DonnyFerguson.com
Wednesday, September 15, 2021
In today’s issue:
HONORING OUR HEROES
1) Barrasso honors life and service of U.S. Marine Lance Corporal Rylee McCollum
2) Cruz honors fallen hero Lance Corporal David Espinoza on Senate floor
THE LIBERAL AGENDA
3) New move to keep Congress in Washington if Biden shut downs government
4) Biden scheme to gift Putin an oil pipeline violates federal law
5) Foxx: Dem totalitarian overreach threatens you
6) Supreme Court asked to intervene after appeals court upholds officer threatening to shoot man for asking questions
7) More than 30 school and child advocates ask Supreme Court to overturn discrimination against religious schoolS
8) Disturbing new FDA records reveal scheme to buy fetal organs, heads and tissue for ‘humanized mice’ experiment
9) Delaware Supreme Court hearing case on Biden Senate records secrecy
10) Government union bosses sue after law stops them from skimming worker paychecks
11) Three ways forced unionism makes you poorer and violates your rights
YOUR MONEY
12) Democrats plot to have 87,000 new IRS agents spy on any American with more than $600
13) Biden weaponizing SEC to hammer socialist agenda down Americans' throats
14) With families already pinching pennies Biden plans to slap Americans with $350 billion in new taxes on goods
GREEN SCHEMES
15) Lummis moves to stop ecoradical policies from unleashing more wildfires
16) Elitist Democrat agenda leaves rural America 'out in the cold'
17) Study exposes deadly threat posed by plans in Congress to ban plastic
18) Here’s how Democrats will hurt you with their radical ‘no energy’ agenda
19) Biden jets to Colorado to announce job killing Green New Deal scheme
COVID NEWS
20) Biden rejects science to place your kids' health in hands of radical campaign donor
21) Scalise and Comer investigate claims Biden is politicizing booster shot recommendations
22) Lee and Tuberville introduce bill requiring Senate vote for CDC director
FOREIGN RELATIONS
23) Biden admin has no idea who they droned in attack that reportedly killed aid worker and children
24) Biden admin confesses they abandoned ‘several thousand’ legal US residents to murderous Taliban animals
25) Cruz: Biden Blame Game a desperate attempt to deflect from Afghanistan catastrophe
26) Daines challenges Biden: Stop cowering and show American strength
27) McConnell unleashes blistering truth about Biden botched Afghan policy
OFF TO THE RACES
28) Floundering Dem senator Hassan literally runs from question on $3.5 trillion spending scheme
29) Dem Senate recruit Conor Lamb follows Pelosi orders and kills aid to veterans
30) GOP announces record breaking Senate fundraising haul
31) Troubled Dem senator Kelly jetting around state with convicted drug felon
HONORING OUR HEROES
Barrasso honors life and service of U.S. Marine Lance Corporal Rylee McCollum
U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) delivered the following remarks in tribute to the life and service of U.S. Marine Lance Corporal Rylee McCollum. McCollum, who was from Bondurant, Wyoming, lost his life along with 12 other service members in the terrorist attack in Kabul, Afghanistan on August 26, 2021.
Excerpts of Senator Barrasso’s remarks:
“I come to the floor today to pay tribute to the life and service of Lance Corporal Rylee McCollum. He was from Bondurant, Wyoming.
“On Thursday, August 26th, the United States lost 13 men and women in uniform. Eleven Marines, an Army soldier, and a Navy corpsman.
“They were killed by a terrorist attack in Kabul, Afghanistan. At least 20 additional Marines were wounded. It was the deadliest day for our nation's military in more than a decade.
“One of those fallen heroes was Lance Corporal Rylee McCollum.
“He was just 20 years old. Rylee McCollum's life demonstrated the best of our nation. His dad, Jim, told me that Rylee was ‘full-blooded red, white, and blue,’ and from the very beginning.
“Rylee's dad, Jim, wanted to serve in the military but he couldn’t because of a medical issue. Well, his son Rylee grew up with that same great desire to serve our nation.
“Rylee's father said, and his family said, he wanted to be a Marine from the very beginning. His sister Royce said that he ran around in his diapers and cowboy boots with his rifle.
“He attended Jackson Hole High School. He graduated from Summit Innovations High School in Wyoming and he made a real name for himself all around the state as a champion wrestler.
“He had the kind of talents and abilities which he could have done anything and everything. He wanted to serve America.
“He joined the Marines literally as soon as he could. He signed up on his 18th birthday. His plan was to serve in uniform and then come home to Wyoming. His goal was to teach history and coach wrestling.
“On August 26th, on his first deployment, he stood guard at the Hamid Karzai Airport in Kabul, Afghanistan. He protected the airport as Americans and our allies escaped to safety.
“His mission saved thousands of lives. While Rylee was protecting others, he was killed by a terrorist bomb.
“Rylee had just been married in February. His wife, Gigi, was expecting their first child and he was excited to become a father. His child will never know Rylee, yet his child will always know that Rylee McCollum, her father, was a hero.
“On Friday, I stood side by side with Rylee’s family and his pregnant wife Gigi at the airport in Jackson, Wyoming, as Rylee's flag-draped casket was brought home for his very last trip to Wyoming.
“And today, I got a text from Gigi with this magnificent picture.
“The text came within the last hour or so and we were able to do a blowup of the text picture. It’s from a naval hospital in Camp Pendleton saying: Welcomes baby girl Levi Rylee Rose, 8-pounds, 10-ounces, September 13, today, at 2:00 A.M.
“There's the baby and there's the cutout of her father, Rylee McCollum.
“People in Wyoming and all across America have shown their love and respect and appreciation and admiration for Rylee and his family.
“People have already donated close to a million dollars to help Gigi and the baby. They donated these funds through a GoFundMe page on the internet.
“It’s a testament to the gratitude of the American people for the life and service of Rylee McCollum.
Cruz honors fallen hero Lance Corporal David Espinoza on Senate floor
U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) took to the Senate floor to honor the life and service of Lance Corporal David Espinoza, a Texas Marine who was killed in action in the August 26 bombing at the Kabul airport. Read Sen. Cruz's full remarks below.
"I rise today to honor the life of David Lee Espinoza, who died in defense of our nation on August 26. David was a Marine who was helping with the evacuation of the Kabul airport when he was murdered by a suicide bomber, along with 12 other servicemen and women who so senselessly had their lives taken from them that day.
"His mother got the call that every parent of every service member fears when she was told at 2:30 in the morning that her son had lost his life in Afghanistan. David was just 20 years old.
"David was a lifelong Texan. He was born in Laredo, and raised in nearby Rio Bravo, where he was the eldest of four children. David always wanted to be a marine. And as a child, he loved to consider different military strategies as he played with toy soldiers. David joined the Marines the summer after he graduated from LBJ High School in Laredo in 2019. He spent time serving in Jordan, before being sent to Kabul the week before he died. It's been said that other service branches wanted David to join their ranks, but David always knew he was meant to be a marine.
"David was a beloved son, a brother, a friend, and a fellow marine. He was a patriot who had a passion for service, and our nation can never repay the debt that we owe to David and to his family for giving what President Lincoln hailed as ‘the last full measure of devotion.'
"Yesterday, at David's funeral Mass, Father Francisco Stodola, said, ‘As tragic as this loss is, and as deep as the wounds of sorrow have pierced the hearts of his loved ones, and particularly his mother, because the mother would rather lose an arm or a leg than to have to lose a child, we can console ourselves with the fact that David died doing what he wanted to do, with the people he wanted to do it with.'
"We will remember David and the incredible sacrifice he gave for our country. He will also be remembered by his community. The Laredo city council has already voted to name the road in front of LBJ High School, David's alma mater as the ‘Lance Corporal David Lee Espinoza Memorial Boulevard.'
"To David's parents, Elizabeth Holguin and Victor Manuel Dominguez, and to his siblings, Angel Martin Espinoza, Victor Manuel Dominguez Jr, and Delilah Alyssa Dominguez, I want to say that your son and your brother was a brave patriot who will never be forgotten. Heidi and I are lifting you up in prayer as you mourn the loss of your beloved David. The 91st Psalm is sometimes called the soldiers or the warrior Psalm because it asks the Lord for protection against many foes and it assures us that the Lord will be with us in times of trouble:
‘Because he loves me, says the Lord, ‘I will rescue him;
I will protect him, for he acknowledges my name.
He will call on me and I will answer him;
I will be with him in trouble,
I will deliver him and honor him.'
"David's sacrifice was not in vain. He died as he lived, giving of himself in service of others. David now rests from his labor, having been a good and faithful servant. To the families of all of those whose lives were lost in Afghanistan this year, and in the 20 years that preceded it, know that your sacrifice, know that your loss was not in vain. America is better. America is safer. American lives are more secure because your sons and daughters answered the call. America is better and safer and more secure because David Espinoza answered the call. Texas and America are better for having known him and we are in his debt."
THE LIBERAL AGENDA
New move to keep Congress in Washington if Biden shut downs government
U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) along with Sens. James Lankford (R-Okla.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), Mike Braun (R-Ind.), Rick Scott (R-Fla.), Steve Daines (R-Mont.), Angus King (I-Maine), Ben Sasse (R-Neb.), and Bill Cassidy, MD (R-La.) plan to reintroduce the Prevent Government Shutdowns Act of 2021, which would take government shutdowns off the table by setting up an automatic continuing resolution if government funding has not been enacted on time and by requiring Congress to stay in town until the job is done.
“Government shutdowns are inefficient and come at an enormous cost to American taxpayers,” said Johnson. “In Wisconsin, if the governor and state legislature can’t pass the budget, we don’t shut down the state government, we just spend at last year's level. The Prevent Government Shutdowns Act would enforce the same discipline at the federal level. It is a common-sense piece of legislation that should’ve been passed and implemented a long time ago.”
The Prevent Government Shutdowns Act is supported by the following groups: Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, Council for Citizens Against Government Waste, FreedomWorks, National Taxpayers Union, Americans for Prosperity, Americans for Tax Reform, and the American Conservative Union.
Upon a lapse in government funding, the bill would implement an automatic continuing resolution, on rolling 14-day periods, based on the most current spending levels enacted in the previous fiscal year. This would prevent a shutdown and continue critical services and operations while not increasing spending.
During the covered period of an automatic continuing resolution, the restrictions put in place include no taxpayer-funded travel allowances for official business (except one flight to return to Washington) for White House Office of Management and Budget staff and leadership, members of the House and Senate, and committee and personal staff of the House and Senate. Additionally, no official funds may be used for congressional delegation or staff delegation travel, campaign funds may not be used by congressional offices to supplement official duties or travel expenses, and no motions may be made to recess or adjourn in the House or Senate for a period or more than 23 hours.
In addition, under the bill, no other votes would be in order in the House and Senate unless they pertain to passage of the appropriations bills or mandatory quorum calls in the Senate. However, after 30 days under the automatic continuing resolution, certain expiring authorization bills and executive calendar nominations would be eligible for consideration on the Senate floor, including a nomination for a justice of the Supreme Court or a cabinet secretary, and narrow reauthorization legislation for programs operating under an authorization that has already expired or will expire within the next 30 days.
These restrictions can be waived by a two-thirds vote in either chamber but not for longer than seven days. Additionally, the bill provides for expedited consideration of bipartisan funding bills if appropriations have not been enacted after 30 days after the start of the fiscal year. This further incentivizes Congress to process bipartisan spending bills and fund the government on time. Lastly, the bill ensures Congress is not under floor and travel restrictions after they get the job done and are awaiting the president’s signature. However, if the president vetoes any funding bills, the restrictions on congressional travel and floor consideration are re-imposed.
Although federal funding runs out on Sept. 30, Congress has failed to enact any of the 12 annual appropriations bills, which once again means we face a possible government shutdown or another continuing resolution that fails to take into account what we actually need as a nation.
Introduced initially in February 2019, the Prevent Government Shutdowns Act requires that if appropriations work is not done on time, all members of Congress must stay in Washington and work until the spending bills are completed. This will prevent a government-wide shut down, continue critical services and operations for Americans, and hold federal workers harmless while Congress finishes its job.
Biden scheme to gift Putin an oil pipeline violates federal law
U.S. Senators Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) and Ted Cruz (R-Texas) are calling on President Biden to follow the law and sanction Nord Stream 2 AG (NS2AG). In a letter to Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Menendez and Senate Banking Committee Chairman Sherrod Brown, the senators agreed to proceed with the confirmation process for a number of Treasury and State Department nominees if President Biden sanctions NS2AG.
“Whether NS2 AG is sanctioned under CAATSA is not simply a matter of policy preference; it is the law,” the senators wrote. “CAATSA Section 228 requires sanctions on any person engaged in evading sanctions on behalf of a separately-sanctioned Russian entity. There is overwhelming evidence that NS2 AG meets the statutory requirement for being sanctioned.”
In July, Senate Banking Committee Republicans sent a letter informing Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen of Republicans’ intent to oppose two Treasury nominees—Brian Nelson and Elizabeth Rosenberg—until the administration imposes mandatory sanctions on NS2AG. The Banking Committee is scheduled to vote on both nominees during a markup this week.
Sen. Cruz has said since the opening weeks of Joe Biden’s presidency he would use all available leverage and prerogatives available to him as a United States Senator, including placing holds on State Department nominees until President Biden and his administration met their Congressionally-mandated obligations related to Nord Stream 2 sanctions.
“There is a way out of this impasse,” the senators wrote. “If the president sanctions NS2 AG—the Gazprom-owned holding company responsible for the construction and operation of the pipeline—under CAATSA Section 228, Senator Cruz will lift his holds on career State Department nominees and Treasury Department nominees and Senator Toomey will drop his objection to Mr. Nelson and Ms. Rosenberg.”
Read the full letter below.
September 13, 2021
Dear Chairmen Menendez and Brown:
As you know, President Biden has reversed longstanding U.S. policy on Nord Stream 2 by greenlighting the completion of the pipeline and abandoning efforts to thwart its progress. The administration’s so-called “deal” with Germany hands Vladimir Putin a geostrategic victory, entrenches corrupt Russian influence in Europe, and drastically weakens the security of Ukraine, Poland, and other states on the frontline of Kremlin aggression.
We believe that the administration’s policy reversal is unacceptable, and have taken steps in the committees that you respectively chair to pressure the administration to change course. Specifically, Senator Cruz has held over State Department nominees awaiting consideration by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and has withheld consent for confirmation without floor consideration, and has similarly denied unanimous consent to Treasury Department nominees. Senator Toomey, in conjunction with every Republican member of the Senate Banking Committee, has committed to vote against reporting out from committee two Treasury Department nominees, Brian Nelson and Elizabeth Rosenberg, unless the administration applies the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA; P.L. 115-44) to Nord Stream 2 AG (NS2 AG).
There is a way out of this impasse. If the president sanctions NS2 AG—the Gazprom-owned holding company responsible for the construction and operation of the pipeline—under CAATSA Section 228, Senator Cruz will lift his holds on career State Department nominees and Treasury Department nominees and Senator Toomey will drop his objection to Mr. Nelson and Ms. Rosenberg. These positions have been conveyed to the Biden administration in granular detail. For Senator Toomey, the administration must follow the law and sanction NS2 AG under CAATSA Section 228 in order for his objections to fall. For Senator Cruz, if the administration commits to maintaining NS2 AG on the Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List, Senator Cruz will lift his holds immediately. If the administration elects to remove the sanctioning of NS2 AG, Senator Cruz will still agree to lift his holds if and when Congress votes on a joint resolution of disapproval pursuant to CAATSA Section 216.
Whether NS2 AG is sanctioned under CAATSA is not simply a matter of policy preference; it is the law. CAATSA Section 228 requires sanctions on any person engaged in evading sanctions on behalf of a separately-sanctioned Russian entity. There is overwhelming evidence that NS2 AG meets the statutory requirement for being sanctioned.
We are hopeful that the president will follow the law and sanction NS2 AG as soon as possible, clearing a path to confirmation for nominees in both of your committees.
Foxx: Dem totalitarian overreach threatens you
Democrats’ totalitarian tendencies are putting American values, freedoms, and livelihoods at stake. They promise to know what is best for America while they push for more government interference and less freedom.
In Case You Missed It via the Washington Times, Education and Labor Committee Republican Leader Virginia Foxx (R-NC) wrote an op-ed about the harm Democrats are inflicting on our economy and constitutional rights.
Dems’ totalitarian overreach threatens Americans’ livelihood
By: Rep. Virginia Foxx
September 13, 2021
(The Washington Times) … The stakes of our current battle against totalitarian tendencies may not yet be as significant as those of past decades, but today’s authoritarians can still act in deeply pernicious ways.
Some of these contemporary authoritarians take the form of cultural elitists, casting themselves in messianic roles promising that they know what is best for the American citizen. Skeptics of their “enlightened” ways are castigated as degenerates. And when new information emerges, which challenges the position of the enlightened few, that information is repressed, sacrificing truth on the altar of politics.
As Senior Republican Leader of the U.S. House Committee on Education and Labor, I see examples of these deceptive assertions weekly.
Democrats cite science to enforce mask mandates in schools, steamrolling parental rights and ignoring the harm masks inflicts on young children’s learning.
…
House Democrats passed a bill that would skim the top off workers’ paychecks to line the pockets of union bosses even though those workers are not even union members.
And most recently, Congressional Democrats are pushing a $3.5 trillion socialist wish list, which the New York Times said, “would touch virtually every American’s life, from conception to aged infirmity.”
Read the full article here.
Supreme Court asked to intervene after appeals court upholds officer threatening to shoot man for asking questions
What does it take to hold federal police accountable for using excessive force? That question is once again being raised with cases being appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. And it’s coming to the Justices in the form of a petition from Kevin Byrd, a Texas mechanic who was almost shot to death by a federal officer in a dispute over a purely personal matter.
Kevin is not fighting alone. The Institute for Justice (IJ) represents him in his U.S. Supreme Court appeal. And three groups of exceptional scholars and cross-philosophical public policy organizations are supporting him with friend-of-the-court briefs in which they urge the Justices to take up Kevin’s case.
This legal fight started for Kevin on February 2, 2019, when he was at a restaurant asking questions about a drunk driving car crash that injured the mother of Kevin’s child. There, Kevin encountered the father of the driver involved in the crash—Department of Homeland Security Agent Ray Lamb. Displeased that Kevin was asking questions that could get his son into trouble, Agent Lamb resolved to stop Kevin. With his gun drawn, Lamb jumped out of a truck, yelling that he would “put a bullet through” Kevin’s “f—ing skull” and “blow his head off.” At the time, Kevin was in his car, getting ready to leave the restaurant. The agent tried to enter Kevin’s car by hitting the driver’s side window with his gun. Failing to break through, Lamb tried to shoot Kevin, but his gun malfunctioned.
Terrified for his life, Kevin called 911. When local police arrived, Lamb showed them his federal badge, prompting the officers to detain Kevin in the back of a police car. Thankfully, the entire encounter was recorded on video. After reviewing it, the officers let Kevin go and arrested Lamb for aggravated assault and misdemeanor criminal mischief.
Because nothing came of the charges, Kevin sought accountability in the only legal forum available to him—a federal district court. He initially succeeded, because the district court held that even qualified immunity—an obstacle that already makes it extremely difficult for victims of constitutional abuse to seek accountability—does not protect an officer who commits such a clear constitutional violation. But when Lamb appealed to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, his victory turned into a defeat because, according to that court, federal officers are entitled to absolute (not qualified) immunity, meaning they cannot be sued at all simply by virtue of being employed by the federal government. This holding prompted one of the judges sitting on the panel to lament that in Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi federal officers now operate in a “Constitution-free zone.”
“Had Agent Lamb worked for a state or local government, a case against him would have proceeded to trial,” said Patrick Jaicomo, an attorney for the Institute for Justice, which represents Kevin in his appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. “But because he happens to be a federal cop, he gets away Scot free.
“That’s not only wrong, it is also inconsistent with our history,” added IJ Attorney Anya Bidwell, co-counsel in the case. “Remember that the Constitution first and foremost limited the power of the federal government and only applied to the states after the Civil War.”
On August 6, Kevin and the Institute for Justice filed a petition for certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the Justices to take on the case and reverse the 5th Circuit’s decision.
They are now joined by a diverse group of highly respected law professors and public policy organizations that filed briefs in support of the Court taking up Kevin’s case. These include briefs by:
Professor Peter Schuck, the Simeon E. Baldwin Professor of Law Emeritus at Yale University. An academic legend in the field of constitutional accountability, Prof. Schuck wrote a treatise—Suing Government: Citizen Remedies for Official Wrongs (1983)—which became the foundational text on the subject and inspired many great legal minds to get involved in the field. In his brief, Professor Schuck argues that the 5th Circuit’s decision denying Kevin his day in court “departs radically from this Court’s established framework for evaluating damages claims against federal officials for constitutional torts, creating a split among the circuits.” Supreme Court review, therefore, is not only warranted but badly needed.
Professor Seth Stoughton, a former police officer who, among other appointments, teaches at the University of South Carolina School of Law. Professor Stoughton is a well-respected authority on the use of force issues that plague our nation today. According to his brief, the 5th Circuit is home to one of the largest federal law enforcement forces in the country. There are more than 18,000 federal law enforcement officers in Texas alone, with the 5th Circuit overall hosting more than 20,500 federal police. This means that if the 5th Circuit’s decision is allowed to stand, a constitutional remedy will “effectively be abolished exactly where it is most crucial.”
The ACLU, Cato Institute, DKT Liberty Project, Goldwater Institute, Law Enforcement Action Partnership and New Civil Liberties Alliance filed a cross-philosophical brief arguing that the nation needs a reevaluation of the excessive force jurisprudence and also needs to get back to the original principles of this country’s founding, specifically the ideal that where there is a right, there must be a remedy. The 5th Circuit’s decision cannot be allowed to stand lest this foundational principle be denied to those who most need it.
“We are grateful for the support of esteemed Professors Schuck and Stoughton, and of the amazing cross-philosophical group of amici,” said Scott Bullock, IJ president and general counsel. “In this polarized moment in our nation’s history, it is inspiring to have such a broad coalition, especially at this early stage of Supreme Court review. We all agree that the Constitution is not an empty promise but provides vitally important constraints on government power. We ask the Supreme Court to grant review and make this absolutely clear to federal courts nationwide.”
This case is litigated as part of the Institute for Justice’s Project on Immunity and Accountability, which seeks to hold government officials more accountable when they violate individual rights. As part of the Project, IJ will continue to fight against the many special protections that shield government officials from accountability.
For more information on this and IJ’s other cases dealing with holding federal officials accountable when they violate someone’s constitutional rights, visit: https://ij.org/case/federal-police-immunity-cert-petitions/.
More than 30 school and child advocates ask Supreme Court to overturn discrimination against religious schools
More than 30 amicus (or “friend-of-the-court”) briefs have been filed in Carson v. Makin, calling for greater educational choice for parents and their children. Carson, which is being litigated by the Institute for Justice (IJ), is expected to set a landmark precedent when it comes to education reform. In the case, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether a state may exclude families from an otherwise generally available student-aid program simply because they send their children to schools that provide religious instruction. The Court is expected to hear argument in the case in late 2021.
In an earlier IJ case, 2020’s Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, the Supreme Court held that states may not bar families from choosing schools in student-aid programs simply because of the school’s religious identity, or status. Yet, in Carson, the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Maine’s exclusion of religious schools from a state tuition assistance program for high school students. The 1st Circuit acknowledged that Espinoza forbids a state from excluding schools because of their religious status, but it nevertheless held that the Constitution permits a state to exclude schools based on the religious use to which a student’s aid might be put there—namely, religious instruction. In other words, the 1st Circuit held that although states may not exclude schools because they are religious, they are perfectly free to exclude schools because they do religious things.
The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear an appeal of the 1st Circuit’s decision, and on September 3, 2021, IJ filed its opening brief in the Supreme Court, demonstrating the constitutional irrelevance of the “use/status distinction” drawn by the 1st Circuit and arguing that Maine’s religious exclusion is just as unconstitutional as the exclusion the Supreme Court held unconstitutional in Espinoza. Late last week, some 33 amicus curiae, or friend-of-the-court, briefs were filed supporting IJ’s position. The briefs come from groups across the ideological, political and religious spectrums, demonstrating the depth of support for IJ’s position on educational choice programs.
Among the amici are:
Coalition of 18 States: Eighteen states, most of which have educational choice programs of their own, argue that “a State need not discriminate on the basis of religion to serve its undoubtedly compelling interest in educating children. Just the opposite, openness to partnering with religious schools furthers the States’ goals by providing an array of educational choices.” They add that “[f]ully including religious schools also protects the constitutional rights of a State’s citizens.”
Members of the United States Senate: Eleven members of the United States Senate note that throughout history, Congress has partnered with religious organizations to provide vital learning opportunities to American children. These efforts date back to the Northwest Ordinance of 1787; continued through the 19th century, when Congress financially supported religious education for Native Americans and freed slaves; and continue today, with the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program for low-income families in the District of Columbia.
Southern Christian Leadership Conference–Memphis Chapter: The Memphis Chapter of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, founded by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and other civil rights leaders in 1957, as well as a group of African-American community leaders from Memphis, survey the history of the 14th Amendment, which demonstrates “that the Equal Protection Clause is rooted in notions of religious as well as racial equality.” They note that “the federal government actively and directly funded religious schools alongside secular schools at the time the Fourteenth Amendment was passed and later ratified.” In fact, “[i]n 1866, the same Congress that passed the Fourteenth Amendment also instructed the newly created Freedmen’s Bureau to provide suitable education to newly freed slaves through the funding of private benevolent associations,” most of which were northern missionary societies.
Professor Michael McConnell of Stanford University: Professor Michael McConnell, formerly a federal judge on the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, is widely recognized as a leading authority on the Religion Clauses of the U.S. Constitution. His brief undertakes a comprehensive study of the history of the Free Exercise Clause, which makes clear that the clause, as originally understood, protects not only religious belief or status, but also religious conduct. Thus, he argues, there is no basis for the “use/status distinction” that the 1st Circuit relied on to uphold Maine’s sectarian exclusion. Professor McConnell’s brief also demonstrates how Maine’s exclusion requires intrusive religious inquiries by the state that result in inter-religious discrimination in violation of the Establishment Clause.
Defense of Freedom Institute for Policy Studies: Authored by David Boies, who litigated the successful constitutional challenge to California’s Proposition 8 banning same-sex marriage, this brief argues that the “semantic distinction between status and use makes no constitutional difference.” The brief notes that the U.S. Supreme Court has rejected any comparable distinction in other contexts—for example, laws that discriminate based on sexual orientation, race, or sex. The brief urges the Court to reject the distinction when it comes to religion, as well, explaining that “[f]or an antidiscrimination protection to have any real force, it must reject such meaningless distinctions.”
Innovative Private Schools: Build UP (which operates a workforce development model to provide low-income youth in Alabama and Ohio with career-ready skills through paid apprenticeships), Kuumba Preparatory School for the Arts (an African-centered private school located in southeast Washington, D.C.), and Blaze Kids Academy (which is in the process of designing and building a faith-based all-year-around boarding facility for students from rural parts of the United States) were “founded on the principle that different students learn differently, and that it is the responsibility of educators to embrace students’ unique capacities as a tool for learning, not an obstacle to it.” The 1st Circuit’s decision, their brief argues, has “the perverse effect of blocking funding from those students who are most likely to benefit from innovative schools, and it will chill creativity and experimentation by schools that fear such experimentation may result in their students losing access to critical tuition assistance.”
Partnership for Inner-City Education, Council of Islamic Schools in North America, and National Council of Young Israel: This interfaith brief is on behalf of organizations that operate, represent, and support elementary and secondary schools in the Catholic, Islamic and Jewish traditions. “Central to these schools’ religious and educational missions,” the brief stresses, “is the integration of faith throughout all aspects of their educational programs, making the religious status/religious use distinction employed by the First Circuit below both unworkable and discriminatory.”
Institute for Justice Senior Attorney Michael Bindas, who will argue Carson before the Supreme Court, said, “We are grateful for the overwhelming support we’ve received from so many states, public servants, churches, civil rights organizations, schools, think tanks, and religious organizations of all denominations and faiths. As their briefs make clear, Maine’s exclusion of ‘sectarian’ options from its tuition assistance program is discriminatory, unconstitutional and ultimately harmful to the very schoolchildren that Maine purports to help. We are confident the U.S. Supreme Court will see it the same way.”
Disturbing new FDA records reveal scheme to buy fetal organs, heads and tissue for ‘humanized mice’ experiment
Judicial Watch has received 198 pages of records and communications from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) involving “humanized mice” research with human fetal heads, organs and tissue, including communications and contracts with human fetal tissue provider Advanced Bioscience Resources (ABR). Most of the records are communications and related attachments between Perrin Larton, a procurement manager for ABR, and research veterinary medical officer Dr. Kristina Howard of the FDA.
Judicial Watch received the records through a March 2019 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, of which the FDA is a part (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department Health and Human Services (No. 1:19-cv-00876)). The lawsuit asks for all contracts and related documentation on disbursement of funds, procedural documents and communications between FDA and ABR for the provision of human fetal tissue to be used in humanized mice research. After successfully opposing the FDA’s redaction of certain information from its records, a federal court ordered HHS to release additional information about its purchases of organs harvested from aborted human fetuses – including “line item prices,” or the price per organ the government paid to ABR. The court also found “there is reason to question” whether the transactions violate federal law barring the sale of fetal organs. Documents previously uncovered in this lawsuit show that the federal government demanded the purchased fetal organs be “fresh and never frozen.”)
The records include an FDA generated contract with ABR, based on a “requisition” it issued on July 27, 2012, for $12,000 worth of “tissue procurement for humanized mice,” indicates the requisition was for a “non-competitive award.” Although the initial award was for $12,000, the total estimated amount of funds allocated for the requisition was $60,000. Under “Justification for Other than Full and Open Competition,” the FDA writes:
Scientists within the FDA and in the larger field of humanized mouse research have searched extensively over the past several years and ABR is the only company in the U.S. capable of supplying tissues suitable for HM research. No other company or organization is capable of fulfilling the need.
***
Costs are estimated [for the fetal parts] at $230 per tissue x two tissues per shipment = $460 plus $95 shipping = $555 per shipment. A total of 21 shipments = $11,655.00.
An April 1, 2013, “Amendment of Solicitation/Modification of Contract” form that shows the FDA purchased fetal livers and thymuses from ABR going back to at least October 2012, billing $580 per liver/thymus set, but later paying a unit price of $685.
A January 1, 2013, “Fees for Services Schedule” provided by ABR to the FDA includes:
FETAL CADAVEROUS PROCUREMENT SERVICE FEE
2nd trimester D&E [Dilation and Evacuation abortion] (13-24 weeks) per specimen $275
1st trimester aspiration [abortion] (8-12 weeks) per specimen $515
Intact Calvarium [baby’s skull] (8-24 weeks)” per specimen $515
The fees for services schedule also includes “Special Processing/Preservation” of the fetal parts, such as “Tissue ‘Cleaning,’” “Snap freezing” and “Passive freezing (Dry ice).”
In a September 9, 2014, “Order for Supplies or Services,” the FDA writes regarding a $9,900 order:
The Contractors shall ship 2nd Trimester thymus $325, 2nd Trimester liver $325. Overnight deliver $150 and EFT wire transfer fee $25, for a total per delivery of $825. Total of this contract not to exceed $9,900.00.
As the result of an August 21, 2015, “Amendment of Solicitation/Modification of Contract,” ABR bumped up the price of baby livers and thymuses from $325 each to $340 each.
A “Tissue Acquisition Quote” sent by ABR to Howard on July 5, 2017, provided a quote of $5,440 each to provide 16 sets of second trimester (16-24 weeks) livers and 16 sets of second trimester (16-24 weeks) thymuses at $340 per “sample.” The request for the quote notes that “tissue known to be positive for HIV, HepA, HepB, HepC or chromosomal abnormalities are not acceptable.”
On June 28, 2017, a redacted FDA contract specialist sends Larton at ABR a request for a quote (RFQ) of pricing for human fetal tissue, aged “16-24 weeks,” including a “Statement of Needs”:
The HM [humanized mice] are created by surgical implantations of human tissue into mice that have multiple genetic mutations that block the development of the mouse immune system at a very early stage. The absence of the mouse immune system allows the human tissues to grow and develop into functional human tissues…. In order for the humanization to proceed correctly we need to obtain fetal tissue with a specific set of specialized characteristics.
A May 2018, report from a company named “LABS,” which was employed by ABR to test fetal parts and their mothers for hepatitis and HIV, notes in its “methodology description” that they are approved by the FDA “for living and cadaveric donor screening.”
The records include a recitation of requirements by the FDA for “Payment by Electronic Funds Transfer,” in which ABR must adhere to regulations relating to “Convict Labor” and “Child Labor-Cooperation with Authorities and Remedies.”
On September 24, 2018, the Trump FDA terminated its contract with ABR for human tissue purchases and began an audit of its acquisitions of baby body parts. The records include the FDA’s letter terminating the contract:
Based on the terms and conditions of the Purchase Order as awarded to Advanced Bioscience Resources, Inc. (“ABR”) on July 27, 2018, the Government is not sufficiently assured that the human tissue provided to the Government to humanize the immune systems of mice will comply with the prohibitions set forth under 42 U.S.C. § 289g- 2. Furthermore, the Government has concerns with the sufficiency of the sole-source justification. Therefore, pursuant to FAR [Federal Acquisition Regulation] clause 52.213-4(f), the Purchase Order is being terminated effective September 24, 2018.
“Chopping up aborted human beings for their organs and tissue is a moral and legal outrage,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “This issue should be front and center in any debate about America’s barbaric abortion industry.”
In February 2020, Judicial Watch first uncovered through this lawsuit hundreds of pages of records from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) showing that the agency paid thousands of dollars to a California-based firm to purchase organs from aborted human fetuses to create “humanized mice” for HIV research.
In May 2021, this lawsuit uncovered FDA records showing the agency spent tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars to buy human fetal tissue from ABR. The tissue was used in creating “humanized mice” to test “biologic drug products.” The records indicated the FDA wanted tissue purchases “Fresh; shipped on wet ice.”
On August 3, 2021, Judicial Watch announced that it and The Center for Medical Progress (CMP), through a separate lawsuit, received 252 pages of new documents from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that reveal nearly $3 million in federal funds were spent on the University of Pittsburgh’s quest to become a “Tissue Hub” for human fetal tissue ranging from 6 to 42 weeks’ gestation. The Pitt scientists note that, “All fetal tissue is collected through a collaborative process including Family Planning, Obstetrics and Pathology.” Pitt anticipated “being able to harvest and distribute quality tissue and cells … [and] do not anticipate any major problems related to the acquisition and distribution of the tissues.” Pitt’s target goal “is to have available a minimum of 5 cases (tissues and if possible other biologicals) per week of gestational age for ages 6-42 weeks.”
Delaware Supreme Court hearing case on Biden Senate records secrecy
Judicial Watch announced a hearing is scheduled for Wednesday before Supreme Court of Delaware in its state Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit, which was also filed on behalf of the Daily Caller News Foundation, for access to records about President Joe Biden’s Senate records held by the University of Delaware. Biden’s papers include more than 1,850 boxes of archival records from his senate career. The University is withholding the alleged agreement with President Biden to keep them secret as well as communications between the University and representatives of the President about keeping them secret.
Date: Wednesday, September 15, 2021
Time: 10:00 am ET
Location: Delaware Supreme Court Building
55 The Green
Dover, Delaware 19901
Livestream: https://livestream.com/delawaresupremecourt/events/9820231
The Daily Caller and Judicial Watch filed requests on April 30, 2020, for all of Biden’s records and for records about the preservation and any proposed release of the records, including communications with Mr. Biden or his representatives.
Judicial Watch’s appeal challenges a Superior Court of Delaware’s January 4, 2021, ruling upholding the Delaware state attorney general’s opinion that the records are not “public records” because, the opinion concludes without evidence, no public funds are used to support the Biden records project at the University of Delaware.
Judicial Watch argues that it is impossible for the housing of Biden’s senatorial records in the University of Delaware’s Library to not be supported by or have an effect on any public funds. Judicial Watch notes that the University admitted that “[t]he State of Delaware provides the University with approximately $120 million each year through an appropriation in the state budget,” but has yet to show how any of these funds are not used to support the papers.
Judicial Watch also points out that “archival storage space and professional staff members’ time are things of value that it can be inferred are paid for with public funds,” and notes that the requests even listed the “University personnel who maintain the Senatorial Papers whose salaries, it can be inferred, are paid with State funds.”
“The University of Delaware’s argument that a public university housing public records is not subject to public disclosure requirements would be comical if all this weren’t so serious. We are hopeful that the court will not allow this attempt to hide President Biden’s rightfully public information to stand,” said Daily Caller News Foundation President Neil Patel.
“It is more than a little bit curious that President Biden refuses to make not one page of his Senate records available to the American public,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Delaware law requires state entities, including the University of Delaware, to provide public access to these records.”
Judicial Watch filed the July 2020 FOIA lawsuit after the University denied its April 30, 2020, request for:
All records regarding the proposed release of the records pertaining to former Vice President Joe Biden’s tenure as a Senator that have been housed at the University of Delaware Library since 2012. This request includes all related records of communication between the University of Delaware and any other records created pertaining to any meeting of the Board of Trustees during which the proposed release of the records was discussed.
All records of communication between any representative of the University of Delaware and former Vice President Biden or any other individual acting on his behalf between January 1, 2018 and the present.
Also on April 30, the Daily Caller News Foundation submitted its FOIA request to the University for:
All agreements concerning the storage of more than 1,850 boxes of archival records and 415 gigabytes of electronic records from Joe Biden’s senate career from 1973 through 2009.
Communications between the staff of the University of Delaware Library and Joe Biden or his senatorial, vice-presidential or political campaign staff, or for anyone representing any of those entities between January 1, 2010, and April 30, 2020, about Joe Biden’s senate records.
Any logs or sign-in sheets recording any individuals who have visited the special-collections department where records from Joe Biden’s senate career are stored between 2010 to the date of this request.
All records from Joe Biden’s Senate career that have been submitted to the University of Delaware Library.
Judicial Watch and the Daily Caller News Foundation are being represented by Delaware lawyers Ted Kittila and Bill Green of Halloran Farkas + Kittila LLP.
Government union bosses sue after law stops them from skimming worker paychecks
Staff attorneys at the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, a charitable nonprofit dedicated to protecting workers’ legal rights from compulsory unionism, have just filed an amicus brief defending the legality of a state law that protects the First Amendment right of West Virginia public employees to refrain from funding a union. The brief comes during a legal battle by union bosses against the law, in which a Kanawha County Circuit Court judge issued a preliminary injunction at the behest of union lawyers stopping the bill from going into effect.
Foundation staff attorneys urge the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals to undo the injunction, arguing that West Virginia’s Paycheck Protection Act is not only valid, but essential to protect West Virginia public sector workers’ rights under the Foundation-won 2018 Janus v. AFSCME Supreme Court decision. In Janus, the justices ruled that forcing public sector workers to subsidize union activities as a condition of keeping their jobs violates the First Amendment. The Court also held that no union dues or fees can be taken from a public worker’s wages without a knowing and intelligent waiver of that employee’s First Amendment right not to pay, and that such a waiver “cannot be presumed.”
The justices reasoned in Janus that, because all public sector union activities involve lobbying the government, forcing public sector workers to pay any money to a union amounts to forced political speech forbidden by the First Amendment.
“The Act prevents the government from unwittingly violating their employees’ First Amendment rights by seizing union dues from them without their voluntary, affirmative consent and knowing, intelligent waiver of those rights, as required under Janus,” the brief reads. “The State’s protection of its employees’ First Amendment rights does not violate the constitutional rights of Respondents West Virginia AFL-CIO, et. al. (‘the Unions’), because the Unions have no constitutional entitlement to employees’ money or to the employer’s administration of union dues deduction schemes.”
Because West Virginia has a legitimate interest in protecting its employees’ First Amendment rights, and because union officials’ lawsuit against the Paycheck Protection Act has no chance of success on the merits, Foundation attorneys argue, the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals should overturn the preliminary injunction.
This is not the first time the Foundation has supported state policy that protects public employees’ First Amendment Janus rights. Last year, Foundation staff attorneys filed detailed comments backing a Michigan Civil Service Commission (MiCSC) policy that required public employers to obtain annual consent from their workers before taking union payments out of their wages. Officials from the United Auto Workers (UAW) and other unions abandoned a lawsuit contesting the rule in October 2020.
Foundation staff attorneys also filed 10 legal briefs defending West Virginia’s Right to Work law, which was the target of a legal attack by union officials from 2016 until last year. Among the Foundation’s filings were amicus briefs for Reginald Gibbs, who worked as a lead slot machine technician with the Greenbrier Hotel in White Sulphur Springs, WV, and Donna Harper, who worked as a laundry aide and nursing assistant at the Genesis HealthCare Tygart Center in Fairmont, WV. Both workers opposed paying money to the union bosses in power at their workplaces.
“West Virginia union bosses’ aggressive opposition to this commonsense law shows that they care more about finding ways to keep employee money flowing into their pockets than they do about respecting the First Amendment rights of those they claim to ‘represent,’” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “This law just ensures that public employees maintain full control over whether their money is going to support a union.”
“By opposing this simple protection, West Virginia union bosses are doubling down on coercion instead of focusing on ways to win over the voluntary support of public servants,” Mix added.
Three ways forced unionism makes you poorer and violates your rights
Every year the National Right to Work Foundation uses Labor Day to remind Americans that celebrating workers must include respecting their individual rights by opposing the injustices of forced unionism. This year, National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix’s opinion pieces calling out union coercion and extolling the vital freedoms and opportunity secured by Right to Work reached the public through dozens of outlets. Here are some of the highlights:
On Right to Work’s Freedom and Prosperity
“With help from the same National Right to Work Foundation attorney who argued and won the Janus case, [Chicago teachers Ifeoma Nkemdi and Joanne Troesch] appealed to the Supreme Court. Sixteen states and 4 separate legal foundations filed amicus briefs supporting the educators’ petition, which the Supreme Court is set to take up in October.
“The educators are riding the momentum from a historic decade of wins against compulsory unionism. Since 2012, five states – Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin, West Virginia, and Kentucky – passed Right to Work protections, ensuring union membership and financial support are strictly voluntary.”
-Mark Mix in The Washington Times, 9/6/2021
“And so, a year after the COVID-19-induced economic slump hit its lowest point in April 2020, Right to Work states led the way in getting jobs back on track. In Right to Work states, the number of manufacturing payroll employees had rebounded 10.1 percent just one year after its 2020 lows, a bump 63 percent greater than what forced-unionism states experienced, according to Labor Department statistics from July.”
-Mark Mix in Fox Business, 9/6/2021
“Sluggish job growth in forced-unionism states was not limited to just the pandemic recovery. A National Institute for Labor Relations Research analysis points out that, from 2020 back to 2010, employment in states lacking Right to Work protections increased by only 2.4%, paling in comparison to Right to Work states’ 11.0% jump in the same decade.
“It’s no surprise, then, that Right to Work states passed the milestone just last year of now playing host to the majority of employed people in the United States, according to the Department of Labor’s Household Survey.”
-Mark Mix in the Boston Herald, 9/6/2021
On Union Boss Attempts to Expand their Coercive Powers over Rank-and-File Workers
“It’s no wonder polls consistently show that more than 80% of Americans support the right-to-work principle that no worker should be forced to pay union dues as a condition of employment. Union members, too, overwhelmingly agree.
“When union membership and financial support are voluntary, union officials are held accountable by workers who can cut off support if these officials aren’t meeting their needs.
“Instead of rising to the challenge and seeking workers’ voluntary support, union bosses continually resort to attacking the right to work.”
-Mark Mix in the Washington Examiner, 9/3/2021
“Union officials attempt to justify their use of coercion by claiming that forced association and forced dues are good for workers, but even Vice President Kamala Harris has admitted that’s not true. As California’s Attorney General she filed a Supreme Court brief acknowledging that ‘unions do have substantial latitude to advance bargaining positions that … run counter to the economic interests of some employees.’”
-Mark Mix in Newsmax, 8/31/2021
“Why do teachers’ unions across the country have the power to dictate the terms of school districts’ reopening, while the tax dollars of parents—nearly 80 percent of whom supported in-person instruction—continue to flow towards those districts?
“The answer is that, in nearly every state, the heads of public-sector unions have at least some power to force teachers, police officers, firefighters and other public employees into one-size-fits-all contracts that make public services more responsive to the interests of union bosses than to those of the public…
“In the devastating wake of COVID-19 and the misguided policies that came with it, now is a better time than ever to take a close look at how public-sector unions became the entrenched special interest group they are today. Ending union officials’ monopoly bargaining privileges would strike at the root of the problem while protecting the freedom of association of teachers and other public employees who do not feel that these unions represent them.”
-Mark Mix in Newsweek, 9/3/2021
On Union Corruption
“If Pantoja’s account correctly depicts the facts, the culture of union corruption must be deeply ingrained in the IAM. If even a union vice president can’t attempt to combat embezzlement and lies by a fellow union officer without facing a vicious campaign of retaliation, imagine what would happen to a rank-and-file worker who tried to do the same…
“Unfortunately, under current federal policies, many if not most IAM-‘represented’ workers in all 50 states, including the 27 Right to Work states, may currently be forced to bankroll a union, or be fired, as a consequence of the federally-imposed railroad/airline-industry loophole in state bans on forced union dues and fees.”
-Mark Mix in Newsmax, 9/10/2021
“Workers in Michigan are now free to decide for themselves whether union officials deserve their support. Meanwhile, [Bob] King’s UAW has been engulfed in a massive corruption scandal including the misuse of workers’ dues money…
“Had King and other union bosses had their way, workers in Michigan would be forced to not only fund union officials’ opulent lifestyles, but also their salaries and the legal bills associated with the scandal. In states without right-to-work protections, workers in UAW shops continue to bear those costs.”
-Mark Mix in The Detroit News, 9/6/2021
YOUR MONEY
Democrats plot to have 87,000 new IRS agents spy on any American with more than $600
Seeking to protect taxpayers against Democrats’ campaign to monitor Americans’ bank accounts, place taxpayer finances in a surveillance dragnet, and provide massive, additional mandatory funding to IRS for an army of IRS agents, U.S. Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) and U.S. House Ways and Means Republican Leader Kevin Brady (R-Texas) introduced the Tax Gap Reform and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Enforcement Act.
“In light of recent proposals to massively expand the IRS, with unprecedented amounts of mandatory funding, and the IRS’s continued abuses of taxpayer rights and privacy, any additional IRS funding and monitoring of Americans’ private finances must come with guardrails to help protect against abuses,” said Crapo. “This legislation places important guardrails around IRS funding to protect taxpayers’ rights and privacy.”
“Before American taxpayers are subjected to 80,000 new IRS agents and surveillance of their private bank accounts, let’s begin with an accurate, independent estimate of Treasury’s so-called ‘tax gap,’” said Brady. “This bill also protects taxpayers from IRS targeting based on their political or religious beliefs and closes loopholes that risk leaking private taxpayer returns.”
Under the guise of closing the “tax gap,” Democrats are seeking to increase IRS funding by a massive $80 billion over the next 10 years to expand “enforcement and compliance activities” at the IRS, and to create a “comprehensive financial account information reporting regime,” under which gross inflows and outflows of taxpayers’ financial accounts are reported by financial intermediaries to the IRS, effectively acting as IRS agents.
Key provisions of the TaxGap Reform and IRS Enforcement Act:
Tax Gap Reform: Requires timely, annually-updated information on tax gap estimates in coordination with the Joint Committee on Taxation.
Taxpayer Protection: Prevents the IRS from targeting Americans for their political and ideological beliefs, codifies President Biden’s pledge to not increase audits of taxpayers making less than $400,000 per year, and prohibits the establishment of new bank reporting requirements.
Smarter Enforcement: Requires the IRS to use existing data and tools to improve its corporate audit selection process and increase enforcement against high-income non-filers.
Closes the Expertise Gap: Creates an IRS enforcement fellowship pilot program to assist with the agency’s most complex audits and case selection decisions. Before hiring thousands of new agents, Congress should test the effectiveness of increasing expertise in a targeted way.
Original Senate co-sponsors include John Barrasso (R-Wyoming), Mike Braun (R-Indiana), John Boozman (R-Arkansas), Bill Cassidy (R-Louisiana), Kevin Cramer (R-North Dakota), James Lankford (R-Oklahoma), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Mike Rounds (R-Nebraska), Marco Rubio (R-Florida), Thom Tillis (R-North Carolina) and Todd Young (R-Indiana).
The legislation is supported by the National Taxpayers Union, Americans for Tax Reform and the Center for a Free Economy.
“This legislation is a strong alternative to recent proposals that would write an $80 billion check to the IRS with too little forethought,” said Pete Sepp, President of the National Taxpayers Union. “If lawmakers move forward with an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) budget boost anyway, these reforms and more should be considered prerequisites for any major proposed increase in the IRS budget, and would both safeguard taxpayers’ rights and support taxpayers’ interest in an effective, modern, and agile IRS.”
“Democrats want to give the IRS $80 billion and hire 87,000 new agents so they can harass and audit taxpayers and create a new reporting regime that targets any bank account, Venmo account, or financial account exceeding $600 in gross inflows and outflows,” said Grover Norquist, President of Americans for Tax Reform. “This should be alarming given the IRS has a long history of failing to do its job and targeting taxpayers based on their political beliefs. The Tax Gap Reform and IRS Enforcement Act introduced by Congressman Brady and Senator Crapo takes steps towards protecting taxpayers by implementing important safeguards against potential new IRS targeting and abuse.”
“Congressional Democrats' answer to Americans' frustrations with the IRS is to hire more tax bureaucrats to audit them,” said Ryan Ellis, President of the Center for a Free Economy. “This bill provides a welcome reform-based alternative. People are fed up with being told they are tax cheats by academics and bureaucrats who have never signed the front of a paycheck, and that they must become the subject of fishing expedition audits in service to a fabricated ‘tax gap.’ Reining in the tax gap estimation and audit process gives taxpayers a fair shake if the tax man comes knocking. Congress should focus on getting the IRS to answer phone calls and correspondence in a timely manner, not on new audits.”
Biden weaponizing SEC to hammer socialist agenda down Americans' throats
In his opening statement at this week’s U.S. Senate Banking Committee hearing, Ranking Member Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) expressed concern over the direction of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) under Chairman Gary Gensler’s leadership. Pointing to Mr. Gensler’s efforts to restrict retail investor freedom, to regulate cryptocurrencies by enforcement, and to impose new mandatory disclosures on global warming and “human capital,” Senator Toomey urged the SEC to change course.
Ranking Member Toomey’s remarks, as prepared for delivery:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Welcome, Chair Gensler.
The SEC has historically administered securities laws on a bipartisan basis. During your confirmation process, I expressed concerns that you’d stray from this tradition and use the SEC to advance a liberal political agenda, such as combatting global warming and advancing so-called social justice; and push the legal bounds of the SEC’s authority to pursue disclosures that are not financially material to the reporting companies. Unfortunately, your actions at the SEC have not alleviated these concerns.
You added mandatory disclosures on global warming and “human capital”—such as board and employee racial and gender identity—to the SEC’s agenda. And you’ve essentially said that if large investment advisors and pension funds like BlackRock and CalPERS—who invest other people’s money—want information about global warming or workforce diversity, it must be disclosed even if financially insignificant and irrelevant to a particular business.
Even President Obama’s SEC Chair, Mary Jo White, opposed using the SEC’s disclosure powers for the purpose of “exerting societal pressure on companies to change behavior, rather than to disclose financial information that primarily informs investment decisions.” That’s exactly what you’re doing. You are also well on your way to politicizing the PCAOB after firing all of the existing board members.
It’s not the SEC’s role nor expertise—as an independent financial regulator with zero democratic accountability—to address these political and social issues.
Similarly, I worried that you’d favor the paternalistic push by some on the Left to restrict investor freedom under the guise of protection, while actually harming retail investors. Such harm may result from your apparent opposition to payment for order flow, which helped allow brokers to offer commission-free trading.
Payment for order flow allows a broker to keep a portion of the price improvement obtained by routing to a wholesaler. The SEC hasn’t demonstrated any failure or harm associated with payment for order flow, which the SEC has allowed for years. Banning payment for order flow could very well have the effect of eliminating commission-free trading, and would be a grave disservice to average investors.
Likewise, you’ve criticized mobile apps that make investing easy and fun as “gamification.” Since when has delivering a product that customers like been a bad thing?
I worry that you’re attempting to fix problems that don’t exist. Today is the best time ever to be a retail investor. Retail investors receive best execution. A person of modest means can share in the gains of stock market at negligible transaction costs. We see the tightest bid/offer spreads ever.
Four major developments made this possible. Retail investors can access commission-free trading, accounts with no minimum balances, low- or no-fee mutual funds and ETFs, and user-friendly technology like mobile apps. Investors can also voluntarily use a broker who declines payment for order flow but may charge a commission.
Despite decades of rapidly growing numbers of retail investors participating in stock market gains, and enjoying more product opportunities at lower costs, some colleagues suggest that the markets are rigged against retail investors. I’d like to hear how it is rigged. Don’t retail investors receive dividends like institutional investors? Aren’t retail investors entitled to best execution like institutional investors? Don’t the value of retail investors’ shares and those of institutional investors increase when a stock’s price increases?
The SEC’s job is not to make retail investing expensive, unpleasant, and difficult. In America, adults investing their own money should be free to decide how to do so.
Let me turn to cryptocurrency, which we should further study and support. Cryptocurrencies and blockchain are important new technologies that are actively traded on many platforms.
A key question is whether a cryptocurrency is a security for regulatory purposes under Howey or some other test. Based on your public statements, you believe that some are securities but others are not. So, I am frustrated by the lack of helpful SEC public guidance explaining how you make this distinction. What makes some of them securities and others not?
I understand that SEC staff will privately provide feedback and analysis on whether a cryptocurrency is a security. Why keep this analysis private? Why not publicly announce what characteristics make a cryptocurrency a security or not a security? Why wait to make the SEC’s views known only when it swoops in with an enforcement action, in some cases years after the product was launched?
This regulation by enforcement is extremely objectionable and will kill domestic innovation.
Chair Gensler, there are many things on which you and I agree and that the SEC can do to protect investors, ensure fair, orderly, and efficient markets, and facilitate capital formation. I hope that we can productively work together on this mission.
With families already pinching pennies Biden plans to slap Americans with $350 billion in new taxes on goods
Americans for Free Trade spokesperson Jonathan Gold released the following statement regarding reports that the Biden administration is considering a new Section 301 investigation which could lead to new tariffs on imports from China.
“The news that the Biden administration is considering additional tariffs on imports from China is discouraging, as so many American businesses are already struggling to bear the costs of tariffs on more than $350 billion in goods imposed by the previous administration. Those tariffs failed to fulfill their stated goal of creating leverage in dealing with China, and as revealed by a Moody’s report earlier this year, importers have been forced to take on more than 90 percent of the costs created by 20 percent tariffs on Chinese goods. New tariffs will not change that. Tariffs hurt businesses throughout the country and it’s time for a new approach to working with our trading partners that relieves the weight of the current tariffs and finally brings an end to this misguided trade war.”
GREEN SCHEMES
Lummis moves to stop ecoradical policies from unleashing more wildfires
Senator Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) introduced the Stop CATASTROPHIES Act or the Stop Causing Alarming Tree, Air, and Soil Trauma Resulting from Obstructive Progressives’ and Hypocritical Environmentalists’ Schemes Act. This is the Senate companion bill to Representative Dan Newhouse’s (R-WA) bill of the same name.
Of the bill, Senator Lummis said, “For too long, litigious radical groups have hindered efforts to maintain and preserve our national forests under the guise of environmentalism. This bill would cut some of the red tape that these groups exploit to ensure that Wyoming’s and the nation’s forest managers have the resources and flexibility needed to actively manage forests and prevent wildfires.”
Under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), agencies may be granted exclusions to certain requirements of the law for actions that do not individually or cumulatively have significant effects on the environment. These CE’s or “categorical exclusions” can reduce paperwork and save limited time and resources. Under this bill, categorical exclusions are expanded to include the removal of noxious weeds, hazardous fuel management, creating fuel/fire breaks, allowing fencing to improve wildlife habitat, erosion control devices and the creation of permanent infrastructure, such as stock ponds. This bill also increases acreage caps for categorical exclusions to 10,000 acres in order to allow these forest management activities to be utilized on a greater scale.
Elitist Democrat agenda leaves rural America 'out in the cold'
U.S. Senator John Boozman (R-AR), ranking member of the U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, told senior industry leaders, policy makers and key thought leaders that the Democrat’s tax and spend bill leaves animal agriculture “out in the cold” during his remarks at the “Sustainable Solutions for Zero Hunger by 2030” forum.
“Just this week, House Democrats selected their winners and losers when it comes to climate policy as the agriculture portion of the partisan Reconciliation bill advanced through the House,” Boozman said. “The segment of American agriculture responsible for over half of our country’s farm receipts was left out in the cold entirely. This signals to me that the administration is not interested in assisting animal agriculture in being more sustainable.”
Boozman noted that more than $66 billion was directed toward research and infrastructure initiatives focusing on urban agriculture, civilian climate corps, organics, specialty crops, tree equity and more.
“In what we’ve seen so far, not a single dollar in that $94 billion package was devoted to animal agriculture,” the ranking member said.
Presented in partnership with Elanco and Agri-Pulse, the virtual forum “Sustainable Solutions for Zero Hunger by 2030” brought together key leaders across the global livestock community to discuss the next steps of food production’s sustainable transformation and our ability to fight hunger while reducing the environmental impact of our global food systems.
“The White House has its own agenda. The president and his allies have little regard for the impact of their decisions on the agriculture community as a whole. The fact that they have refused to consider your voices in the discussion should be very alarming as the decision on where to spend this money, or in this case where not to, will have long-term ramifications on the industry’s future,” Boozman said.
Study exposes deadly threat posed by plans in Congress to ban plastic
In a new paper, Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) senior fellow Angela Logomasini, PhD argues destroying the U.S. plastics industry, as several pieces of legislation pending before Congress aim to do, would have far-reaching negative consequences for humanity.
In The Immeasurable Benefits of Plastics to Humanity, Logomasini writes that banning plastics would jeopardize the level of health care humans receive from medical facilities, put the world food supply at risk, and undermine public health.
Examples of how banning plastics would put humans at risk include:
Medical professionals rely on vast numbers of plastic products. Single use plastics are vital in preventing hospital-acquired infections, which is more important than ever given the COVID-19 pandemic.
Plastics are an essential part of protecting our food supply and by extension, our health, from dangerous pathogens. By extending shelf life, plastic food packaging also makes it more affordable to feed the world’s growing population, while leaving excess land for wildlife.
Plastics make homes more affordable and bring many benefits to construction. Plastics can be used for vinyl siding, vinyl flooring, pipes, wire coating, insulation, window frames, decking, fencing, components of lighting and appliances, tools, and more.
Manufacturers use plastics to make many affordable, lightweight safety devices, from hardhats to goggles, to sporting equipment. For example, plastics have replaced glass in many applications because they are safer and less prone to breaking. Plastics greatly relieve risk of injury to babies and children from potential shards of glass from broken cups and bottles.
“Misguided anti-plastics policies jeopardize the level of care people receive in medical facilities, put the world food supply at risk and undermine public health,” said study author Logomasini.
“Telling hospitals they must stop using single-use plastics would put more patients at risk of contracting COVID-19 or other hospital-born infections. Destroying the plastics industry in the United States would not eliminate the need for plastics, it would force us to depend on foreign sources for plastics in order to meet our most basic needs.”
Here’s how Democrats will hurt you with their radical ‘no energy’ agenda
Joe Biden and Senate Democrats’ radical tax and spending spree is causing energy prices to skyrocket. From heating homes to fueling cars, this assault on American energy affects every hardworking American’s bottom line. Small businesses must pay more to ship products, daily commutes to work cost more, and home heating bills are more expensive.
Rising energy costs aren’t the only byproduct of Democrats’ radical energy agenda. American energy workers are suffering while the Biden Administration creates energy jobs in foreign countries.
Joe Biden and Senate Democrats’ radical energy agenda is killing good-paying American energy jobs while creating energy jobs in countries like Russia. Joe Biden killed 11,000 American energy jobs on his first day in office when he cancelled the Keystone XL Pipeline. Meanwhile, he allowed Russia to continue construction on the Nordstream 2 pipeline, creating thousands of Russian energy jobs.
Statement from NRSC Spokesman Jonathan Turcotte: “Democrats’ radical energy agenda is killing American jobs and sending energy prices through the roof, but Democrats aren’t done. They are doubling down on their radical tax and spending spree in their latest $5 trillion liberal boondoggle. This multibillion-dollar spending spree – along with the largest tax hike in decades – will no doubt cause energy prices to skyrocket even further. Joe Biden and Senate Democrats say they only want to raise taxes on the wealthy. But, make no mistake, their anti-American energy agenda is a tax hike on ALL Americans.”
Biden jets to Colorado to announce job killing Green New Deal scheme
President Joe Biden is headed to Colorado to talk up his Administration’s radical climate agenda authored by Green New Deal architect, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
The petroleum industry employs about 100,000 people in Colorado, and generates $13.5 billion in economic activity, providing state and local governments with $1 billion in tax revenue. Unfortunately, they have been bamboozled by their senior Senator – and failed presidential candidate – Michael Bennet, who has caved to pressure from the radical Left to toe the AOC, Green New Deal line.
He cowardly voted “present” on the motion to invoke cloture and proceed with the Green New Deal resolution.
Then, he brazenly flip-flopped on the Keystone XL pipeline that would have created thousands of jobs and offered a safe, environmentally friendly way of transporting gas from Canada.
Bennet has voted multiple times against blocking the Biden Administration from banning fracking, a move that would directly impact the livelihoods of many Coloradans.
He even voted against an amendment to expand the use of natural gas as a means to reduce greenhouse emissions.
When the President arrives in Colorado to regurgitate AOC’s talking points, many Coloradans will feel attacked, but there will be one man who is happy to throw his constituents under the bus and applaud: Senator Michael Bennet.
Statement from NRSC Spokesman T.W. Arrighi: “Many Coloradans are asking themselves: What in the world happened to Michael Bennet? The energy industry in Colorado is under unprecedented assault and Bennet now appears content to burn the whole industry to the ground. Biden and AOC have ushered in a new age of Green New Deal environmentalism, and the losers in this deal are the people of Colorado.”
COVID NEWS
Biden rejects science to place your kids' health in hands of radical campaign donor
The Biden administration is still colluding with teachers unions.
After the nation’s largest teachers union sent the White House a threatening email on school masking policies, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) just-so-happened to announce that wearing a mask, regardless of vaccination status, would remain necessary in schools.
The CDC is supposed to be a leader in the scientific community, not an echo chamber for left-wing talking points. However, the National Education Association is calling the shots on masking guidelines in schools, begging the question – who does Joe Biden serve?
In Case You Missed It via Fox News, the CDC flip-flops on in-school masking policies after complaints from teachers unions.
CDC tightened masking guidelines after threats from teachers union, emails show
By: Joe Schoffstall
September 9, 2021
(Fox News)The Biden administration tightened its masking guidance after a prominent teachers union threatened White House officials with publicly releasing harsh criticism, internal emails show.
The National Education Association sent a draft statement to White House officials that included harsh criticism of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's masking guidance, the emails show. But the teachers union ultimately published a version with a much softer tone, and the CDC clarified its guidance to indicate that everyone should be masked in schools, regardless of vaccination status.
Read the full article here.
Scalise and Comer investigate claims Biden is politicizing booster shot recommendations
House Republican Whip and Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis Ranking Member Steve Scalise (R-La.) and House Committee on Oversight and Reform Ranking Member James Comer (R-Ky.) sent a letter to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) expressing concerns that the Biden White House was pressuring career FDA officials to recommend booster shots before the agency saw research showing that booster shots are necessary.
In their letter to Janet Woodcock, Acting Commissioner of the FDA, the Republican lawmakers wrote, “Without evidence and data, President Biden announced that booster doses of the mRNA vaccines would be available for Americans starting September 20, 2021. Top scientists and researchers were stunned by this decision—particularly because the CDC and the FDA had not yet conducted their independent review of the data…The political manipulation and pressure to interfere with the science by President Biden’s White House reportedly contributed to the decision of two top career scientists, Marion Gruber and Phill Krause, who were key in the vaccine process, to leave the FDA.”
Below is the full text of the letter.
September 14, 2021
Dear Acting Commissioner Woodcock:
Select Subcommittee Republicans are conducting oversight of potential political interference with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) by the Biden Administration. President Biden, instead of following the science, is attempting to distract from his numerous crises by playing politics and moving out ahead of the FDA and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) when it comes to the science on coronavirus vaccine booster shots.
Without evidence and data, President Biden announced that booster doses of the mRNA vaccines would be available for Americans starting September 20, 2021. Top scientists and researchers were stunned by this decision—particularly because the CDC and the FDA had not yet conducted their independent review of the data. In fact, two vaccine manufacturers have not yet submitted the relevant data to the government agencies. The political manipulation and pressure to interfere with the science by President Biden’s White House reportedly contributed to the decision of two top career scientists, Marion Gruber and Phill Krause, who were key in the vaccine process, to leave the FDA. They felt that the FDA was being sidelined by the Biden Administration and “what finally did it for them was the White House getting ahead of FDA on booster shots.”
Further, we now know that those same FDA scientists disagreed with the Biden Administration on the need for booster shots. In a paper published September 13, 2021, both Krause and Gruber argued that “[c]urrent evidence does not, therefore, appear to show a need for boosting in the general population, in which efficacy against severe disease remains high.”
In order for the Select Subcommittee to conduct legitimate oversight and enable a better response to the next pandemic, we request the following documents and information as soon as possible but no later than September 28, 2021.
All documents and communications relating to the study and implementation of a booster shot option for mRNA vaccine recipients.
All documents and communications between the FDA and the White House relating to booster shots.
All documents and communications related to President Biden’s August 18, 2021 announcement that booster shots would be available for Americans beginning September 20, 2021.
All documents and communications relating to any effort by political appointees or White House personnel to review, revise, edit, delay, or prohibit publication of information related to booster shots.
All documents and communications related to the departure of FDA scientist Marion Gruber.
All documents and communications related to the departure of FDA scientist Phil Krause.
All documents and communications relating to any adverse employment action taken or considered against any employee, official, or contractor of the federal government for actions taken in the course of their employment related to the science of American receiving booster shots.
The Committee on Oversight and Reform is the principal oversight committee of the U.S. House of Representatives and has broad authority to investigate “any matter” at “any time” under House Rule X. Further, the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis is empowered to investigate “preparedness for and response to the coronavirus crisis, including the planning for and implementation of testing, containment, mitigation, and surveillance activities.” Thank you in advance for your cooperation with this inquiry.
Sincerely,
Steve J. Scalise, Ranking Member, Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis
James Comer, Ranking Member, Committee on Oversight and Reform
Lee and Tuberville introduce bill requiring Senate vote for CDC director
Sens. Mike Lee (R-UT) and Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) today introduced the Restoring Trust in Public Health Act which would require that nominees for Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) be confirmed by the United States Senate. Recently, the CDC has impacted the lives of hundreds of millions of Americans through its COVID-19 guidelines and eviction moratorium all under directors that have not been confirmed by the U.S. Senate.
Of the bill Sen. Lee said, “The CDC has exerted astonishing power over the everyday lives of millions of Americans without any say from Congress. This bill will ensure that, through the confirmation process, future directors are qualified, honest, and reasonable. Few agencies need such tempered, rational leadership as much as the CDC.”
Sen. Tuberville said, “The CDC Director is arguably the most powerful position at HHS that is not subject to Senate confirmation. In the past year and a half during a global pandemic, CDC-issued guidance has impacted every American - without input from Congress. If an individual is going to have such vast and seemingly unchecked power, the CDC Director should be a Senate-confirmed role to ensure the American people get a say in the process and that the individual selected has the temperament and qualifications necessary.”
Sens. Lee and Tuberville are joined by Sens. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), Dan Sullivan (R-AK), and Mike Braun (R-IN) as cosponsors.
FOREIGN AFFAIRS
Biden admin has no idea who they droned in attack that reportedly killed aid worker and children
U.S. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) questioned Secretary of State Antony Blinken during a U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on the Biden Administration’s botched Afghanistan withdrawal and continued incompetence.
Dr. Paul: “The guy the Biden administration droned, was he an aid worker or an ISIS-K operative?”
Sec. Blinken: “I don’t know because we’re reviewing it.”
Dr. Paul: “You’d think you’d kind of know before you off somebody with a predator drone.”
Dr. Paul has continually advocated for an end to the Afghan war, but never did anyone conceive of such colossal incompetence. He will continue to hold the Biden Administration accountable and responsible for the botched exit from Afghanistan that left all of our weaponry to the Taliban, and worst of all cost 13 of our brave young men and women their lives.
Biden admin confesses they abandoned ‘several thousand’ legal US residents to murderous Taliban animals
U.S. Senator Ben Sasse, a member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, issued the following statement after Secretary of State Blinken admitted to Congress that “there are several thousand green card holders in Afghanistan.”
“After lying about this slow-motion hostage crisis for weeks and stonewalling requests for hard numbers, Secretary Blinken just admitted to Congress that ‘several thousand’ American green card holders are still trapped in Afghanistan. This is a national humiliation. Let’s be very clear about this: These men and women are legal permanent residents of the United States. When America gives someone a green card, it’s a promise that their permanent home is here in the United States with us. President Biden abandoned thousands of these American residents behind Taliban lines to fend for themselves. He has a duty to bring every single American citizen and green card holder home. No more happy talk about the blood-thirsty Taliban — get our people home.”
Cruz: Biden Blame Game a desperate attempt to deflect from Afghanistan catastrophe
U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, took to the Senate floor this week to prevent an effort by Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) to circumvent floor debate on one of President Biden's State Department nominees. Sen. Cruz announced weeks into the Biden administration's term that he would use his full range of Senate prerogatives to pressure the Biden administration to impose Congressionally-mandated sanctions on Russia's Nord Stream 2 pipeline. He also did not object to confirmation of two other nominees he had formally held, saying they might be able to help "clean the mess that the Biden administration has made in Afghanistan."
Read excerpts of his floor remarks below.
Upon releasing his hold on Donald Lu to be Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of South and Central Asian affairs, Sen. Cruz said:
"The reality is that had these nominees been confirmed in August, they would have done nothing to stop the administration's disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan. President Biden bears responsibility for the catastrophe that has unfolded in Afghanistan. President Biden repeatedly ignored reasonable advice and the intelligence on what was happening on the ground in the run up to the disastrous withdrawal. He abandoned the Bagram Airfield well before August, setting the stage for the chaos at the Kabul airport. He wasn't even listening to his staff on what needed to be done on Afghanistan. Instead, he imposed an arbitrary deadline for political purposes with disastrous results. I'm not going to object to consent on this individual Mr. Lew and Mr. Holmgren in a moment that Senator Menendez will ask for. But let's be clear, the administration is trying to play a blame game to deflect blame for their absolute failure to conduct a reasonable and rational drawdown."
[...]
"None of the nominees I have holds on would have made one difference in what happened in Afghanistan. It's difficult to believe that even my Democratic colleagues believe, political talking points notwithstanding, how, for instance, the Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs could have stopped President Biden from gift wrapping Bagram Airfield and giving it to the Taliban."
[...]
"Because this nominee and the next one are directly relevant to cleaning up the mess that the Biden administration has made in Afghanistan, I do not object."
Upon releasing his hold on Brett Holmgren to be Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence and Research, Sen. Cruz said:
"Reserving the right to object for the same reasons I just articulated that this position, as with the previous one, is directly related to trying to clean up the mess, the disaster the Biden administration has created in Afghanistan. I intend not to object to this nomination; the remaining holds remain in place. And the administration can lift the Treasury holds and the career state holds anytime they want, by following the law under CAATSA and either imposing sanctions, or if they don't want to impose sanctions on Russia, triggering a vote in Congress so that this body can decide whether or not sanction should be imposed on Russia. The administration has had that option in front of it for many weeks. It still has that option. I do not object."
Upon objecting to Marcela Escobari to be head of the Bureau of Latin American and the Caribbean at the United States Agency for International Development, Sen. Cruz said:
"The Biden administration is in outright defiance of federal law. An overwhelming bipartisan majority in the Senate and the House had passed tough sanctions on Russia sanctions that work, sanctions that shut down the Nord Stream 2 pipeline for a year. But when President Biden came into office, he chose to override federal law instead to give a multibillion-dollar gift to Vladimir Putin and Russia. That decision is a generational geopolitical mistake. It harms U.S. national security interests, it benefits Russia, and it hurts Europe. Moreover, my holds on these nominations, I have expressed to the administration in writing and orally over a month ago, they have a path to lifting the holds on the Treasury Department nominees and the career State Department nominees simply by either enforcing sanctions under CAATSA on Russia, or overriding those sanctions and triggering a vote in this body where members of this body can register our views on whether Joe Biden is correct in giving this multibillion-dollar gift of Vladimir Putin that undermines our national security. Accordingly, I object."
Daines challenges Biden: Stop cowering and show American strength
Following the failed withdrawal from Afghanistan that left Americans and allies behind enemy lines, U.S. Senator Steve Daines is calling on President Joe Biden to project strength abroad, reassure our allies of U.S. resolve and counter our adversaries like China who in the wake of the U.S. withdrawal are moving to diminish U.S. influence around the world.
“Our closest allies feel vulnerable, and some are re-evaluating their ties with the U.S. The strongest world power for nearly a century is seen as weak and reluctant, embattled with internal strife. As we pivot from Afghanistan, the U.S. must not validate those perceptions with partisan infighting, and we must instead act decisively to regain our footing abroad,” Daines wrote.
“Over the past three days, Super-typhoon Chantu brought devastating winds and torrential rainfall upon our closest allies in the south Pacific, including the Philippines and Taiwan. Scenes of catastrophic flooding, landslides, and human suffering are likely hours away, ripe for Chinese propaganda to chip away at the confidence of its 23 million citizens. U.S. ships should be first on scene to provide assistance as necessary to those in need. Concurrently, the Philippine National Defense Secretary has asked your Administration for support in defending its sovereignty against China’s new maritime law which took effect on September 1st, requiring vessels inside the nine-dash line to report to Chinese authorities. Those assurances should be implicitly understood, and any ambiguity resolved before the Secretary’s return to the Philippines. The U.S. should also protect and support the freedom of navigation in the South China Sea for trade and our allies in the region. Additionally, China is reportedly considering troop deployments to Bagram Air Base in consultation with Taliban authorities, giving credence and legitimacy to its government. We must not cede any more leverage in our diplomatic efforts—or what little remains from our outpost in Doha,” Daines continued.
McConnell unleashes blistering truth about Biden botched Afghan policy
U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) delivered the following remarks on the Senate floor regarding Afghanistan:
“…to a deadly degree, a parade of mistakes in Afghanistan tells us President Biden and his team have failed this most basic test of competence.
“…The collapse we’ve witnessed wasn’t inevitable. It didn’t happen on its own. It happened because President Biden pulled the plug on our Afghan partners and pulled the rug out from under our allies who were with us in this shared fight.
“Everyone seems to realize this is a historic disaster for the United States except the President and his loyal retainers.
“Secretary Blinken points to the frantic evacuation of a hundred thousand desperate people as a huge success.
“Seriously? They initially didn’t envision having to evacuate anyone. The number of people evacuated is not a metric of success for this Administration; it is a measure of their failure.
“Back in April, my colleague the Democratic Leader heaped praise on what he called President Biden’s, quote, “careful and thought-out plan with a real timetable and a firm end date.” End quote.
“Does he stand by his lavish praise for a careful and though-out plan? Crickets.
“Was it wise to conduct our retreat during the height of the fighting season?
“Was it sound strategy to preemptively abandon the strategic Bagram air base in the middle of the night without telling our partners?
“Was it careful and prudent to tie our departure to the 20th anniversary of September 11?
“Our botched retreat from a so-called endless war cost more American lives than nearly the prior two years combined.”
“…The President said everyone who wanted to get out would be able to do so, that we would leave no one behind. Instead, we left Americans and vulnerable Afghans behind.
“Secretary Blinken said the Taliban committed to allow Americans and vulnerable Afghans safe passage to the airport. Instead, we know Americans and Afghans were prevented from getting to the airport. Many still cannot leave.
“The Administration said we’d have tremendous leverage over the Taliban; that they would need international recognition and funding. Yet the Taliban doesn’t seem terribly concerned with global PR.
“The Administration said they would hold the Taliban accountable. They haven’t.
“The Administration seemed to believe the Taliban would establish an inclusive and representational government.
“We’re talking about a government of medieval theocrats. The same killers, kidnappers, and hostage-takers who aided and abetted the terrorist architects of 9/11.
“Well, their government is inclusive in one way: It includes 4 of the Guantanamo Bay terrorists released by President Obama in exchange for Bowe Bergdahl.
“It also includes a senior Haqqani terrorist with a $5 million bounty on his head and American blood on his hands.
“This is not a government that cares about staying in the good graces of the so-called international community.
“Enough fluff. Enough spin. It’s time for hard truths and accountability.
“The Biden Administration’s conduct over the past several months demands thorough investigation by the Senate.
“That will begin with Secretary Blinken’s hearing at the Foreign Relations Committee today.
“I hope the Secretary, and the Administration he represents, are prepared to answer some tough questions – about past decisions and future plans.
“The American people, and the vulnerable partners we’ve left behind, deserve nothing less.”
OFF TO THE RACES
Floundering Dem senator Hassan literally runs from question on $3.5 trillion spending scheme
The $3.5 trillion (more like $5 trillion) liberal tax-and-spending spree currently tearing the Democrat Party apart is not an issue that most vulnerable Senate Democrats want to talk about.
Just take New Hampshire Democrat Maggie Hassan. Her poll numbers are collapsing and she is already going up with a TV ad 14 months before the election – the last thing she wants is to chat about an unpopular socialist spending spree that will exacerbate our inflation crisis.
Yesterday, she was asked not once, but twice, in the halls of the Senate if she supported the bill. Her answer: “I said I’m running into vote.” Oof.
The baselines of this reckless tax-and-spend package are well known and have been for months. Some of her Democrat colleagues like Sens. Manchin and Sinema are on the record saying that the price tag is too high. Meanwhile, radicals in the House like Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib and Senate Majority Leader Bernie Sanders have said that the current $3.5 trillion is the negotiating floor.
The stakes are clear and have been for a while. It’s long past time for vulnerable Democrats like Maggie Hassan to be honest with the people of New Hampshire on where she stands.
Statement from NRSC Spokesman T.W. Arrighi: “Maggie Hassan is petrified. Her refusal to say where she stands on a radical tax-and-spending spree tells you everything you need to know. Hassan knows this bill is bad for New Hampshire, but she is such a Democrat partisan that she refuses to offer an independent thought. As the polling shows, New Hampshirites are well aware that Maggie Hassan represents the interests of Washington Democrats, not them.”
Dem Senate recruit Conor Lamb follows Pelosi orders and kills aid to veterans
During this week’s House Veterans’ Affairs Markup, Senate hopeful Congressman Conor Lamb sided with House Democrats and voted against veterans.
Let’s take a look:
Lamb voted against funding for a program to help veterans who are struggling because of the events in Afghanistan.
Lamb voted against funding for programs to boost the Veterans Crisis Line and for suicide prevention for veterans and their families.
Lamb voted against expanded funding for a program to help veterans exposed to toxic waste.
Statement from NRSC Spokeswoman Lizzie Litzow: “Votes don’t lie – Conor Lamb is just another extreme liberal in Pennsylvania’s Senate race. In 2021 thus far, Lamb has voted with a majority of his fellow Democrats 99% of the time and voted with Pelosi 100% of the time. He will vote along party lines every chance he gets; it doesn’t matter if it’s against veterans or Pennsylvanians.”
GOP announces record breaking Senate fundraising haul
NRSC Chairman Rick Scott announced the Committee brought in $8 million during August – a record for August of the off-year. The NRSC achieved a record number of gifts, donors, and first-time donors for any month of the 2022 cycle, with grassroots donors hitting a record-high of more than 174,000 and first-time donors nearing 19,000.
Chairman Scott also announced that the August 2021 haul is more than double than what the NRSC raised during the same month during the 2020 cycle and has now outpaced the DSCC’s entire 2019 fundraising. The NRSC has $25.24 million cash on hand.
“As Joe Biden and Senate Democrats continue to tout their ‘Agenda of Abandonment,’ American voters are starting to abandon them,” said NRSC Chairman Rick Scott. “Democrats are responsible for the skyrocketing prices of everyday goods, for a border crisis that’s raged on since January, and for the botched withdrawal from Afghanistan that left our own troops and our allies out to dry. Voters are turning their backs on Democrats’ constant failures because they know Democrats do not have solutions. Voters know it will be a Republican Senate majority that will work to protect their families and hold Joe Biden accountable for abandoning hardworking Americans everywhere.”
Fast Facts:
August total raised: $8 million
Cash on Hand: $25.24 million
Number of August donations: 175,552
Average donation: $45.17
Number of August first-time donors: 18,981
Number of August donations under $200: 174,028
Total of August donations under $200: $4.96 million
Debt: $0
Troubled Dem senator Kelly jetting around state with convicted drug felon
What might sound like a riddle is simply another day in the Arizona Senate race. In this case, a new report reveals how Mark Kelly flies himself across Arizona in a rented plane. It is not so much Mark Kelly’s flight log that raises eyebrows, it’s the plane itself.
Mark Kelly rents a plane through Tucson-based Newton Consulting & Engineering, Inc (NCE), a defense contractor that needs approval from Mark Kelly’s Senate Armed Services Committee to potentially win more Pentagon contracts. But NCE does not own this plane; they serve as a third party for the plane’s owner to lease it out to other pilots.
According to this report, Mark Kelly is flying across Arizona visiting constituents in a plane owned by Dr. Sheldon Gingerich, an alleged felon facing “31 counts of unlawful distributions of controlled substances” for writing “sham prescriptions for oxycodone, morphine, hydrocodone, and fentanyl.”
A “wacky” story, indeed.
Statement from NRSC Spokeswoman Katharine Cooksey: “Of all of the planes to rent in Arizona, it is unsurprising that Mark Kelly chose to rent a plane that blurs ethical lines and links him to a doctor that allegedly has fueled the opioid epidemic. Kelly’s entire political career is marked by shameless corruption – first with the Chinese Communist Party and Harvey Weinstein, and now with alleged felons and defense contractors he oversees. Mark Kelly’s shady ties are exactly what happens when you prioritize D.C. special interest groups over delivering for Arizonans.”