Biden lied about monoclonal antibody shortage when cutting off care to red states
14 stories today
DonnyFerguson.com
Thursday, September 23, 2021
“The accounts of the Federal Reserve System have never been audited. It operates outside the control of Congress and manipulates the credit of the United States.” – Barry Goldwater
In this issue:
COVID NEWS
>>> ALG EXCLUSIVE: Biden lied about monoclonal antibody shortage when cutting off care to red states
>>> Scalise demands to know why Pelosi blocking hearings on COVID’s possible US tax-funded Chinese origins
YOUR MONEY
>>> 86% ‘extremely’ or ‘very’ worried about inflation
>>> Dem spending spree jacks up taxes on working Americans while doling out huge tax cuts to wealthy supporters
>>> Garcia calls for military pay raise as servicemembers fall below poverty line
THE LIBERAL AGENDA
>>> Insane Biden proposal bans transporting hunted meat across state lines
>>> With radicalized CFPB on a rampage, new bill requires their budget to be approved by Congress
>>> Biden continues possibly illegal purge of Trump appointees from military posts
>>> Radicalized ‘Defund The Police’ Dems kill bipartisan police reform bill
JUSTICE
>>> Citizens sue after city steals cars for cash
>>> Workers sue after government union bosses skim their paychecks to bankroll politics
>>> SEIU union bosses forced to refund money pilfered from man after he resigned membership
OFF TO THE RACES
>>> Socialists praise Conor Lamb for backing $5 trillion spending scheme
>>> Brutal Iowa poll reveals middle America turning against Biden and radicalized Dems
COVID NEWS
>>> ALG EXCLUSIVE: Biden lied about monoclonal antibody shortage when cutting off care to red states
A tipster inside the pharmaceutical company that produces the monoclonal antibodies proven to be effective in treating individuals with Covid-19 tells Americans for Limited Government that there is “no supply shortage of the monoclonal antibodies at this time.” This is in direct contrast with the narrative the Biden White House is pushing as the reason for rationing the treatment in Red states such as Florida where the federal government has reduced shipments of the treatment by half in recent days.
When asked why Red states are being targeted with rationing, White House press secretary Jen Psaki answers by saying, “supplies are not unlimited… it is our role as the federal government… to be equitable in how we distribute.”
Americans for Limited Government President Richard Manning issued the following statement in response to the White House’s false narrative:
“Joe Biden wants to punish states that don’t bow to his Covid vaccine dictates by making it harder for them to access effective treatments. Biden is rationing health care for his political opponents. There is no shortage of this monoclonal antibodies treatment. This fact directly contradicts the White House basis for restricting access to the antibodies in states such as Florida.
“Joe Biden is getting between you and your doctor. He has no business there.”
# # # #
>>> Scalise demands to know why Pelosi blocking hearings on COVID’s possible US tax-funded Chinese origins
House Republican Whip and Ranking Member of the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis Steve Scalise’s (R-La.) opening statement at this weeks’s Select Subcommittee’s hearing calls out Select Committee Democrats for attempting to use their hearing to sell President Biden and Speaker Pelosi’s trillion-dollar tax-and-spending spree.
Whip Scalise questioned why House Democrats have not held a single hearing on the origins of the COVID-19 and pointed out that Dr. Fauci may have lied to Congress about the United States’ support for gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. In addition, Whip Scalise expressed 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.
Remarks as prepared for delivery:
“Mr. Chairman, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle plan to use this hearing as an opportunity to sell their misguided and reckless tax and spending bill.
“But before we get into that, I want to direct everyone’s attention to what is happening with the coronavirus and the Biden Administration, which I thought was the entire purpose of the select subcommittee.
“This virus has killed more than 672,000 Americans. The daily death count is 2,000 a day. Almost two years into this pandemic and things are still bad.
“Yet, we still haven’t had a hearing about where the virus came from. The U.S. intelligence community has failed to reach a definitive conclusion about whether the coronavirus escaped from a lab in China or got into humans through an infected animal. We’re in no better of a position today than we were before to prevent the next pandemic.
“There are serious questions that have been raised about whether the U.S. played a role in funding gain of function research at the very lab suspected of leaking the coronavirus. Leaked documents from a FOIA request show that the U.S. government gave $3.1 million to the health organization, EcoHealth Alliance, which funded coronavirus research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), and that almost $600,000 of that federal money was partially used by the Wuhan lab to find and alter bat coronaviruses that could jump to humans and infect them.
“Another area ripe for oversight is the Biden Administration’s political interference with the science. Biden proclaimed he was going to: ‘Follow the science.’ But the Biden Administration has been caught letting teachers’ union bosses—NOT SCIENCE—dictate public health policy regarding mask mandates in schools.
“And most recently, the Biden Administration prematurely announced that booster shots would be available this week, telling the American people that the vaccines have diminished efficacy over time. Then, two career officials involved in vaccine review at the FDA departed amid concerns that the Biden White House was pressuring them to recommend boosters before there was any scientific data to support that decision. Now, the FDA advisory committee says: No—boosters aren’t broadly necessary yet. Talk about mixed messaging.
“Political interference at the FDA, which this certainly looks like, would be incredibly damaging to public confidence in the coronavirus vaccine and every other drug or treatment the FDA approves. That’s why Oversight Committee Ranking Member Comer and I sent a letter to FDA to investigate the potential interference with the science by the Biden White House. By the way, more than nine months into Biden’s presidency and he still has not nominated an FDA commissioner. We’re in a public health pandemic and there’s no one steering the ship at FDA. That’s a major failure on President Biden’s part and it’s truly unacceptable.
“Just today, the New York Times extensively covered the lack of in-home testing options, the FDA’s slow pace in approving testing options—not to mention the slow pace of therapeutics approvals. Experts called the process for approvals ‘onerous’ and ‘inappropriate.’ As the New York Times said: ‘COVID isn’t disappearing anytime soon. So long as it continues to circulate and cause both serious illness and anxiety, rapid testing is arguably the only way society can return to something that resembles normal life.’
“There’s a migrant crisis at the southern border. Thousands of people pouring into the country each day. We know that many are bringing COVID into our country, and the Biden Administration is more concerned with putting masks on our two-year-old children and imposing new travel restrictions on American citizens than checking the COVID status of the thousands of illegals coming across our southern border every single day.
“Surely, these are topics worth looking into and yet here we are, examining ways to spend more money to further fuel inflation and indebt our children.
“Today’s hearing will be used to try to sell the Democrats socialist dream of a bigger welfare state. They want to spend $3.5 trillion and raise taxes high enough to pay for it. While they tout what ‘free money’ can accomplish today, I want to tell the other side of the story.
“Businesses couldn’t find workers all summer long because the Democrats insisted on paying people more money to stay home and collect unemployment than to get back to work. Competing with Uncle Sam is something most businesses can’t do without raising prices. On top of that, reckless government spending is causing inflation. Prices are up at the gas pump and in the grocery store. They’re rising faster than wages and it’s the lower-income families that are feeling this pain the most.
“Democrats’ multi-trillion-dollar tax increases will certainly affect low- and middle-income Americans. President Biden’s tax pledge will be broken many times over.
“For example, the natural gas tax will disproportionately harm low-income American families. This unworkable and unfair tax will directly increase the cost of electricity, heating homes, hospitals and schools, buy groceries, and produce more than 6,000 products made from natural gas that we use every day. The American Gas Association estimates that this will raise Americans’ energy bills up to $242 a year. The cost to the broader economy will be equally devastating costing billions of dollars in lost GDP, and tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of jobs, lost.
“On top of harmful tax increases, the Democrats want to pay for a chunk of their spending by imposing price controls used in socialist countries on drugs for seniors. They want to do this despite the evidence that this will remove incentives for pharmaceutical innovation and crush spending on research and development. Experts estimate it will lead to as many as 342 fewer new drug approvals by 2039. Patients hoping for cures and medical breakthroughs can’t afford this bill.
“For my Democrat friends, there’s no problem that can’t be solved by throwing taxpayer money at it. But of course, Socialism is expensive, and everyone will have to pay one way or another.
“I’d like to remind everyone that before the coronavirus upended our lives, our economy was flourishing under the Republican Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. A tax code built for growth gave us an economy that benefited everyone.
“Under TCJA, the unemployment rate reached a generational low, with record low unemployment for women, people of color, and workers without high school degrees. The economy gained nearly 5 million jobs before the pandemic. Businesses started to reinvest again, making businesses and workers more productive, while boosting workers’ wages.
“Workers’ net worth soared. Low and middle class families saw the largest gains in wealth growth in 2018 and 2019, according to the Federal Reserve. Low-income families saw their net worth increase 37 percent. Middle class families saw their net worth increase 40 percent. “This is the type of success American families want. I believe they’d much prefer a good job than to depend on a government check. If we enact the right policies and get the government out of the way, people will prosper.”
# # # #
YOUR MONEY
>>> 86% ‘extremely’ or ‘very’ worried about inflation
U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) delivered the following remarks on the Senate floor regarding inflation:
“Over the past several months, American families have had to contend with an historic amount of painful inflation.
“This summer we saw the prices for core personal consumption soar at the fastest pace in nearly 30 years. Last month, the producer price index notched its steepest year-on-year jump in more than a decade.
“Across the country, across the economy, families and businesses are being hit hard.
“One measure of construction materials is reporting that homebuilders are facing materials costs that are 22% higher than last year.
“Homeowners and renters are approaching a fall and winter in which heating costs are projected to reach a 13-year high.
“86% of respondents told one recent poll they were ‘extremely’ or ‘very’ worried about inflation.
“This is exactly what Republicans, independent experts, and even liberal economists warned would happen if Democrats started ramming through massive inflationary spending.
“Back in the springtime, Larry Summers, a top economic adviser to both President Clinton and President Obama, warned at the time that runaway spending could, ‘set off inflationary pressures of a kind we have not seen in a generation.’
“Well, just ask any working family in this country about their last trip to the gas station, the grocery store, or the car dealership.
“Inflation has gotten so bad on Democrats’ watch that it has wiped out every ounce of the average American worker’s pay growth during this economic recovery – and then some. Annual real wage growth is negative even though employers have been handing out raises. Because of inflation.
“Remember, at the start of the year, working Americans had an economy that was teed up for a roaring recovery.
“So, when Washington Democrats rolled out their first springtime spending spree, even the Washington Post cautioned, ‘the improving picture is raising questions about whether the stimulus bill is mismatched to the needs of the current moment.’
“You might think the disastrous consequences of Democrats’ last spending binge for working Americans might give our colleagues some pause about their next one.
“No such luck.
“Behind closed doors, they’re putting together another, even more reckless taxing and spending spree. They want to take the last bill, which Democrats called the most left-wing law in American history, and dwarf even that.
“Massive tax hikes on Americans that will hurt families and help China. A socialist transformation that nobody voted for. Another invitation for even for more painful inflation that will hit working Americans where it hurts.
“The American people don’t want it. And Senate Republicans won’t support it.”
# # # #
>>> Dem spending spree jacks up taxes on working Americans while doling out huge tax cuts to wealthy supporters
As more is learned about the House Democrats latest 2,500+ page tax and spending spree reconciliation bill, more information is coming to light about the contents and the consequences of what is included in their plans. Specifically, the legislation would raise taxes on working families and small businesses while fueling higher prices on goods and services in order to give tax breaks and handouts to the Democrats’ wealthy friends.
House Budget Committee Republican Leader Jason Smith (MO-08) issued the following statement in response to the Democrat push for tax hikes on working families to reward the wealthy:
“When you look at just some of what Democrats are proposing in their tax and spending spree, it is crystal clear that their goal is to funnel more money to their wealthy friends and elites by raising taxes on working families and job creators. It is a slap in the face to hardworking Americans whose wages are already being taxed in the form of higher prices for goods and services brought on by the Biden Administration’s inflation crisis. The Congressional Budget Office has even said ‘inflation has eroded the purchasing power of families.’ Rather than continuing to fight amongst themselves over how to jam their reckless socialist agenda through the House and Senate, Democrats should stop and explain their priorities and answer why they think working families should have to pay for handouts to the wealthy.”
The Democrats’ plan to tax working families and raise their cost-of-living includes but is not limited to:
Trillions in new spending that will further fuel the highest inflation the country has seen in forty years.
$54.3 billion tax increase on grieving families with an enhanced death tax.
$78 billion tax increase on small businesses by limiting the 20% small business deduction.
$96.8 billion tax increase on low- and middle-income Americans with 94% of the regressive tobacco tax falling on people making under $200,000 a year.
$540.1 billion tax increase on American employers when the Joint Committee on Taxation has confirmed that two-thirds of a tax increase on employers falls on low- and middle-income Americans over the long term.
New regulations to deter domestic and traditional energy production and increase the price Americans will pay to put gas in their cars, heat and cool their homes, and keep the lights on.
$242 increase in yearly energy costs per family from EPA tax on methane emissions which could also leave dairy farmers paying an additional $6,504 per cow per year.
The Democrats’ plan to give breaks and handouts to the wealthy includes but is not limited to:
$42.3 billion in tax credits for the wealthy to purchase electric vehicles (EV).
78% of EV credits are claimed by those making $100,000 or more per year.
$12,500 tax subsidy to a family making $800,000 to buy an EV.
$11.6 billion in special tax credits would go to big businesses to purchase their own electric vehicle fleets.
$28,000 in taxpayer funded paid leave benefits handed out to households making $500,000.
$2.3 billion tax cut for mega-university endowment income.
$125 million tax credit for wealthy university donors in the name of “research infrastructure.”
$1,200 average monthly childcare subsidy for a family of four making $200,000 per year.
$50 billion to award free college to any students, including those from millionaire families.
$82,000 in a government homebuying subsidy would be available to individuals making $200,000 a year.
$10,000 more in Obamacare premium tax credits for families making over $200,000 per year than for families making $50,000 per year.
$36,000 tax cut for the top 1% of filers if the cap on state and local tax deduction is removed.
# # # #
>>> Garcia calls for military pay raise as servicemembers fall below poverty line
Representative Mike Garcia (CA-25) delivered remarks on the House Floor advocating for a higher pay raise for U.S. military servicemembers within the FY2022 National Defense Authorization Act. The legislation calls for a 2.7% pay increase— an increase that still leaves military servicemembers below the poverty line.
“When considering the 2.7% pay increase included in the FY2022 NDAA, we must realize that this would still leave many servicemembers below the $15 minimum that I advocated for in July. Not to mention that the 2.7% pay increase actually falls below the current inflation rate, so they are actually losing ground relative to current prices. It also fails to keep our servicemembers pay at pace with their civilian counterparts pay,” said Garcia on the House Floor.
Earlier this year, Garcia offered an amendment at the House Appropriations Committee markup on the FY2022 Defense Appropriations bill that would have ensured all servicemembers make at least $15 an hour. While his amendment was not included in the final bill, he secured a commitment from Defense Subcommittee Chairwoman Betty McCollum that she would create a working group to find a way to address the necessary military pay raise in Conference negotiations with the Senate.
Below are his remarks as prepared for delivery:
I rise today to speak on an important facet of the Fiscal Year 2022 National Defense Authorization Act. While I am pleased that the NDAA bill delivers good top line and procurement of financial support for our nation’s defense capabilities, the bill is not perfect.
Specifically, I want to share my frustration with the bill's failure to properly increase our nation’s military pay, and specially our enlisted personnel. The 2.7% pay increase for our military servicemembers is simply not enough.
Throughout today during the debate over the NDAA, we will hear members from both sides of the aisle talk about the 2.7%, almost touting this. I want to put this into perspective— for the average junior enlisted member, this translates to $1.80 a day more for their service.
This is unsatisfactory, especially given the gap between military pay and their civilian counterparts currently being at an all-time high.
The reality is that many of our U.S. servicemembers and their families must serve three years and gain the rank of E4 before they can be at or above most state’s minimum wage.
This is also based on the assumption that they are working only 40-hours a week, which we know is not true. Most servicemembers are actually working 50-60 hours per week, given the current operational tempo worldwide.
We should never have to discuss food insecurities for those protecting our security, but the reality is that we have a significant percentage of servicemembers and their families who actually qualify for food stamps. This is unacceptable.
We should start by paying them an adequate amount of base pay and avoid the burden of food stamps for our military.
Earlier this year, during committee markup during the FY2022 Defense Appropriations bill, I offered an amendment that would ensure that all servicemembers make the equivalent of $15 an hour, or $31,200 a year in base pay. These are not seismic numbers. These are numbers our nation can afford.
When considering the 2.7% pay increase included in the FY2022 NDAA, we must realize that this would still leave many servicemembers below the $15 minimum that I advocated for in July. Not to mention that the 2.7% pay increase actually falls below the current inflation rate, so they are actually losing ground relative to current prices. It also fails to keep our servicemembers pay at pace with their civilian counterparts pay.
If we want to attract and retain the requisite skillsets in warriors needed in a complex battle space, against a threat like China, we need to be willing to pay our troops a living wage.
In the grand scheme of things, this pay raise for our enlisted ranks is extremely affordable. It not only pays for our servicemembers and their families, but it also deepens and solidifies our nation’s security. This is a priceless return on a relatively small investment.
While the amendment I offered to the FY2022 Defense Appropriations bill was not included in the final bill, I secured a commitment from Defense Subcommittee Chairwoman Betty McCollum that she would create a working group to find a way to address the necessary military pay raise in Conference negotiations with the Senate, and I appreciate the Chairwoman’s willingness to work with me on this issue.
Let me be clear – while the FY2022 NDAA is not perfect and it does not properly raise our military’s pay, I plan to support the overall bill as it does make important strides to provide a large majority of the necessary funding, and the initiates, that our nation’s military needs. I also promise to continue to work on ensuring our service members receive the pay raise they deserve.
After 20 years of unprecedented deployment cycles during the Global War on Terror, now is the time to invest in our precious servicemembers and their families who provide our beautiful nation its security blanket on a daily basis. $15 an hour, or $31,200 a year, is a reasonable minimum base salary for our troops.
# # # #
THE LIBERAL AGENDA
>>> Insane Biden proposal bans transporting hunted meat across state lines
Gun Owners of America (GOA) is announcing its opposition to a petition that would heavily restrict the importation of legally harvested wildlife into the United States as well as prohibit or heavily restrict the transportation of legally harvested wildlife across state lines.
This petition was sent to the U.S. Department of the Interior’s U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USDOI/USFWS), as well as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), by the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC).
Mark Jones, a Certified Wildlife Biologist and GOA’s National Hunting Outreach Director, commented, “This petition threatens to change hunting as we know it in America and also represents a backdoor attack on gun owners. This petition, if it were to go into effect, would cripple many hunting opportunities and damage the American economy. Further, it would damage the authority of the 50 state Fish and Wildlife Agencies that have a great track record of managing the nation’s wildlife for generations. All hunters and Second Amendment supporters stand to be severely impacted if this petition were implemented, and the American tradition of hunting would never be the same.”
GOA has sent letters to both USDOI/USFWS and the CDC detailing the detrimental consequences of this petition for hunters and the United States economy. From the letter:
…..sportsmen and women would be restricted from many hunting activities. This would cripple wildlife conservation funding and deal a death blow to rural economies. Hunters that were restricted from transporting harvests (i.e., meat, antlers, hides, etc.), without unnecessary bureaucratic hurdles, would be less likely to take part in such pursuits. Long-term consequences for hunting are unknown but sure to be damaging…..Gun Owners of America urges the USDOI/USFWS and CDC to reject the CBD/NRDC petition.
# # # #
>>> With radicalized CFPB on a rampage, new bill requires their budget to be approved by Congress
U.S. Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.), and 15 of their Senate colleagues introduced the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) Accountability Act of 2021. Cosponsors of the bill include Sens. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.), Tim Scott (R-S.C.), John Kennedy (R-La.), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), John Hoeven (R-N.D.), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Mike Braun (R-Ind.), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), John Boozman (R-Ark.), and Rick Scott (R-Fla.).
The legislation comes as Senate Democrats advanced the nomination of Rohit Chopra to be CFPB Director to the Senate floor for final confirmation. This bill would make the agency accountable to the American people by requiring its funding be appropriated by Congress, as is the case for other Executive Branch agencies. Currently, the Federal Reserve is required to provide whatever funding the CFPB requests within certain limits, a highly unusual arrangement that allows the CFPB to avoid the fiscal accountability the rest of the Executive Branch is subject.
Upon introduction, Sen. Cruz said:
"The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is largely unaccountable to Congress, and I have long said it is a waste of taxpayer funds. I am proud to join Sen. Hagerty on this bill to subject the CFPB's funding to Congressional approval and ensure it is rightfully held accountable by elected officials and the American people."
Sen. Hagerty added:
"Should Democrats choose to confirm President Biden's radical nominee, who has dodged questions throughout the confirmation process and is likely to continue the anti-job-creation, unaccountable CFPB conduct of the Obama Administration, the CFPB must be required to go through the regular congressional appropriations process to ensure public accountability. As a lifelong businessman, protecting consumers in the financial marketplace is important, but handing vast government regulatory power to an agency that is not accountable to the American people's elected representatives is improper. Americans deserve to have far greater input in this agency."
The CFPB was created by Congress in 2010 as an independent agency inappropriately unaccountable to Congress or the President. In June 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the law making the CFPB Director unaccountable to the President. The current funding process of the agency is similarly inappropriate.
# # # #
>>> Biden continues possibly illegal purge of Trump appointees from military posts
House Committee on Oversight and Reform Ranking Member James Comer (R-Ky.) and Oversight Republicans sent a letter to the Office of Presidential Personnel Director Catherine Russell requesting all documents and communications related to President Biden’s recent decision to abruptly fire all eighteen Trump-appointed board members on the Air Force Academy, Military Academy, and Naval Academy Board of Advisors. In light of these unprecedented and possibly unlawful political firings, the lawmakers are seeking to understand the process and legal basis behind the Biden Administration’s decision.
“On September 8, 2021, you demanded the resignation of all eighteen President Trump-appointed advisory board members from our military service academies. Board members refusing to resign were considered fired at 6:00 p.m. that same day. We are unaware of any such action taken by a prior President or Administration,” wrote the lawmakers. “With these firings, President Biden continues a pattern of political gamesmanship to purge Trump appointees from the government. In this case, the firings are not only unprecedented but potentially a violation of law. The eighteen board members you discharged have had their positions terminated within their respective three-year terms; thus, the legal ground for the firings is both uncertain and untested… The firings of academy board members are yet another example of the Biden Administration’s mismanagement of and disregard for our armed forces.”
# # # #
>>> Radicalized ‘Defund The Police’ Dems kill bipartisan police reform bill
U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-S.C.) released the following statement on Democrats walking away from the negotiating table on police reform.
“After months of making progress, I am deeply disappointed that Democrats have once again squandered a crucial opportunity to implement meaningful reform to make our neighborhoods safer and mend the tenuous relationship between law enforcement and communities of color. Crime will continue to increase while safety decreases, and more officers are going to walk away from the force because my negotiating partners walked away from the table.
“I made a promise to never walk away from the table because walking away means we’re giving up on the communities and officers whose lives hang in the balance. I’ve heard from and spoken to the families of the victims who have lost their lives at the hands of police. The areas where we agreed—banning chokeholds, limiting the transfer of military equipment, increased mental health resources, and more—would have brought justice to these families. I’ve also heard from police and sheriffs groups who supported the work we were doing to provide more resources to implement better training, standards, and accountability for departments.
“Defunding the police destabilizes our communities. Change requires resources. I offered to introduce a bill that included our areas of compromise—a bill that activists and law enforcement alike could have supported. Despite having plenty of agreement, Democrats said no because they could not let go of their push to defund our law enforcement. Once again, the Left let their misguided idea of perfect be the enemy of good, impactful legislation.
“Reverting to a partisan approach to score political points when American lives are at risk is just plain wrong. As they are doing on so many other issues, I fear Democrats will continue to pursue a partisan route to create problems in search of solutions. While I am frustrated that the Left abandoned such a critical issue at such a critical time, I will continue to work with anyone who is serious about finding bipartisan solutions that bring justice, fairness, and safety for the most vulnerable among us.”
# # # #
JUSTICE
>>> Citizens sue after city steals cars for cash
Wilmington contracts out its municipal impound system to private towing companies and funds the whole system by letting these companies wrongfully take and keep people’s cars. The city pays these companies nothing for their services, but there’s no such thing as a free lunch. The price of Wilmington’s “cost-free” impound services falls squarely on vehicle owners in Wilmington, who are at risk of losing their cars to an impound system woefully deficient of due process that profits off scrapping the cars they tow. Two victims of Wilmington’s tow-and-impound racket, Ameera Shaheed and Earl Dickerson, represented by the Institute for Justice (IJ), today filed a lawsuit seeking to bring an end to Wilmington’s unconstitutional impound system.
The lawsuit challenges Wilmington’s impound system in several ways: First, the lawsuit challenges the city’s program on the grounds that the city and its contractors take cars that are worth more than the amount of debt at issue, but then fail to return any surplus value to the owner (or even to credit the value of the car toward the ticket debt). In other words, the city can’t keep a $4,000 car over a $400 debt. Next, the lawsuit challenges the lack of procedural protections provided by the city’s program. The city violates the Fourth Amendment by seizing cars without a warrant and the city violates due process by failing to provide any pre- or post-seizure hearing. Finally, the lawsuit challenges the loss of a car as an excessive fine, as keeping someone’s car over an alleged parking violation is grossly disproportionate.
“The Constitution requires that any penalty imposed by the government be proportional to the crime. The loss of one’s car for ticket debt is unconstitutional,” said IJ Attorney Will Aronin. “People depend on their cars to work, to visit family, and for all parts of their lives. Nobody should lose their car just because they can’t afford to pay a parking ticket.”
Ameera Shaheed’s ordeal in Wilmington’s outsourced impound system should trouble anybody who drives or will drive through Wilmington. The city ticketed her legally parked car six times in nine days. While her appeal of the wrongly-issued tickets was pending, the city towed her car and demanded payment in full. When Ameera, a disabled grandmother of three, could not afford to pay $320 in tickets within 30 days, First State Towing scrapped her car. Though Ameera’s lost car was worth over $4,000, Wilmington still demands payment and has actually increased what she owes with added penalties to $580.
“When they took my vehicle, it hindered me from being able to get around. I have a bad back. I can’t do a lot of walking,” Ameera said. “I needed that vehicle. It was my pride and joy.”
Unfortunately, Ameera is not the only one to wrongly lose their car to Wilmington’s impound system. Earl Dickerson, a retired Wilmington grandfather, could not afford to drive much during the pandemic and left his car legally parked on his street. Wilmington ticketed his car and demanded he move it within seven days. Earl, dealing with a death in the family, missed the deadline and his car was towed. He paid the $60 ticket he was issued in full.
That should have been the end of Earl’s involvement in Wilmington’s impound system, but the towing company then demanded an additional $910 in “storage fees” before releasing his car. Earl could not afford to pay the ransom, so the towing company scrapped his car and kept the full value for themselves.
“It was my only means of transportation,” Earl said. “And without that, I felt almost helpless.”
“Wilmington is taking cars without any kind of procedural protections, holding them for ransom, and then refusing even to credit the value of the car toward the supposed ticket debt,” said IJ Senior Attorney Rob Johnson. “No private debt collector could ever get away with that. The city doesn’t get extra leeway to take private property just because it’s the government. To the contrary, we should be holding the government to a higher standard.”
The Institute for Justice, which litigates property rights cases across the country, regularly challenges unconstitutional fines and fees. In 2019, IJ won a victory before the United States Supreme Court, in which the Court held that the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of excessive fines applies to state governments, not just the federal government.
# # # #
>>> Workers sue after government union bosses skim their paychecks to bankroll politics
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.
# # # #
>>> SEIU union bosses forced to refund money pilfered from man after he resigned membership
Former University of Illinois Healthcare worker Johnathan Shepard won a full refund of money deducted from his paycheck by union officials who refused to stop charging Shepard unless he submitted a request during a fifteen-day annual “escape period.” Union officials returned the money after Shepard filed a federal lawsuit with free legal aid from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.
Shepard was a mental health counselor for the University of Illinois Hospital and Health Sciences System. Shepard sent a letter to Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 73 resigning his membership, but was told union officials would continue seizing union dues from his paycheck unless he waited several months and sent another revocation letter during a narrow 15-day “escape period.”
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in its 2018 Janus decision that public sector workers like Shepard cannot be forced to pay union dues or fees. The High Court agreed with then-Illinois state employee Mark Janus and his National Right to Work Foundation attorneys that taking union dues from public sector workers without their affirmative consent violates the First Amendment by forcing them to subsidize union speech. Shepard argued that he had withdrawn his affirmative consent by resigning from the union, giving union officials no basis to continue seizing his money.
The SEIU officials’ “escape period” scheme is designed to stop employees from exercising their First Amendment rights under Janus for 350 days of the year (351 during leap years). Shepard filed a class action lawsuit in U.S. District Court against SEIU Local 73 and the University of Illinois Board of Trustees. Rather than defend their “escape period” scheme, SEIU officials settled with Shepard and returned all the money they seized after he exercised his First Amendment right.
During Shepard’s lawsuit, SEIU Local 73 officials revealed that about two dozen other employees had similarly been blocked from cutting off union dues under the union’s “escape period” scheme. Foundation attorneys are challenging “escape periods” across the country, including in two pending Supreme Court petitions. One petition involves Chicago Public Schools educators Joanne Troesch and Ifeoma Nkemdi, whose ability to cut off union dues was confined to the month of August. Workers who have been victimized by compulsory unionism are encouraged to contact the National Right to Work Foundation for free legal aid.
“When the Foundation-won Janus decision outlawed compulsory union dues in the public sector – essentially giving Right to Work protections to every government worker – union bosses immediately created new restrictions to make cutting off dues time consuming and confusing,” said National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation President Mark Mix. “We won’t stop fighting until ‘escape period’ schemes everywhere are eliminated and no worker can be forced to pay union dues or fees without their consent.”
# # # #
OFF TO THE RACES
>>> Socialists praise Conor Lamb for backing $5 trillion spending scheme
Conor Lamb has been quiet about where he stands on the Democrats’ trillion-dollar socialist spending bill. But the Progressive Caucus Chairwoman Pramila Jayapal just blew his cover.
Jayapal appeared on CNN this morning and said that “people like Conor Lamb” “have been some of our best friends” in trying to pass the $3.5 trillion tax-and-spend spree.
Oops. We don’t think Conor Lamb was too happy watching that interview.
Statement from NRSC Spokeswoman Lizzie Litzow: “If you didn’t believe that Conor Lamb is just another extreme progressive liberal, the Chairwoman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus just spelled it out for you. She admitted that Conor Lamb is one of their best friends and is helping them try to pass the trillion-dollar socialist spending spree. Can’t get much clearer than that. Lamb can remain quiet all he wants, but as we’ve said before, actions speak louder than words.”
# # # #
>>> Brutal Iowa poll reveals middle America turning against Biden and radicalized Dems
As if it could get any worse for Abby Finkenauer. Yesterday morning, a Des Moines Register poll revealed Joe Biden – who she led the way on endorsing in Iowa – is underwater in Iowa with a mere 31% approval rating.
Yesterday afternoon, the same poll revealed that in a likely Senate matchup between Chuck Grassley and Abby Finkenauer, Grassley would cruise to an 18-point victory over failed Congresswoman Finkenauer. Unfortunately for Finkenauer, her numbers don’t get better among the Iowans that know her best. According to the poll, “In the 1st District, which Finkenauer represented in Congress, Grassley leads 58% to 35%.” Finkenauer’s numbers will only get worse as she introduces herself and her anti-Iowa agenda across the state.
With these poll numbers, it’s no surprise that the DSCC left Iowa off their list of target states in 2022. Abby just can’t catch a break!
Statement from NRSC Spokeswoman Katharine Cooksey: “There’s a reason why Abby Finkenauer has already been coined a two-time loser. According to Iowa’s ‘gold standard poll,’ she has a steep mountain to climb, and that mountain will only grow steeper as Iowans get to know her preference for radical, far-Left policies that will destroy the livelihoods of Iowa families and job creators. Nobody fights for Iowa’s best interests like Chuck Grassley does.”
# # # #