was their exact wording, too.” She added: “Everything can be a trigger. How far is it going to go? If everyone says something bothers them about a shared space then that could be a problem because then there will be nothing on any walls.” UCI student Matthew Guevara, who sits on the Student Association board, authored the resolution (R50-70) to ban the U.S. flag from the association’s lobby wall. The resolution passed narrowly on Thursday in a 6-4 vote in favor, with two abstentions, but was overturned and vetoed on Saturday during a private meeting held by the Associated Student’s Executive Cabinet by a 4-1 vote. UCI administrators also issued a statement on Saturday following the vote to ban the flag, stating that they do not endorse what they described as a “misguided decision” by a political minority that they claim is not representative of the school nor the broader student body…”
http://www.breitbart.com/california/2015/03/08/student-u-s-flag-banned-to-avoid-triggering-hurt-feelings-among-illegals/
American Flag Ban Vetoed by UC Irvine Campus Leaders (Follow up to previous story)
“A University of California Irvine student executive cabinet on Saturday vetoed a resolution banning the American flag from the lobby of the student government offices, KNBC-TV reported, noting a post on the school’s website. The post called the resolution enacted by undergraduate members of the legislative council earlier this week “misguided legislation”; in addition the post said it wasn’t endorsed by campus leadership or the University of California, KNBC reported. The executive cabinet oversees the legislative council, KTLA-TV reported. “The American flag is still proudly flying throughout our campus and will continue to do so,” the post read, concluding with sign off by the executive cabinet of the Associated Students – University of California…”
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/07/american-flag-ban-vetoed-by-uc-irvine-campus-leaders/
SPENDING/BUDGET/ECONOMY:
Vacationer in chief: Tens of millions spent on 38 Obama holidays
“The first family, Michelle Obama fresh from her annual Aspen ski vacation with her daughters, and President Obama back from a weekend of golf in sunny Palm Springs, Calif., have spent tens of millions in tax dollars to vacation, and they still have two more years to go, according to an accounting of their trips. As the first lady readies for a trip to Japan and Cambodia this month, Secrets calculated that the first family has racked up 38 holidays, working vacations, and fun trips like a date night in New York. They are on par to take at least 45 holidays before leaving office…”
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/vacationer-in-chief-tens-of-millions-spent-on-38-obama-holidays/article/2561162
JEFF SESSIONS LEAVES EPA CHIEF UNABLE TO JUSTIFY MONEY GRAB
“At a Senate Environment and Public Works Committee hearing, Senator Jeff Sessions grilled EPA chief Gina McCarthy and left her unable to justify her money grab, showing that she could not explain whether climate change models were correct or not. The full transcript of the amazing exchange follows:
SESSIONS: I think EPA this year should be flat spending, or at least no more than 2.5 percent increase, you’re proposing a 6 percent increase. I mean, where does the money come from? Are you proposing to break the limitations?
McCARTHY: It is part of the president’s proposal, which is not going to buy into the bad policy of sequestration, but he’s designed the budget that can accommodate this. Senator, the one thing I want to say—
SESSIONS: Inflation rate in the United States is about 2 percent, so you want to have a three times the inflation rate increase in spending. I would suggest that when we go to our states, the group we have the most complaints about from our constituencies, whether it’s highway people, farmers, whether its energy people, is the Environmental Protection Agency. It’s an extraordinary overreach. You are apparently unaware of the pushback that’s occurring in the real world. I just want to tell you, I’m not inclined to increase your funding 6 percent above. So now you say that we’ve got a crisis and there are dangers out there. Let me ask you this: There was an article by Mr. Lomborg, who testified before the Budget Committee, from the Copenhagen Institute, and he quotes along with Dr. Pielke, from Colorado, that we’ve had fewer droughts in recent years. Do you dispute that?
McCARTHY: I don’t know in what context he’s making statements like that but I certainly can tell you about the droughts that are happening today.
SESSIONS: No, no, no, no. You can’t – I’m not arguing to you today that you are wrong about global warming because we have a cold spell. I’m asking you what are the data, don’t you know the worldwide data about whether or not we are having fewer or less droughts?
McCARTHY: I’m happy to provide it, but I certainly am aware that droughts are becoming more extreme and frequent.
SESSIONS: Are you aware that the IPCC has found that moisture content of the soil is, if anything, slightly greater than it has been over the last decades in their report? Are you aware of that?
McCARTHY: I don’t know what you’re referring to Senator, but I’m happy to respond—
SESSIONS: You need to know, because you’re asking this economy to sustain tremendous cost and you don’t know whether or not the soil worldwide is more moist or less moist?
McCARTHY: I don’t know, I don’t know where your cost figures are coming from, but if you take a look at—
SESSIONS: The IPCC. Second: what about hurricanes? We had more or less hurricanes in the last decade?
McCARTHY: There have been more frequent hurricanes and more intense. In terms of landing— those hurricanes on land, I cannot answer that question; it’s a very complicated issue.
SESSIONS: It’s not complicated about how many have landed; we’ve had a dramatic reduction in the number. We’ve had a decade without a hurricane class three or above.
McCARTHY: But sir, the scientists are not really considering that number to be significant. The subset is so small that you’re looking at, that you’re taking issues in science out of context. It’s not my job to be—
SESSIONS: Are you asserting that you have evidence that we have greater hurricanes around the world in the last decade than the previous decade?
McCARTHY: I am asserting that I have plenty of evidence, factual evidence from scientists who know this issue, that climate change is happening, it’s real, it’s happening now, and we need to take action to address it.
SESSIONS: Well, of course the climate is changing, Ms. McCarthy. I just asked you—you have been saying that there are more storms. Will you submit within a few days, it shouldn’t take long, to show we’ve had more storms in the last decade?
McCARTHY: I am able to submit all the science that we have. When you say we, what are you talking about? The U.S.?
SESSIONS: The world. The world.
McCARTHY: I am happy to submit the full breadth of science that we have behind climate; we’ve submitted it on many occasions, we’ll do it again…”
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/03/06/jeff-sessions-leaves-epa-chief-unable-to-justify-money-grab/
Obama’s Plan Will Kill Jobs, Hike Heating Costs
“Any Wisconsinites starting to wonder whether they are living through “The Long Winter,” as described by Laura Ingalls Wilder, will find no comfort in President Obama’s plans to cut the use of our most affordable and reliable sources of energy. Though we may not be relegated to heating our homes by burning twisted bundles of straw, the president’s plans to restrict use of our most economical fuels will not only increase the costs of driving, heating and lighting, they will reduce incomes and kill jobs. For Wisconsin, it works out to 20,000 fewer manufacturing jobs by 2023. How so? Natural gas, petroleum and coal provide nearly 80 percent of all energy used in the United States. Despite large subsidy and mandate driven growth rates, wind and solar satisfy only about 2.5 percent of our energy needs and do so at higher cost and with intermittent supply. And therein lies the problem. Eliminating conventional energy makes us pay more and get less. There are no magic wands here. When energy is more expensive, consumers spend more on it and less on other things. And producers must pay those higher energy costs as well. That raises the costs of lawn mowers, blenders and every other product people may want at the same time those people (i.e., the aforementioned consumers) have less to spend on those things. So, guess what? Fewer lawn mowers and blenders will be sold; and it takes fewer employees to make those lower quantities. Researchers at The Heritage Foundation used a clone of the Department of Energy’s big energy model and estimated the economic impact of the Obama administration’s broadly stated carbon targets. What we found is that, for Wisconsin, “fewer” means 20,000 lost manufacturing jobs. And this is after accounting for any increases in jobs manufacturing no-carbon or low-carbon substitutes and any gains from increased energy efficiency that the higher energy prices induce. That 20,000 figure is the net job loss. There are those who say (however indirectly) that those 20,000 newly unemployed workers need to take one for the team to prevent climate catastrophe. There are a couple of Grand Canyon sized holes in this argument. First, the associated claims of increasingly extreme weather are not borne out in the data kept by our own National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration nor even by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s data keepers. There just aren’t any upward trends in hurricanes, tornadoes, droughts or floods. Nor is sea-level rise accelerating. Extreme weather events have been with us since there was us, and they will almost certainly continue regardless of rules from Washington, D.C. Second, cutting our emissions by even 60 percent (we are not on track for that) would moderate world temperatures by less than a tenth of a degree Celsius by the end of the century. Throw in a 60 percent cut from the rest of the developed world and any increase is cut by less than two-tenths of a degree. So to the 20,000 lost Wisconsin manufacturing jobs add those from the other 49 states, Canada, Japan, all of Western Europe, and the impact still would be an amount nobody could detect without a very accurate thermometer. If the lost jobs don’t buy us much on the global warming side, wouldn’t we at least get cleaner air? Since CO2 is colorless, odorless and nontoxic (and helpful to plant growth) we need to look at conventional pollution. The air has gotten cleaner even as energy production has risen dramatically. According to the National Energy Technology Laboratory, modern coal power technology cuts emissions of nitrous oxides by 86 percent, of sulfur dioxides by 98 percent, and of soot by 99.8 percent. If you want to, go ahead and worry about your own carbon footprint, but let’s not have Washington use its regulatory footprint to stomp out 20,000 manufacturing jobs in Wisconsin for no good reason.”
http://dailysignal.com/2015/03/07/obamas-plan-will-kill-jobs-hike-heating-costs/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=thf03072015HeatingCosts
The Most Important Part Of The Unemployment Numbers; Those Not Looking For Work
“Last week’s employment numbers were good: 295,000 jobs added in the economy. The unemployment numbers were good, unemployment is now down to 5.5%. Still rather higher than we’d hope 6 years after the onset of a recession but still reasonable enough. And as Rogoff and Reinhardt have been pointing out, a recession that follows from a financial crash is indeed different this time. However, there’s another number entirely which is really at the heart of what policy makers are pondering over at the moment. And that’s not the number unemployed by the official definition, but those so discouraged at not being able to find work that they’re not even looking for work by that official definition. I discussed this in theoretical terms here, yesterday. Today we’ve got other people making much the same point in non-technical terms: The number of Americans participating in the labor force has been on a decline for the past few years. Nearly 33 percent of the Americans above age 16 are not part of the workforce, the highest number since 1978. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) report issued recently has found 92,898,000 Americans above age 16 not a part of the labor force of the country as on February 2015. When President Obama took over the office in January 2009, nearly 80,529,000 Americans were not a part of the labor force. The number has increase by nearly 12 million over the last few years. Some of this is entirely benevolent. Stay at home Moms, students, those actually incapable of working (all those on disability for example) and so on. But we don’t think that this group has increased by 12 million in just these few short years. Rather, we think that at least some of these people have become so discouraged in their search for a job that they’re just not searching any more. And something we know from Europe is that people who become so detached from the labour market have a very hard time coming back into it if they ever do. The BLS says the aging of the baby boom generation is a key factor affecting the labor force participation rate. “In 2000, baby boomers were aged 36 to 54 years and were in the group with the highest participation rates: the prime-aged group 25 to 54 years old,” BLS wrote. “The participation rate for women in this group was 76.7 percent and for men was 91.6 percent, so that the overall participation rate of the group was 84.0 percent. The participation rate of the next-older age group, that 55 years and older, was 32.4 percent, so the difference between the two age groups was 52 percentage points.” It may actually be that. Just a lot of people taking early retirement. And good luck to them in their golden years. But this all feeds into the Fed’s decision of when to raise interest rates. As Paul Krugman points out the Fed has overestimated the unemployment rate at which inflation starts to pick up in the past. And we’d really rather it didn’t do that again and raise rates too early. However, it’s all complicated this time around as we’ve never actually had this sort of disengagement from the labour force in the US before. It’s been common enough in Europe but we just don’t know how Americans are going to react to the tightening job market. Will they come back into the labour force? That means that rates can stay lower for longer. Will they not come back? Then that means we might be (or at least should be) looking at an imminent rate rise…”
http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2015/03/08/the-most-important-part-of-the-unemployment-numbers-those-not-looking-for-work/
Americans participating in the labor force reduce to multi-year lows
<a href="http://uncovermich