Greg Corombos of Radio America and Andrew Johnson of National Review cheer a new poll showing Bill Cassidy far ahead of Mary Landrieu in the run-off for the Louisiana Senate seat and marvel as President Obama threatens to veto the Keystone pipeline bill designed to save her. They also cringe as ISIS and Al Qaeda call a truce with each and commit to killing us. And they react to White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest’s assertion that the administration did not mislead the public on Obamacare and that it’s really the Republicans who have not been transparent on the issue.
‘Congress Needs to Keep the President on A Very Short Leash’
President Obama’s plan to grant legal status to some five million illegal immigrants through executive action is unlawful, goes directly against the will of the American voters and should be resisted by Congress in any way possible, according to Jessica Vaughan of the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS).
Vaughan also says a brand new CIS report showing both legal and illegal immigrants adding disproportionately to the Medicaid rolls and costing billions of dollars shows now is the time to employ greater scrutiny on who comes into the country, rather than open the gates to millions of illegals.
On Wednesday, reports surfaced that President Obama is preparing a ten-point immigration reform plan that he intends to implement through executive action. In addition to facilitating legal status for highly sought after specialists in a variety of technical fields and advocating for pay raises for Immigration and Custom Enforcement officials, the centerpiece of the Obama plan is to grant legal status to some 4.5 million people in the U.S. illegally is their children were born here or given legal status.
The clear message from the administration is that it does not want to rip apart families by removing illegal immigrants while allowing legal ones to stay, but Vaughan says that argument is deeply flawed.
“The only thing separating these families is their choice is their choice to be here illegally,” said Vaughan, suggesting the way to keep families with illegal immigrants together is to send all of them back to the nations from which they came.
“In many cases, the U.S. citizen children they have were born here to illegal parents. They haven’t been here a long time. We’re talking about small children. They don’t have meaningful ties to this country. The best thing for them to do is to accompany their family member back to their home country and get on with their lives,” she said.
Vaughan says many Americans feel tremendous compassion for the dire conditions many immigrants faced in their own countries, but that doesn’t mean the solution is to open the floodgates into the U.S. at a time of domestic economic challenges.
“People are very sympathetic to living conditions in other countries, but the answer is not to just let everyone come here regardless of our laws. We have Americans who are out of work in those very same kinds of jobs. We also have four and a half million people waiting their turn to come in through the legal immigration system, who have been sponsored by U.S. citizens or American companies who need their skills. Those people should have first access to being able to live here,” said Vaughan.
Besides staunchly opposing the Obama immigration agenda, Vaughan says she is stunned at the political tone deafness on display with Obama.
“It’s really shocking that this is at the top of his agenda after an election in which American voters resoundingly rejected these kinds of policies and sent a message to their elected representatives that immigration enforcement of the laws we have is much more important than providing amnesty for such a large number of people,” said Vaughan.
“It’s really surprising that he would move forward on something so unpopular and would have such a negative effect on American workers, on legal immigrants and on public safety in our communities,” she added.
Congressional Republicans are furious with Obama’s plans for unilateral action. Some have threatened to use the upcoming omnibus spending bill to fund the federal government as leverage against executive action on immigration and possibly defund government departments tasked with enforcing immigration policy. Vaughan hopes the GOP pursues that and any other tactic that could stop Obama in his tracks.
“Congress clearly needs to keep the president on a very short leash because what he is planning is most definitely something that is beyond his authority and certainly contrary to congressional intent and public opinion. So they need to use whatever authority they have,” said Vaughan.
Polls suggest the vast majority of Americans do not want Obama to act unilaterally, but many Republicans are hesitant for use the “power of the purse” to force Obama’s hand, fearing a another possible government shutdown over the issue which could cost the GOP the moral high ground on the issue and stain its ascension to the Senate majority.
Vaughan believes withholding funding in response to Obama’s executive action would be welcomed by most Americans.
“If they have to use their funding authority to keep the president from doing something that would be such a mistake for our country, I think the public would back the members of Congress who do that,” she said.
Last week, Obama said he was tired of waiting for Congress to act on immigration reform but suggested any reforms passed in the future would trump his unilateral action so critics had little to worry about.
“That’s not how our democracy works. The president doesn’t get to say, ‘I’m going to do this. Catch me if you can. Pass your own law to overturn it.’ That would also be unfair to the people he’s dangling this amnesty in front of and saying, ‘Okay, I’m going to give you amnesty. I’m going to make Congress take it away from you.’ That’s just political gamesmanship,” said Vaughan.
Adding fuel to Vaughan’s case is a new study CIS released Thursday morning, showing that immigrants (both legal and illegal) constituted 42 percent of new enrollees into Medicaid since 2011 at a cost of $4.6 billion. Vaughan says somewhat difficult to determine how much of that influx comes from illegal immigrants.
“We don’t know exactly. Part of the reason is because there are so many people in this kind of limbo-like status, because of presidential amnesties and and deferred action programs, who have been living here illegally. They don’t qualify for a green card but they are allowed to get a work permit and a Social Security numbers so states will enroll them in health care programs,” said Vaughan.
While the immediate fight in Washington is over illegal immigrants, Vaughan says flaws in our legal immigration policy are contributing to the surge of legal immigrants onto the Medicaid rolls.
“A lot of the immigrants that we have been accepting, and a lot of the people that we’ve been giving legal status to, are not able to be self-sufficient. The main reason for that is our country does not have a labor shortage, so wages are not going up. So they’re going to be dependent on government programs like Obamacare. That means any huge executive action or amnesty or increases in illegal immigration is going to be costly for taxpayers,” said Vaughan.
Three Martini Lunch 11/13/14
Greg Corombos of Radio America and Andrew Johnson of National Review cheer Republican unity in their Senate leadership elections and enjoy Missouri Democrat Claire McCaskill saying she will not back Harry Reid as party leader. They also slam the mainstream media for being more critical of GOP responses to Jonathan Gruber’s admissions that the Obama administration lied to the public to pass Obamacare than with the comments themselves. And they shake their heads as outgoing Arkansas Gov. Mike Beebe plans to use on of very few pardons to wipe out his own son’s marijuana conviction.
Obama’s Raw Climate Deal
While the Obama administration trumpets an “historic” agreement on carbon emissions with China, a leading climate expert says our economy would have to collapse to comply with the terms of the deal but President Obama’s main goal is to make it difficult for the next president, Congress and the courts to strike down his many environmental regulations.
While in China for the Asia-Pacific Economic Summit, Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping came to an agreement that would have the U.S. reducing its carbon emissions between 26 and 28 percent from 2005 levels. The Chinese, meanwhile vowed to try to peak their emissions by 2030 and attempt to get 20 percent of its energy from “zero carbon emission sources” by that same time.
As the deal was announced, Obama’s Twitter account stated: “This is huge: The United States and China have just agreed on an ambitious new joint plan to cut carbon pollution.”
Competitive Enterprise Institute Senior Fellow Christopher Horner says the deal means business as usual for China but would force the U.S. to make draconian changes over the next decade.
“It promised massive reductions, which nobody knows how you could get to barring serious economic collapse on the part of the U.S. This is even after the hydro-fracking boom. Even assuming you kill coal dead, nobody knows how you get to where he’s talking about, which of course will be someone else’s problem,” said Horner. “You sort of want to be on the other side of the negotiating table from people who view things like this as victories. It was hardly that.”
Horner believes handcuffing the next president is the real motivation here.
“What he’s seeking to do is bind the next president and the next president’s (Environmental Protection Agency), this Congress and the courts to say, ‘You know what? You really can’t undo my EPA rules. They’re now part of something larger. They’re embedded in a promise to the world and I’d like the court’s to recognize that.’ While it sounds crazy, it’s called customary international law and there’s always a chance,” said Horner.
Previous attempts to commit the U.S. to reduced carbon were soundly rejected in the 1990s, when the Clinton administration embraced the Kyoto Accords, but the U.S. Senate unanimously approved a non-binding vote warning Clinton and then-Vice President Al Gore that any such deal would be dead on arrival.
The Constitution states the Senate must ratify any proposed treaties with a two-thirds majority. Horner says Obama’s plan is to declare that this agreement is not a treaty and is not subject to Senate approval.
“This is probably the most intriguing and disturbing aspect of this. For more than twenty years, the executive, no matter what party he’s from, and the Senate have recognized that this is part of the treaty process. It needs to be part of the treaty process. We have a system and this goes through it. Now that the treaty process makes it clear that they never would ratify such an agreement, the president said, ‘This isn’t a treaty. Next year won’t be a treaty, simply because I’m calling it not a treaty,'” said Horner.
“What they’re doing is side-stepping the system. He’s side-stepped it without legislation to regulate and now he’s hoping to get a treaty by calling it not a treaty to avoid a loss in the Senate. It’s very problematic,” he said.
However, just because Obama tries to contend it’s not an actual treaty does not mean that’s how the Senate has see it.
“It’s a non-binding sense of the Senate resolution (he can’t veto it) in response to a non-binding non-treaty, saying, ‘You’re freelancing in a legally meaningless way. You’re not speaking for the United States and no court or other country should take this as an expression of U.S. intent.’ That is the equivalent of the Senate saying, ‘No, it is a treaty,'” said Horner.
If that were to happen, Horner is convinced the Senate would have much stronger legal ground than the president.
“This desire to say, ‘Look, we’ve embedded our rules in promises to the rest of the world’ falls apart because the Senate is saying, ‘In fact you didn’t. You are not speaking on behalf of the United States. The Senate has a role in speaking on behalf of the United States under advise and consent. We’re saying you’re speaking without our word. You don’t want our advice, you certainly don’t get our consent,'” said Horner.
This strategy does not surprise Horner. Like the president’s unilateral approach to immigration policy, he says Obama is acting alone on climate policy despite the clear opposition of the American people.
“This was an issue in a lot of campaigns. [Billionaire environmental activist] Tom Steyer organized $85 million, which is almost teachers’ union money of $100 million to make climate what they called the winning issue this year. Those candidates all lost. Two survived. No candidate embraced the issue. They were doing this so the candidates wouldn’t have to and the voters rejected it,” said Horner.
Three Martini Lunch 11/12/14
Greg Corombos of Radio America and Andrew Johnson of National Review cheer a new Gallup poll showing Americans, by a wide margin, want Republicans to set the agenda in the next two years. They also discuss Senate Democrats considering a vote on the Keystone XL pipeline as a way to boost the re-election chances of Sen. Mary Landrieu. And they enjoy watching Al Sharpton and friends act horrified at the thought of the Clintons traveling commercially.
Connecting with Heroes
As Americans consider ways to thank and help veterans of all generations, a Navy wife and war reporter suggests simply listening to them and caring about them means more than we can ever know, particularly those recently returning from combat and for their caregivers.
Kristin Henderson is also the communications director at the Yellow Ribbon Fund and is one of 40 contributors to “Stories around the Table: Laughter, Wisdom, and Strength in Military Life.” She says the book is an important window for non-military families into what life is like for those who serve and for their families and serves as an example of how to relate to those returning from the horrors of war.
“Stories are how we connect with each other and it’s also how we make sense of our experiences. It’s crucial on so many levels. On a personal level, when I tell you a story about what’s happened to me, and you listen, that’s deeply affirming that what happened to me matters. It also, in the process of telling the story, helps me make sense of the experience. For the listener, you learn. You get to walk a mile in the other person’s shoes,” said Henderson.
Not only does this sort of communication help families and neighbors connect, but on a wide scale helps the general public take an informed view of the national security challenges facing the nation.
“That’s so important because the military takes its orders from civilians and civilians need to understand the limits and possibilities on the military side. And the military side needs to stay connected to the civilians they serve,” said Henderson.
The affection of the vast majority of Americans for the nation’s veterans and active duty personnel is obvious and a welcome change from the scandalous treatment of veterans returning from Vietnam some 40 years ago. But despite the best of intentions, Henderson says people without a direct connection to the military often have no idea what those families go through.
“It’s hard for people to imagine, particularly for people on the home front, how that dominates your life when you have a loved one in a war zone. I remember during my husband’s first deployment to Iraq, I was visiting my sister and she was living in a completely civilian community, I was outside and ran into a neighbor. The neighbor said, ‘Oh, you have a husband in a war zone. Your husband’s in Iraq. What’s that like?’ Talking to her, I began to realize I was the closest thing to the military that she knew. She knew nobody else,” said Henderson.
She says there are some do’s and don’ts when it comes to having meaningful conversations with veterans and their families but the best thing you can do is provide a listening ear.
“If you just listen compassionately without judgment you really can’t go wrong. One of the big things people often ask returning veterans is, ‘Did you shoot anybody? Did you kill anybody?’ That’s always a no-no. Basically, if you’re interested and caring, you’ll be alright,” said Henderson.
Henderson says that approach works in the war theater as well as at home, In 2008, she embedded with U.S. Marines on a remote mountaintop in Afghanistan’s Helmand Province. She was struck by how glad the Marines were to see her interest in their story.
“We got up to the top and we spent about an hour up there and the Marines up there showed me around. There’s just half a dozen up there at a time. As we were leaving, one of the young Marines pulled me aside and said, ‘Ma’am, I just want to thank you for coming up here and seeing what we do. Not many people would do that,” said Henderson.
“When he said that to me, I was so moved and it made it all worthwhile to me as well. That’s essentially what you’re doing when you listen to other people’s stories without judgment and in a way that’s caring and in a way that tells them you think what happens to them matters, whatever your political opinions may be,” she said.
But understanding veterans and their challenges on the home front can also be difficult. Henderson’s husband, Frank, is a U.S. Navy chaplain who served in Iraq and Afghanistan. His final assignment was at the combat hospital at Kandahar Air Field. While there, he was tasked with preparing the bodies of Americans killed in combat for their journey home. When he returned to the U.S., it was a rocky couple of years as Henderson says her husband was still “numb” from the experience.
She says a neighbor jokingly shouted “boo” to surprise Frank, and his war zone instincts caused an intense reaction.
“It’s physically painful. The startle reflex comes from being in a war zone. You’re always on alert for danger and the brain literally gets locked open in that mode, that ready to fight or fight mode. So a lot of adrenaline gets released when you’re startled and it can be extremely painful. We’ll, when he had an extreme reaction to someone saying “boo” to him, they thought that was pretty funny and they laughed and laughed and said, ‘Good thing you weren’t carrying an AK-47.’ That’s what not to say,” she said.
As this was going on, Henderson and her husband spent one Fourth of July with service members recovering at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center. In an essay for “Stories around the Table” entitled “Alive Day”, Henderson explains how they got into a huge fight on the way to the facility but being with others dealing with far more severe issues was deeply therapeutic for them.
“When we got there, we were focused on other people instead of ourselves. It was kind of the psychologically wounded helping the psychologically wounded, the blind leading the blind. When you reach our and help that way, when you volunteer with non-profits like the Yellow Ribbon Fund or Operation Homefront, which is benefiting from sales of this book, you help yourself as much as you help the people that you’re trying to help,” she said.
Henderson believes psychological wounds are often far more challenging than obvious physical wounds and makes reaching out to caregivers a critical mission as well
“Getting to know these families of the wounded and seeing how many sacrifices they make (leaves a tremendous impact). I mean these moms and wives primarily, they get that call that their loved one’s been injured. They drop everything. They rush to the hospital like Walter Reed. They may be there for weeks. They may be there for years if their loved one is gravely injured. They lose their job. They lose a huge amount of benefits and pay for years. They may be caring for children at the same time or they may or they may have to farm their kids out to other family members,” said Henderson.
“If I hadn’t worked there, I wouldn’t know those stories. So it’s really important to share those stories so that everybody knows,” she said.
Three Martini Lunch 11/11/14
Greg Corombos of Radio America and Andrew Johnson of National Review cheer reports that the Senate will not fast-track the nomination of Loretta Lynch to be the next attorney general. They also react to concerns that Obamacare could become insolvent due to insufficient enrollment numbers. And they have fun with Democratic exasperation that President Obama hardly ever reaches out to them to discuss his agenda.
Obamacare Lies Blown Wide Open
A new video clearly depicts Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber admitting the law was intentionally vague so the administration could deceive the public on key components and take advantage of the “stupidity of the American voter.”
The conservative group American Commitment discovered Gruber’s comments in YouTube video filmed at an event in October 2013. The comments came less than three weeks into the chaotic open enrollment of the federal healthcare exchange. Nonetheless, Gruber offered an unguarded view of the White House approach to the health care debate in 2009-2010.
“This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure that CBO (the Congressional Budget Office) did not score the mandate as taxes. If CBO scores the mandate as taxes, the bill dies. OK. So it’s written to do that. In terms of risk-rated subsidies, if you had a law that made it explicit that the healthy people pay in and sick people get money, it would not have passed,” said Gruber.
While the tactics may infuriate opponents who repeatedly stated the bill would do those things, Gruber’s attitude toward winning over enough of the public to get the law approved was even more blunt.
“Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. Call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical to getting the thing to pass,” he said.
Gruber was unapologetic in taking that deceptive approach.
“I’d rather have this law than not,” he said. “Yeah, there’s things I wish I could change, but I’d rather have this law than not.”
Galen Institute President Grace-Marie Turner says Gruber not only confirmed many of the conservative Obamacare criticisms but revealed the ugly side of how this administration pursued its signature legislative priority.
“This kind of validation from Jonathan Gruber, the architect of this law, is really shocking; that he would admit that the only way they would possibly be able to get this passed was basically to lie to the American people,” said Turner, who says those fears have been confirmed by the intensifying disapproval numbers for the law as more details become known.
“The more people find out about the law, the more they were realized how they were duped with all of the promises. The thing I think is really telling is that this is the guy who really helped shape and craft this law. For him to say the only way they could get it passed was through trickery is astonishing,” said Turner.
Turner also believes Gruber’s attitude is indicative of the entire administration’s approach to health care and other policies.
“I really think that it’s part of the whole philosophy, the whole philosophy that health care is just too complicated for people to figure out for themselves and all these smart elites need to figure it out for us,” she said.
Gruber’s comments came in response to Wharton School of Business Professor Mark Pauly imploring Washington to be as transparent as possible with the public.
“(Gruber’s) saying, ‘No, no, no. The American people are so stupid we have to do this for them.’ It’s a basic elitist attitude. ‘We know best and the American people are too stupid to know what’s right for them.’ Now we hear it on tape,” said Turner.
Turner is confident the incoming Republican congress can make significant dents in the law in order to restore more “balance” to the system. She believes eliminating the employer mandate will be first on the agenda, followed by efforts to repeal the medical device tax and other taxes.
Three Martini Lunch 11/10/14
Greg Corombos of Radio America and Andrew Johnson of National Review enjoy Mary Landrieu’s attempt to criticize Bill Cassidy over Katrina blow up in her face. They’re also stunned at the admission of Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber that the public was intentionally lied to for the sake of passing Obamacare. And they rip Huffington Post columnist Darron Smith for suggesting Mia Love isn’t really black because she champions conservative principles.
Three Martini Lunch 11/7/14
Republicans in Congress threaten to defund any executive order that favors amnesty. President Obama reaches out to Iran. The Pentagon struggles to keep pot out of the military.