TheFrontPageCover
~ Featuring ~  
Rush to Subvert Electoral College 
Hits Roadblock

Brian Mark Weber
.
Supreme Court rules against scumbag/liar-
nObama-era provision on Medicare
reimbursements
by Jacqueline Thomsen and Peter Sullivan
thehill.com } ~ The Supreme Court on Monday ruled that an scumbag/liar-nObama-era rule change on how Medicare reimbursements to hospitals are made should be removed... because officials did not follow the proper notice and comment regulations in implementing the formula. The court ruled 7-1 to vacate the rule, with Justice Neil Gorsuch writing the majority opinion. Justice Stephen Breyer was the sole dissenting member of the court, and Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the newest member of the court, was not involved in the case.The highly technical ruling and dispute involves billions of dollars in Medicare payments to hospitals. The court ruled for hospitals that had sued over the 2014 policy, which reduced their payments for serving low-income patients because of a change to the payment formula. “In 2014, the government revealed a new policy on its website that dramatically—and retroactively—reduced payments to hospitals serving low-income patients,” Gorsuch wrote. "Because affected members of the public received no advance warning and no chance to comment first, and because the government has not identified a lawful excuse for neglecting its statutory notice-and-comment obligations, we agree with the court of appeals that the new policy cannot stand,” he continued. Breyer, however, argued that the type of agency action in question did not require going through the full notice and comment process... https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/446608-supreme-court-r...
.
Calif. bill gives full healthcare coverage to illegal immigrants. Dems stick it to Trump and taxpayers
by Frieda Powers
{ bizpacreview.com } ~ California Democrats continue to prove that they are more interested in showing up President Trump than stepping up for their own residents... After months of negotiations, Gov. Gavin Newsom and Democrats in the state legislature delivered a bill Sunday as part of the state’s budget that would run counter to the Trump administration’s immigration efforts by making California the first and only state in the nation to pay for the health care of thousands of illegal immigrants. California’s Medicaid program, known as Medi-Cal, would become available to any low-income California resident between the ages of 19 and 25 beginning in January 2020 under the proposed bill, the Sacramento Bee reported. The plan states it would “extend eligibility for full-scope Medi-Cal benefits to individuals of all ages, if otherwise eligible for those benefits, but for their immigration status, and would delete provisions delaying eligibility and enrollment.” Costing about $98 million per year, the bill which was part of an overall $213 billion budget, will use the “extraordinary” state budget surplus to now cover the health care of thousands living in the state illegally, though it will not include undocumented seniors. “While it’s not all we sought, it will provide a real tangible difference for people, especially for those around and below poverty and for middle income families who don’t get any help under the federal law,” Anthony Wright, executive director of advocacy group Health Access, said. Newsom was reportedly shocked buy the homeless levels in the state and announced he would launch a task force using $1 billion of taxpayer funds to “find solutions,” something Donald Trump Jr. slammed in a tweet recommending Californians reject the so-called leadership of Democrats. “And yet most 2020 Democratic candidates for president want you to believe that President Donald Trump is the problem, and the Democratic policies creating the dystopian nightmare in California should be exported throughout the nation,” Bruce wrote in her op-ed. “Yeah, no.” The latest budget agreement, which would wipe out existing citizenship requirements to receive benefits, must be approved by the full state Legislature where Democrats enjoy a super majority... The people of Calif will be paying for this.  https://www.bizpacreview.com/2019/06/10/california-bill-gives-full-...  
.
'Low-Cost' Renewable Energy 
Is Breathtakingly Expensive
by Joseph Toomey
americanthinker.com } ~ How often do we hear proponents of renewable energy claiming that wind and solar power are the lowest-cost power sources on offer?... Hardly a day goes by without these ideological zealots offering one or another discredited argument that their favored sources are not only necessary to save the planet from some existential climate catastrophe, but also lower-cost than conventional power sources. These outlandish claims got a major boost when a freshman House of Representatives member unveiled her "Green New Deal," which absurdly claimed that the world would end in 12 years unless the U.S. made a crash effort to radically transform its economy in the next ten years. That transformation would entail, in addition to a lengthy list of inane ideas, complete elimination of beef and dairy cattle, elimination of air travel in favor of high-speed ground transport options, and complete conversion of all power generation to renewable sources like wind and solar power. The contention, born out of economic illiteracy, is that this transformation was not only necessary for planetary survival, but would be so affordable that we would struggle to know what to do with all the newfound prosperity. We don't need to wait around for decades to learn how this program would work in practice. At least some of these wild claims are testable today by examining energy prices in places that have already deployed large measures of renewable energy. Currently, 29 states have enacted laws called Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) requiring certain threshold levels of renewable energy to be used in the generation of electricity. Thus, it's a simple matter to compare the effect of high renewable energy penetration on system prices in those states that have integrated large amounts of renewable energy into their generation portfolios with those of adjacent places that have forgone this option. Let's examine in detail all-sector electricity rate activity in five states with high degrees of renewable penetration i.e., states that have deployed renewable capacity to such a degree that their 2018 renewable generation output represents the highest percentages of total in-state generation output from all sources.  Kansas is the U.S. state with the highest degree of renewable energy penetration in 2018. As the chart below shows, the state began deploying wind power at a furious pace beginning in 2008. Note: Kansas first deployed wind power in 2001, but the state saw only token deployments until 2008. At the beginning of 2008, year-to-date all-sector rates were below 73% of the U.S. average. But by the end of 2018, Kansas rates were essentially equivalent to the national average. As the state increased wind capacity by nearly a factor of six, its rates climbed more than 7.8 times faster than the average of the 45 states with the lowest degree of renewable energy penetration. It wasn't an accident.  A recent Kansas rate study of several utilities in the state makes clear that a large measure of blame for skyrocketing rates resides with inordinate amounts of fixed investment in power generation i.e., wind farms and transmission lines i.e., the costly integration infrastructure required to connect far-flung wind power turbines to distant consuming regions...
Why Courts Need To Treat Embryos 
As People, Not Property  
by Rita Lowery Gitchell
{thefederalist.com} ~ The U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark 1857 decision, Dred Scott v. Sandford, erroneously and shamefully held that the Constitution could never confer American rights and privileges to black people... Today’s courts risk a similarly disgraceful stain on their reputation by neglecting to keep pace with life science, especially embryology.  Scientific advancement in fertility has now moved four decades beyond “test tube baby” Louise Brown, conceived outside the womb via in vitro fertilization (IVF) in a petri dish. Cryogenically preserved embryos, while not commonplace, are no longer rare, and custody battles have rocked courtrooms and gossip programming. The problem surrounding the legal assignment of custody for preserved embryos is that courts are more prone to address these tiny new humans as property rather than the offspring they truly are. The science of embryology has documented the development of human life prior to implantation in the womb, yet the legal process is way behind the science in failing to recognize them as developing human beings. In the same way that the high court fell victim to errant understanding in the discreditable days of slavery, the judicial system is missing the mark on conceived, pre-implanted, fully human embryos. Embryos are organisms, not cells or tissue. IVF clinics do not store dead embryos, but viable embryos intended to continue life. These cryogenically preserved children are human beings, and the 13th Amendment unflinchingly removes human beings from the category of property to be owned. This week, the National Embryo Donation Center celebrates the births of 800 children, implanted as embryos in women who are not their genetic mothers. These children, birthed and parented by their adoptive mothers, have been separate beings from conception...
.
Why Overturning Roe V. WadeRequires 
A Constitutional Amendment  
by Kyle Sammin
{thefederalist.com} ~ As it has been for decades now, abortion is at the center of the debate over the Supreme Court... With a solid majority of conservative justices in place, pro-lifers hope—and abortion rights advocates fear—the days in which Roe v. Wade is law of the land may be numbered. Whether that is true or not, a decree from the court will not settle the issue any more than it did when Roe was written in 1973. Roe was wrong on the day it was written, but to settle the issue we must go beyond overturning it. The people must demand that the Constitution be amended to prevent rulings like Roe from happening again.The authors of the Supreme Court’s disastrous ruling initially believed that taking the issue out of public debate and reshaping it as a constitutional right, via Roe v. Wade, would quiet the increasingly heated national argument. This has, quite obviously, not been the case. By shoehorning a right to abortion into the Constitution, the court only encouraged legal absolutists on both sides. That should have been obvious to Justice Harry Blackmun and the six justices who joined his opinion. Rights are absolutes, with limits to them being rare exceptions. Inventing this new right only encouraged pro-abortion forces to press harder, just as defenders of actual rights do. Planned Parenthood v. Casey reshaped the administration of this right with one of the court’s inscrutable balancing tests, but left the main holding—the right to abortion—intact. In judicial confirmation hearings, the principle of stare decisis takes center stage. This once was a bedrock principle in common law countries requiring that cases be decided in accordance with the decisions in earlier, similar cases. Now it is a tool that judges use more selectively, according to their own political wishes...
.
.
Rush to Subvert Electoral College 
Hits Roadblock

Brian Mark Weber:  Ever since the 2017 inauguration, we’ve known leftists would do whatever they could to bring down Donald Trump’s presidency. Indeed, while most of the nation waited breathlessly for Robert Mueller to announce the results of his two-year, $30-million investigation into the now-debunked Trump/Russia collusion conspiracy, Democrats were working on a backup plan to keep future Republican nominees from ever setting foot into the White House.
 

Their plan is known as the National Popular Vote, an interstate compact that would essentially make the Electoral College null and void. In its early stages, the campaign didn’t garner much attention. But now that we’re facing the real possibility of ending the Electoral College, people seem to be waking up to this sleight-of-hand attempt to undermine the Constitution and ensure one-party rule in perpetuity.

The campaign had been picking up steam. Had. Recently, both Maine and Nevada dealt setbacks to the initiative, with Maine’s state House rejecting it in bipartisan fashion and Nevada Democrat Gov. Steve Sisolak vetoing his state’s measure. He even explained what many Americans already know to be true: The NPV compact would “diminish the role of smaller states like Nevada in national electoral contests and force Nevada’s electors to side with whoever wins the nationwide popular vote, rather than the candidate Nevadans choose.”

Still, as the editors at The Wall Street Journal write, “Fourteen states so far, along with the District of Columbia, have joined a compact to bypass the Electoral College by pledging their presidential electors to whichever candidate wins more ballots nationally.”

In other words, if the candidate your state chooses on Election Day falls short by one vote in the national tally, all of his electoral votes go to his opponent.

Even worse, the system would open up the floodgates to increased voter fraud and would do violence to both the wisdom of the Founders and the “one person, one vote” goal that Democrats talk about ad nauseam.

The initiative is misleading and subversive.

Tara Ross writes at The Daily Signal, “National Popular Vote’s compact would radically change the presidential election system, even as it pretends to leave America’s current state-based Electoral College untouched. National Popular Vote must be laughing all the way to the bank. It relies on the state-based aspects of the system when convenient, but then switches to reliance on a national tally when that’s convenient.”

Ross asks us to “consider what is happening on another front: California legislators are working to prevent President Donald Trump from appearing on their state ballot in 2020. Assuming Trump is the Republican nominee, how could he possibly win the national popular vote when he will be unable to win even a single vote from the largest state in the Union?”

Democrats who pride themselves on defending voting rights are essentially seeking to steal the votes from millions of Americans in order to support the popular-vote winner. And while no system is perfect, the Electoral College ensures that presidents represent the interests of a broad section of the American population, not merely the views of people living in big cities or on the coasts.

Under NPV, future candidates for president would never again set foot in Nevada, Iowa, New Mexico, or any other state between New York and California. After all, why go on the stump in 30 small states when all one needs is California, New York, and a few other big states to siphon the votes away from the rest of the citizenry?

Think about it: Under NPV, a candidate could theoretically lose 39 states and still win the presidency. That’s what founding father James Madison called “the tyranny of the majority.”

Undeterred, Oregon moved one step closer to becoming the 15th state to pass the national popular vote bill by sending it to the Democrat governor for a rubber stamp. This would bring the tally to 196 of the 270 votes needed to put the NPV into effect.

But there’s still a glimmer of hope that we can save the Electoral College. Nathaniel Rakich writes at FiveThirtyEight, “The compact could encounter other obstacles. Republicans could recapture full control of one (or more) of the states in the compact and repeal the National Popular Vote law. And if the compact began to look like it was really going to take effect, opponents would likely sue and claim that it is unconstitutional. So despite its successes in 2019, the National Popular Vote interstate compact remains a highly uncertain proposition in the long term.”

For now, it looks like the Electoral College will remain in place for the 2020 presidential election. After that, all bets are off. Progressives have chipped away at the Constitution for more than a century, but now they’re taking a sledgehammer to its foundation.

If thoughtful legislators don’t rise up to stop NPV from taking effect now, we may never have the means to stop it in the future.  

~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/articles/63498?mailing_id=4320&utm_mediu...  

Views: 14

Comment

You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by Tom Stiglich

Political Cartoons by Michael RamirezPolitical Cartoons by Gary Varvel

ALERT ALERT

Trump National Diversity Coalition's Bruce LeVell: President’s Support Among Blacks, Hispanics Will ‘More Than Double’ In 2020

Bruce LeVell, the National Diversity Coalition for Trump executive director, said on Sunday evening he predicts President Donald Trump will win even higher levels of support in the black and Hispanic communities in 2020 than he did in 2016.

“Pastor Darrell Scott is the CEO, we started this back in 2015,” LeVell said on Breitbart News Sunday on SiriusXM 125 the Patriot Channel on Sunday evening about the National Diversity Coalition for Trump. “It is the largest diversity coalition platform in history for a Republican candidate, not to mention a sitting president, and there are millions of guests that sign on and sign up that are part of this. If you look on the website, you see African Americans for Trump, Haitian Americans for Trump, Korean Americans for Trump, Chinese Americans for Trump, Hispanic Americans for Trump–all very large. They all stand in one agreement that they believe in this great president and that he is here for all and wants everyone to be successful. It’s pretty flattering, honestly, to be a part of this. It just totally debunks everything that they try to make him out to be–a racist, which he’s not. The numbers prove that he’s not. You can see where he’s rising in terms of the Hispanic vote, and the African American vote. It’s just really going to be mind-boggling on the next go-around. I guarantee it. It’s going to more than double because people are happy; they’re working.”

LeVell, when asked for his rationale on why he thinks Trump’s support in 2020 among blacks and Hispanics will more than double, attributed it to the results President Trump has gotten for those communities.

“Sometimes you have to speak things into existence,” LeVell said. “The president said, ‘What do you have to lose?’ That challenge, especially in the underserved communities, well, yeah, what do we have to lose? We tried it this way for 30 or 40 years. Some of these cities and municipalities were under Democrat rule, as you might say, for many years, and then you say, ‘You know what? Let’s make the ask.’ You know, the president made the ask. Sometimes, you just have to ask, ‘Hey, what do you got to lose? Try this.’ Let’s try one of the biggest, strongest bills that he’s signed, that was so beneficial, called the Opportunity Zones. This bill right here alone is bringing a lifeline to some of these underserved communities and is projected to bring in over hundreds of billions of dollars in these underserved communities, which are predominantly African American communities. For example, in Atlanta, there are minority business contractors teaming up with other business contractors building a hotel in an Opportunity Zone. This community has just been blighted for God knows how long. These are the things that people are starting to see–the light at the end of the tunnel. Here’s a businessman that understands what I call a balance sheet, a P & L sheet of profit and loss. The president wants to see the country profitable, not losses. So that’s what he does. He says, ‘Okay, where can we improve? What can we do?’”

He continued, “Like I said earlier, I think the Opportunity Zones is a sleeper; it has so many moving parts to it where you can sell a piece of property for $2 million and instead of paying that very high capital gains [tax] you can identify those funds over the zone, and then, you can build another little hotel or a shopping center for economic empowerment for that community. So there’s so many initiatives out there for people of color, like myself, who see opportunities. You know, how about this? You live in a black community under the Trump administration, you walk down the street and say, ‘Wow, 98 percent who live in the community are African American,’ and you say, ‘Why don’t you build that grocery store? Why don’t you build that gas station?’ Wow, you’re right. I can. The programs that are out there, like in the Small Business Administration, you get as little as five or ten percent down, and they can maturize it to 30 years, and if you’re a veteran, they waive the fees. There are so many tools out there, and you saw the president when he adjusted Dodd-Frank last year; that was a terrible, terrible deal they did in 2009 and 2010 that literally almost just choked and killed the business community because of the Dodd-Frank, going in there and regulating these small community banks, which were life support for these small communities especially in the African American community, where he readjusted that last year and made it work. These are the things this president understands that as a businessman he can bring his lifelong talents to the White House and can help America. The biggest thing about this is, remember, the president is not beholden to any special interest group; this is a very key part of this conversation right here because he can go in there and govern without having to worry about paying back favors.”

According to NBC News analysis in the immediate aftermath of the 2016 election, Trump actually outperformed now-Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT)–then the former governor of Massachusetts–in the 2012 election when it came to both the black and Hispanic communities.

“Trump claimed 29 percent of the Hispanic vote on Tuesday, compared to Romney’s 27 percent in 2012,” NBC News wrote. “With blacks, exit polls show Trump claimed 8 percent of the vote to the previous Republican nominee’s 6 percent.”

If Trump is able to double support in the black and Hispanic communities in 2020, as LeVell predicts he will, no Democrat will stand even close to a chance of defeating him; the margins they would need for victories in a number of states would be significantly eroded. Perhaps that is why the Democrats are now attempting to paint Trump as a racist amid his battle with the so-called “Squad” of socialist Reps. Alexandria Ocasi0-Cortez (D-NY), Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), Ilhan Omar (D-MN), and Rashida Tlaib (D-MI). The new faces of the Democrat Party, the “Squad,” in other words, is worried they may lose the election in 2020 if LeVell and other Trump backers are right. But the scurrilous accusations of racism for quick political gains, which have also been leveled at House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and former Vice President Joe Biden in recent weeks, LeVell warns, may undermine the ability to stand up to actual racism where it exists.

“At first, it was kind of bizarre,” LeVell, who knows Trump well and has known him prior to his run for president, said of the false racism accusations. “Now, it’s just plainly un-American. It’s so anti-patriotic. You know, the interesting thing about it for me as a black conservative or Republican–I like to define myself as a Frederick Douglass Republican–most of the name-calling comes from people who actually look like me, 90 percent of it. It’s bizarre, and it’s because our thinking process is not lining up with theirs. It’s the only playbook they have, like I said earlier, which is, ‘Let’s just use the race card.’

LeVell went on to say, “Getting back to the president, I’ve been around him–I was just with him at the rally–in very intimate settings, behind the scenes at the rally, and you’re right: I’ve traveled with him, been on the plane with him. I’ve been in private meetings with him. I’ve talked with him, and you know–let me tell you something: I’m 55 years old, I’ve lived my whole life in the South, and I’m world-traveled. Let me tell you: I know racism when I see it. This man is nowhere near being a racist. It’s so sad because it does such a disservice to this great nation that they would throw that name and throw those words around. I mean, you have people calling Biden racist. They’re calling Pelosi racist. They’re calling the dog-catcher racist because he impounded the black dog instead of the white dog. Come on. What’s next? You know, it’s kind of sad because it’s pretty much watered down things that are legitimate, to where people are just going to get so numb with it, and people are just being like, ‘Wow, are you serious?’”

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service