Radio America Online News Bureau

congress

SCOTUS & Voter Rolls, Anti-Semite Seeks Ellison Seat, NYT Suddenly Loves Mitt

by


Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America praise the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold an Ohio law that cuts inactive voters from the rolls if they haven’t voted in the past six years or asked the state to keep them on.  They also blast a self-described intersectional, Muslim feminist, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for Keith Ellison’s Minnesota congressional seat, over her ugly tweet about Israel.  And they unload on the New York Times for their sudden embrace of Mitt Romney.

Share

Former FBI Bosses Under Fire, Pizza Delivery & Deportation, Sanders Snubs Son

by


Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America react to reports that former FBI Director James Comey is described as “insubordinate” in the forthcoming inspector general’s report and former deputy director Andrew McCabe is asking for immunity before testifying to Congress about the Hillary Clinton email investigation.  They also push back against the outrage surrounding the arrest of an illegal immigrant delivering pizzas to a military base, pointing out the man told a judge he would leave the country eight years ago and never did.  And they’re puzzled by Sen. Bernie Sanders refusing to endorse his own son’s congressional bid when he’s been very active backing other candidates around the country.

Share

Simple Solution to Save Medicare, Social Security

by

Social Security and Medicare are on the path to insolvency sooner than previously thought, and Rep. Dave Brat, R-Va., is frustrated that Congress won’t act to stave off fiscal disaster when the solution seems obvious to him.

On Tuesday, the government announced that on their present courses, Medicare will become insolvent in 2026 and Social Security faces the same fate in 2034.  The Medicare projection moves the insolvency date three year’s closer than the government estimated just last year.

And it’s not just the warnings of impending fiscal chaos.  Brat says mandatory entitlement spending once consumed 25 percent of the budget and 75 percent was spent on defense and other domestic spending.  Now, he says entitlements gobble up 75 percent of the budget and it already has some people feeling the pain, since far less money is available for other priorities.

“People are starting to feel that and states are starting to feel that and localities, because the same money is not getting down to them,” said Brat, always ready with an example of the red ink engulfing the U.S. to the tune of $21 trillion and another $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities.

“In ten years or so, they’re saying the interest payment alone on the debt will be bigger than the defense budget,” said Brat.

He’s also keeping a close eye on Wall Street.

“The bond market is the ultimate arbiter here.  They will send the signal on what is too much debt.  The unfunded liabilities fit into that indirectly.  They put (on) pressure.  You’re getting a lot of new concerns from the market itself.

“That is unfortunately what it will take.  As soon as the bond market has a hiccup, then everyone’s going to get way more responsive,” said Brat.

The trillions of dollars in debt the nation faces is hard for anyone to fully comprehend, but Brat says there is a simple approach to restoring solid footing to Medicare and Social Security.

He says those programs began when the life expectancy in the U.S. was 65, so the government made money on the people who aid into the system but didn’t reach retirement age and had enough resources to provide assistance for those that lived longer.

That has changed.

“The programs still kick in at 65 but the average death age is now 83.  So you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to figure out what the answer is.  But that’s politically explosive to rearrange these programs and reform them so that has to be bipartisan and it has to be done within an election cycle,” said Brat.

Brat suspects the Democrats will continue to argue that tax hikes on “the rich” will shore up the systems for the long haul.  Brat says that would barely make a dent.

“If I told you how much you would have to raise taxes to make these programs solvent, you wouldn’t believe it.  It’s through the roof.  Those aren’t politically palatable and if you put those tax increases in, you’d bring the economy to a halt.  You’d have zero growth or recession immediately,” said Brat.

“The Democrats don’t like spinach.  They’re more on the spending side.  They’re not trying to trim and save money over the long run.  They want to expand all of government,” said Brat.

Democrats strongly dispute the diagnosis for the encroaching insolvency.  Many politicians on the left and some policy experts contend the $1.5 trillion Republican tax cuts are the driving force behind the revised estimates on Medicare.

Brat pushes back strongly against that analysis.

“That’s just pure politics.  The tax cuts are $150 billion a year (over ten years) and if you grow at three percent they’re paid for.  The left said you’ll never get three percent and we’re at three percent,” said Brat.

He says reckless spending like the Democrats forced into the recent omnibus that also boosted military spending is how we got to this point.

“What they won’t tell you is that to get nine Democrat Senate votes at the end of the budget debate, we had to plus up the budget $400 billion – the tax cuts were $150 billion – to go sign a budget,” said Brat.

Brat says Congress must get it’s act together but shows no interest in doing so.

“No. Nothing. No response.  That’s what’s stunning.  People have internalized the politics and realized what it would take to achieve that change,” said Brat.  “We should be dealing with it right now if we’re rational and foresighted.”

He says the inaction leaves an unfair burden on upcoming generations.

“The only substantial power group that doesn’t have a lobbyist up here is the kids, and if you’re not represented, you don’t get attention,” said Brat

Standard Podcast [ 10:46 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

‘First Step’ Toward Prison Reform

by

The House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a prison reform bill last week that aims to better prepare inmates for re-entering society, a leading criminal justice reform advocate is blasting liberals for suggesting the legislation is a wasted opportunity because it does not include sentencing reforms.

The bipartisan “First Step Act” passed the House 360-59 but faces a much bigger hurdle in the Senate because of the demand for sentencing reforms.  Organizations like the Brennan Center for Justice call the House bill a “piecemeal improvement masquerading as real reform.”

Right on Crime Director Derek Cohen says opposing a bill for what’s not in it makes no sense.

“The idea that this is the only bite at the apple, therefore we should do something strong or do nothing at all is a completely self-defeating argument,” said Cohen.

“You are literally making that choice between a modest bill, the bill that’s in front of us right now, or nothing.  I think that is a tough sell to these families that have individuals incarcerated and have to drive more than 500 miles to go see their relatives that are getting put in programming that doesn’t help,” said Cohen.

Liberal groups want Congress to address mandatory minimum sentencing, arguing that such policies force non-violent offenders to spend much more time in prison than necessary and makes it harder for them to re-enter society when their sentences end.

Cohen wouldn’t mind seeing some sentencing reforms in the “First Step Act,” but he cautions there is no plan that would pass right now.

“The problem is there is no consensus as to what a package of sentencing reforms looks like, on the left or the right,” he said, noting that despite some common ground, the left and the right have some deep differences on criminal justice reform.

“Folks on the left tend to support more affirmative programs, like actually providing folks with jobs or compelling people to not inquire about criminal history, ‘ban the box’ as it’s known.

“The conservative answer to that is simply indemnifying landlords for renting to these folks…indemnifying employers for employing these folks.  Make it more attractive for these folks to actually be hired,” said Cohen, who says employers often rave about the former convicts they’ve hired because those offenders are so eager to prove themselves worthy of the job.

So what is in the bill passed by the House?  Cohen says it’s geared towards easing burdens on families and better preparing convicts to contribute to their communities when they get out of prison.

“It looks at how we have these folks in prison.  What are we doing to lower their recidivism, lowering their chance of re-offending once they’re out.  That includes criminogenic rehabilitation.  It includes education.  It includes training.  It includes making the decision before we plug folks into one of those programs that it is a program that particular person needs, as opposed to just spinning our tires or wasting our money.

“It also tries to move individuals closer to their home to better facilitate re-entry, so that family can still come and visit and prison ministry that might exist in their community might be able to visit with them in their facility – to really deliver that kind of warm handoff we’ve come to understand in criminal justice, to make sure we’re not just shooting somebody out the door and basically hoping they don’t re-offend,” said Cohen.

In addition to calling for more targeted education and job training programs, the bill also calls for a risk-needs assessment for prisoners who need help reacting properly to stressful situations and providing the help they need.

“That risk-needs assessment is basically an instrument that diagnoses the offender, and when it comes back it says ‘anti-social personality traits, anti-social cognitions, and they also have an anti-social peer group.’  Those three things alone are incredibly detrimental to success on re-entry,” said Cohen.

Standard Podcast [ 9:09 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

Weinstein Charged, New Sonic Attack on Diplomats, McCabe’s Secret $70,000 Table

by


Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America are glad to see disgraced Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein charged for rape but they already see signs that Weinstein plans to portray himself as the victim.  They also react to new reports of U.S. diplomats suffering from brain injury due to a possible sonic attack, this time in China.  And they unload on former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe for spending $70,000 on a conference table and trying to hide it from lawmakers by redacting the purchase from a report to Congress.

Share

GOP Hopes Brighten, Russia & the Midterms, Valentine’s Day Blame Game

by


Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America welcome a new Politico/Morning Consult poll showing more Americans now plan to vote for a Republican congressional candidate than for a Democrat, which is a big swing since in recent weeks.  They also roll their eyes as Democrats and pundits fret that President Trump hasn’t given specific orders for the FBI to thwart Russian attempts to meddle in the midterm elections, when FBI Director Christopher Wray says they are on the case because it is their job after all.  And they look at the Valentine’s Day tradition of columns by liberal women blaming men for their own relationship frustrations and the decline of modern romance.

Share

The Dire Need for Civil Service Reform

by

President Trump fired a major shot in the effort to enact civil service reform during his State of the Union address on Tuesday, creating what one leading workforce expert hopes will be an effort to root out the “intransigence and incompetence” from the federal workforce.

In his speech, Trump hailed the passage of legislation in 2017 that gave more authority for Veterans Affairs Secretary Dr. David Shulkin to fire people failing to perform at levels needed to provide veterans the service they deserve.  He then said that flexibility should be available to all cabinet secretaries.

“Tonight, I call on Congress to empower every cabinet secretary with the authority to reward good workers and to remove federal employees who undermine the public trust or fail the American people,” said Trump.

American Legislative Exchange Council Education and Workforce Development Task Force Director Inez Stepman studies civil service issues and detailed the problem in a Federalist column Wednesday.

Stepman says getting rid of most incompetent and uncooperative federal workers is exceedingly difficult.

“I think the average American has very little idea how difficult it actually is to fire a federal worker.  The process is usually over 300 days long.  It includes two appeals that are conducted at the same standard of proof as a civil trial.

“That means there is a discovery period.  You can call witnesses.  You can call Bob from across the cubicle and say, ‘Well, Bob says I’m doing a great job.  Why are you firing me?'” said Stepman.

She says the recent false alert for a missile attack in Hawaii is a perfect example of the problem.

“The guy who believed the drill in Hawaii and then sent out that horrible message that basically said, ‘Duck and cover, there’s a nuclear missile on the way to Hawaii,’ that guy was known to be a problem in the department for ten years.  but you can’t get rid of someone like that under our current civil service laws,” said Stepman.

It doesn’t have to be that dramatic.  Stepman says Americans are plagued by slow, subpar service on a daily basis.

“Almost anyone who’s ever tried to apply for a passport, who’s ever tried to go to the DMV, who has ever tried to go to any government outlet – since this is a problem at the state level as well – has been frustrated with how slow and incompetent government employees seem to be.  And this has a lot to do with that,” said Stepman.

Current civil service laws largely stem back to legislation passed in 1883 that was designed to make civil servants apolitical by hiring based on merit and making it very difficult to remove them by the changing of administrations.

Instead the system left Americans stuck with with too many slow and incompetent workers.  But Stepman says the impact on the functioning of our government is the bigger problem.

“It’s a deeper constitutional problem.  We have 2.8 million federal workers all over the country, but many of them in D.C.  They have very little political accountability.  They stay in office no matter who the people vote in or what policies the voters want to be enacted,” said Stepman.

The other goal of the 1883 reforms was to keep civil servants politically impartial.  Stepman says Federal Elections Commission records from 2016 prove that effort a failure too.

“Ninety-five percent of the donations over $200 that were made by federal employees went to Hillary Clinton in 2016.  It was 99 percent at the State Department.  That’s not an apolitical civil service.  That’s a civil service that has its own interests in growing government.  We’re talking about millions of people who make decisions for the American people, where the voters have absolutely no say over whether they stay or go,” said Stepman.

Stepman says we see this bias rise up against President Trump on a regular basis.

“Even in instances where you can see President Trump is trying to shake something up, often times he’s dealing with a flood of leaks.  He’s dealing with openly rebellious staff in most of his departments.

“Those people cannot be fired.  Donald Trump cannot say, ‘You are obviously trying to slow walk my policy…It’s time for you to go.  If you can’t get in line with the program the American people voted for, it’s time to get someone else.’  He can’t do that, nor can any other president.  Bill Clinton complained about the same thing,” said Stepman.

Stepman says some states are addressing the problem.  Georgia, for example, changed their hiring policy for state employees and is now seeing a big difference.

“The State of Georgia, a couple decades ago, said all their new hires would be at-will.  They couldn’t do much about the union contracts from the past, but all their new hires were going to be at-will.  Now their civil service is about 88-90 percent at-will and functioning a lot better than most other states,” said Stepman.

She says following the template of the Veterans Affairs reform bill would be a great legislative plan at the federal level.

“I think an easy first step would be to take the exact same language from that VA bill that was passed overwhelmingly with both parties and say, ‘Why is this only good for the VA?  Don’t you want the Department of Education or the Department of Energy to have the ability to cultivate a good workforce as well,” said Stepman.

Stepman expects labor unions and other interests to fight back if this idea gains legislative traction, but she says the push is now on after Trump’s speech.

“President Trump saying this as part of the State of the Union is the first major coverage this issue has received outside of super wonky circles.  So I think it’s important that we keep informing the American people about the fact that federal employees enjoy so many job protections that most Americans do not at their jobs,” said Stepman.

Standard Podcast [ 10:57 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

Rohrabacher: Forget Leverage, Ditch DACA Altogether

by

While Republicans and Democrats work to produce legislation to grant legal status and a pathway to citizenship for people brought to the United States illegally when they were children, one Republican congressman says Congress should refuse to enshrine that policy into law to avoid a flood of new illegal immigrants looking to benefit from the same policy.

In September, President Trump announced that the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA, would end in March 2018, but also suggested that the people impacted by his decision ought not to worry.  President Obama enacted DACA in 2012 and the program survived despite fierce criticism that such a change in the law could come through an act of Congress.

With the DACA expiration now just weeks away, House and Senate leaders in both parties appear united in wanting to pass legislation to protect those impacted by the policy. A “Gang of Six” in the Senate is working on the bill, although President Trump has rejected their first overture.

Many conservatives are urging GOP leaders and President Trump to use DACA as leverage to squeeze concessions out of Democrats, including a reduction in chain migration, and end to the visa lottery, expanded E-Verify at businesses and greater border security including at least portions of a new border wall.

However, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., rejects the premise of the discussions.  He doesn’t want DACA as part of federal law.

“If we legalize the status of 850,000 young people who are here illegally, we can expect tens of millions of young people throughout the world to notice that.

“If they would like the government benefits of health care and education that comes from legally being in the United States, there is no reason for me to believe this won’t obliterate out chances of getting control of our border,” said Rohrabacher.

The congressman says once Congress gives the green to putting “dreamers” on the path to citizenship, it may be impossible to restore integrity to our immigration system.

“We’re talking about millions of people here who will be brought into this country and there’s no way we can build a wall high enough or dig a ditch deep enough to stop it after we’ve given them a treasure house of medical care and education.  We are going to undo any good we can possibly do otherwise,” said Rohrabacher.

Rohrabacher says even if the legislation agrees to significant limits on chain migration, providing legal status to people who came to the U.S. illegally will still be crippling.

“We cannot secure our borders as long as we’re giving this ultimate prize to people who have made it across the border illegally.  When we have young people like this, we’re notifying parents all over the world, ‘Whatever you do, get your kid to the United States,'” said Rohrabacher.

While Rohrabacher admits many young people are suffering terribly in our own hemisphere and around the world, the resources of the United States only go so far.

“There are people who are living in horrible situations overseas.  Young people.  We cannot afford to take care of every one of them while we don’t even have the money now to take care of our own people, meaning the veterans and the seniors, and yes, the young people who need educational training here,” said Rohrabacher.

At an on-camera negotiation this week, President Trump was open to a two-step approach to immigration offered by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who wanted a “clean” DACA bill now with a commitment to address comprehensive immigration reform later.  Trump later explained he considers a border wall part of a clean DACA bill.

Rohrabacher has no interest in that.

“The only thing I would have a stomach for if DACA comes first is if it’s defeated,” said Rohrabacher.

With Republicans, Democrats and the president seemingly agreeing to the general path forward to enshrine DACA, Rohrabacher says other critical voices are being ignored yet again.

“What hasn’t changed is the American people.  They keep getting left out of this as if their point of view doesn’t count.  Up until now, nobody’s made the case to the American people of the magnitude of what we’re talking about,” said Rohrabacher.

He says people who casually follow the debate think it’s about helping a few impoverished kids from Latin America or Asia when the facts are very different.

“They don’t know that they’re talking about the large number of people that we’re talking about and the impact that it will have later on as people all over the world pay attention to the fact that if young people can get to the United States, we don’t have the heart to send them back.  Then what we’ll see is a flood of millions more people coming in,” said Rohrabacher.

Rohrabacher has been part of efforts to beat back immigration legislation in 2006, 2007, and 2013.  He says public pressure clearly makes a difference.

“The only thing that’s saved us from a massive onslaught of people crossing our borders from all over the world, many of whom probably would have been detrimental to us in terms of terrorism, it’s been alerting the American people that’s given us the leverage,” said Rohrabacher.

President Trump campaigned vigorously on enforcing immigration laws and beefing up border security, most famously with a wall.  However, Rohrabacher says the performance of Republicans in the televised meeting suggests most GOP members have no intention of pursuing Trump’s campaign vision.

“I don’t think there was anybody in that meeting that was someone who was, on principle and in practicality, opposed to legalization of illegal immigrants,” said Rohrabacher, who admits no lawmakers would admit to such a label.\

However, the congressman says actions speak louder than words and the emerging talks suggest a major disconnect between lawmakers and the voters who sent them there.  He says it could have a major impact come Election Day 2018.

“We could turn off our base the same way moderate Republicans have turned off their base and lost elections for the last 20 years,” said Rohrabacher.

Interestingly, despite his vehement opposition to congressional legislation on DACA, Rohrabacher is not guaranteeing a ‘no’ vote.

“I’m not telling you that if I lose in my argument that I will vote against any bill that has DACA in it or any other type of immigration reforms or changes they plan to make,” said Rohrabacher.

“I’ll pay attention to the compromise to see if it’s possible that I could vote for it.  I’ll keep an open mind, but I think it will do us great harm, so I would prefer not to have a legalization, especially of 850,000 young people,” said Rohrabacher.

Standard Podcast [ 9:34 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

Awards: Person of the Year, Turncoat of the Year, Predictions for 2018

by


Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America reveal their choices for the biggest Three Martini Lunch award categories.  They explain their choices for Person of the Year, as Jim names someone he once dismissed as unserious and Greg selects a large group of people joined by a common theme.  They also hold nothing back in detailing which people most egregiously turned their backs on conservative principles in 2017.  And they ditch their traditional New Year’s resolutions to offer fearless predictions for 2018.  Happy New Year to all of our wonderful listeners!  We will return on January 2, 2018.

Share

Awards: Underreported Stories, Overreported Stories, Best Stories of 2017

by


Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America focus squarely on the media in this episode of the Three Martini Lunch awards.  They begin by discussing two massive stories that media either ignore or are severely downplaying – one overseas and one here in the U.S.  Then they switch gears to reveal which stories received far too much coverage in 2017.  Finally, they choose what they see as the best stories of the past year.

Share