Matthew Shepard's Brutal Murder--No "Hoax," But No "Hate Crime"
Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) has admitted making a "poor choice of words," during House debate on a "hate crimes" bill on April 29, when she used the word "hoax" in connection with the 1998 murder of a homosexual Wyoming college student, Matthew Shepard.
Here's what she actually said:
"We know that young man was killed in the commitment of a robbery. It wasn't because he was gay. The bill was named for him, the hate crimes bill was named for him, but it's really a hoax that continues to be used as an excuse for passing these bills."
It should be clear to anyone remotely familiar with the Shepard murder or the hate crimes issue that she was not claiming that Shepard never existed or that his murder was a "hoax," but only that it's classification as an anti-gay "hate crime" was a "hoax." Nevertheless, she was mocked as roughly the equivalent of a Holocaust denier.
Maternal and Fetal Health Interim Guidance Concerning N1H1 or Swine Flu from the CDC
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) provides guidance and information on background, risks, suggested treatments, and other considerations for pregnant women and N1H1 or Swine Flu. The CDC currently reports, "Pregnant women are also known to be higher risk for seasonal influenza complications and during prior pandemics, and it is reasonable to assume that pregnant women are also at higher risk for swine influenza complications.
Who are you going to Believe, Me or your own Eyes?
An unnamed White House aide has tried to stifle criticism of the President for his deep and low bow before Saudi King Abdullah at the recently concluded G-20 summit in London. That anonymous fellow seems to giving us Groucho Marx's line: "Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?" The aide claims that the tall President was merely taking both hands of the diminutive desert monarch in his and had to bend down.
That set off another round of Internet speculation. Queen Elizabeth II is also much shorter than the President, and you can see him giving a short, sharp bow of the head to her. The point of our previous criticism is not that Barack Obama showed greater deference to the king of a despotic regime that persecutes Christians while slighting the Head of State of our leading ally, Britain. The point was simple: Americans do not bow to anyone.
The internet is alive with stories about President Barack Obama bowing low before Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah. It was bad enough when George W. Bush invited this odious tyrant to Crawford and was pictured walking hand-in-hand with him. The White House defensively claimed then that it was a Saudi custom for men to express their friendship by holding hands. Had they never heard: "When in Rome, do as the Romans do"? That was bad enough. This Obama obeisance was horrible.
Franklin D. Roosevelt was accused of wanting to be a king. But he knew a lot more about how to behave around monarchs than his present-day successors do. When King George VI and his wife, Queen Elizabeth (parents of Elizabeth II) came to the Roosevelt home at Hyde Park in 1939, Franklin and Eleanor gave them a picnic. They served the first British monarchs ever to set foot on U.S. soil hot dogs and beans! How thoroughly American.
You can't say the FRC blog isn't timely. Over the past two weeks my colleague Michael Fragoso and I have written on this blog about the emerging position of CNBC as a major, national news source and the adverse impact of that development on the Obama administration.
This state of affairs escalated enormously over the weekend after CNBC's Jim Cramer was slapped silly on Jon Stewart's Comedy Central program last Thursday. Stewart is part of the Democrat-Left-Borg collective that hurtles through space attempting to bludgeon those who oppose their agenda into abject submission. (For an excellent analysis of Stewart's completely dishonest attack on CNBC's Rick Santelli read this post by Dan Gifford on the Big Hollywood blog.)
Stewart has been on television for years, but I don't recall that he ever attacked the integrity of CNBC before. Of course, CNBC never before pointed out that the Obama economic program was failing miserably. Therein lies the difference. When was the last time Stewart viciously sandbagged a Lefty guest while declaring his righteous outrage? Answer: [Hear crickets chirping] Never happened.
In short, we have entered an unparalleled time in which the Hollywood-media-"news"-industrial-complex makes little or no attempt to pretend that it is not advancing the socialist, anti-family, anti-church agenda of the Left. Where will Barack Obama be tonight? On the Jay Leno show, I believe. The alliance begun during the presidential campaign appears to grow stronger daily.
In the last couple weeks The Politico (www.politico.com) has published a series of extraordinary stories describing planned attacks originating from the White House and Leftist activist groups targeting political enemies. Read this piece as an example. As such, it was not surprising that Tony Blankley observed here in today's Washington Times that the atmosphere in Washington has become incredibly poisonous and ugly.
Well, folks, about two months down and forty-six to go. It's going to get interesting.
An Open Letter to Larry Kudlow, the Nation's Irreplaceable CNBC Host
Dear Larry:
The Politico reported yesterday "it's rumored that [Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CT)] could face a challenge [in his 2010 Senate re-election race] from CNBC host Larry Kudlow, an opponent who would focus the coming election squarely on the economy."
Say it ain't so, Kudlow.
For those not familiar with you, Larry, I provide two links with some fair and balanced info: CNBC, Wikipedia. In short, you are a supply-side economist who served in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, the Reagan Administration's Treasury Department, and various Wall Street firms with distinction. You are a happy guy; an optimist. You are a conservative, and, as I have observed over the years, a much-needed media friend of the pro-life cause - something we at FRC appreciate greatly. And, since the financial meltdown you have been hosting a M-F 7:00 p.m. hour-long market analysis program on CNBC - now called The Kudlow Report.
What Kathleen Sebelius Could Mean for the Department of Health and Human Services
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is not just another massive bureaucracy. It is the largest department in the federal government, with a proposed budget of $821 billion for 2010. In contrast, the Defense Department's budget of $534 seems puny.
Much of the HHS budget is composed of outlays for two "entitlement" programs, Medicare and Medicaid. Yet HHS is a vast federal agency, laden with sub-agencies and programs, most of which are unfamiliar to the American people but many of which have a direct bearing on federal policy regarding pre-born life, in our own country and internationally.
Now, with the nomination of abortion advocate Gov. Kathleen Sebelius (D-KS) to be HHS Secretary, President Obama has signaled his willingness to use the nation's largest Cabinet department as a means of advancing a radical abortion agenda.
Sens. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) are eager to bring back the so-called Fairness Doctrine (FD). That was a rule laid down by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) that was used to squelch broadcast criticism of the (mostly liberal) administrations in Washington. The FD was the 20th century equivalent of the Alien and Sedition Acts. The FD reigned for several decades and had the effect of suppressing debate on the airwaves. Until the boneheaded McCain-Feingold law was passed, FD was the worst infringement on free speech going. It was repealed under Ronald Reagan in 1987. That was the year he called for the Berlin Wall to come down. As a result of Reagan's liberating efforts, we saw freedom rise at home and abroad.
Conservative radio talkers are calling the threat of a reconstituted FD a "Hush Rush" bill. We need to be aware, however, that liberals may achieve their ends without passing legislation, or even without a new FCC "fairness" rule. They could do it by requiring a fixed amount of local content for radio. The idea there is that our mostly liberal major metropolitan areas would produce the local content and squeeze out the conservatives-like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, and Bill Bennett--who tend to be nationally syndicated.
How do you know that you know way too much about Washington bureaucracies and how they "work"? Here's how. When you hear CNBC's Rick Santelli calling for a Chicago Tea Party tax protest this summer, you immediately start to wonder whether he'll need to get permits from some government entity like the Environmental Protection Agency. And then you wonder whether Illinois permits will be needed also. Well, I plead guilty to having had such thoughts last Thursday.
Fortunately, I am not alone and not nearly as bad off as Scott Ott of the D.C. Examiner appears to be. Ott has written a brilliant, hilarious piece entitled, "EPA Arrests Rick Santelli, 'Chicago Tea Party' Cancelled." (See Feb. 24, 2009 ed., p. 14.) The satirical article contains the following slam from President Obama's press secretary, Robert Gibbs, commenting on Santelli's arrest for threatening to pollute Lake Michigan: "I don't know where Mr. Santelli lives, but apparently, like most conservative critics, he has a callous disregard for the lives of the waterfowl, sturgeon and fresh-water mollusks that inhabit the Lake Michigan watershed."
That's funny, but I wouldn't be surprised if Santelli really could be arrested for dumping tea or "derivative securities" (paper) into the Great Lakes. Well done, Mr. Ott.
Andie Coller of The Politico observed today that Gibbs "dismissed [Santelli] as a know-nothing derivatives trader out of touch with Main Street." Coller then noted that "[a] Rasmussen poll released Monday found that 55 percent of those surveyed thought federal mortgage subsidies to those most at risk of losing their homes would be 'rewarding bad behavior.'" If I were the White House I would be very careful about trying to roll out a campaign of intimidation and bullying against journalists, in general, and a journalist, in particular, who is very much attuned to public sentiment, is an expert in the numerous cross-cutting markets traded in Chicago, and is the most popular figure on America's #1 financial news network.
With his signature of his economic "stimulus" bill, President Obama puts the U.S. total indebtedness just a few billion dollars shy of the total world annual Gross Domestic Product. But he is not going for bust-and he can prove it. The President has sent back to our British allies a valuable bust of Sir Winston Churchill. The bust-valued at hundreds of thousands of pounds-was loaned to the White House by the British government after the September 11th attacks. President Obama wanted the thing out of there.
Gregg's Revolt Unmasks Obama's Highly Politicized White House
Senator Judd Gregg's announcement late Thursday afternoon, revoking his agreement to serve as Secretary of Commerce, badly damages President Barack Obama's aura of bipartisanship. Gregg clearly concluded that his future effectiveness at Commerce was rapidly deteriorating. Furthermore, he must have been furious at having been politically humiliated by the White House last Thursday when it announced it would wrest control of the Census Bureau from the Commerce Department. Unfortunately, this debacle reflects the true nature and inherent weakness of the highly politicized White House now being created by President Obama.
Keep an eye out for an amazing documentary on CNBC called "House of Cards." (It will be showing numerous times this weekend.) David Faber narrates a two-hour program on the current financial-economic recession and its origins in mortgages, securitized debt instruments, the dishonest or incompetent rating of those instruments, and governmental incompetence. Greed, fraud, stupidity, and recklessness are all on display. It is an excellent program that is a nice introduction to what happened to our economy.
To me one person stood out above all the rest: "The Maestro," Alan Greenspan, former U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman. Watching Greenspan make excuses for his non-stop money printing in the early 2000s makes it clear that this guy had no business being in that job. He essentially admits that he made no effort to control the Fed's credit expansion because it wasn't what the political powers in Washington wanted. This is the problem with having a politician, like Greenspan, as Fed Chief. The Fed was designed to be insulated from political decision-making; his job was to make the tough choices and control credit. Instead, he threw up his hands and cranked up the presses. Disgraceful.
Economists from the Austrian School knew Greenspan's policies were dangerous. Read this before-the-crash assessment of his Fed tenure by Stefan Karlsson from the Ludwig von Mises Institute website. Greenspan's philosophy was not deregulatory. No group of economists is more deregulatory than the Austrian School, but they are also committed to price stability and tight money. Don't be fooled if someone tells you Greenspan was a conservative; he wasn't.
The House passed the Stimulus bill with all Republicans and 7 Democrats voting against it (except for two Republican absences who would have been NO and one Democrat, Rep. Lipinski, (D-Mich.) who voted PRESENT)
The Democrats voting yes (or switching from the last vote):
5 switched NO to YES: Reps. Boyd (D-Fla.), Cooper (D-Tenn.), Ellsworth (D-Ind.), Kanjorski (D-PA) and Kratovil (D-Md.)
6 stayed NO: Rep. Bright (D-Ala.), Griffith (D-Ala.), Minnick (D-Id.), Peterson (D-Minn.), Shuler (D-N.C.) and Taylor D-Miss.)
1 switched YES to NO: DeFazio (D-Or.)
Representative Boehner gave an impassioned speech (no crying though) on the House floor, you can watch it here
Senate update:
The Senate will vote at 5:30 pm tonight on the Stimulus Conference Report. The vote will be on a motion to waive the budget point of order (must achieve 60 votes) and under the order the vote on the motion to waive will count as final passage of the conference report.
Keep in mind this vote will be held open for a bit in order for all Members to have a chance to record their vote.
The substitute "compromise" made cloture* tonight with a vote of 61-36. Beyond the Terrible Trio (Senators Collins (R-Me.), Snowe (R-Me.) and Arlen Specter (R-Penn.)) no Republicans voted for the measure. No Democrats voted against cloture. Senator Cornyn (R-Tex.) missed the vote, but one can safely assume he would have voted against it, and Senator Gregg abstained because he is going to be the next Commerce Secretary (I am assuming he is getting a head start on abstaining from all fiscal responsibility for the next four years.)
From the Senate: "Under the previous order, at 12:00pm tomorrow (Tuesday), the bill will be subject to another 60 vote hurdle by either waiving a budget point of order (if it is raised) or a 60 vote threshold on the amendment. If the amendment is agreed to, the Senate will then proceed to final passage of the Stimulus bill.
Majority Leader Reid also said this evening that additional votes on Executive Nominations may occur tomorrow."
I've talked to several offices and between this and the David Ogden nomination Senate offices are getting swamped with phone calls - so keep them coming. It inspires those on our side and sends a strong message to those who are not.
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released a new estimate tonight on the "compromise." CBO estimates that the package will cost $838.2 billion (not including interest which puts it over a trillion dollars). This is $18.7 billion more than the House-passed bill.
I also updated the greatest quotes (HERE) with the help of some FRC and Senate staffers.
*Cloture is the process by which debate can be limited in the Senate without unanimous consent. When invoked by roll call vote - three-fifths of those present and voting - it limits each senator to one hour of debate.
On Saturday the Senate will be in session from 12:00 - 3:00 pm for members to speak and there will be no roll call votes. Also on Saturday cloture will be filed on the Collins/Nelson amendment and the cloture vote on the amendment will occur on Monday at 5:30 pm. If cloture is invoked on the amendment post cloture time will run until noon on Tuesday. At noon on Tuesday the bill will be subject to another 60 vote hurdle by either waiving a budget point of order or achieving 60 votes on final passage.
The Senate will not be in session on Sunday.
Why is Senator Harry Reid (D-Nev.) in the Senate taking so long in building bipartisan support to pass the bill instead of just passing it without Republican support like Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and the Democrats in the House did? Well one, the Democrats in the Senate do not yet have 60 Members to defeat any filibuster from the Republicans and secondly, as the blog Hot Air points out, a new CBS poll shows "eighty-one percent of Americans say the stimulus bill should be a bipartisan effort. Just 13 percent think it is okay for a bill to be passed with only the backing of the Democratic majority."
This new bill still has a good chance of passing, especially if liberal spending Republican Senators like Arlen Specter (R-Penn.), Susan Collins (R-Me.) and Olymia Snowe (R-Me.) vote for the bill. So please contact your Senators today. The phones have been lighting up so you might have to try a few times. Many of the problems we have documented (religious institutions, money to ACORN, etc.) remain in the new bill.
Some news reports are calling the new Senate legislation a streamlined bill. Mark Hemmingway over at the Corner has a list of a few of the cuts - however the bill is still full of pork and payoffs. Additionally the Senate Republican Policy Committee have sent around numbers disputing that this bill is more frugal:
Cost of deal: $780 billion
Cost of amendments added on the floor: $47 billion
Total cost of Senate bill: $827 billion
Total estimated cost with interest: $1.2 trillion
Senate bill is $7.5 billion higher than the House bill
Additionally, as Senate Minority Leader Mith McConnell (R-Ky.) points out "According to the figures I've been given, the House bill is about $820 billion. The Senate bill, under the compromise, we believe, would be about $827 billion. Bear in mind the interest costs on either of those proposals would be $348 billion. So we're really talking about a $1.1 trillion pending measure."
Greatest Hits from the Porkulus Debate - UPDATED 02/09/09
Darned If You Do, Darned If You Don't "Because if we don't move swiftly to put this plan in motion, our economic crisis could become a national catastrophe."President Barack Obama's weekly radio address, February 7th.
"President Obama's economic recovery package will actually hurt the economy more in the long run than if he were to do nothing, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) said Wednesday.
CBO, the official scorekeepers for legislation, said the House and Senate bills will help in the short term but result in so much government debt that within a few years they would crowd out private investment, actually leading to a lower Gross Domestic Product over the next 10 years than if the government had done nothing." Stephen Dinan, "CBO: Obama Stimulus Harmful Over the Longhaul." Washington Times, February 4th, 2009.
Hey Wait a Second! What Happened to That Guy Always Talking About "Hope"? "Because each day we wait to begin the work of turning our economy around, more people lose their jobs, their savings and their homes. And if nothing is done, this recession might linger for years. Our economy will lose 5 million more jobs. Unemployment will approach double digits. Our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse." President Barack Obama, "The Action America Needs," Washington Post, February 5, 2009.
Bye Bye Bipartisanship? "Washington seems consumed in the process argument of bipartisanship."House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) commenting on the attempt to get Republican support for the legislation in the Senate.
It All Depends on What Your Definition of Stimulus Is "So then you get the argument, well, this is not a stimulus bill, this is a spending bill. What do you think a stimulus is? That's the whole point."President Barack Obama at the House Democratic Caucus Annual Issues Conference in Williamsburg, VA.
Spending Cuts Shmending Cuts "These cuts are very damaging -- [the House bill] was put together very carefully." . . .
"The new Senate cuts, if passed, 'will do violence to the future,' said Pelosi." House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on spending cuts in the Senate version of the legislation.
"Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, told reporters he and others hoped that some of the funds on the chopping block would be restored next week when negotiations open on a House-Senate compromise." "Tentative Deal on Senate Stimulus Bill", Associated Press, February 6, 2009.
Shortest Night EVER "So it is 6:15 tonight and I would hope in the next 12 hours we could have a piece of legislation we will feel good about it after working on the many hours that we have worked ... There isn't a single senator who has come to this floor who hasn't said that this economy is in deep trouble, and we have to do something to fix it. And my comment was I hope we can do that. And that's the reason I've said we've got to work the night." Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on the Senate floor Thursday, February 5th.
"We're going to stop legislating tonight"Senator Reid less then three hours later.
Short But to the Point Award "So what."House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D-Wisc.) in response to a question on NPR's "Morning Edition" about the perceived lack of direction from Congress as to how money in the stimulus should be spent.
Party of Personal (Shifting of) Responsibility "The person who spends the money badly will be responsible (not the U.S. Congress)." House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D-Wisc.) on the lack of direction of where exactly the money should go in the bill.
I Don't Think Neil Kinnok Will Claim Authorship of This Speech "Anybody remember a time when we're talking about, if we don't make some real changes, deficits that are a trillion two hundred billion dollars a year for as far as the eye can see, if we don't, ah, get it right, which you guys have already?" Vice President Joe Biden remarks at the House Democratic Caucus Annual Issues Conference in Williamsburg, VA. It appears he was starting to talk about the deficit and then realized he was talking to a crowd that just greatly increased the deficit. Politico reports "(d)uring the speech, some members read newspapers or checked BlackBerrys in the warm conference room."
It's Tiring Spending All Your Money "My staff is worn out, working around the clock. So is David Obey's staff. So is Nancy Pelosi's staff."President Barack Obama at the House Democratic Caucus Annual Issues Conference in Williamsburg, VA.
"Man am I tired. Working all day to find enough R votes to get this thing to conference. I confess I'm cranky." Senator Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) twittering on the Senate negotiations.
Joe the (Lousy) Oddsmaker "If we do everything right. We do it with absolute certainty . . .there is still a thirty percent chance we are going to get it wrong." Vice President Joe Biden remarks at the House Democratic Caucus Annual Issues Conference in Williamsburg, VA.
Maybe She Was Talking About In All 57 States? "Every month we do not have an economic recovery package, 500 million Americans lose their jobs." House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) The latest census numbers show the U.S. population is 303 million.
Easing Families Burdens by Eliminating Them "One of the elements of this package is assistance to the states. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children's health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs. One of those - one of the initiatives you mentioned, the contraception, will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government." House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), on This Week With George Stephanopoulos, defending giving millions of dollars to Planned Parenthood as "stimulus."
It's All Bush's Fault "I do think that there was some spending in the bill that was makeup for a starvation diet under the Bush administration, some important priorities of our party" Senator Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) on why there was a lot of bloated spending in the so called stimulus bill.
This Guy Could Almost Make Me Miss Lincoln Chafee. Almost "If a city needs tree planting and that brings real jobs and it puts people and their trucks and their trees and their nurserymen to work, and if it provides shade, and it provides greenness, and if it absorbs carbon, and if it engages in traffic calming, there are all sorts of good reasons why people would want to do that."Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) speaking against Coburn amendment 309 that prohibited stimulus funds from being spent on any casino or other gambling establishment, aquarium, zoo, golf course, swimming pool, stadium, community park, museum, theater, art center, and highway beautification project.
In Ogden's case, pornography is incompatible with Justice
As the research shows, frequent use of pornography distorts the perception of social realities in gender relations, weakens and frequently destroys marriages, has deleterious effects on children and ultimately undermines the sexual capacities of those who become addicted to it.
Not only is it indefensible as an industry, rather it should be severely contained and suppressed because of its effects on family, children and adults. David Ogden's connections to the pornography industry preclude his ability to serve in the Department of Justice.
I listened this morning to President Obama as he addressed the National Prayer Breakfast. I was filled with awe. Not because of his smooth delivery or his gracious style. Rather, that his style so completely belies what his motives are. This president is the most pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, anti-life movement president in the history of the United States, and oh by the way, very likeable as he glides through with his wrecking ball on life and marriage issues. When he refers to the fact that religion should not divide people, does any thinking person doubt that he is speaking of abortion and marriage policies?
This president seems so completely owned - not just politically, but mentally as well - by the liberal philosophies which are drummed into students' brains on college campuses, that he has the audacity to tell a Prayer Breakfast audience that he will change the Faith-Based Offices from faith-based to faith-based plus non-faith-based groups. What might some of those be? Perhaps, Planned Parenthood because they have done such "fine work" in the community?
He can get away with diminishing the purpose of the faith based offices with Americans who are not familiar with the ways of politicians, but this writer sees right through to his intent. His gleaming smile cannot hide the giant wrecking ball he wields. He has begun the dismantling of the protection of marriage (because standing up to the gay attack on Christians and their beliefs is "divisive"), he has voted against protecting human life in and out of the womb (because to defend the voiceless is "divisive") and he will put in place those people and those organizations who know just how to do it (read bios here.)
Sadly, he is popular enough to attend a national prayer breakfast and deliver a speech that carried more criticism of religion than the worth of it. I know that by blurring the tenets of all religions he was sending a message of hope to radical Muslims who have pledged to kill those who disagree with them. Oddly, I get the feeling he was sending the same message to those of us who would stand and defend the unborn and who would demand that the sacrament of marriage be left alone.
President Barack Obama's decision to nominate Senator Judd Gregg (R-NH) to head the Commerce Department has at least one interesting ricochet.How will Gregg affect Obama administration policy toward reimposition of the Fairness Doctrine?The Commerce Department contains one of the federal telecommunications regulatory agencies, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). It appears that NTIA would have no direct role in matters pertaining to the reimposition of the Fairness Doctrine ....that capacity lies solely within the jurisdiction of the FCC and Congress.Of course, judicial review would occur also.
That being said, what is Senator Gregg's position on the Fairness Doctrine?Well, Save Talk Radio Dot Org posted the text of a press release from Senator Norm Coleman's office dated July 13, 2007.The release states that on that date Senate Democrats blocked an amendment "to the Defense Authorization bill that would prohibit the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) from reinstituting the Fairness Doctrine...."One of the amendment's co-sponsors was Senator Judd Gregg.
Even though Commerce/NTIA would not play a direct role in this matter, as a department secretary whose portfolio does touch on telecommunications issues, Judd Gregg would be better positioned to present a pro-First Amendment case to the President and the Obama cabinet.He would certainly be much better placed to let the President know the sort of nuclear political war he will start should an Obama FCC go down that path.
Hopefully, Senator Gregg will be reminded of this 2007 vote during his confirmation hearing.
CBO estimates that the Senate version of the so-called stimulus plan will top at least $1.1 trillion. Trying to wrap my mind around that I found some interesting figures what you could get with a trillion dollars. Some examples:
If you stack up $1,000 bills, $1 trillion would need a pile that is 80 miles high.
$ 1 trillion is more than the combined gross revenues of Wal Mart, Exxon, General Motors and Ford Motors.
Assuming the United States consumes about 17 billion barrels of oil a year and assuming the cost of a barrel of oil is about $65, a trillion dollars will buy an entire year's worth of oil for the USA.
You could buy a thousand Queen Mary 2 with accommodations for 2,620 passengers
With a population of approximately 300 million people, you could give away $1 trillion by giving every man, woman and child in the U.S. $ 3,400 each.
We could buy everyone on Earth an iPod.
We could pave the entire U.S. interstate highway system with 23.5-karat gold leaf.
We could buy 16.6 million Habitat for Humanity houses
We could hire 1.9 million additional teachers
In my search I found a great website that helps you buy luxury and charitable items trying to add up to a trillion dollars. It was based on the spending involved with the Iraq War, but it works with out of control spending too. Here is the list I came up with:
You could buy:
8,700 Porsche 911 Turbos ($126,000 each): $1,097,940,000
New York Yankees: $1,200,000,000
New York Mets: $482,000,000
Every NFL Franchise: $8,600,000,000
Dracula's Romanian castle: $140,000,000
1,000 60SE Lear jets ($11,595,000 each): $11,595,000,000
Denver International Airport: $4,822,000,000
10 Picasso's (113,400,000 each): $1,134,000,000
Hard Rock Casino in Vegas: $770,000,000
Hong Kong Disneyland: $3,500,000,000
South Pacific Island of Katafanga: $38,900,000
Buy the whole world 100 cans of Coke: $650,000,000,000
Buy 50 Super bowl ads ($2,600,000 each): $130,000,000
Build 1,001 Habitat for Humanity houses (at $60,000 each): $600,060,000
Build 2,000 miles of Metro rail ($150,000,000 per a mile of track): $300,000,000,000
Build 250 hospitals in Third World nations ($41,300,000 each): $10,325,000,000
Produce your own Hollywood movie: $150,000,000
Buy the Maltese Falcon, the world's most expensive yacht: $100,000,000
Buy 2 Napa Valley wineries ($34,000,000 each): $68,000,000
Buy 26 McDonalds' franchises ($1,000,000 each): $26,000,000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Total: $1,000,000,000,000
Everyone is now familiar with former Sen. Tom Daschle's failure to pay upwards of $100,000 in taxes. Hoping to salvage his nomination as HHS secretary he undertook the usual DC kabuki theater of the heartfelt apology. Unlike the usual show, however, Daschle didn't apologize exactly, instead he said, ""I am deeply embarrassed and disappointed by the errors that required me to amend my tax returns." I, for one, thought I accidentally had tuned into a repeat of Sunday's episode of The Office. See this exchange (at 16:10) -
Dwight [reading from a page]: I state my regret. Jim: You couldn't have memorized that?
Why does Planned Parenthood hate family planning that creates families
In responding (as I was asked to) to Steven Waldman's posting on Beliefnet.com it is easy to know where to start. It would be at the original title, "Why Pro-lifers Hate Family Planning," which can be described mildly as inflammatory. It has since been changed to "Why Many Pro-lifers Oppose Family Planning," which, at best, is less rabble-rousing. Taken with the rest of the post one could easily draw the conclusion that supporting family planning can only be defined as supporting taxpayer funding of condoms. But what of abstinence? Or natural family planning? While many religions are opposed to condoms, there are a few who are not, however still religious organizations are pretty active on family planning - be it pregnancy care centers, churches with abstinence and pre-marital and marital counseling, abstinence programs, etc. Most religious conservatives, in my opinion, are more unified in opposing federal involvement. With sheckles come shackles.
The rest of the post does seem to try to draw a balance, though I do disagree with the premise "that there is evidence that government financed family planning does reduce abortions" - which seems to have at its base a quote from Planned Parenthood's research arm, the Guttmacher Institute. However Guttmacher's own numbers seem to dispute their quote. Many major cities have been seeing an increase of both pregnancy and abortion, despite also having liberal rules and regulations on family planning. Take New York City, which has liberalized sex education and even has its own brand of condom.In New York State 1/3 of the pregnancies result in induced abortion. Additionally the state rate of abortions per 1,000 women of reproductive age is almost double the national rate. It does not stop there, in New York City, rates for teenage pregnancy far exceed the national averages and the city "remains the epicenter of the HIV/AIDS epidemic, with youths, the poor, and minorities increasingly - and unevenly - affected by the disease."
Finally Mr. Waldman points out that Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest promoter of abortion, "also provides prenatal care that prevents infant death and birth control that stops unintended pregnancies." While how much of this counseling and care is actually done by Planned Parenthood is disputed, what of the other groups that do not promote abortion, like pregnancy care centers, that because of their opposition to abortion, do not accept federal funds under the Title X program that distributes them? These pro-life pregnancy care centers, if they accepted Title X funds, would be forced by the federal government to include referring for abortions as part of their pre-natal care - thanks to a regulation passed by President Clinton and never rescinded by President George W. Bush. Additionally pregnancy care centers, unlike Planned Parenthood, do not spend tens of millions of dollars to elect pro-abortion politicians or overturn popular incremental pro-life laws like parental consent.
How much more could these pregnancy care centers do if they received the millions in subsidies that U.S. taxpayers are currently giving to Planned Parenthood? The question isn't why do pro-lifers hate family planning but more why does Planned Parenthood hate family planning that creates families?
Sunlight Before Signing: Too often bills are rushed through Congress and to the president before the public has the opportunity to review them. As president, Obama will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days.
Then how does he explain the Lilly Ledbetter Act, which Heritage correctly describes as a payoff to trial lawyers? According to the Congressional website THOMAS the Lilly Ledbetter Act was passed by the Senate on January 22, then passed by the House of Representatives on January 27 and signed into law by President Obama two days later.
I searched the White House website and there was no five day "waiting period" before President Obama signed the legislation into law, and certainly no explanation that this trial lawyers' dream of a bill is "emergency" legislation.
There is a section of the White House website on the bill that asks for comments - but I am told by people in the White House it did not go up till two hours AFTER the bill was signed!
Speaker Pelosi's Pork and Payoff bill updated - That's not all folks!
When you have a huge bill like Hr. 1, the so-called stimulus bill, sometimes it takes a while for things to come out. I've found some updates on political pork being directed towards the author of the bill's, Rep. David Obey (D-Wisc.), son. Also the unions are given a sweet deal and, in what could possibly be called a bailout for the porn industry, the National Science Foundation gets $1.2 billion.
We have a new contender for my favorite Congressman of the 111th Congress, not sure if this is in time for Wesley Snipes though (my new nominee for Treasury Secretary):
New Bill Would Eliminate All IRS Penalties and Interest for U.S. Citizens
Congressman John Carter to introduce "Rangel Rule" Legislation Wednesday
(Washington, DC) - U.S. Rep. John Carter (R-TX) will introduce new legislation tomorrow to eliminate all penalty and interest charges by the Internal Revenue Service against U.S. citizens. The bill is designed to provide the same treatment for all U.S. taxpayers owing back taxes as that enjoyed by House Ways and Means Chairman Charles Rangel (D-NY).
What's up in Alaska? Senator Lisa Murkowski today voted with President Obama to overturn the Mexico City Policy which, according to World Magazine, "prohibits grantees in receipt of U.S. funding from performing abortions, lobbying to legalize abortion, or promoting abortion as a family-planning method." (See also, our Tom McClusky's description of the policy below - in the blog on 1/23/09.) That places her in the company of liberal Republicans Arlen Specter, Susan Collins, and Olympia Snowe as the only Republicans to vote with the Democrats. Alaska's new senator, Mark Begich, voted to fund overseas abortion providers as well.
I wonder whether Sarah Palin would have made it a trio ?? The GOP Platform on which Palin ran for President with John McCain stated:
"We strongly support the long-held policy of the Republican Party known as the 'Mexico City policy,' which prohibits federal monies from being given to non-governmental organizations that provide abortions or actively promote abortion as a method of family planning in other countries. We reject any treaty or agreement that would violate those values."
Perhaps, I am wrong, but I never heard Palin stating an objection to the platform on this point.
Not Quite a Stimulus: Speaker Pelosi's Payoffs and Pork Bill - UPDATED
Updated 01.29.09
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) recently found that the cost of the Pelosi-Reid stimulus package now exceeds $1.1 trillion. CBO also estimated that only 7 percent of infrastructure money would make its way into the economy by the end of the year and only 38 percent would be spent by the end of the 2010 fiscal year. Senator Jeff Session's (R-Ala.) office estimates the actual number going to tangible road and bridge construction is just a little more than 3 percent.
Where is this money going to? A not exhaustive look at the 1,588 page legislation, H.R. 1, "The American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 2009" shows the bill is more payoffs and pork then stimulus.
Many thanks to the website readthestimulus.org and its participating organizations.
PAYOFFS
To the "Green" Lobby
$600 Million To Buy New Cars For Government Workers (Page 89)
These cars would be "green" friendly cars - however very few gas pumps have the right gas to run these cars. The Federal government already spends $3.5 billion a year.
$10M for bike and walking trails (Page 65)
$200M for plug-in car stations (Page 31)
$400 million for NASA scientists to conduct climate change research (Page 22)
$800 million to clean up Superfund sites (Page 122)
$600 million for grants for diesel emission reduction (Page 119)
$650 million for "alternative energy technologies, energy efficiency enhancements and deferred maintenance at Federal facilities" (Page 119)
$1.5 billion for construction of "Green Schools" (Page 176)
To the Unions
$1 billion to the controversial COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICING SERVICES COPS Hiring Program
"$150 billion in new federal spending, a vast two-year investment that would more than double the Department of Education's current budget. The proposed emergency expenditures on nearly every realm of education, including school renovation, special education, Head Start and grants to needy college students" Sam Dillon, "Stimulus Plan Would Provide Flood of Aid to Education," New York Times. January 27, 2009. NOTE: Private and religious schools are excluded.
Look for the Union Label. "The stimulus bill passed by the House last night contains a controversial provision that would mostly bar foreign steel and iron from the infrastructure projects laid out by the $819 billion economic package. A Senate version, yet to be acted upon, goes further, requiring, with few exceptions, that all stimulus-funded projects use only American-made equipment and goods." Anthony Faiola, "'Buy American' Rider sparks trade Debate," WashingtonPost, January 29, 2009.
To the Abortion Industry
Representative Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) inserted in the original bill billions of dollars for family planning groups, including the abortion giant, Planned Parenthood. Pressure and public exposure from Congressional Republicans forced the Democrats to remove such funding from this bill. However the bill still provides billions in reforming the health care system and working towards nationalized health care - with little to no debate.
$2.7B in NIH grants which would be targeted to among other things embryonic stem cell experimentation. (Page 56)
Other Special Interests
$3 Billion for Prevention & Wellness Programs, Including $335 million for STD Education and Prevention -- Recent government expenditures in this area include a transgender beauty pageant in San Francisco that advertised available HIV testing and an event called "Got Love? - Flirt/Date/Score" that taught participants how "to flirt with greater finesse."
$83 billion for the earned income credit for people who don't pay income tax. SOURCE Wall Street Journal
$50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts (Page 122)
$75 million for smoking cessation (Page 148). This contradicts the latest version of SCHIP that is funded largely by new taxes on cigarettes.
$4.19 billion open to ACORN. The Pelosi-Reid bill makes groups like ACORN eligible for a $4.19 billion pot of money for "neighborhood stabilization activities."
MISCELLANEOUS PORK
Some of the biggest winners in the package are federal agencies and Congressional relatives:
$2 Billion for national parks. "A top House Republican is demanding an investigation into whether the more than $2 billion for national parks in the House stimulus package is proper in light of the fact that the chief lobbyist for the National Parks Conservation Association is the son of House Appropriations Committee Chairman David R. Obey (chief author of the bill.)" Stephen Dinan and S.A. Miller, "Stimulus has plum for Lawmakers Son," WashingtonTimes, January 29, 2009.
$54 billion will go to federal programs that the Office of Management and Budget or the Government Accountability Office have already criticized as "ineffective" or unable to pass basic financial audits.SOURCE Wall Street Journal
$462 Million for Equipment, Construction, and Renovation of Facilities at the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) (Page 137)
$1.2 billion to the National Science Foundation (Page 46) "Chuck Grassley knows it when he sees it. The "it," of course, is pornography. And Grassley has seen it deep in a demurely titled section of a report from the National Science Foundation -- a report that says NSF employees have been spending significant amounts of company time on smut sites and in other explicit pursuits . . . In one particularly egregious case, the report says one NSF "senior official" was discovered to have spent as much as 20 percent of his working hours over a two-year interval 'viewing sexually explicit images and engaging in sexually explicit online 'chats' with various women.' Investigators calculated the value of the time lost at more than $58,000 -- for that employee alone." Andie Coller, "Grassley Lainches Porn Inquiry," Politico, January 29, 2009.
$150 Million for Repairs to Smithsonian Institution Facilities (Page 128)
$44 million to the Agricultural Research Service (Page 135)
$227 million for oversight of the pork barrel spending in the stimulus (Page 11)
$1 Billion for the Follow-Up to the 2010 Census (Page 49)
Discretion is given to governors and Mayors for how to spend a large chunk of the money. The U.S. Conference of Mayors recently sent Congress a $96.6 billion wish list of "shovel-ready" projects which now could be funded by the stimulus. These projects include: "$1 million for annual sewer rehabilitation in Casper, WY; $6.1 million for corporate hangars, parking lots, and a business apron at the Fayetteville, AR airport; 28 projects with the term "stadium" in them; and 117 projects mentioning landscaping and/or beautification efforts. The taxpayers should be most teed off at the 20 golf courses included in the list." SOURCE National Taxpayers Union
Kevin Martin has proven himself to be an unwavering ally for families throughout his tenure at the Federal Communications Commission. He has crossed party lines to protect consumers and families from indecent and obscene programming. He has never hesitated to go up against corporations and networks when necessary.
Martin consistently demonstrated a genuine concern for the impact of telecommunications on the family. I thank him for safeguarding the public's right to make the airwaves suitable for viewing and listening. It is our hope that Julius Genachowski, Obama's pick to head the FCC, follows in Martin's footsteps and continues this commitment to the American people."
Family: Wife, Dr. Sharon Malone, and three children.
Occupation: Partner in the Washington, D.C., law firm Covington & Burling
Education: Doctorate from Columbia Law School in 1976
Judicial appointment: President Reagan nominated Holder for associate judge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia in 1988; served five years.
Clinton White House: Nominated by President Clinton in 1993 for U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, a position he held for four years; appointed Clinton's deputy attorney general in 1997.
Hate Crimes
"Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder testified in support of the legislation, indicating that it would strengthen federal-state law enforcement capabilities without encroaching upon state responsibilities. He also denied the claim, made by some federal officials in the past, that the federal law enforcement agencies would be overwhelmed if the bill were passed to include new hate crime categories prohibiting bias crimes based sex, sexual orientation and disability." NOW website, June 7, 1999
Prosecution of Porn Peddlers
"Some civil libertarians worry that Eric Holder will be inclined to continue the Bush administration's crusade against pornography. They cite a June 1998 memo in which he told U.S. attorneys that obscenity prosecutions should focus on "cases involving large-scale distributors who realize substantial income from multistate operations and cases in which there is evidence of organized crime involvement" but added that "cases involving relatively small distributors can have a deterrent effect." The Clinton administration's actual track record in this area, however, consisted almost entirely of cases involving child pornography. "We continue to make these [child porn] cases a priority," Holder says in the memo. Social conservatives often complained that the Clinton administration was not interested in taking on pornography made by and for consenting adults. We probably can look forward to hearing such complaints again under the Obama administration." [source]
Elian Gonzalez Fiasco
"Mr. Holder said his agents were heavily armed when they entered the house because they had 'intelligence that the possibility existed there were guns in the house. We had to make sure our people were protected and they were in a position to protect people within the house. I don't know if there were any guns in the house. I don't know if they found any guns. We had to deal, however, with the intelligence we had that we got from local sources and make sure everybody was adequately protected.' Apparently no guns were found." (Jerry Seper and Clarence Williams, "Holder Defends Sudden Raid For Elian," The Washington Times, 4/24/00)
Bill Clinton's Presidential Pardons
Holder played a major role in the decision to grant clemency to 16 former members of the Puerto Rican terrorist group the Armed Forces Of National Liberation (FALN). "Holder . . .has played major roles in the probe of Democratic funny-money in the 1996 elections, the Sexgate scandal and the recommendation to President Clinton on whether to free FALN terrorists from jail. A list of FALN documents withheld from Congress shows that many memos on the FALN clemency decision went directly to Holder, while Reno's role was minimal." (Brian Blomquist, "Ailing Reno Yielding Reins Of Justice," New York Post, 12/15/99)
"As deputy attorney general under President Clinton, Mr. Holder reviewed the last-minute pardon of fugitive financier Marc Rich." (Jim McElhatton, "GOP Hits Another Obama Adviser," The Washington Times, 6/13/08)
Second Amendment
As Deputy Attorney General, Holder was a strong supporter of restrictive gun control. He advocated federal licensing of handgun owners, a three day waiting period on handgun sales, rationing handgun sales to no more than one per month, banning possession of handguns and so-called 'assault weapons' (cosmetically incorrect guns) by anyone under age of 21, a gun show restriction bill that would have given the federal government the power to shut down all gun shows, national gun registration, and mandatory prison sentences for trivial offenses (e.g., giving your son an heirloom handgun for Christmas, if he were two weeks shy of his 21st birthday). He also promoted the factoid that 'Every day that goes by, about 12, 13 more children in this country die from gun violence'--a statistic is true only if one counts 18-year-old gangsters who shoot each other as 'children.' (Sources: Holder testimony before House Judiciary Committee, Subcommitee on Crime, May 27, 1999; Holder Weekly Briefing, May 20, 2000.) After the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the D.C. handgun ban and self-defense ban were unconstitutional in 2007, Holder complained that the decision "opens the door to more people having more access to guns and putting guns on the streets." [source]
US Attorney Mixed Record?
"Eric Holder gets good national press, but some of those who know something about his activities in DC know better. As a lackluster local US Attorney, he not only sat on information concerning police and water department corruption, his staff regularly signed off on excessive police overtime to keep cops friendly to the prosecutors. Holder was also instrumental in getting law changes that made jury trials more difficult for certain defendants." - Progressive Review, 1998
One of Holder's predecessors, Joseph DiGenova, says, "When you have corruption staring you in the face, and you fail to act, you should resign. You can't worry about judgeships or your next job. And this from former city auditor Otis Troupe: "For years, in audit after audit, and in newspaper article after newspaper articles, we have established fact patterns that constitute crimes. And in all but a handful of case, nobody did anything in the prosecutor's office." - Progressive Review, 1997
As US Attorney, Eric Holder was the guy who indicted Dan Rostenkowsi and was responsible for his eventual conviction.
Waco
There have been questions about his role in the Justice Department's conduct in Waco: "The federal prosecutor who raised questions about a possible Justice Department cover-up in the Waco standoff was abruptly removed from the case along with his boss, according to a court filing made public Tuesday. Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder recused U.S. Attorney James W. Blagg in San Antonio and assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Johnston in Waco, Texas, from any further dealings in criminal or civil proceedings related to the siege. Holder appointed the U.S. attorney in a neighboring district as a "special attorney to the U.S. attorney general." Michelle Mittelstadt, September 14, 1999, Associated Press,
Miscellaneous
His firm, Covington and Burling, lobbies for the NFL and was a major player in the passage of the Internet Gambling bill. Eric Holder did not play any part in those negotiations.
Over the extended holiday weekend, the WashingtonTimes published an editorial and a commentary piece that are well worth reading:
The Timeseditorial appeared on Friday, November 28, and was entitled "Judicial Imperialism." First, the paper discusses the worrying ramifications of the recent settlement by eHarmony, a California company, which was forced by the state of New Jersey to offer dating services to gay customers in New Jersey. Second, the editorial discusses the dangerous and illegitimate effort to have the California Supreme Court thwart the will of the Golden State's voters and declare its recently-passed marriage amendment unconstitutional.
The commentary piece was authored by Jeffrey T. Kuhner. His first Sunday opinion column with the Times was published on September 28th. In Kuhner's latest, entitled "Obama vs. Pope Benedict," he recognizes the struggle that may erupt between Mr. Obama and the Pope should the new administration pass the Freedom of Choice Act. He sets the stage as follows:
Mr. Obama signing the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) "would be the equivalent of a war," a senior Vatican official told Time magazine last week. "It would be like saying, 'We've heard the Catholic Church and we have no interest in their concerns.' "
FRC Submits Comments to HHS on Conscience Protection
On August 26, 2008, the Department of Health and Human Services ("HHS") asked the public for comments about rules it proposed to protect the rights of conscience of health care providers - in particular, to permit them to refuse to assist in, provide, or refer patients for abortions. These conscience rights were created by three historic federal statutes known more commonly as the Church, Coats, and Weldon Amendments.
The Family Research Council and several other groups filed comments on September 25th responding to HHS. Get a copy of them here.
Here is a summary of our main points:
HHS's proposed rules (regulations) are needed because many participants in the health care system are violating the Church, Coats, and Weldon Amendments. Many intended beneficiaries of these landmark civil rights laws - intended to protect health care providers' right of religious and moral conscience - do not know their rights under the law. HHS regulations are needed to clarify the extent of these statutory protections.
HHS should adopt a fertilization-based definition of pregnancy (and thus abortion) because that is consistent with the prevailing medical dictionary definitions, religious thought, and medical science on when life begins: these are, after all, conscience protections, so they should protect the conscience's of the various health care providers.
Even if HHS does not adopt a fertilization-based definition of pregnancy, it should reject the implantation-based definition in HHS's human-subject regulations for a number of reasons.
o For example, non-uterine, ectopicpregnancies demonstrate that uterine implantation cannot define the onset of pregnancy.
As a final alternative, HHS should recognize that the reasonable, subjective religious or moral conviction of the individual or institutional health care provider should govern, given the statutory focus on protecting conscience. Religious freedom and conscience in this country plainly reflect the views of the individual or institution, not the views of third parties.
Recognizing a right of conscience does not discriminate against women or violate any concepts mandated in Roe v. Wade and its progeny which do not purport to require any particular health care provider to participate in abortions.
HHS should enforce the Church, Coats, and Weldon Amendments in the same manner as it enforces other civil rights statutes, like Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972.
HHS's Title X regulations, which require grant recipients to counsel and refer for abortions, appear to violate the law as set forth in the Church, Coats, and Weldon Amendments.
Congress can sometimes be likened to when your young children try to make you breakfast. There is a flurry of activity trying to obtain the objective but by the time they are finished all you are left with is an unpalatable mess that you (the taxpayer) are left to clean up. At least in the case of your children you can admire their good intentions, not as much with Congress.
In the Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank brought up a new bill (the eighth this Congress) to undermine the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) that was passed overwhelmingly in the 109th Congress. Chairman Franks, working closely with the foreign based Internet gambling industry, crafted his legislation to allow all forms of Internet gambling, except for sports betting, until an Administrative Law Judge with the Federal Reserve Board decides what the definition of "unlawful Internet gambling" should be. Needless to say, that could take years and this is meant to totally gut the effect of the law just passed last Congress. Chairman Frank unsuccessfully sought to divide and conquer the unique coalition of national and state family groups, religious organizations, every major sports association, many major financial organizations and the National Association of Attorneys by granting numerous exemptions. However, the bill still holds the same destructive goal of overruling state laws and opening the door for destructive Internet gambling into people's homes. Representative Franks' claimed he was trying to "clarify" the original UIGEA, however considering the time and effort he has put into overturning current law in relation to Internet gambling, his true motives are pretty clear. Chairman Frank's bill was voted out by the Democratically-controlled Committee and Members of the full House of Representatives need to know to vote against this bill if it reaches the House floor.
Meanwhile in the full House the Democratic Leadership agreed to a vote on energy however avoided the bipartisan H.R. 6566, "American Energy Act," and instead passed legislation, H.R. 6899, which does nothing to advance America's energy concerns. The Democrat's plan allows for offshore drilling, but only more then fifty miles offshore, where very few oil reserves are known to exist! The drill makes permanent any ban on drilling closer to shore, and also calls for higher taxes on energy producing companies. The Senate is expected to take up either this bill or a similar one, though President Bush has threatened to veto the House bill.
Talking of the Senate, the Defense Authorization bill passed cloture yesterday, meaning the vote will be forthcoming. Hate crimes wasn't even an issue this time around - clearly the Democrats seeing it too hot a political issue to push right before an election. A number of Republicans (including Senators Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) and Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) voted against cloture because Senator Reid refused to allow Senator DeMint's amendment that would strike Section 1002, and restore the effect of the President's executive order to ensure all earmarks in committee reports are subjected to a competitive, merit-based review. This would allow agencies to continue funding worthy projects, while stopping wasteful earmarks and directing the tax dollars to real priorities. With the right amount of pressure, Senator Harry Reid (D-Nev.) might allow for a vote on Senator DeMint's amendment.
This brings us to the Queen of Tabloid Television, Ms. Oprah Winfrey. This is the first year Ms. Winfrey has dipped her foot into the political arena by endorsing a Presidential candidate, and she must have liked the feel of it for she is now working to pass legislation she supports. Earlier this week Oprah did a show on S. 1738, "The PROTECT Our Children Act" which she says is being held up by "partisan politics" and she is urging people to call Senators to pass the bill now.
We did some digging for Ms. Winfrey and found out that "The PROTECT Our Children Act" is one of the over 30 bills that Senator Reid combined into one large "Omnibus Bill" in an effort to get passed legislation that while not allowing for ample floor debate on the issues that are within the multitude of bills. If "The PROTECT Our Children Act" alone was brought up today, with no other bills attached to it, there would be no opposition to it and it would be allowed a straight up or down vote. However since it is attached to all these other bills, many of which good people oppose on being wasteful or unnecessary, is why it is controversial.
FRC's position on the legislation is currently neutral, however if constituents want to support the bill they need to call Senator Reid's office at 202-224-5556 or e-mail his office here and not the full Congress as Ms. Winfrey suggests, and tell Senator Reid to cut out the partisan games and allow "The PROTECT Our Children Act" passed as a stand alone bill.
HHS Proposed Conscience Regs Published in Federal Register
Today, the Federal Register published the Department of Health and Human Services' notice of proposed rulemaking that seeks to ensure that HHS "funds do not support coercive or discriminatory policies or practices in violation of federal law" (lower case mine).The notice for these proposed conscience protection rules can be found in PDF via this link.The deadline for filing comments is September 25, 2008.
Julia Duin (Washington Times) has written a fair article today on the proposed regulations that HHS will publish soon in the Federal Register and which are designed to "protect doctors and other health care professionals from being fired or discriminated against for refusing to provide abortions for conscience or religious reasons." HHS Secretary Michael O. Leavitt has blogged about the regulations and the reasons that make their promulgation necessary. A draft copy of the proposed regulations is available from Sec. Levitt's blog using this link. Yesterday, Tony Perkins, President of the Family Research Council, released this statement.
A group of liberal Congressmen, joined by Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), are looking for cosponsors for H.R. 6680, a bill to increase federal funding for controversial needle exchange programs. They make a rather questionable claim in their "Dear Colleague":
"With approximately 12,000 Americans contracting HIV/AIDS directly or indirectly each year from the sharing of contaminated syringes, it is critical that we make federal dollars available to programs that effectively reduce the number of contaminated syringes on our streets."
While most of my experience with needle exchange program is more anecdotal from my time in Washington, DC (which has allowed for private funding for years and just recently allowed for taxpayer funded needle exchanges), it has not been pleasant. The areas where the needle distribution trucks would gather generally became high crime areas and also drew in a lot of drug dealers knowing they had a gathered customer base. Scientific evidence about the efficacy of needle exchange programs has been imprecise. The truth is giving needles to illegal drug users is like giving matches and gasoline to a pyromaniac. Instead of reducing cases of HIV/AIDS many cities that have needle exchange programs find higher rates among drug users.
The city of Baltimore has had a taxpayer funded needle exchange for over a decade. A recent report from the Baltimore City Commission on HIV and AIDS has found that Baltimore now ranks second among cities in the nation for HIV/AIDS cases. The study also showed that AIDS cases are most prevalent in areas with high drug abuse and among injection drug users.
Congress' newest effort would result in facilitating an extermination program of the addicted - I'm sure that is not their intention, however that would clearly be the result.
I blogged Monday about the Forum on the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act (CIANA) that Judiciary minority members held last Thursday, July 10th, and I posted the statements made by Representatives Franks, Lamar Smith and testimony given by Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen.
A commonsense way to reduce abortion would be for Congress to pass legislation requiring parental notification. The problem is that many abortion clinics lure young girls from their home states that have parental notice laws to states where they can get abortions without their parents knowing. Often the man who gets a young girl pregnant takes her to the clinic. To counter this type of human trafficking, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) reintroduced the Child Interstate Notification Act (H.R. 1063).
Testimony on the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act (CIANA)
On Thursday, I testified at a legislative forum on behalf of the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act (CIANA). Also testifying were Professor Teresa Collett, Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, and local pro-life activist Missy Smith. Five Members of Congress were at the hearing and about 20 members of the media and congressional staff were present.
I am not quite sure what has gotten into Dick Armey these days, but he sure is grumpy. He opened fire this week on a proposal that we have floated calling upon the White House to establish a “Family Czar” to revive an initiative first undertaken by Ronald Reagan.
Armey not only misses the target on almost every point, his facts are wrong, including his claim that I endorsed a Republican presidential candidate that he opposed. I didn’t endorse; my role at FRC is not to elect presidents, but to shape policy and that is exactly what we are proposing with the idea of a Family Czar.
Armey mistakenly claims we are calling for the creation of more government intrusion into the lives of America’s families. Like Mr. Armey, I have a legislative record that is solidly conservative, for limited and smaller government. I hold to my conservative credentials and our proposal reflects them. Mr. Armey’s disregard for the importance of strong families is shocking. If we are willing to create issue-specific White House policy coordinators, some of whom the media has deemed “czars,” is it too much to ask the government to recognize the value of the family and our need to strengthen rather than usurp it?
Ronald Reagan understood the fact that America as a country could be no stronger than its families; that is why he had a quasi-family czar in domestic policy advisor Gary Bauer. That is why in 1987, by executive order 12606, President Reagan pushed the traditional family to the forefront in Washington by requiring government agencies to consider the impact their policies would have on families before issuing them. The measure was designed to block intrusive federal action and slow the growth of government. Among the order’s strong provisions was a requirement that federal agencies ask whether a planned action helps “the family perform its functions, or does it substitute governmental activity for the function?”
When families prosper the nation prospers. Unfortunately, President Clinton rescinded the executive order when he took office. Efforts to pass the measure through Congress during Mr. Armey’s watch were unsuccessful. Had it succeeded there is little doubt the gains of the Left would have been braked not accelerated.
Working off the language of President Reagan’s Executive Order 12606, I wrote and passed “The Family Impact Statement” legislation in my home state of Louisiana. I am convinced it will be a valuable tool in the hands of a true conservative like Governor Bobby Jindal, and I think it would be a good step for a White House committed to the traditional family unit. Calling on government to consider the impact of its proposals on the family, whether it is the strength of the marital commitment, the rights of parents to raise their children as they see fit, or the family’s budget, is a conservative idea. But to give it life, the family must be given priority. I’m not wedded to the term “Family Czar,” and the images it unintentionally evokes certainly give Mr. Armey a bone to pick, but he can rest assured we support solutions that push authority and financial resources back to the smallest government of all, the home.
News report: On Tuesday, McCain's delegates at the West Virginia convention swung over to support Huckabee at the last minute in a successful maneuver designed to deprive Romney of a victory.
This convention tactic is as old as conventions. Abraham Lincoln's supporters employed it in Illinois in 1856. We can read about it in Doris Kearns Goodwin's excellent "Team of Rivals." She shows how Abraham Lincoln's political allies did exactly the same thing in Illinois in 1856. They knew Lincoln could not get the Senate nomination, so they threw their support to Orville Browning to block a rival. Lincoln got the support of that Senator Browning in his 1858 race against Steven Douglas.
Usually when one thinks of recess you think of schoolchildren getting a break to play during the school day. “Recess” is also the word Congress uses when they take a long time period off (usually traveling on the taxpayer’s dime!) Dictionary.com defines recess as “temporary withdrawal or cessation from the usual work or activity.” Considering the type of activity currently going on in our Nation’s Capitol, I can think of a whole host of Members of Congress who deserve Detention when they return to Washington, D.C.!
Here is a list of pending topics that your Representative and Senators need to hear from you about:
Hate crimes: The House of Representatives voted favorably for the bill and currently it sits in the Senate. Additionally Sen. Kennedy has his own bill and Sens. Kennedy and Smith introduced an amendment (which included full text of their hate crimes bill) to the Defense Bill. The Defense Bill and any amendments to it will be debated when the Senate returns in September.
Judges: Judge Southwick has been voted out successfully from committee but now awaits a floor vote - still tied up in committee or on the floor is over a dozen qualified candidates. Senators need to hear from you that these candidates deserve a fair up or down vote. Judicial nominees should be judged on their ability to judge – not be lost to partisan politics.
Abstinence: The S-Chip bill in the House gutted one of the largest abstinence funding streams and the other large funding stream expires this fall. Contact your Representatives and Senators to protect this vital educational tool for children – and to not let the money go to abortion organizations like Planned Parenthood!
Embryonic stem-cells experimentation: After passing both the Senate and the House and then rightly vetoed by President Bush, the Senate now plans to vote to override the President veto - as it stands right now we have enough votes in the Senate to protect the veto but it is close. Additionally, Senator Specter and Harkin attached ESC expansion to the Labor Appropriations bill. Contact your Senator to vote against this deadly experimentation and for actual life saving ethical research like stem cell and cord blood stem cell research.
ENDA: The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) is misleadingly referred to as a logical extension of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. H.R. 2015 is a radical transformation of workplace discrimination law. It would grant special consideration on the basis of “sexual orientation” or “gender identity” that would not be extended to other employees in the workplace. ENDA is a “one size fits all” solution to alleged discrimination that erases all marriage-based distinctions. It grants special rights to homosexuals while ignoring those of employers. The federal government should not force private businesses to abandon their moral principles. Contact your Representatives and Senators to vote against this legislation when it comes up for a vote.
Fake pro-life bills: The Democratic Leadership will start pushing these more in an attempt to co-opt the strong pro-life tendencies of the American people. Supporters of these bills say that they will reduce abortions but instead they increase funding to Planned Parenthood and seek to get government funding for Plan B (which the manufacturer agrees is a "sometimes abortifacient")
Education: No Child Left Behind is up for re-authorization, within that bill we will seek to continue and expand protections for home schooled and private schooled kids and to return power locally where it belongs. We also support the alternative by Sen. Jim DeMint and John Cornyn that removes federal control from education
Pro-Life Riders: The House and Senate Foreign Operations spending bills undermine the pro-life Mexico City policy, which prevents funding for international groups that perform abortions. The Senate bill also gives money to international groups that support coercive abortion and sterilization programs.
The New York Times has a strange quote from Speaker Nancy Pelosi:
“Science is a gift of God to all of us and science has take us to a place that is biblical in its power to cure,” said Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Democrat of California. “And that is the embryonic stem cell research.”
I completely agree that science, like all good things, can sometimes be viewed as a gift from God. I'm less clear, though, on the other part of that sentence. How exactly is it "biblical" to kill a human being in the fanciful hope that we one day might obtain cures for other humans beings? Is that written in one of those obscure Old Testament books that no one reads?
Perhaps Ms. Pelosi, Democratic House leader and theologian, can explain that one for us.
While criminal law treats all violent acts equally, the proposed law would additionally punish the accused for any prejudice they might have toward the victim. Instead of ending discrimination, this bill would create a judicial caste system in American society by creating categories where some victims are given more consideration and attention than others. This is a direct affront to the equal protection provision of our constitution.
As a former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Human Rights Commission, and a person who grew up fighting racism, I oppose the idea of thought crimes. In America, our Constitution guarantees everyone the freedom to think and believe whatever he or she wants, no matter how repulsive those beliefs are to others. And, our Declaration of Independence champions the dignity and worth of every individual.
So, the Democrats in Congress claim they support people of faith, while preventing a vote two weeks ago on an amendment to the Head Start bill that would have changed the law to allow faith-based groups who get Head Start funds to hire according to their beliefs…. (should a religious organization be required to hire a person from another religion, or none at all?). Democrats made much of their support for faith-based groups while effectively cutting out those that hire based on their religious beliefs.
But yesterday during a House Judiciary hearing, Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN) went after Monica Goodling’s Christian affiliation, since she attended law school at a Regent University.
If Monica Goodling did something unethical or illegal, she should be held to account for doing something unethical or illegal, not for having attended a Christian law school. I wonder if Rep. Cohen would have asked about Monica’s religious affiliation if she had attended a Jewish law school. I don’t know, but his constituents may want to ask him.
COHEN: “The mission of the law school you attended, Regent, is to bring to bear upon legal education and the legal profession the will of almighty God, our creator. What is the will of almighty God, our creator, on the legal profession?”
GOODLING: “I'm not sure that I could define that question for you.”
Click here and fast forward to 2:43 minutes to view the exchange between Rep. Cohen and Ms. Goodling (with WPost reporter Dana Milbank giving commentary):
To read about more about Goodling’s testimony, and the exchange with Rep. Cohen read Byron York’s article here.
How much have you spent this year on the abortion-oriented services of Planned Parenthood? This question may seem too personal, or out of line with your religious beliefs. But the truth is that if you pay taxes, you support Planned Parenthood.
Splashed across this morning's newspapers are photos of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) sporting a headscarf as she visited Syria, which included a stop at a mosque. While it is troubling that the leader third in line for the presidency (behind only the Vice President) would kowtow to a country that is a major purveyor in the trafficking of women, illegal drugs and terrorism, it's even more disturbing that she would concede by covering her head--which is usually seen as a sign of submission in the Muslim world.
On the home front we continue to uncover the anti-family efforts of this new Congress. The major accomplishments the new Democratic Leadership in the House can point to are furthering taxpayer funding of destructive human embryo research, de-funding (and demoralizing) our troops fighting the war against terrorists and passing a budget that would raise our taxes by at least $400 billion.
Unfortunately, this is only the beginning. Waiting in the on-deck circle are bills that would treat homosexuals as a special protected class, eliminate abstinence funding and use tax money for abortions--just to name a few. The more this Congress attacks the values important to American families, the clearer it is that they have strayed from their mandate.
Due to some backroom machinations by Indiana State House Speaker Patrick Bauer (D), it looks like Hoosiers will be denied a right to amend their constitution and protect marriage. Despite Bauer's promise that the full House would be given an opportunity to vote on the marriage protection amendment, members of the House Rules Committee failed to pass the amendment in a 5-5 vote. Although several conservative leaders have vowed to reintroduce the amendment, it's uncertain whether they can do so in time to ensure that the issue appears on the 2008 ballot.
FRC Action has been heavily involved in the fight, publishing an ad in a local newspaper last week and promoting it in an audio/radio alert throughout the state over the weekend. As Indiana's pro-family leaders regroup, we urge citizens across the state to encourage Speaker Bauer to revive the proposal--before time runs out.
Since his unanimous confirmation by the U.S. Senate in 2001, Dr. Wade Horn has served admirably as the Assistant Secretary of the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) at the Department of Health and Human Services. As he announces his departure, we commend him for his unwavering commitment to the intact family and abstinence.
Under his watch, ACF has promoted positive, life-changing programs for adolescents, parents, and married couples, including several new partnerships with faith-based organizations and abstinence educators. His principled leadership will be sorely missed. As the administration considers a replacement to fill the big shoes that Wade is leaving behind, we urge the White House to select a person who shares his commitment for putting the family first.
Also in the op/ed department, FRC's Cathy Ruse, Senior Fellow for Legal Studies, writes in today's Christian Science Monitor about the recent overturning by the courts of the Child Online Protection Act:
Another federal judge has struck down the Child Online Protection Act. Had it taken effect, the 1998 law would have done one simple thing: require Internet pornographers to verify the age of customers through the use of adult-access codes or credit cards.
Last month, Judge Lowell Reed Jr ruled out even this basic measure of accountability as a violation of the free-speech rights of porn purveyors and their often addicted customers.
Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) is a highly decorated former Marine and Vietnam veteran. He's also the chairman of the House Appropriations Defense Subcommittee and one of the most outspoken opponents of the Iraq conflict. Recently he told CNN's Wolf Blitzer that he supports reinstating the military draft and said that he believes "everyone ought to be obligated to serve":
Before you would-be draft dodgers rush off to buy a one-way bus tickets to Canada, keep in mind that hardly anyone--including the military and Murtha's fellow legislators--agrees that a draft is desirable.
When it comes to promoting faith on Capitol Hill, there is safety in numbers--"219" to be exact. That's the House meeting room where a group of members gather each week to ask the Lord's blessing on our nation. In 2005, Rep. J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.) made it official by creating the Congressional Prayer Caucus, a group of leaders committed to praying for our nation and protecting the rights of all Americans to pray. In the past two years, the number of Caucus members has grown to 42 (almost a 10% of the representatives in the House).
Yesterday, FRC attended the press conference in which the Caucus announced its plan to spread what they call "219 prayer groups" across America. They hope that as the faithful meet to pray these "spiritual blocks" will form a powerful wall of protection around America. We applaud Rep. Forbes' leadership in helping to fulfill 2 Chronicles 7:14: "If my people, who are called by my Name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, I will hear from heaven, will forgive their sin, and heal their land." We invite you to join with the 219 group and FRC, which also has a prayer initiative as part of our Church Ministries Program. Both are keys to the revival our country so desperately needs.
Somewhere between the November elections and this week's debate, the GOP must have rediscovered its backbone. Apart from the runaway pork, which a handful of Republicans did support, the new minority has used its humble status to block several unconstitutional anti-family measures on everything from emergency contraception to D.C. voting rights.
Tuesday, the GOP's latest move, prompted by the Minneapolis lawsuit filed by the "flying imans" against their fellow plane passengers, managed to take liberals completely by surprise. Using a procedural vote, introduced an amendmentRepublicans to the Rail and Public Transportation Security Act that would protect passengers from being sued when they report suspicious activity. Although the debate was heated, the provision proved extremely popular among Republicans and nearly half of the Democrats, passing 304-121. Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) dismissed the claims that the bill would lead to racial profiling. When Americans "see something," they should be free to "say something," King argued.
Unfortunately, the suit in Minneapolis is just a symptom of the broader strategy by radical Islamists to manipulate American law. The Twin City taxi drivers, three-fourths of whom are Muslim, now refuse to transport passengers carrying alcohol. Likewise, Muslim clerks at Target stores are refusing to scan items that contain pork. In both instances, Islamic law forbids the consumption of these foods--not the handling of them. But until their agenda is challenged by leaders like Rep. King and the freedom of Americans upheld, these determined radicals will continue to use our own code of tolerance to chip away at Western law.
Despite suffering several rounds of defeat on the state level, the Senate's pro-abortion dream team of Sens. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) reintroduced an archaic (and unnecessary) Equal Rights Amendment for consideration. In conjunction with the Feminist Majority Foundation, liberals hope their transparent ploy for women's rights will ultimately nullify parental notification laws and the Hyde Amendment, which bans the use of taxpayer funds for abortions.
As an added bonus to same-sex marriage advocates, a federal ERA would create a legal avenue for attacking traditional marriage. Already a Maryland state court has ruled in favor of same-sex unions on the grounds that the state's ERA prohibits a "sex-based classification." If feminists were truly concerned about women, they would concentrate their efforts not on achieving a status they already enjoy but on policies that will reverse the worldwide phenomena of sex selection abortion and infanticide that have resulted in an estimated 100 million missing girls. It is clear that what radical liberals lack in principle, they certainly make up for in persistence.
Last week, the U.S. House proposed funding the war on spinach. This week the Senate has shifted the funding to the war on sugar beets. Here is a list of provisions in the emergency war supplemental “U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans’ Health and Iraq Accountability Act, 2007" that do not fund the war:
1) $24 million for funding for sugar beets.
2) $3 million for funding for sugar cane (goes to one Hawaiian co-op).
3) $20 million for insect infestation damage reimbursements in Nevada, Idaho, and Utah.
4) $2.1 billion for crop production losses.
5) $1.5 billion for livestock production losses.
6) $100 million for Dairy Production Losses.
7) $13 million for Ewe Lamb Replacement and Retention Program.
8) $32 million for Livestock Indemnity Program.
9) $40 million for the Tree Assistance Program.
10) $100 million for Small Agricultural Dependent Businesses.
11) $6 million for North Dakota flooded crop land.
12) $35 million for emergency conservation program.
13) $50 million for the emergency watershed program.
14) $115 million for the conservation security program.
15) $18 million for drought assistance in upper Great Plains/South West.
16) Provision that extends the availability by a year $3.5 million in funding for guided tours of the Capitol. Also a provision allows transfer of funds from holiday ornament sales in the Senate gift shop.
17) 165.9 million for fisheries disaster relief, funded through NOAA (including $60.4 million for salmon fisheries in the Klamath Basin region).
18) $12 million for forest service money (requested by the president in the non-emergency FY2008 budget).
19) $425 million for education grants for rural areas - (Secure Rural Schools program).
20) $640 million for LIHEAP.
21) $25 million for asbestos abatement at the Capitol Power Plant.
22) $388.9 million for funding for backlog of old Department of Transportation projects.
23) $22.8 million for geothermal research and development.
24) $500 million for wildland fire management.
25) $13 million for mine safety technology research.
26) $31 million for one month extension of Milk Income Loss Contract program (MILC)
27) $50 million for fisheries disaster mitigation fund.
28) $100 million to help pay for Republican and Democrat party conventions.
Thanks to Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine (D), parents who drop off their kids at the public library can now have more assurance that their children are checking out books and not pornography on the Internet. After a prolonged, three-year battle, state legislators passed a bill that requires public libraries to install filtering software on their computers to protect patrons from pornography and indecency.
Before the legislation passed, fewer than half of the library systems in Virginia had installed the software. Without them, a simple, misspelled word in a web search could lead children to pornographic and violent sites instead. The bill passed both the House and Senate by wide margins, echoing the broad local support for the proposal.
According to a survey by the Virginia Family Foundation, 89% of citizens supported the measure when asked last October. Virginia will join 21 other states that have similar legislation in place. Unfortunately, several other states legislatures have debated comparable bills but seen them fall prey to "free speech" objections. Ironically, some politicians seem more interested in protecting kids from the so-called "dangers of religious speech" than from the perils of pornography.
Virginia leaders were able to overcome the First Amendment obstacles by including a provision that allows adults to have the filters disabled for legitimate purposes. We applaud the Virginia Family Foundation and pro-family leaders, all of whom fought tirelessly for "safe surfing" in the state.
Wedding Crashers: States Battle Against Same-Sex Marriage
As their motto implies, residents of Indiana truly are at "The Crossroads of America" when it comes to traditional marriage. When Rep. Patrick Bauer (D) campaigned to become the next Speaker of the state House, he pledged to "allow committee meetings, floor debate, and a final vote in the chamber on a constitutional amendment to prohibit gay marriages in Indiana."
Since his election, things may have changed. Bauer is reportedly considering new language that would undercut traditional marriage and deny citizens a vote on the issue until at least 2010. In response, FRC Action and allies placed a full-page ad today in the South Bend Tribune calling on the Speaker to keep his promise on the amendment and let the people of Indiana decide.
Perhaps Bauer could take his cue from the Senate President of Massachusetts, Therese Murray, who announced this week that she will not use her power to block a vote on the state's marriage protection amendment. Despite her objections to the proposal, Murray put the democratic process ahead of her political agenda. In Maryland, the prospects of passing a marriage amendment were crushed by the House Judiciary Committee, whose members rejected the bill before it reached the floor.
On the bright side, South Carolina celebrated the formal ratification of its new constitutional amendment upholding traditional marriage last week. The state officially joins 27 others that have resolved to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman.
While the federal government is mired in debates about the culture of life, three states have taken it upon themselves to pass a bevy of pro-life legislation. In Mississippi, Gov. Haley Barbour signed a bill that would prohibit abortion in the state if Roe v. Wade is ever overturned. In the meantime, the legislation requires abortion clinics to offer women an ultrasound before they consent to the procedure.
Neighboring Arkansas approved a House measure that requires abortion businesses to tell women that they cannot be coerced into having an abortion. Vermont tackled a bill that affects the end of life. Despite pressure to follow in Oregon's footsteps, the Vermont House defeated a measure that would have legalized assisted suicide.
Unfortunately, New Hampshire is one state that has become the focus of an intense attack from anti-family forces. Next week, legislators are considering bills on every subject from parental notification and abortion regulation to legalizing civil unions and a constitutional amendment to protect marriage. Our friends at Cornerstone Policy Research are hosting a rally tomorrow at the New Hampshire statehouse in Concord. The Granite State is increasingly a key battle ground in the nation's culture wars.
Last week I pointed out that the bill to provide supplemental war funding included $25 million for payments to spinach producers, $120 million to the shrimp industry, $74 million for peanut storage, and $5 million for shellfish, oyster and clam producers (see: Funding the War on Spinach). In response to this pork-loading, Congressman Mike Pence has a great retort:
"Spinach, shrimp, peanuts and shellfish? That's not a war funding bill, that's the salad bar at Denny's. "
Is there anything good about presidential political campaigns starting so early? Ken Blackwell, FRC's new Senior Fellow for Family Empowerment, says there is:
There appears to be every possibility that ideas will ultimately decide the nomination, perhaps for both parties. The thinking primary has begun. That's a welcome sign, because this is the primary that matters, and if there is any advantage to having our presidential competitions start almost two years away from Election Day it's the opportunity to examine and think about our options.
While the country awaits a decision from the U.S. Supreme Court on the constitutionality of public funding of faith-based social services, a secularist group launched a related suit. Americans United for the Separation of Church and State tried, unsuccessfully, to strip funds from a U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) grant recipient because of its religious roots.
For years, the Northwest Marriage Institute has provided marriage workshops in an effort to strengthen relationships and eliminate poverty. Impressed by the organization's strong track record, the Administration for Children & Families awarded the group three grants so that low-income couples could take the secular seminars for free. None of the funds were used for the biblical workshops, yet former ACLU chief Barry Lynn's organization argued that Northwest's religious affiliation should exclude it from participating in government programs.
Fortunately, Federal District Judge Franklin Burgess disagreed, ruling, "[It] has never been held that religious institutions are disabled by the First Amendment from participating in publicly sponsored social welfare programs." We applaud the Alliance Defense Fund, which represented the Institute and successfully convinced the court that religious groups--that provide valuable social services cannot be treated like "second-class citizens."
As you fill out this year's IRS paperwork, enjoy your family tax breaks. If the new Senate leadership has its way, they may be among your last. This week, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) unveiled a resolution that calls for a balanced budget by 2012. While it seems like an insurmountable task, liberals have found an easy solution. They'll simply reverse every GOP tax cut and raise an extra $900 billion in revenue.
As part of the plan, Democrats would reinstate the tax penalty on married couples, causing the standard deduction for joint filers to shrink from 200 to 167 percent by 2011. Also, liberals recommend slashing the child tax credit in half, reducing it from $1,000 to $500. Although Congress has managed to whittle the death taxes down to nearly nothing under the current code, Democrats would resurrect them in four short years. Unfortunately, the tax rates would rise substantially in every bracket, even among low-income taxpayers who would be forced to pay Uncle Sam at a 15 percent rate. Under the measure, taxes on both dividends and capital gains would increase by January 2009.
Although painful, this would help erase the U.S. budget deficit, right? Wrong. Reid's legislation actually increases spending for health care, education, and transportation projects. Republicans are understandably frustrated by the proposal, which could lead to the biggest tax increase in history. Families, who were finally experiencing some tax relief under President Bush, would again be forced to shoulder a heavy financial burden--not to ease American debt--but to pay for Democrats' pet programs. As Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.) said, "As we [start to debate] the budget... we shouldn't begin with a plan to grow an even more massive bureaucracy on the backs of the American taxpayer."
The House leadership, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and company, is moving forward with bills that undermine the U.S. Constitution. In 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a ruling that would have given native Hawaiians "sovereignty." New legislation that would have a similar effect has been quietly introduced under the name "Hawaiian Homeownership Opportunity Act." The bill could lead to exempting Hawaiians from the Constitution and allowing them to create their own race-based government.
A second proposal, which would give the District of Columbia its own representative in the House, has come under fire from the White House for being "unconstitutional." The measure has already passed through two House committees and Pelosi vows to secure the bill's approval on the floor.
Finally, as if there weren't enough hot air in Congress this week, Al Gore is paying a visit to Capitol Hill to offer his flawed research as grounds for U.S. climate change legislation. He was invited to testify before a joint subcommittee despite the fact that scientists are increasingly critical of his methods and conclusions.
$25 million for livestock (2005 Hurricane Livestock Indemnity program).
$100 million for citrus assistance (2005 Hurricanes Citrus program)
$283 million for the Milk Income Loss Contract program.
$120 million to compensate for the effects “of Hurricane Katrina on the shrimp and menhaden fishing industries.”
$60.4 million for salmon fishery "disaster" in the Klamath River region in California and Oregon.
$48 million for salaries and expenses for Farm Service Agency.
An additional $500 million for emergency wildfires suppression even though the Forest Service already has $831 million available for this purpose.
$400 million for rural schools.
Government contracting reform.
Minimum wage increase, which is already moving on a separate track.
$50 million for asbestos mitigation U.S. Capitol Plant.
$16 million for security upgrades to House of Representative Office buildings.
$6.4 million for House of Representative’s Salaries and Expenses Account for business continuity and disaster recovery expenses.
$35 million for NASA risk mitigation projects in Gulf Coast.
$20 million for Emergency Conservation Program for farmland damaged by freezing temperatures.
$5 million for losses suffered by aquaculture businesses including breeding, rearing, or transporting live fish as a result of viral hemorrhagic septicemia.
$4 million for Office of Women’s Health of FDA.
$10 million for the International Boundary and Water Commission, US/Mexico for the Rio Grande Flood Control System Rehabilitation project.
If liberal judicial activism were ever put on trial, the foolish decisions of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (sometimes referred to as the Ninth Circus) would be Exhibit A. An editorial in yesterday's Wall Street Journal notes that the Supreme Court has reviewed eight decisions by the Ninth Circuit in its current term--and has overturned all eight. The cumulative vote of the justices against the Ninth Circuit's positions is an astronomical 67-5.
This gives hope that the Supremes will overturn another absurd Ninth Circuit ruling handed down Friday. The Contra Costa County (Calif.) Library makes meeting rooms available to the public for "educational, cultural and community related" activities--but forbids their use for "religious services." A district court judge overturned this blatantly unconstitutional policy, but a Ninth Circuit panel overruled that decision, and now the full court has refused to hear an appeal. The judges argue that "mere religious worship" is entitled to less protection under the First Amendment than is secular speech or religious speech other than worship. The dissenting judges declared that "the majority has disregarded equal-access cases stretching back nearly three decades."
It's no wonder that former House Speaker Newt Gingrich told Dr. James Dobson last week in a radio interview that he favors abolishing the Ninth Circuit altogether.
At the annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), every GOP presidential candidate but Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) tried to stake a claim for conservative support. The results of CPAC's presidential straw poll indicate that voters are grappling to find candidates whose platform addresses both the crisis abroad and the dilemmas at home.
Of 1,705 registrants, 21 percent backed former Gov. Mitt Romney (R-Mass.) for President. Rudy Giuliani, who was given a prime-time slot at the event, came in second-place with just 17 percent of the vote. Senator Sam Brownback received 15%. The poll also surveyed conservatives for their opinion on what the government's priorities ought to be. Half responded that "their most important goal is to promote individual freedom by reducing the size of government."
FRC Radio correspondent Bethanie Swendsen reports from the Supreme Court on the legal challenge by a humanist group of President Bush's faith-based initiatives.
After a grueling five hours of testimony, Hawaiian lawmakers refused even to vote on a bill in committee that would have allowed same-sex unions. Later, the state's legislators refused to offer an explanation for the move, but we applaud the Hawaii Family Forum for motivating voters to voice their opposition to this dangerous measure. The vote in Hawaii is more evidence that legislatures are reluctant to change the public understanding of marriage when they are free to debate and vote in the absence of a judicial decree that puts a finger on the scales of justice.
Hawaii is a politically liberal state, but it was one of the first in the nation to grapple with a pro-homosexual judicial ruling upsetting the man-woman character of marriage. When Hawaii courts first ruled on the matter roughly a decade ago, voters amended the state constitution to require that any changes in state law on the nature of marriage could only be made by the elected branches of government, not judges.
This stands in sharp contrast to the judicially-driven outcomes in Vermont, Massachusetts, and now New Jersey. It also has the virtue of being more honest: elected officials must account for themselves, and not point to another branch of government and say, "They made me do it." Whatever your position is on this issue, or any other controversial matter, voters should expect their elected officials to stand on the courage of their convictions, not the convenience of coercion.
On Wenesday, FRC filed a "friend-of-the-court" brief with our friends at the Alliance Defense Fund in the U.S. Supreme Court case Fausey v. Hiller. We are arguing that the Court should review the case, which would determine if parents can control "third-party visitation rights." These cases pit a third party (often a grandparent) against a parent in determining whether visits with the parent's children will be permitted, and on what terms.
Some states have sought to use a standard ("best interests of the child") that was developed for mother-and-father disputes and to expand that standard to other relatives and parties. In today's world these disputes can enmesh families where the grandparents are in fact loving in their intentions.
While recognizing this, FRC maintains that before the state intervenes in a decision made by what the law deems "a fit parent," the only reasonable standard is to put the burden on the third party to show that the child would suffer harm if such visits were denied. Only such a standard can preserve the fundamental right of parents to supervise the upbringing of their children, a right long ago recognized by the Supreme Court as fundamental under the U.S. Constitution. Churches, counselors and other resources can and should employed to help families achieve reconciliation and enjoy the important cross-generational ties that strong families experience.
Stating that "nothing defines us more as Americans [than] our religious liberties," Attorney General Alberto Gonzales unveiled the Justice Department's "First Freedom Project" to the Southern Baptist Executive Committee in Nashville on Tuesday. His new Religious Freedom Task Force will step up enforcement of laws prohibiting discrimination on the basis of religion and will educate churches on how to file complaints about violations of their rights. We applaud Attorney General Gonzales for recognizing the ongoing threat to religious freedom and for taking firm steps to defend our "first freedom."
Congress Blocks Funding of “Baby AIDS” Program (Update)
Last week I wrote about Congress' de-funding of the “Baby AIDS” program Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) believed the move was “retribution by appropriators for his militant stance on spending, as well as for his criticism of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention” while others claimed the initiative was simply an unfortunate casualty of earmark reform.
The new House appropriations chief David Obey (D-WI) even attempted to use this line of reasoning, claiming "Many worthwhile earmarks are not funded in this measure, but we had to take this step to clear the decks, clean up the process and start over."
But notes Kimberley Strassel of The Wall Street Journal, “The key language here is ‘not funded in this measure,’…”
Congressional members, led by appropriators and an army of staff, have already figured out a new way to keep their favors in the money, and it might as well be called 1-800-EARMARKS (which unfortunately is already taken). All across Washington, members are at this moment phoning budget officers at federal agencies--Interior, Defense, HUD, you name it--privately demanding that earmarks in previous legislation be fully renewed again this year.
To ensure this back door option wouldn’t be available to Coburn, language was included in the bill that explicitly stated that “None of the funds appropriated by this division may be used” for the infant AIDS program. Someone at the CDC was apparently still upset over another one of the Senator’s amendment to move $60 million from the CDC construction program to another AIDS reduction program.
Although the language will try to be overridden, Coburn’s staff is unsure that the money would actually be used for HIV/AIDS testing and prevention. In a memo to the CDC they wrote:
If you're a 72 year-old homosexual who doesn't believe in God your chances of being elected POTUS are rather slim.That's one of the conclusions that could be gleaned from a recent Gallup poll on presidential candidates. The poll asked Americans whether they would vote for "a generally well-qualified" presidential candidate nominated by their party with each of the following characteristics: Jewish, Catholic, Mormon, an atheist, a woman, black, Hispanic, homosexual, 72 years of age, and someone married for the third time. The results:
According to Gallup, only about one in five Americans said they would vote for an atheist when the item was first asked in the late 1950s, compared with 45% today. Just 26% said they would support a homosexual presidential candidate in 1978, compared with the current 55%.
Despite support by pro-life Republicans and Reps. Dale Kildee (D-MI) and Jason Altmire (D-PA) an amendment to expand the definition of "family member" to include the unborn and adoptive children in the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act failed in the House Education and Labor Committee. Chairman George Miller (D-CA) did offer a provision that would include "fetuses" in the bill. However, this does not address children in the process of being adopted and unborn children younger than nine weeks' gestation. Also, it does not remedy the dilemma for IVF embryos. FRC will continue to urge House members to close this devastating loophole.
Every year thousands of babies, predominately from poor African-American families, are born at risk of developing HIV. Many of these children develop HIV related infections that could have easily been prevented by prenatal testing and treatment. States that have implemented HIV testing for infants have seen their infections rates drop dramatically. Such success even inspired Congress to pass the Ryan White Early Diagnosis Grant Program. The program authorized $30 million in funding to states with infant HIV testing in order to ensure that these vulnerable children are protected.
The program was created just two months ago yet someone has already included language in the appropriations bill to prohibit funding for the “Baby Aids” program. Section 20613(b) of H.J.Res. 20 states:
(b) None of the funds appropriated by this division may be used to: (1) implement section 2625 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300ff-33; relating to the Ryan White early diagnosis grant program)…
This provision does not save any money but simply prohibits funds to help identify these toddlers. In fact, the funding was already included in President Bush’s FY08 budget request. So why would anyone insert this language into the bill?
Earlier this week, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) attempted to add an amendment to restore the funding. Unfortunately, Democratic Leader Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) never allowed the amendment to be included before the bill reached the Senate floor for a vote.
One would think that protecting sick babies is an issue that both Democrats and Republicans would fully endorse. So who inserted this language? And why wasn’t Sen. Coburn's amendment added? Every American who cares about children should be asking that question – and demanding that Congress give us an answer.
The Old Gray Lady has a tool that allows you to interactively compare words used in the 2007 State of the Union address to the addresses of previous years. Do a search for, say, "marriage," and you'll see that while completely absent in last night's speech, the word was used nine times in the 2004 address.
President Bush: Crossing the aisle or crossing his allies?
In the past State of the Union speeches President Bush has been consistent in recognizing issues important to families. After the speech last night I would assume his focus is now away from families and includes Nancy Pelosi. Global warming? Amnesty? Redistribution of income (raising taxes on the rich)?
Past speeches mention of culture: 2003:“By caring for children who need mentors and for addicted men and women who need treatment, we are building a more welcoming society, a culture that values every life. And in this work, we must not overlook the weakest among us. I ask you to protect infants at the very hour of their birth and end the practice of partial-birth abortion. And because no human life should be started or ended as the object of an experiment, I ask you to set a high standard for humanity and pass a law against all human cloning.”
2004:“To encourage right choices, we must be willing to confront the dangers young people face, even when they're difficult to talk about. Each year, about 3 million teenagers contract sexually transmitted diseases that can harm them or kill them or prevent them from ever becoming parents. In my budget, I propose a grassroots campaign to help inform families about these medical risks. We will double Federal funding for abstinence programs, so schools can teach this fact of life: Abstinence for young people is the only certain way to avoid sexually transmitted diseases.
Decisions children now make can affect their health and character for the rest of their lives. All of us, parents and schools and government, must work together to counter the negative influence of the culture and to send the right messages to our children.
A strong America must also value the institution of marriage. I believe we should respect individuals as we take a principled stand for one of the most fundamental, enduring institutions of our civilization. Congress has already taken a stand on this issue by passing the Defense of Marriage Act, signed in 1996 by President Clinton. That statute protects marriage under Federal law as a union of a man and a woman and declares that one State may not redefine marriage for other States.
Activist judges, however, have begun redefining marriage by court order, without regard for the will of the people and their elected representatives. On an issue of such great consequence, the people's voice must be heard. If judges insist on forcing their arbitrary will upon the people, the only alternative left to the people would be the constitutional process. Our Nation must defend the sanctity of marriage.
The outcome of this debate is important, and so is the way we conduct it. The same moral tradition that defines marriage also teaches that each individual has dignity and value in God's sight.”
2005:“Because a society is measured by how it treats the weak and vulnerable, we must strive to build a culture of life. Medical research can help us reach that goal, by developing treatments and cures that save lives and help people overcome disabilities - and I thank Congress for doubling the funding of the National Institutes of Health. To build a culture of life, we must also ensure that scientific advances always serve human dignity, not take advantage of some lives for the benefit of others. We should all be able to agree on some clear standards. I will work with Congress to ensure that human embryos are not created for experimentation or grown for body parts, and that human life is never bought and sold as a commodity. America will continue to lead the world in medical research that is ambitious, aggressive, and always ethical.”
2006:“A hopeful society has institutions of science and medicine that do not cut ethical corners and that recognize the matchless value of every life. Tonight I ask you to pass legislation to prohibit the most egregious abuses of medical research: Human cloning in all its forms; creating or implanting embryos for experiments; creating human-animal hybrids; and buying, selling, or patenting human embryos. Human life is a gift from our Creator, and that gift should never be discarded, devalued, or put up for sale.”
The Associated Press has reported that William Haynes, William Myers, and Terrance Boyle have asked that their names be withdrawn from future consideration as candidates for judicial office. Further consideration would extend the unprecedented long wait these well-qualified candidates have been forced to endure in order to receive a fair up-or-down vote by the U.S. Senate. These distinguished public servants add their names to a growing list of nominees who have withdrawn from the confirmation process, a list which includes Miguel Estrada, Carolyn Kuhl, Michael Wallace and Charles Pickering.
The AP cites several of the reasons why certain members of the Senate opposed their confirmation yet fails to mention any facts which strongly support the several nominees. Other media outlets have reported this as a concession to the Democrats. While it is deeply unfortunate that the nation will not benefit from their service on the federal bench, one surely cannot blame the nominees from exiting a confirmation process where extreme liberal interest groups rule the day, with decency and fairness being shut out.
"The haters... and negative nabobs...the people who spoke against [Rep. William Jefferson] couldn't prevail against the people who spoke for him."
-- Dr. Michael Eric Dyson, master of ceremonies for the Congressional Black Caucus's celebratory event. The FBI is currently conducting an investigation that alleges Jefferson accepted $100,000 from a telecommunications businessman ($90,000 of which was later recovered in the congressman's freezer). The caucus members--part of the "most ethical congress ever"--gave Jefferson a standing ovation.
Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA) says that President Bush's policy toward Katrina victims represents a policy of "ethnic cleansing by inaction."
“And, what I believe is, at this point you’re not talking about [inaudible], but what you’re talking about is, I think, a [inaudible], what you’re talking about is when you simply, in a calculated way, refuse to do anything for well over a year … [inaudible] … and [stuttering] I, I, the policy I think here is ethnic cleansing by inaction.
“It’s not ethnic cleansing in the sense that they’re killing people or [driving] people out, but what we need to recognize here is that, they’re in this happy position for them, where the federal government does nothing, as they become richer and richer, because well not only black people needed housing assistance,..."
The 110th Congress: Hey who needs an excuse to party?
I predicted Al D'Amato would beat Chuck Schumer. I predicted George H. W. Bush would beat Bill Clinton. I predicted Hillary Clinton would never become Senator of New York State. I predicted the Republicans would retain both Chambers of Congress. I predicted a ship like the Titanic could never be sunk and the Hindenburg was as safe as a horseless carriage. Finally, I predicted that the Democratic leadership wouldn't be able to help themselves after winning Congress and would throw a lavish Hollywood type "Inaugural" - the kind normally reserved for Presidential elections. I guess I had to be right one of these times:
Tony Bennett is coming, of course, to croon his trademark "I Left My Heart in San Francisco.''
Carole King and Wyclef Jean will be there. Mayor Gavin Newsom is scheduled to be there, too.
And a big delegation of San Francisco Chamber of Commerce and labor leaders is jetting back East, together no less.
All will converge on Washington in early January to take part in four days of events surrounding the swearing-in of Rep. Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco, who will be elected the new speaker of the House and the first woman and first Californian to occupy the post.
After running through a long list of planned events designed to highlight different phases of 66-year-old Pelosi's life, her spokesman Brendan Daly said, "Overall this is who Nancy Pelosi is. And this is a chance for people to meet Nancy Pelosi and see who she is.''
A couple of FDA items in the news yesterday are of interest, as is an oped about dealing with drug costs. First, the Washington Post reports on a new Government Accountability Office (GAO) study that new drugs are decreasing while the cost of drug R&D is increasing. In fact, the cost of R&D for drugs has increased to $60 billion annually from 1993 to 2004.
The amount of regulation on drug companies is definitely part of the reason for the enormous costs of getting new drugs to the market. I had a friend working for a company, and her job was to help companies run clinical trials in line with FDA regs. After a trial was complete, she said the amount of paperwork literally filled two trucks (not pickup trucks either). The amount of paper work alone has got to drive up costs, which of course are passed on to the consumer.
Second, it was widely reported yesterday that the FDA will require clearer labels for over-the-counter pain meds. I was shocked at how many deaths are attributed to pain killers (Tylenol, Aleve, etc). According to a Washington Post article:
Mishandling classified information, committing a crime and then lying to cover it up - and then when caught he still denies everything!! Where did he learn his ethics from? Oh wait I forgot who his former boss was.
President Clinton's national security adviser removed classified documents from the National Archives, hid them under a construction trailer and later tried to find the trash collector to retrieve them, the agency's internal watchdog said Wednesday.
The report was issued more than a year after Sandy Berger pleaded guilty and received a criminal sentence for removing the documents.
Berger took the documents in the fall of 2003 while working to prepare himself and Clinton administration witnesses for testimony to the Sept. 11 commission. Berger was authorized as the Clinton administration's representative to make sure the commission got the correct classified materials.
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Despite criticism for adjourning last week without acting on several major legislative initiatives, members of Congress can boast significant achievements in at least one area of federal lawmaking -- naming post offices.
Of the 383 pieces of legislation that were signed into law during the two-year 109th Congress, more than one-quarter dealt with naming or renaming federal buildings and structures -- primarily post offices -- after various Americans.
Three post offices were named after entertainers. Ray Charles, the late singer and musician, was honored with a post office in Los Angeles in July 2005 in a bill sponsored by Rep. Diane Watson, D-California Rep. Henry Waxman, D-California, authored a law naming another Los Angeles post office after actor and former American Express pitchman Karl Malden.
The ACLU is saying a teacher's First Amendment rights are being violated because he was fired due to his side job of making paintings that are probably the butt of many wise cracks. In what way is the school stifling his freedom of expression? The "artist" is still free to do his "paintings," however the school district by no means needs to condone his behavior. The ACLU knows that by suing under First Amendment grounds that they can profit by suing the school district for legal fees. This is done by abusing existing civil rights laws that were meant to protect minorities who were victims of prejudice; instead the ACLU uses it as a cash cow. This is why Congress needs to stop this abuse and reintroduce and pass the Public Expression of Religion Act as soon as they come back.
RICHMOND, Va. -- Chesterfield County school officials have suspended a teacher they say may be setting a bad example for students through his outside artistic activities.
Stephen Murmer is a self-described "butt-printing artist."
He creates floral and abstract art by plastering his posterior and genitals with paint and pressing them against canvas.
His cheeky creations sell for hundreds of dollars.
But Murmer is also known as a popular, joke-cracking art teacher at Monacan High School.
Chesterfield County schools spokeswoman Debra Marlow says school system regulations state that teachers must set an example for students through their personal conduct.
Murmer was placed on administrative leave on Friday.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia says the suspension goes against Murmer's First Amendment rights.
We did some digging for Ms. Winfrey and found out that "The PROTECT Our Children Act" is one of the over 30 bills that Senator Reid combined into one large "Omnibus Bill" in an effort to get passed legislation that while not allowing for ample floor debate on the issues that are within the multitude of bills. If "The PROTECT Our Children Act" alone was brought up today, with no other bills attached to it, there would be no opposition to it and it would be allowed a straight up or down vote. However since it is attached to all these other bills, many of which good people oppose on being wasteful or unnecessary, is why it is controversial.
At the annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), every GOP presidential candidate but Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) tried to stake a claim for conservative support. The results of CPAC's presidential straw poll indicate that voters are grappling to find candidates whose platform addresses both the crisis abroad and the dilemmas at home. 
Despite support by pro-life Republicans and Reps. Dale Kildee (D-MI) and Jason Altmire (D-PA) an amendment to expand the definition of "family member" to include the unborn and adoptive children in the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act failed in the House Education and Labor Committee. Chairman George Miller (D-CA) did offer a provision that would include "fetuses" in the bill. However, this does not address children in the process of being adopted and unborn children younger than nine weeks' gestation. Also, it does not remedy the dilemma for IVF embryos. FRC will continue to urge House members to close this devastating loophole.
I predicted Al D'Amato would beat Chuck Schumer. I predicted George H. W. Bush would beat Bill Clinton. I predicted Hillary Clinton would never become Senator of New York State. I predicted the Republicans would retain both Chambers of Congress. I predicted a ship like the Titanic could never be sunk and the Hindenburg was as safe as a horseless carriage. Finally, I predicted that the Democratic leadership wouldn't be able to help themselves after winning Congress and would throw a lavish Hollywood type "Inaugural" - the kind normally reserved for Presidential elections. I guess I had to be right 
In what way is the school stifling his freedom of expression? The "artist" is still free to do his "paintings," however the school district by no means needs to condone his behavior. The ACLU knows that by suing under First Amendment grounds that they can profit by suing the school district for legal fees. This is done by abusing existing civil rights laws that were meant to protect minorities who were victims of prejudice; instead the ACLU uses it as a cash cow. This is why Congress needs to stop this abuse and reintroduce and pass the Public Expression of Religion Act as soon as they come back.
