Tuesday, May 5, 2015

Barker's Newsbites: Tuesday, May 5, 2015

And here we have this morning's "above the fold" Drudge Report headlines:

Extreme secrecy erodes support for Obama's trade pact...

Lawmakers forced to surrender notes...

Forbidden from discussing details with public...

USA runs more than $50 billion trade deficit -- in one month!

Economic Confidence Index Down Sharply...

And you wonder why I'm having difficulties in forcing myself to newsbite...

(*HUGE SIGH*)


 

8 comments:

William R. Barker said...

* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/05/04/brooks-brat-denounce-amendment-to-allow-illegal-immigrants-to-serve-in-military/

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) should not be used as a vehicle to pursue allowing illegal immigrants to serve in the U.S. military, according Reps. Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL)

In a statement Monday, Brat and Brooks announced their intention to remove language added as an amendment to the NDAA — which passed out of committee last week — that would encourage the Secretary of Defense to consider allowing illegal immigrants granted executive amnesty via the Obama administration’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program to serve in the military.

* THAT PASSED THE REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED COMMITTEE...

(*SIGH*)

According to Brat and Brooks, the amendment puts illegal immigrants’ interests ahead of American citizens.

“It is unconscionable that certain members of Congress seek to use America’s military as a bargaining chip in a bid to cement the president’s unconstitutional amnesty actions – adding the amendment to the ‘must pass’ National Defense Authorization Act, a bill that is intended to authorize essential programs for our military. We can’t speak for other Congressmen, but, as for ourselves, we were elected to promote and protect the interests of American citizens, not illegal immigrants,” they said in a joint statement.

* NAMES, PLEASE...???

Brooks and Brat continued, arguing that the amendment would serve to endorse “a cycle of perpetual amnesty for illegal immigrants and betraying struggling young Americans who wish to serve in America’s armed forces.”

They concluded, stressing that they “are working to remove this language from the NDAA, and we urge our House leaders to support our efforts.”

* HA! NOT LIKELY! (FOLKS... AGAIN... THE GOP HAS FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES BEEN "CAPTURED.")

* TO BE CONTINUED...

William R. Barker said...

* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)

Read their full statement:

"With passage of this amendment, a majority on the Armed Services Committee urged the Secretary of Defense to hire DACA illegal immigrants, rather than American citizens, at the same time the Pentagon is in the process of laying off tens of thousands of American troops. According to Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno, the active Army will be cut by and/or lay off more than 80,000 uniformed personnel by the end of fiscal year 2017. Further, competition for enlistment is so challenging that American high-school graduates now face, ‘more difficulty qualifying for the armed services than ever in the 40-year history of the all-volunteer force.’

Do members of the House Armed Services Committee who voted for this amendment really believe that these are jobs Americans won’t do? It is unconscionable that certain members of Congress seek to use America’s military as a bargaining chip in a bid to cement the president’s unconstitutional amnesty actions – adding the amendment to the ‘must pass’ National Defense Authorization Act, a bill that is intended to authorize essential programs for our military. We can’t speak for other Congressmen, but, as for ourselves, we were elected to promote and protect the interests of American citizens, not illegal immigrants.

Moreover, given the crisis at our nation’s border where tens of thousands of children are pouring into our country illegally, it is mindboggling that Congress would consider a policy that encourages even more illegal immigrants to unlawfully cross America’s borders.

Former leaders of the U.S. military wrote last year, ‘[Such a policy] would enable adoption by the Congress of measures that would confer amnesty on millions of immigrants illegally in this country and, by failing to secure the borders, ensure that millions more will be headed here in due course.’

By voting to encourage DACA illegal immigrants to enlist in the military, members of Congress are both endorsing a cycle of perpetual amnesty for illegal immigrants and betraying struggling young Americans who wish to serve in America’s armed forces.

Congress serves as a body to check and balance the powers of the executive branch in accordance with the Constitution, not to aid the White House in violating the Constitution. Doing so with a national defense bill is especially troubling. We are working to remove this language from the NDAA, and we urge our House leaders to support our efforts.”

William R. Barker said...

* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)

http://dailysignal.com/2015/04/30/time-to-end-the-production-tax-credit-once-and-for-all/?utm_source=heritagefoundation&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=morningbell&mkt_tok=3RkMMJWWfF9wsRojvq%2FAZKXonjHpfsX56%2BorWa6zlMI%2F0ER3fOvrPUfGjI4GRcZiI%2BSLDwEYGJlv6SgFQrLBMa1ozrgOWxU%3D

If we want to build a healthier American economy, Congress must stop supporting special interests at the expense of our nation’s economic potential. The Production Tax Credit is a prime example of just how much this self-destructive pattern hurts competition, enables waste and works against the middle class.

Created in 1992 as a temporary provision to encourage investment in nascent forms of energy, the PTC has ballooned from a short term boost to aid innovation into a massive handout for the now multibillion-dollar wind industry. Since the PTC’s inception, wind energy production has surged from 2.8 million to 167.6 million megawatt-hours. That’s an increase of nearly 6,000%. Meanwhile, according to the Department of Energy, the cost of a wind turbine has come down by as much as 40% since 2008.

The wind industry is also producing on a regular basis more energy than the market demands.

Common sense says that a mature and self-sufficient wind industry should no longer be paid for by the American taxpayer. But, common sense is a rare commodity in Washington and it becomes even scarcer when the special interest spigot has been opened.

(*NOD*)

The wind industry is now larger than ever - and so is its influence on Capitol Hill.

With the growth in the wind industry’s lobbying have come perpetual increases in the PTC’s price tag.

Last year, the PTC cost taxpayers $1.5 billion. This year it’s projected to cost $2.8 billion. Next year – $3.5 billion.

* GEEZUS...

The PTC also fosters vast market distortion and even puts the environment at risk. The credit pays out per kilowatt-hour (kWh) of energy produced. That means the more energy you generate, the more money you make – regardless of actual demand.

(*SIGH*)

Wind power generators looking to milk the credit for all it’s worth are going to generate as much wind energy as possible. They then sell at artificially low prices and sometimes even engage in negative pricing, where they pay grid operators to take the load off their hands. All of this puts immense pressure on non-PTC eligible clean energy producers, such as natural gas and nuclear, that are forced to compete on the skewed playing field of price-warping subsidies. In fact, all things considered, wind power in 2010 received 18-times the subsidies of nuclear power and 88-times those of natural gas per kWh.

* TO BE CONTINUED...

William R. Barker said...

* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)

Ironically, because of this dynamic, the PTC can foster greater dependence on baseload energy resources that are worse for the environment.

Over its long life, the PTC has expired and been renewed nine times.

* "MATH" DICTATES A GUESS THAT REPUBLICANS DID MOST OF THE RENEWING.

(*SIGH*)

In theory, the PTC is expired right now. In reality, the PTC is more like a walking-dead credit because it pays eligible claimants for ten years of energy produced. Facilities that met vague “beginning of construction” standards just before the PTC “expired” on Dec. 31, 2014 will receive credits until 2025 or beyond.

(*PUTTING THE BARREL OF THE GUN IN MY MOUTH*)

That assumes special interests do not succeed in getting PTC extended yet again.

(*MIGRAINE HEADACHE*)

Just a one-year extension comes with an estimated 10-year cost of $6.4 billion. If made permanent, as President Obama requested in his 2016 budget, taxpayers would be hit with a $35 billion bill to pay.

* F--KING OBAMA!

The wind industry has greatly matured since PTC’s inception, and it should not be spoon-fed by taxpayers any longer. Even the American Wind Energy Association recognized this back in 2012 when it publically supported a future phase-out of the PTC.

By beginning to take on such wasteful, counter-productive subsidies, Congress can show how serious we are in tackling true tax reform. This is why we introduced the PTC Elimination Act. Our legislation significantly scales back PTC handouts to those who remain eligible and completely dismantles the credit’s statutory framework. Similar proposals have been estimated to save taxpayers $9.6 billion.

But the PTC Elimination Act doesn’t stop there. It uses the savings to lower the U.S. corporate tax rate, which, being the highest in the world, is a major handicap for American businesses. Even President Obama agrees that the corporate rate has to come down if we want to keep U.S. businesses competitive.

Let’s put the American people first, bring new life to the U.S. economy, and eliminate the PTC once and for all.

William R. Barker said...

* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)

http://us6.campaign-archive2.com/?u=a6b3044a9fe8889c822d11c16&id=6354a6a777&e=860a7086e5

* THE EVER HONORABLE RON PAUL - PRIVATE CITIZEN!

Apologists for the National Security Agency (NSA) point to the arrest of David Coleman Headley as an example of how warrantless mass surveillance is necessary to catch terrorists. Headley played a major role in the 2008 Mumbai terrorist attack that killed 166 people.

While few would argue that bringing someone like Headley to justice is not a good thing, Headley’s case in no way justifies mass surveillance. For one thing, there is no “terrorist” exception in the Fourth Amendment. Saying a good end (capturing terrorists) justifies a bad means (mass surveillance) gives the government a blank check to violate our liberties.

Even if the Headley case somehow justified overturning the Fourth Amendment, it still would not justify mass surveillance and bulk data collection. This is because, according to an investigation by ProPublica, NSA surveillance played an insignificant role in catching Headley. One former counter-terrorism official said when he heard that NSA surveillance was responsible for Headley's capture he “was trying to figure out how NSA played a role.”

The Headley case is not the only evidence that the PATRIOT Act and other post-9/11 sacrifices of our liberty have not increased our security. For example, the NSA’s claim that its surveillance programs thwarted 54 terrorist attacks has been widely discredited. Even the president’s Review Group on Intelligence and Communications Technologies found that mass surveillance and bulk data collection was “not essential to preventing attacks.”

According to the congressional Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Activities before and after the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001 and the 9/11 Commission, the powers granted the NSA by the PATRIOT Act would not have prevented the 9/11 attacks. Many intelligence experts have pointed out that, by increasing the size of the haystack government agencies must look through, mass surveillance makes it harder to find the needle of legitimate threats.

Even though mass surveillance threatens our liberty, violates the Constitution, and does nothing to protect us from terrorism, many in Congress still cling to the fiction that the only way to ensure security is to give the government virtually unlimited spying powers. These supporters of the surveillance state are desperate to extend the provisions of the PATRIOT Act that are set to expire at the end of the month. They are particularly eager to preserve Section 215, which authorizes many of the most egregious violations of our liberties, including the NSA’s “metadata” program.

* AGAIN... A CONSTANT REFRAIN... I WISH AUTHORS WOULD "NAME NAMES." AT LEAST NAME THE LEAD PROPONENTS OF THE SURVEILLANCE STATE!

* TO BE CONTINUED...

William R. Barker said...

* CONCLUDING... (Part 2 of 2)

Edward Snowden's revelations have galvanized opposition to the NSA’s ongoing violations of our liberties. This is why Congress will soon vote on the USA FREEDOM Act. This bill extends the expiring surveillance laws.

It also contains some “reforms” that supposedly address all the legitimate concerns regarding mass surveillance.

(*SMIRK*)

A look at the USA FREEDOM Act’s details, as opposed to the press releases of its supporters, shows that the act leaves the government’s mass surveillance powers virtually untouched.

* NO DOUBT...

The USA FREEDOM Act has about as much to do with freedom as the PATRIOT Act had to do with patriotism. If Congress truly wanted to protect our liberties it would pass the Surveillance State Repeal Act, which repeals the PATRIOT Act. Congress should also reverse the interventionist foreign policy that increases the risk of terrorism by fostering resentment and hatred of Americans.

Fourteen years after the PATRIOT Act was rushed into law, it is clear that sacrificing liberty does little or nothing to preserve security. Instead of trying to fool the American people with phony reforms, Congress should repeal all laws that violate the Fourth Amendment, starting with the PATRIOT Act.

William R. Barker said...

http://dailysignal.com/2015/04/29/conservative-house-freedom-caucus-comes-out-against-export-import-bank/

A group of 40 conservative lawmakers collectively known as the House Freedom Caucus have come out in opposition to the Export-Import Bank, joining Republican presidential candidates and a legion of conservative groups speaking out against the agency’s reauthorization.

“The Ex-Im Bank financially supports less than 2% of U.S. exports and supports mega-corporations at the expense of small businesses — literally picking winners and losers among American workers,” the House Freedom Caucus said in a statement.

* AND THE DEMOCRATS...??? WHERE DO THEY STAND...???

Calling the bank the “bridge to nowhere” of corporate welfare, the group argued Ex-Im has failed to comply with reforms mandated in Congress’ previous reauthorizations and noted that there are still 31 open fraud investigations at Ex-Im.

* IF THE REFORMS HAVE BEEN MANDATED... YET NOT EFFECTED... SHOULDN'T THERE BE PEOPLE IN JAIL...???

In addition to the fraud investigations, one former loan officer at the agency, Johnny Gutierrez, was indicted and pled guilty to accepting bribes on 19 different occasions between 2006 and 2013. His criminal charges — and the possibly for more indictments in the remaining fraud cases—have been cited multiple times by lawmakers opposing Ex-Im’s reauthorization.

* AND WHAT HAPPENED TO... er... MR. GUTIERREZ...??? (I JUST DID A QUICK GOOGLE SEARCH AND CAME UP EMPTY.)

The caucus also pushed House Republican leadership to refrain from bringing a bill reauthorizing the bank directly to the House floor.

Michael Steel, spokesman for Speaker John Boehner, told The Daily Signal that House Financial Services Chairman Jeb Hensarling of Texas and his committee are continuing to lead discussions with Republican members on the issue.

* WHY ARE "DISCUSSIONS" NECESSARY...???

Despite the concerns cited by the House Freedom Caucus and many other bank opponents, supporters believe it supports jobs in the U.S. and helps small businesses compete globally.

* "SUPPORTERS" ARE WRONG.

Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, serves as chairman of the House Freedom Caucus and has been one of the bank’s more outspoken opponents. The group, which launched earlier this year, currently has approximately 40 members and bills itself as a caucus of House Republicans working to give a voice to “countless Americans who feel that Washington does not represent them.” Members include Reps. Raúl Labrador of Idaho, John Fleming of Louisiana, Mark Meadows of North Carolina and Matt Salmon of Arizona.

In addition to members of the House Freedom Caucus, a number of top Republicans have spoken out against reauthorizing Ex-Im. Two members of Republican leadership — House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy and Majority Whip Steve Scalise — said this month they oppose the bank. Scalise told CQ Roll Call on Monday Ex-Im was “on track” to expire.

Additionally, Hensarling and Ways and Means Chairman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin have both called on Congress to allow Ex-Im’s charter to expire.

* OK! SOME GOOD NEWS FOR A CHANGE!

A number of Republican presidential contenders have also joined the chorus of GOP policymakers in advocating for Ex-Im’s end. Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, along with Sens. Marco Rubio of Florida, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Ted Cruz of Texas, have all voiced their opposition to its reauthorization.

* EVEN, JEB, HUH?

(*SNORT*)

* AND RUBIO...???

(*SMIRK*)

* THEY'RE BOTH DOING IT ONLY BECAUSE THEY'RE SCARED NOT TO.

The Republican Study Committee, which the House Freedom Caucus is a complementary group of, has not yet taken an official position on the bank’s reauthorization.

* THE RSC IS NO LONGER RELEVANT; RINOs TOOK IT OVER YEARS AGO.

William R. Barker said...

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/secrecy-eroding-support-for-trade-pact-critics-say-117581.html

If you want to hear the details of the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal the Obama administration is hoping to pass, you’ve got to be a member of Congress, and you’ve got to go to classified briefings and leave your staff and cellphone at the door.

* DOES THIS SOUND LIKE AMERICA TO YOU, FOLKS; THE AMERICA YOU WERE TAUGHT ABOUT?

If you’re a member who wants to read the text, you’ve got to go to a room in the basement of the Capitol Visitor Center and be handed it one section at a time, watched over as you read, and forced to hand over any notes you make before leaving.

* FOLKS. THINK ABOUT IT. WHY WOULD EVEN DEMOCRATS PUT UP WITH THIS IF THEY HAD ANY OTHER CHOICE? THERE'S BEEN A COUP.

And no matter what, you can’t discuss the details of what you’ve read.

* FOLKS... THIS IS POLITICO REPORTING - NOT SOME RIGHT-WING BLOG!