Tuesday, November 18th, 2014 by Ericka Andersen and is filed under Blog
There’s more than one major issue coming to a head during the lame duck session of Congress this year. One of the biggest votes is happening tonight, on construction of the Keystone Pipeline.
While they still have some control, the Left would like to quell the debate on moving forward with the controversial legislation, but American energy prospects may put a damper on their hopes.
The Obama Administration has procrastinated on the issue for years, despite ample support from at least 62 Senators two years ago. Detractors say the pipeline will cause environmental stress but research has shown that not to be the case.
Heritage Foundation energy policy analyst Nick Loris wrote:
“The State Department has conducted multiple environmental reviews, concluding that the pipeline would be safe and not contribute significantly to climate change.”
Now, a bill in support of the Pipeline has passed the House and is currently awaiting a vote in the Senate. The Senate version is bipartisanly sponsored by Sen. Mary Landreiu (D-LA) and Sen. John Hoeven (R-ND) so supporters remain hopeful — but nothing is certain right now.
The bill easily passed the House but Hoeven told MSNBC earlier today that they had only 59 of the 60 necessary “yes” votes confirmed, with a few “maybes” on the fence.
In fact, even if the bill is passed in the Senate, President Obama will likely veto it. However, the political symbolism of the pipeline is part of why the votes politicians take on it matter. It has become a very visible issue representing expanding domestic energy production.
A majority of Americans support building Keystone and Speaker John Boehner said today that if Obama vetoes the bill, he’d be “calling the American people stupid.”
Landrieu is currently embroiled in a runoff Senate race with opponent Bill Cassidy. She’s taken Keystone on as a priority issue and is reported to have been scrambling today in effort to secure the necessary votes in the Senate.
The vote is set for Tuesday evening, so we’ll soon see if Washington had the guts to listen to the American people. If Obama vetoes a passed bill in both House and Senate, it will only serve to strengthen his reputation for unconstitutionally abusing executive power.
Friday, November 14th, 2014 by Ericka Andersen and is filed under Blog, Foreign Policy
If you told candidate Barack Obama in 2008 that he’d be doubling troops in Iraq in the year 2014, after announcing he “ended the war in Iraq,” he would have laughed in your face. But reality is a funny thing, isn’t it?
Thankfully, Obama is listening to military leaders who have his ear at this crucial time to combat terrorism. With ISIS running rampant, murdering hostages and terrifying the Iraqi Army into hiding, it’s impossible for the United States to sit across the ocean and watch.
Today, Obama’s top military adviser Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said he’s now open to considering U.S. ground troops to work with Iraqi Army to retake the city of Mosul.
Obama certainly doesn’t want troops on the ground but if he’s willing to heed Dempsey’s wisdom, that’s what we may soon see. And the public may actually be behind the strategy. In a a CBS News poll last month revealed that 71% of Americans said they supported continued air assaults against ISIS. More notably, 47% of Americans said they supported sending troops to Iraq, an increase of 9 percentage points since September.
Additionally, the White House proposes to request $5.6 billion for the campaign, with $1.6 billion of that segmented out for Iraqi troops.
In an interview about the troop upgrade, Obama called his move to double the troops “a new phase” and said that ISIS is not only a threat to Iraq but also to the surrounding region and ultimately, the United States.
“This is a threat we are not only committed to degrade, but also to destroy,” said Obama.
That’s the kind of language Americans have desperately needed to hear from the President for a long time. No one likes war — or wants to put our troops in harm’s way — but as the United States, we have a responsibility to lead the crusade against the terrorist thugs of ISIS
Tuesday, November 11th, 2014 by Ericka Andersen and is filed under Blog, Obamacare
Things continue to get worse for supporters of Obamacare. First, a key architect of the law revealed on camera how deceptive he and the Administration were in crafting the law so it would pass without transparency — “call it the stupidity of the American voter,” he said.
Now, another piece of the law is under continuing fire since the Supreme Court decided it would hear King v. Burwell after an appeal. This is just one of many issues with the law, which has, in fact, already been changed 42 times since it’s passage.
If a law has to be so completely hacked to death over such a short period of time, doesn’t that mean it wasn’t ready to go in the first place? That’s putting it nicely.
King v. Burwell regards whether or not the Obama Administration will provide tax credits to individuals who purchase insurances through the federal Obamacare exchanges – and not just to those using state-based exchanges.
The Supreme Court taking up the case alone makes the Administration look bad — but the confusing language inside the law only serves to confirm that deception via confusion was part of the plan all along.
The Obamacare architect in the video above said the law was “written in a tortured way” on purpose and that such tactics were “really critical in getting the thing to pass.”
Clearly, the tortured language has been torturing the American people since then, and that continues in this latest court case.
Part of getting people to buy into Obamacare was promising them their healthcare would be less expensive or that they’d receive tax breaks. If the Supreme Court now decides, via King v. Burwell, that individuals cannot receive subsidies through the federal exchange, then all the people in those states will be out of luck once again.
It will be yet another promise broken, another misleading part of a law that’s been everything but what many Americans though it would be.
When something is so bad it has to be written “in a tortured way” to deceive people — and revised 42 times in three years — it’s time to admit it shouldn’t have been passed in the first place.
Since Obamacare was passed, there have been plenty of conservative alternatives to consider but both Democrats and the media have ignored them. It’s time to put forward legislation that actually prioritizes Americans and puts the patient first.
Wednesday, November 5th, 2014 by Ericka Andersen and is filed under Blog, Obamacare
What was on the forefront of every candidate’s mind this election season? Obamacare.
Democrats have tried desperately to get away from it and Republicans are doing all they can to remind voters how awful it is. That’s why the House GOP decided to attack Obamacare in their ads more than any other issue this year.
According to the Hill, 1/3 of 130 television ads from the GOP were focused on the controversial legislation.
Even some Democrats ran ads this year criticizing the law, though not going so far as to support repeal.
Many candidates are still campaigning on the notion of repealing and replacing Obamacare. Polls show that up to 60% of voters still want Obamacare to be repealed and numbers began moving up increasingly this summer as Election Day neared.
As conservative grassroots candidates and voters remain committed to getting rid of the law, Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is making some on the Right angry.
McConnell recently said of an Obamacare repeal, “No one thinks we’re going to get that,” proving he’s not nearly as committed to repealing the law as his passionate conservative counterparts.
Despite McConnell’s back tracking, Republicans remain confident that Obamacare criticism is an essential part of gaining voter support. Veteran pollster Scott Rasmussen said in an interview this week that Obamacare is the “defining issue” of the 2014 elections.
With everything from website security issues to unaffordable healthcare plans and taxpayer coverage of abortion, there’s little for voters to find appealing about the law even at face value.
The GOP was wise to keep a strong focus on Obamacare, the legislation that had to be passed in the middle of the night against the will of the American people.
Today, the people speak.
Friday, October 31st, 2014 by Ericka Andersen and is filed under Blog, Elections, Immigration
Ask anyone running for Congress or higher office and they’ll tell you they want to reach millennial voters. They were a key demographic for President Obama’s 2008 victory and typically, voter turnout for that generation is rather low.
While it’s sometimes assumed that youth skew Left, things are actually changing. A new National Harvard Youth Poll shows that millennial voters prefer a Republican Congress by four percent right now.
Today’s youth were sold Obama’s promises but have gradually realized they were empty, even until the end. With only two years left under Obama, young people are reconsidering what they want in the next decade of their lives.
And it’s not just youth. Poll after poll has shown that key demographics are positioning themselves as swing voters or to the Right.
An Associated Press-Gfk poll showed that female voters are split almost dead even between Democrats and Republicans.
Despite the Democrats’ “war on women” rhetoric, many female voters have seen beyond it. The Left most often appeals to women on the basis of sex, birth control and abortion. It seems some young women have finally recognized how degrading and sexist that actually is.
Who else is eyeing the Right? Hispanics. A Pew Research Center poll showed that Hispanics are moving toward the GOP in higher numbers than ever. The same poll showed that 54% of registered Hispanic voters would vote for someone who disagrees with them on immigration reform, providing they share their views on most other issues.
The Left has many talking points for women, young people and minority communities – but they do very little besides spend lots of money in ways that are ineffective in the long run.
The cultural definition of what it means to be a Democrat has evolved from moderate to extreme Left – and these demographics may be realizing that’s not a place they want to be.
Friday, October 31st, 2014 by Tom Jones and is filed under Blog, Elections, Obamacare
There seems to be a general consensus that Republicans will retake the Senate in next Tuesday night’s election. If that is the case, they won’t retake the reins of power until early in January of 2015, giving the Senate Democrats one last gasp at legislating during the forthcoming lame duck session. There are a number of terrible ideas being floated for the lame duck, but the one I want to discuss today is the idea of “clearing the decks” so that Congress can start fresh in 2015.
Currently there is a continuing resolution in effect that funds the government until December 11th. There are rumblings that Congressional leadership, both Republicans and Democrats in both chambers, wants to pass a long term funding bill that funds the government through next fall. If next Tuesday night’s election results hand the Senate over to Republicans, conservatives need to resist this approach vigorously.
First, the obvious reason is that all manner of retired and defeated members will be voting on extremely important issues. Even the fine folks who wrote The West Wing understood how problematic this is.Lame duck Congressman and Senators could be voting on numerous nominees, internet taxation, funding for Obamacare and amnesty for illegal aliens and voting contrary to the people who just turned them out of office.
This brings me to my second and more important point. The funding bill.
Leadership wants to “clear the decks” (by that they mean pass all the major legislation and nominees sitting before Congress) so that they can start off the new Congress focusing on their priorities. Their priorities are much more likely to reflect the priorities of Wall Street and K Street than Main Street. The first thing they want to get out of the way is the controversy surrounding funding Obamacare and the President’s illegal amnesty. And by get out of the way I mean fund Obamacare and amnesty.
Congress – and the House of Representatives in particular – holds the purse strings, without which the President cannot implement his agenda. If Congress does not fund an activity, then the Executive Branch cannot implement it. Further if Congress affirmatively acts to restrict funding for an activity, the Administration’s hands are similarly tied. Congress knows exactly how to limit funding for Obamacare – they have done it in the past – and candidates are pledging to do it on the campaign trail at this moment.
At the same time, the American people want Congress to defund President Obama’s lawless amnesty program for illegal immigrant children – often known as DACA. If media reports are correct, by the time the lame duck begins, President Obama will have issued an even broader amnesty for adult illegal aliens. The only way to stop this will be to turn off the funding for the President’s amnesty.
But if the Congressional leadership “clears the decks” in November the opportunity to include riders to block amnesty and defund Obamacare evaporates until next fall. By the time we get back to appropriations bills the amnesty program will be well underway and much harder to undo.
If candidates are serious about opposing Obamacare and Executive amnesty, they need to pass a very short-term Continuing Resolution in November that only funds the government until January, so that the Republican House and Senate can come back and include the important Obamacare and amnesty defunding provisions they promised the American people.
Tuesday, October 28th, 2014 by Ericka Andersen and is filed under Blog, Elections, Immigration
Just because the media has been quiet about immigration and border security lately doesn’t mean any issues have been settled. While border crossings may have slowed, the number of illegal immigrants residing in the United States continues to rise.
Don’t let your friends and family forget that as we head toward Election Day.
President Obama still, in cowardice, refuses to move forward with his plan for immigration reform until after the election. He knows the American people will not be happy with any sort of amnesty plan – and he doesn’t want to hurt voter turnout for Democrats.
Just this week, his former opponent Mitt Romney called the decision to wait “a very shameful thing” because Romney believes the President has a responsibility to the people to say what he plans to do before the election.
But his promised executive action on immigration is already being supported by the likes of ex-Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, who said in a Monday interview:
“If Congress refuses to act and perform its duties, then I think it’s appropriate for the executive to step in and use his authorities based on law…to take action in the immigration arena.”
Of course, Presidents have the ability to use executive action but that doesn’t mean they should do it every time they disagree with Congress – especially on issue as crucial and consequential as immigration policy.
And if you had any doubt about what the President plans to do, information revealed yesterday may put those to rest. Fox News reported that “the U.S. government ordered supplies to create millions of blank work permits and green cards.”
Of the course the Administration says it has nothing to do with Obama’s coming action – but this revelation is telling.
Rep. Bob Goodlatte, the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said today that Obama’s plans for immigration reform are a bad idea and bad public policy.
“It harms to the ability of the Congress to do immigration reform and most importantly, it violates the U.S. Constitution, “ said Goodlatte, also noting that “no one trusts the President to enforce the [current] law.”
Just because the Left doesn’t want to talk about immigration doesn’t mean you have to keep quiet. Bad policy is coming and there’s precious little time to prevent it.
Monday, October 27th, 2014 by Ericka Andersen and is filed under Blog, Obamacare
$131 billion. These days numbers in the millions, billions and even trillions, have lost their shock value — but they shouldn’t. This is the amount of money the U.S. federal deficit will increase by over the next 10 years, thanks to Obamacare. A new report from the Republican Senate Budget Committee shows why things have gotten so bad.
A top Democrat aide called the report ”garbage,” but we know better. And it’s not just the money it will cost, it’s the jobs. CBO reports that 2.5 million full-time employees will be forced out of their jobs by 2024 because of the law. It’s a double whammy our country doesn’t deserve.
When Obamacare was first passed, CBO estimated it would actually reduce the deficit but things didn’t exactly go as planned. Even though the Obama Administration claimed the law would be funded by 18 new taxes, that’s not enough — never mind the fact that most people aren’t too keen on this new “revenue.”
The Senate report considers changes made to Obamacare since 2012 and how those unexpected events completely shift the fiscal outcome. For example, not as many people signed up for Obamacare as the Administration hoped. Additionally, millions of people have had the Obamacare mandate penalty waived for a variety of reasons. These things, among others, decrease the amount of money the Administration was counting on for funding.
Meanwhile, the President continues to stress that “this thing is working.” Unfortunately for him, it’s quite clear that the law hasn’t “worked” tangibly or technically from the start. In 2009, Obama promised he would not “sign [Obamacare] if it adds one dime to the deficit, now or in the future, period.”
The future is here, Mr. President, and you have more dimes than one to account for now.
Tuesday, October 21st, 2014 by Madison Project Staff and is filed under Blog, Elections
He’s the current state Senator from the 20th district in Wisconsin, having served in that capacity since 2004. In 2011, he was in the middle of the fight against the labor unions in Wisconsin and in support of Governor Scott Walker’s Act 10 bill.
Known as a fiscal hawk and strong advocate of life, he has a proven legislative record in Wisconsin that gives us the confidence that he will fight for conservatism in Washington, DC. In recent months, he has been quoted as saying, “[voters want] conservative candidates who want to stand up to Republican leadership. And that’s me.”
This is why we are excited to endorse Glenn Grothman for Congress today. As part of the conservative revolution in Wisconsin, Glenn has been a tireless champion of lower taxes, education reform and the unborn and we look forward to seeing the same from him in Washington.
Tuesday, October 21st, 2014 by Madison Project Staff and is filed under Blog, Elections
Many know him as nephew of Phil and Si Robertson of Duck Dynasty, but Zach Dasher is also a candidate in Louisiana’s 5th Congressional District.
A businessman who has never run for office, Zach is running on a platform of strong, comprehensive conservatism. From marriage to life to reducing the intrusion of government in our lives, Zach checks all the boxes and has an opportunity to replace a Congressman who ran on a platform of conservatism but voted with GOP leadership once he got to Washington, DC.
In a cycle that is bringing a robust group of conservatives into the House of Representatives, we believe that Zach will be a strong addition to that group and we are excited to endorse him in his run for Congress.
Page 1 of 13212345...102030...»Last »