Between 2010 and 2015, the average annual cost to incarcerate criminal illegal and legal immigrants slightly decreased — as the criminal alien population slightly decreased as well — from $1.56 billion to about $1.42 billion. That cost is paid for by American taxpayers who are forced to offset the costs of mass immigration to the country.
Every year, the U.S. admits more than 1.5 million foreign nationals, with the overwhelming majority arriving through the process known as “chain migration,” whereby newly naturalized are able to bring an unlimited number of foreign relatives to the country. Between 2005 and 2017, chain migration, alone, brought nearly 10 million foreign nationals to the U.S.
Meet the Castro brothers - the Democrats’ new Thought Police.
August 28, 2019
Leftists are fond of summoning the magic of euphemism to make the social problems they create go away.
Like the editors of the Newspeak Dictionary in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four, these social engineers define out of existence the atrocities that necessarily grow out of their ideology.
Take Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-Texas), who has introduced legislation that would strike “alien” and “illegal alien” from the federal law books and replace them with “foreign national” and “undocumented foreign national.” The lawmaker’s twin brother, Democrat presidential candidate Julian Castro, endorsed the measure.
Rep. Castro says his bill, the proposed “Correcting Alienating Names in Government Act,” or CHANGE Act, is “integral to creating a more welcoming and inclusive environment for incoming and current immigrants living in the United States.”
Castro wants “illegal alien” banished because it (quite properly) stigmatizes behavior –that is, being a foreigner present in the United States without authorization— that is unlawful.
There is a certain logic to this.
The Left has to make the hordes of illegal aliens their various so-called immigration law reforms have unleashed on their fellow Americans over the years seem normal and acceptable. This is also why the Left describes just about everyone touched by the nation’s immigration laws as an “immigrant” – whether they’re illegal aliens or legal permanent residents. Smearing anyone who believes in the rule of law as anti-immigrant over and over again makes people defensive and wears down the opposition. It’s a kind of brainwashing.
Radicals who carry “no human being is illegal” placards at protests and Associated Press reporters agree with Castro that lying to destigmatize unlawful behavior is morally virtuous. The thought police at the AP stylebook now declare that “illegal” should be used only to describe an action “such as living in or immigrating to a country illegally.”
They also give a thumbs-down to “illegal alien” and “undocumented,” which itself is already a euphemism. USA Today and other media outlets followed suit. Then-California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) jumped on the bandwagon in 2015 by signing legislation excising “alien” from the state’s labor code.
“Words matter,” Castro said in a press release.
“It’s vital that we respect the dignity of immigrants fleeing violence and prosecution in our language. The words ‘alien’ and ‘illegal alien’ work to demonize and dehumanize the migrant community. They have no place in our government’s description of human beings. Immigrants come to our borders in good faith and work hard for the opportunity to achieve a better life for themselves and their family. Eliminating this language from government expression puts us one step closer to preserving their dignity and ensuring their safety.”
And it makes illegals and their enablers feel good about breaking the law, which is largely the point of the exercise.
Well, that, and it helps to create pressure to get “comprehensive immigration reform,” a euphemism for immigration amnesty, through Congress.
President Donald Trump uses the words and phrases the Left hates because they’re accurate, his base loves them, and leftists hate them. All conservatives and right-thinking patriots should do the same.
Although the likelihood of Rep. Castro’s legislation making it all the way across Pennsylvania Avenue to President Trump’s desk is somewhere between slim and none, federal lawmakers do occasionally banish unfashionable words from the statute books.
Congress banned the perfectly good word “lunatic” in federal legislation in 2012 because it was deemed mean. In 2010 our elected representatives banned “mental retardation,” replacing it with “intellectual disability” in federal laws. And they’ll do it again when other useful words are no longer fashionable.
The feces-covered leftist hell known as San Francisco is getting rid of its crime problem by introducing new vocabulary.
The city’s board of supervisors has decided that “convicted felons” will now be called “justice-involved individuals.” Of course, as Tucker Carlson points out, calling these people “justice-involved individuals” also obliterates the distinction between the felons and their victims who could just as easily be described by the same term.
“So, in other words, victim and criminal are now morally indistinguishable,” Carlson says. “That’s on purpose. This is woke equality.”
San Francisco has also abolished “juvenile delinquents,” replacing them with “young people impacted by the juvenile justice system,” as if the system –as opposed to the young person— actually committed the crime. This makes sense because the Left really does believe criminals are the real victims in society.
The city also calls drug addicts “people with the history of substance use,” instead of "substance abusers" in order to eliminate the stigma associated with illegal drug consumption.
“‘Use,’ not ‘abuse.’ Get it? Heroin addicts are now the same as insulin-dependent diabetics; both use ‘substances.’ You can’t call one better than the other. They’re both exactly the same,” says Carlson.
The Left, with its despotic domination of the news media, academia, and entertainment, has the power to do all of this, but that doesn’t mean we have to go along with it.
HISPANDERERS DESTROYING
OUR COUNTRY
YOU WONDERED WHY OBAMA
AND LA RAZA PELOSI FOUGHT TOOTH AND NAIL OBSTRUCTING SAFE VOTING BY REQUIRING
ILLEGALS TO HAVE VALID (NON-FRAUDULENT) ID's????
nt Majority
Democratic support for
illegal-immigrant drivers’ licenses runs counter to public opinion.
July 18, 2019
New York
Politics
and law
Last
month, New York became the 13th state to grant
drivers’ licenses to illegal immigrants, securing a victory that liberals and
open-borders advocates have fought for since Eliot Spitzer was governor. But
Democrats should worry about how the debate unfolded in New York: a majority of
state voters opposed the bill, including about 40 percent of surveyed
Democrats, mainly because the law will confer real benefits on illegal
residents, thus rewarding violators of the law. The question of voter
fraud—dismissed as a canard by most on the left—raised alarms when Democrats
tried to pass a bill that would have automatically registered all drivers to
vote (though it required non-citizens affirmatively to opt out of voter
registration). After Republican legislators called attention to the potential
consequences, the bill was scuttled. As it is, a state driver’s license is all
that is required for voter registration in New York, so the potential for abuse
is there.
In the
suburbs, stiff opposition pushed Long Island’s Democratic state senators to
vote unanimously against the bill. But the legislation overcame these
headwinds, a testament to the ascendant Left’s newfound
power statewide, particularly in New York City. Last year, Gotham voters unseated
six members of the senate’s moderate Independent Democratic Conference,
replacing them with more progressive challengers. The stridency of the party’s
energized urban base was, on this issue, enough to overcome the opposition of
the diffuse majority.
Advocates
highlighted the modest supposed benefits that licensing illegal-alien drivers
would deliver to the state budget and carriers of car insurance, but most
voters remained unconvinced—presumably because their concern was less about
money and more about the principles at stake. This negative reaction diverged
from polls suggesting that Americans nationally have taken a more positive view
of immigration since Donald Trump’s inauguration. The dissonance between country-wide
polling and the conservative sentiment of deep-blue New York suggests that the
national numbers on immigration may reflect the president’s unpopularity in
particular rather than any fondness for illegal aliens—and that, when Trump is
removed from the equation, the political middle on immigration remains
significantly to the right of today’s Democratic Party.
This
electoral dynamic is even more pronounced at the national level, where most
leading Democrats have followed their activist base to extreme positions.
Presidential candidates Bernie Sanders,
Kirsten Gillibrand, and Elizabeth
Warren all endorse the
idea of abolishing ICE, while another competitor for the
Democratic nomination, former HUD Secretary Julian
Castro, has argued for mass
amnesty. Castro and
Warren also favor decriminalization of illegal entry into
the United States. This radical trend is a recent phenomenon. Just a decade
ago, the two major contenders for the Democratic nomination—Barack Obama and
Hillary Clinton—tacked to the center on immigration. In The Audacity of Hope, Obama complained about the people he saw waving
Mexican flags at immigration rallies, as well as his struggles communicating
with non-English-speaking car mechanics. Clinton, for her part, quickly
distanced herself from an earlier version of the drivers’ license law when
Spitzer advanced it as an executive order.
Unlike
New York Democrats, who voted on an unpopular bill, national Democrats believe
their leftward shift on immigration mirrors a movement in public opinion. They
believe that Trump’s immigration rhetoric fueled Americans’ sympathy on the
issue. But their reasoning is flawed. They cite public opinion polls suggesting
that Americans shift their attitudes leftward when conservatives hold power,
and reverse their position when liberals are in control. Though polling has
captured real dissatisfaction with the president’s approach to immigration, it
has little to say about what policies voters would support.
The
battle over New York’s drivers’ license bill suggests that most voters have not
followed elite Democrats to the far left on immigration. Whether this chasm
harms the eventual Democratic nominee in 2020 remains to be seen—but that
nominee should keep in mind that taking an extreme position on the issue is not
a strategy for broad popularity.
Warren Undercuts Populist Agenda with Donor Class Immigration Plan
4:02
While Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) has vowed an economic nationalist-populist agenda, her plans to increase foreign competition against American workers match the solutions routinely offered by the nation’s donor-class and big business lobby.
With a rise in the polls, Warren is doubling down on her economic agenda, calling out multinational corporations for outsourcing and offshoring American jobs for decades.
“There are a lot of giant companies who like to call themselves ‘American,'” Warren said in a new video out on Twitter. “But face it, they have no loyalty or allegiance to America.”
“In a Warren administration, government policy will support American workers,” Warren said. “I call it economic patriotism … this is not a question of more government or less government. It’s about who government works for.”
A lot of giant companies refer to themselves as “American.” But let’s face it, they only have one real loyalty: Their shareholders. A Warren administration will halt the hollowing out of American cities and create good American jobs. Here’s how.
Warren, however, has juxtapositioned her economic patriotist plan to crack down on outsourcing and offshoring of American jobs by corporations against an agenda to import additional foreign workers for those corporations.
In her immigration outline released last month, Warren promised to “expand legal immigration” beyond current historically high legal immigration levels, at which more than 1.2 million legal immigrants are admitted to the U.S. every year. Part of this plan includes increasing the process known as “chain migration,” whereby newly naturalized citizens are allowed to bring an unlimited number of foreign relatives to the country.
America should welcome more legal immigration — done in the right way and consistent with our principles … We should reflect our values, which means expanding family reunification and making it easier for relatives of citizens and green card holders to come to the United States,” Warren writes.
Warren writes that her expansion of legal immigration will “grow the economy,” the case often deployed by the donor class and big business lobby to demand more foreign workers.
U.S. Chamber of Commerce executives, for example, told the Washington Post this year that the country is “out of people” and thus more legal immigration is necessary to grow the economy and provide an endless flow of foreign workers to business.
Billionaire Michael Bloomberg’s organization New American Economy is wholey dedicated to lobbying for plans like Warren’s to be enacted in order to grow the U.S. economy and GDP. The organization is headed by Bloomberg and funded by a long list of billionaire donors, including the CEOs of Hewlett-Packard, Delta Airlines, Time Warner Inc., Goldman Sachs, Quest Diagnostics, and Citigroup.
Warren’s plan is also supported by the editorial board of billionaire Jeff Bezos’s Washington Post, where they argued that the U.S. needs a constant stream of low-skilled foreign workers to fill American jobs.
Meanwhile, America’s working and middle class have seen their wages crushed for decades just as a stream of illegal and legal foreign workers have grown their share of various U.S. occupations.
Extensive research by economists like George Borjas and analyst Steven Camarota reveals that the country’s current mass legal immigration system burdens U.S. taxpayers and America’s working and middle class while redistributing about $500 billion in wealth every year to major employers and newly arrived immigrants.
Camarota’s research has found that for every one-percent increase in the immigrant portion of American workers’ occupations, their weekly wages are cut by about 0.5 percent. This means the average native-born American worker today has his weekly wages reduced by perhaps 8.75 percent.
Trump’s “Buy American, Hire American” economic model, on the other hand, has lifted wages for America’s blue-collar and working-class by decreasing foreign competition in the labor market through stricter immigration enforcement. Trump’s agenda has also shifted power from corporations to U.S. workers where businesses now compete for workers rather than the decades-long practice of workers competing for jobs at businesses.
USCIS Chief: Paul Ryan Wanted Illegal Immigration, Ran a ‘Chamber of Commerce Congress’
22 Aug 201988
5:38
President Donald Trump’s citizenship director told a Texas business group that House Speaker Paul Ryan “submarined” the best chance for immigration reform because he wanted illegal immigration.
“Let’s not forget … when [Rep.] Paul Ryan was the speaker, Paul Ryan submarined the best opportunity we had legislatively when [judiciary chairman Rep.] Bob Goodlatte’s bill … came through,” Ken Cuccinelli told the Texas Public Policy Foundation on August 22.
Cuccinelli, who is the acting director of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services agency, said, “We had leadership there that defended the status quo. They were the Chamber of Commerce Congress. They wanted illegal immigration.”
In contrast, President Trump is following through on his promises and is giving American voters a clear choice in 2020, he said:
I actually think the 2020 election can help solve that problem. I believe when you run on things, and people know ‘This is what I get if I vote for X, if this party becomes the majority, I get this bill’ …. [then you get] good politics and good policy.
“Not enough people will challenge their own leadership in the GOP to beat them down when they are wrong,” said Cuccinelli, a populist conservative from Virginia.
Goodlatte retired from Congress in 2018. In December, he said that Ryan blocked his bill by dividing the GOP votes between two reform bills: “That is just not a good strategy and I complained about it at the time. I said ‘You’ve got to narrow this down to one bill and then work really hard to get the members to vote for that one bill.’”
Ryan said in November 2018 that he preferred a rival bill, sponsored by GOP Rep. Chris Curbelo, who was defeated in the November election.
On immigration, I really liked—I call it “the Curbelo bill,” it was Goodlatte II — the immigration compromise bill that I put on the floor in July, which satisfied the President’s four pillars.” he said.
“Our goal is to not cut legal immigration,” Rep. Carlos Curbelo told RollCall.com on June 2018. The number of illegals who get green cards from the amnesty should be “as high a number as possible,” he said.
Curbelo repeated his demand, telling TheHill.com that “some visas may be shifted towards employment visas, but our goal is to not cut legal immigration.”
The Goodlatte bill would have cut legal immigration by ending the visa lottery, provided a work permit amnesty to just the 700,000 illegals who are registered in the DACA program, and ensured immigration cuts, said Rosemary Jenks, policy director of NumbersUSA.
It also included much careful language to hinder fraud and to prevent pro-migration judges from hijacking the bill’s limited amnesty for their own goals, said Jenks, who opposed the bigger Ryan bill.
Ryan’s support for the Curbelo bill allowed 41 GOP legislators to vote no on the Goodlatte bill when it came up for a June vote.
On June 14, the House blocked Goodlatte’s H.R. 4760, the “Securing America’s Future Act,” with a vote tally of 193 to 231. No Democrats voted for the reform.
“If it has been the only bill offered, it might have passed,” Goodlatte said. “We were 20, 21 votes short,” said Goodlatte. The [bill] would have passed “if we had gotten half of [the GOP ‘no’ voters] to join with us, we would have gotten there,” he said.
The US has a fast-growing population of roughly 630,000 illegal migrants from India, mixed among the temporary contract-work population of at least 1.5 million Indians. That's great for business & govt's, but bad for Americans' families & employees. http://bit.ly/2zfNggO
India Has More than 630,000 Illegals in the United States | Breitbart
Immigration Numbers
Immigration is a government economic strategy which seeks to stimulate economic growth and stock prices by inflating the supply of labor and consumers.
Each year, roughly four million young Americans join the workforce after graduating from high school or university. This total includes about 800,000 Americans who graduate with skilled degrees in business or health care, engineering or science, software, or statistics.
But the federal government then imports about 1.1 million legal immigrants and refreshes a resident population of roughly 1.5 million white-collar visa workers — including approximately 1 million H-1B workers and spouses — and about 500,000 blue-collar visa workers. The government also prints out more than one million work permits for foreigners, tolerates about eight million illegal workers, and rarely punishes companies for employing the hundreds of thousands of illegal migrants who sneak across the border or overstay their legal visas each year.
This policy of inflating the new labor supply boosts stock values for investors by ensuring that employers do not have to compete in a free market for American workers with offers of higher wages and better working conditions.
This policy of flooding the market with cheap, foreign, white-collar graduates and blue-collar labor shifts enormous wealth from young employees towards older investors, even as it also widens wealth gaps, reduces high-tech investment, increases state and local tax burdens, and hurts children’s schools and college educations.
The cheap-labor economic strategy also pushes Americans away from high-tech careers and sidelines millions of marginalized Americans, including many who are now struggling with fentanyl addictions.
They want no borders, no allegiance to a nation state, no citizenship classification connected to a single country. TOM TANCREDO
2020 Census Citizenship Controversy Exposes True Open Borders Agenda
As usual, the dustup about the census including a question about citizenship has nothing to do with what the loony left claims as their motivation to exclude it. They say it’s all about being sensitive to the hurt feelings and paranoia of people who are illegally present in the U.S. And, by the way, asking the question it is not a Donald Trump trick to ferret out those folks who are hiding under their blankets, afraid that the next knock on the door will be the jackbooted ICE agents, come to drag them from their beds and put them on boxcars headed for concentration camps.
A brief history lesson here. The Constitution of the United States directs the President to conduct a Census every ten years, and that has been done without controversy since 1790. And with rare exceptions, the question on citizenship has been part of it from the beginning. Yet, its inclusion in the 2020 Census has become controversial. The reasons for the opposition to the citizenship question tell us a lot about the declining health of our American constitutional republic.
The vehement opposition to the 2020 Census question on citizenship is a symptom of a deep divide in the body politic, a chasm that only grows wider and deeper as politicians postpone a decision over the meaning of the Constitution's opening words, "We the People."
There is a chasm as wide as the Grand Canyon separating individuals who believe that "We the People" means we the citizens of the United States and those who believe it means, we the global citizens who temporarily inhabit this territory. To one group having an accurate count of both citizens and noncitizens resident in each state is vital to the constitutional purposes of the Census, but to the "global citizen" contingent that count is not only unnecessary, it is slanderous, racist and, well -- undemocratic!
The political resistance to the traditional citizenship question as part of the decennial Census derives its passion and intensity from the ideological goal of transforming the nature of political representation in our republic. In that world, an elected representative in any city council, school board, county commission, state legislature, Board of Regents, or the U. .Congress, is duty bound to represent any resident of his or her district with the same passion and integrity whether that resident be a citizen, a Chinese or German foreign student at a local university, a legal resident alien born in Egypt or an illegal alien who swam across the Rio Grande. Should foreign students at the University of Colorado vote in Boulder city elections? Why not, if every "person" is entitled to "equal representation"?
The population count produced by the 2020 Census will be the foundation for Congress' adoption of revised apportionment of the 435 seats in Congress. Does a new apportionment based on new Census numbers mean a count based on all persons, all citizens, or something else? Such questions will be debated in Congress and litigated all the way to the Supreme Court before we know the answers, but the debate must begin with an accurate count in the Census. Will we get one?
When the national debate over illegal immigration and border security was heating up back in 2005 and 2006 in response to amnesty proposals in Congress, I was roundly criticized for suggesting the opposition to amnesty was rooted in opposition to secure borders. I was attacked by some prominent leaders of the Republican Party for saying that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce saw illegal aliens as cheap labor and the Democrat Party saw them as future Democratic voters. I take no pleasure in observing in 2019 that Democratic leaders in Congress are aggressively advocating open borders as a path to a permanent Democratic majority. And there is an even bigger picture that elitist leftists are trying to paint for us all. They want no borders, no allegiance to a nation state, no citizenship classification connected to a single country.
They want a kumbaya world of global citizens that can be governed by people who “know better.” Think I am wrong? Try to find a recent college or high school grad who can tell you what it means to be an American other than by saying it means abiding in a place called America. The members of what I call the Cult of Multiculturalism infect our schools, our media, and pop culture. The philosophy permeates the West -- its repercussions and can be seen playing out all over Europe.
Only a short decade ago, a world-famous Harvard political scientist, Samuel P. Huntington, wrote a landmark book aptly titled Who Are We? America’s National Identity Crisis. He believed that America's unprecedented achievements and unparalleled prosperity had their foundation in our nation's European heritage, a heritage under siege by the formidable forces of multiculturalism. So eliminating the citizenship question in the Census is a just another step down the road to the elitist utopia promised by Marx and Engels.
Eventually we will come to the step when jackbooted government agents really will be pulling people out of their beds and sending them off to “re-education” camps.” After all, some people might resist the America that Barack Obama promised to thoroughly transform.
Former U.S. Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-CO), serves as Advisory Board Member for We Build The Wall. He was author of the famous Bush Era book called In Mortal Danger: The Battle for America's Border and Security.
House Democrats, 39 Republicans Pass ‘Temporary’ Amnesty for Venezuelans
25 Jul 20191,586
5:09
House Democrats and 39 Republicans passed a plan to provide asylum in the United States to potentially millions of Venezuelans fleeing their socialist dictator.
In a 272 to 158 House vote on Thursday, every Democrat and 39 Republicans voted to create a Temporary Protected Status (TPS) program for Venezuela’s population — allowing nationals who are already in the U.S. to remain and incentivizing more to migrate.
Officials with the Trump administration previously voiced their opposition to the plan in an interview with Breitbart News.
“We would not want to open the floodgates for them,” an official said in March.
The Republicans who voted with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), and Rep. Ilhan Omar (R-MN) include:
- Rep. Don Bacon (R-NE)
- Rep. Michael Bost (R-IL)
- Rep. Tom Cole (R-OK)
- Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX)
- Rep. John Curtis (R-UT)
- Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL)
- Rep. Sean Duffy (R-WI)
- Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA)
- Rep. Jeff Fortenberry (R-NE)
- Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-WI)
- Rep. Anthony Gonzalez (R-OH)
- Rep. Tom Graves (R-GA)
- Rep. Vicky Hartzler (R-MO)
- Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler (R-WA)
- Rep. Clay Higgins (R-LA)
- Rep. French Hill (R-AR)
- Rep. Will Hurd (R-TX)
- Rep. David Joyce (R-OH)
- Rep. John Katko (R-NY)
- Rep. Peter King (R-NY)
- Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL)
- Rep. Brian Mast (R-FL)
- Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX)
- Rep. Tom Reed (R-NY)
- Rep. Cathy McMorris-Rodgers (R-WA)
- Rep. Francis Rooney (R-FL)
- Rep. Austin Scott (R-GA)
- Rep. John Shimkus (R-IL)
- Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ)
- Rep. Ross Spano (R-FL)
- Rep. Elise Stefancik (R-NY)
- Rep. Bryan Steil (R-WI)
- Rep. Steve Stivers (R-OH)
- Rep. Glenn Thompson (R-PA)
- Rep. Michael Waltz (R-FL)
- Rep. Steve Womack (R-AR)
- Rep. Rod Woodall (R-GA)
- Rep. Ted Yoho (R-FL)
- Rep. Don Young (R-AK)
Leading the opposition against giving TPS to Venezuela’s population, Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL) called the plan an effort to continue current U.S. national immigration policy that acts as “the world’s orphanage for children and adults alike.”
Brooks said:
This bill proposes a tsunami of people coming to our country who are ill-equipped to support themselves. And, let’s put that into the perspective of where we are a nation. We just blew through the $22 trillion debt mark earlier this year. This year, we are looking at a roughly $900 billion deficit. A deal that has been reached that will only increase our deficit by $2 trillion over the next two years pushing our debt up to $22 trillion. This is money we do not have, have to borrow to get, and cannot afford to pay back. [Emphasis added]
How does that relate to H.R. 549? Well, let me share some numbers with you. Sixty percent of households with a lawful immigrant in them are on welfare, living off the hard work of others. Seventy percent of illegal alien households are on welfare, living off the hard work of others here in the United States of America. [Emphasis added]
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, a major donor the to the GOP establishment, urged Republicans to join Democrats in helping to pass TPS for Venezuelans.
“The Chamber applauds Representatives Soto and Diaz-Balart for leading the House effort to pass H.R. 549, which would allow many Venezuelans currently in the U.S. the opportunity to legally remain and work in the U.S. while Venezuela is in a state of crisis,” the Chamber’s Neil Bradley said in a statement. “The U.S. government should make it clear that Venezuelan nationals who pose no risk to the safety or security of the U.S. will not be sent back into harm’s way.”
TPS has become a quasi-amnesty for otherwise illegal aliens created under the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1990 (INA) that prevents the deportation of foreign nationals from countries that have suffered through famine, war, or natural disasters. Since the Clinton administration, TPS has been transformed into a de facto amnesty program as the Bush, Obama, and Trump administrations have continuously renewed the program for a variety of countries.
TRUMP’S CRAP ON BORDERS AND HIS PRETEND WALL IS ONLY ONE MORE TRUMP HOAX!
*
Only a complete fool would believe that Trump is any more for American Legal workers than the Democrat Party for Billionaires and Banksters!
*
“Trump Administration Betrays Low-Skilled American Workers.”
*
The latest ad from the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) asks Trump to reject the mass illegal and legal immigration policies supported by Wall Street, corporate executives, and most specifically, the GOP mega-donor Koch brothers.
*
Efforts by the big business lobby, Chamber of Commerce, Koch brothers, and George W. Bush Center include increasing employment-based legal immigration that would likely crush the historic wage gains that Trump has delivered for America’s blue collar and working class citizens.
*
Mark Zuckerberg’s Silicon Valley investors are uniting with the Koch network’s consumer and industrial investors to demand a huge DACA amnesty
*
A handful of Republican and Democrat lawmakers are continuing to tout a plan that gives amnesty to nearly a million illegal aliens in exchange for some amount of funding for President Trump’s proposed border wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.
MAGA vs. the U.S. Chamber of Commerce
The general public typically equates the Chamber of Commerce with local Mom and Pop businesses in their area which meet for networking and mutual support in local chapters across the country. This is erroneous. According to theHill:
While local chambers cater to the needs of car dealers and restaurant owners, the national Chamber operates as the lobbying arm of large corporations that have never met a big government program they did not like.
They are weapons dealers pushing billion-dollar battleships and telecommunication lobbyists protecting slow Internet at the world's highest prices. They are lobbyists for pharmaceutical companies, big banks, and Wall street traders who treat the American people as gullibles to be fleeced without mercy.
Even seasoned politicians are susceptible to having misconceptions about the Chamber. Former U.S. senator Jim Demint admits he naively thought it was lobbying for free enterprise and creating a better business environment for everybody. Now he says, "I pronounce them part of the swamp." Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich), a conservative, adds, "I believe in free markets and am against cronyism and corporate welfare, and they [the U.S. Chamber of Commerce] support those things."
The Chamber of Commerce and its president Thomas Donohue came into conflict with Donald Trump and his America First platform very early on. For 18 months during the runup to the 2016 election, the Chamber spared no effort to demonize Trump. In doing so, the Chamber was carrying water for the Hillary Clinton campaign. Donohue and company figured they could better deal with Hillary than Trump in the Oval Office. In this, the Chamber was exactly right.
The big hangups the Chamber and its client base had against Donald Trump involved immigration, trade, and tariffs. Adhering to its corporate masters’ call for a continuous supply of cheap labor, the Chamber lobbies for more immigration and resists tight border controls. Trade is much the same. Past trade pacts have allowed Wall Street to grow obscenely rich in the outsourcing of American jobs to third-world countries for sake of the bottom line of the multinationals. In the process, over a million ordinary Americans were left holding the bag.
All this is still playing out today. The president is striving to adjust the unfair trading arrangements that the political class, in cahoots with the big money interests on Wall Street, have saddled the U.S. with. But Trump and his trade team of Robert Lighthizer, Wilbur Ross, Steven Mnuchin, and Larry Kudlow are fighting not just China, but what is effectively a Fifth Column here at home. It's composed of the likes of the Chamber of Commerce and a sizable portion of the political establishment, which is used to dipping its beak in special-interest money.
As to this latter point, just look at the breaking news of the dealings of Joe Biden's son, Hunter, with the Chinese government. Writing in the New YorkPost, Peter Schweizer outlines in detail the $1.5 private equity deal the younger Biden made with the Chinese while Biden was vice-president. And now, Joe Biden is out on the stump soft-peddling the damage China has done to the U.S. economy and downplaying its threat to us and pretending to be for the working man. You can't make this up.
It's important not to conflate Big Business (Wall Street) with small business (Main Street). Wall Street is the financial economy. It pushes paper around. For example, they write derivatives on real assets, say stocks, to the point where the value of derivatives traded is far greater than the assets they are based on.Investopedia says this: "The derivatives market is, in a word, gigantic -- often estimated at more than $1.2 quadrillion on the high end."
A quadrillion is 1,000 trillion. In dollar terms, a quadrillion is 15-times the GDP of the entire world.
Main Street actually makes and sells things. For over a generation or more, Big Biz has dominated Main Street. This is why the Midwest and other places across the U.S. are littered with closed factories and why middle-class wages stagnated. In many ways, the financial economy is parasitic on the real economy. In the 2016 election, Donald Trump represented Main Street while Clinton was in the pocket of the big money interests on Wall Street.
What this means is that what is good for Main Street will not be good for Wall Street and Big Biz, at least not in the short run. What benefits the American worker -- fair trade policy and tight immigration control -- will initially hurt Big Biz and Wall Street. And the hurt will continue until the financial economy is scaled back to its proper size and is no longer allowed to the tail that wags the American economic dog. Until then, MAGA is at war with Big Biz and the bought-and-paid-for political establishment. And this explains much of the resistance to Trump's tariffs and trade position.
A closing observation says a lot. Thomas Donohue, the president of the Chamber of Commerce, is 80 years old. His board is pushing him to retire. The replacement they are looking at is former Congressman Paul Ryan. A perfect fit given the Chamber's agenda.
Chamber of Commerce Demands More Immigration: ‘U.S. Is Out of People’
JOHN BINDER
26 Apr 20194,424
4:12
The United States Chamber of Commerce is vowing to continue fighting President Trump’s shaping of the Republican Party into a pro-U.S. worker party of blue collar working and middle class Americans.
In an interview with the Washington Post, numerous Chamber of Commerce officials said the organization’s corporate lobbying efforts would soon attempt to court more elected Democrats to support their economic libertarian agenda of more free trade and increased legal immigration.
“The GOP’s drift toward protectionism, nativism, and isolationism since Donald Trump took over the party in 2016 is also at odds with the Chamber’s longtime support for expanding free trade, growing legal immigration and investing in infrastructure,” the Poststory details.
Specifically, Chamber of Commerce President and CEO Tom Donahue said the U.S. needed more legal immigration so that corporations and business secure a never-ending flow of cheaper labor, claiming the country is “out of people.”
And they’re still looking to work with Trump even on areas where they’re not really in agreement, such as immigration. The Chamber advocates for protecting the “dreamers” from deportation and expanding rates of legal immigration. “The fundamental issue is that the United States of America is out of people,” said Donohue. “We have the lowest unemployment we’ve had in 65 years. We have brought more people back into the workforce and still have the lowest unemployment.” [Emphasis added]
Despite Donahue’s claims, at least 12 million Americans who want full-time jobs remain on the sidelines of the workforce. This includes 6.2 million Americans who are unemployed that want a job, 4.5 million Americans who are underemployed working part-time jobs, and 1.4 million Americans who continue to be entirely out of the workforce though they want full-time employment.
More than 12 million Americans remain unemployed, underemployed, or out of the labor force but wanting a job. Tight labor market still has some slack. https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/04/15/feds-12m-americans-remain-sidelined-out-of-the-workforce/ …
Feds: More Than 12M Americans Remain Sidelined Out of the Workforce
While millions remain on the sidelines of the workforce, the Chamber of Commerce has routinely advocated for increasing legal immigration levels as a boon to corporations while depressing job prospects and wages for America’s working and middle class. Already, about 1.5 million illegal and legal immigrants are admitted to the country every year, to the detriment of U.S. wages.
The Chamber of Commerce’s push to increase legal immigration levels is vastly out of step with Republican voters and American voters as a whole. Last year, nearly two-out-threeU.S. voters said they supported reducing legal immigration, while most recently about 43 percent of Republican voters said immigration hurts the country.
Extensive research by economists like George Borjas and analyst Steven Camarota has found that the country’s current mass legal immigration system — wherein 1.2 million mostly low-skilled workers are admitted annually — burdens U.S. taxpayers and America’s working and middle class while redistributing about $500 billion in wealth every year to major employers and newly arrived immigrants.
Borjas has previously called the country’s legal immigration system the “largest anti-poverty program” in the world at the expense of blue-collar Americans and middle-class taxpayers.
Camarota, director of research for the Center for Immigration Studies, has found that every one-percent increase in the immigrant composition of American workers’ occupations reduces their weekly wages by about 0.5 percent. This means the average native-born American worker today has his weekly wages reduced by perhaps 8.5 percent because of current legal immigration levels.
In a state like Florida, where immigrants make up about 25.4 percent of the labor force, American workers have their weekly wages reduced by about 12.5 percent. In California, where immigrants make up 34 percent of the labor force, American workers’ weekly wages are reduced by potentially 17 percent.
Likewise, every one-percent increase in the immigrant composition of low-skilled U.S. occupations reduces wages by about 0.8 percent. Should 15 percent of low-skilled jobs be held by foreign-born workers, it would reduce the wages of native-born American workers by perhaps 12 percent.
Though corporate interests and the open borders lobby have sought to sway Trump from his “America First” illegal and legal immigration agenda, senior advisor Jared Kushner recently said the president’s top priority in terms of the White House’s reform efforts is protecting Americans’ wages.
///
Chamber of Commerce Considering Legal Action to Block Mexico Tariffs
JOHN CARNEY
31 May 2019634
1:44
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other business groups are considering ways to challenge the new tariffs on goods imported from Mexico.
The powerful U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which advocates for cheap labor policies and opposes American First trade initiatives, told reporters Friday that it is considering all options, including legal challenges, to thwart the Trump administration’s policy.
“We have no choice but to pursue every option available to push back,” Neil Bradley, executive vice president and chief policy officer at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, said Friday.
President Donald Trump said Thursday that he will impose a 5 percent tariff on goods imported from Mexico if the Mexican government does not stem the flow of illegal immigrants from Central America.
Chamber of Commerce President and chief executive Tom Donahue told the Washington Post in April that the U.S. needed more legal immigration because the country is “out of people.” The chamber has pushed for legal protection for so-called “Dreamers” and led political resistance to efforts to deport more illegal border crossers.
The chamber began 2019 by opposing legislation that would have allowed President Donald Trump to impose reciprocal tariffs on specific foreign imports.
“The bill would effectively give the President unilateral authority to increase U.S. tariffs on imports from any foreign country,” Bradley wrote in a letter sent to many lawmakers on Capitol Hill. “The harm to Americans would be immediate: Tariffs are taxes, and they are paid by American families and American businesses.”
Business Cheers as Cory Booker Urges More Low-Skilled Immigration
1 Aug 2019152
6:55
Sen. Cory Booker called for more low-skilled immigration Wednesday night as he tried to cut down Joe Biden in the Democrats’ 2020 race.
“I heard the vice president say that if you got a PhD., you can come right into this country,” Booker said, adding:
Well that’s playing into what the Republicans want, to pit some immigrants against other immigrants. We need to reform this whole immigration system and begin to be the country that says everyone has worth and dignity and this should be a country that honors everyone.
If implemented, Booker’s call for more low-skilled immigration would increase competition for blue-collar jobs and cheap apartments in New Jersey, so imposing additional economic pain on lower-skilled Americans in Booker’s home state. More migration would also add to the divide-and-rule diversity which hinders Americans from periodically uniting to curb the elites’ self-serving policies.
Republicans want to pit some immigrants against others. But we need to reform this whole immigration system and begin to be the country that says, “Everyone has worth and dignity, and this should be a country that honors everyone.” #DemDebate
Booker’s call for un-skilled immigration got plaudits from advocates for “diverse” immigration into the United States.
“That was solid immigration talk from Booker,” said Alex Merced, the “Latinx Vice Chair” of the Libertarian Party. “Merit based immigration is condescending and presumes government can determine our individual potential, I sure as hell don’t trust government to do that.”
“Booker speaking truth again on immigration,” tweeted Jonathan Capeheart, a member of the Washington Post‘s editorial board.
But Booker’s call for more unskilled immigration also got him a shout-out from Todd Schulte, who runs FWD.us, a cheap labor lobby shop for Mark Zuckerberg and other West Coast investors.
“Appreciate @CoryBooker,” said a tweet from Schulte. “Pointing out that this [immigration] section of the debate is being dominated by poor assumptions, bad framing and a lack of focus on many of the most critical aspects of immigration — not cutesy gotcha stuff that misses huge aspects of the debate.”
Schulte’s donors employ many foreign graduates, including both visa workers and immigrants. But his donors also have coherent economic reasons to oppose any cutbacks to the immigration of unskilled workers and family chain migrants, as urged by President Donald Trump’s 2018 “Four Pillars” plan.
Unskilled migrants serve as both cheap workers, extra consumers, and predictable renters. Their multi-sided value for investors is spotlighted by FWD.us’ support for DoorDash, which hires people to deliver food by auto, scooters, and bikes. In a September 2018 statement, the FWD.us investors denounced Trump’s plan to cut unskilled immigration into the United States, saying it would reduce immigrant-driven economic growth:
Immigration powers the American economy, and ensuring that immigrant families living here today can thrive means greater benefits for all U.S. residents and our children in the future. The earning potential of immigrants and their contributions to the labor-force and economy grows over time and over generations …
Tony Xu, the founder of DoorDash, embodies this story … in 2013 Tony founded DoorDash, an incredibly successful meal delivery service. Today, DoorDash is valued at $4 billion, using recent investment to expand into 1,200 new cities and to hire 250 new employees, in addition to over 100,000 part-time gigs already created for delivery drivers across the country.
DoorDash’s investors in FWD.us funders include Sequoia Capital, KPCB, SV Angel, CRV, and Y Combinator. In June 2019, Schulte’s group also helped persuade New York’s legislature to grant drivers’ licenses to illegals — so freeing many to join the labor force of delivery drivers.
The demand by investors for endless migrant labor has created a new thing: The US-India Outsourcing Economy. This no-regulation zone redirects new wealth into a few cities & a small elite. Elites want to expand it, so US college-grads get #HR1044. http://bit.ly/2LpqAmx
Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg Use Stealth to Push Outsourcing Bill
Booker’s televised support for low-skilled immigration also sought to paint an elitist gloss on Biden’s call for higher-skilled migration.
But there is little or no evidence that a President Biden would want to reduce lower-skilled immigration. During the TV debate, for example, Biden described Americans’ homeland as “a country of immigrants.” He continued by crediting immigrants — not skilled immigrants — with creating America, not Americans:
We should … [and] I proposed, significantly increasing the number of legal immigrants who are able to come. This country can tolerate a heck of a lot more people. And the reason we’re the country we are is we’ve been able to cherry-pick from the best of every culture. Immigrants built this country.
…
Some here came against their will; others came because they in fact thought they could fundamentally change their lives … That’s what made us great.
Also, Biden strongly supported the 2013 “Gang of Eight” bill, which would have amnestied all illegals. It would also have doubled legal immigration to two million a year — or one migrant for every two American births. That resulting flood of labor would have shifted more of the nation’s new wealth from employees over to investors, according to a 2013 study of the bill by the Congressional Budget Office. “The rate of return on capital would be higher [than on labor] under the legislation than under current law throughout the next two decades,” says the report, titled “The Economic Impact of S. 744.”
Genial Joe Biden hides his elitist cheap-labor agenda with the usual illegal-migration-bad/legal-migration-good schtick. Econ 101 = inc. labor supply pushes down wages (usually, esp. in short term, etc.). That's been the US economy since the 1990s. http://bit.ly/2yt4yqa
Joe Biden: Illegal Immigration Bad, More Legal immigration Good | Breitbart
Immigration Numbers
Each year, roughly four million young Americans join the workforce after graduating from high school or university. This total includes roughly 800,000 Americans who graduate with skilled degrees in business or healthcare, engineering or science, software or statistics.
But the federal government then imports about 1.1 million legal immigrants and refreshes a resident population of roughly 1.5 million white-collar visa workers — including approximately 1 million H-1B workers and spouses —plus roughly 500,000 blue-collar visa workers.
The government also prints out more than one million work permits for foreigners, tolerates about eight million illegal workers, and does not punish companies for employing the hundreds of thousands of illegal migrants who sneak across the border or overstay their legal visas each year.
This policy of inflating the labor supply boosts economic growth for investors because it transfers wages to investors and ensures that employers do not have to compete for American workers by offering higher wages and better working conditions.
This policy of flooding the market with cheap, foreign, white-collar graduates and blue-collar labor also shifts enormous wealth from young employees towards older investors, even as it also widens wealth gaps, reduces high-tech investment, increases state and local tax burdens, and hurts children’s schools and college educations.
The cheap-labor economic strategy also pushes Americans away from high-tech careers and sidelines millions of marginalized Americans, including many who are now struggling with fentanyl addictions.
The labor policy also moves business investment and wealth from the heartland to the coastal cities, explodes rents and housing costs, shrivels real estate values in the Midwest, and rewards investors for creating low-tech, labor-intensive workplaces.
“If there is a growing flood of foreign labor, the American middle class is no longer going to exist, and Republicans will not have a constituency,” said Hilarie Gamm, a co-cofounder of the American Workers Coalition.
Wages are climbing again. For unclear reasons, blue-collars are gaining faster than college graduates. http://bit.ly/2Kew28v
Wages Climb Again in July, Says Paychex Survey of Employers
"When Obama was still a senator, he declared at a campaign stop while addressing SEIU, “Before immigration debates took place in Washington, I spoke with Eliseo Medina and SEIU members."
How One California Marxist Is Indoctrinating Millions of School Children
August 22, 2019 Updated: August 22, 2019
Commentary
Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) is coming for your children.
Not content with taking over school boards and sending comrades into the teaching profession, the United States’ largest Marxist group is also writing the textbooks your children study.
California DSA member Duane Campbell helped write the new History-Social Science Framework for the state, which was adopted in 2017. Sacramento-based Campbell, a DSA comrade since at least 1983, is an emeritus professor of bilingual/multicultural education at California State University–Sacramento and former chair of the Sacramento DSA. He is also the author of “Choosing Democracy: A Practical Guide to Multicultural Education.”
According to Campbell, “Because of California’s large size and market, what goes into California textbooks frequently also gets written into textbooks around the nation.”
In the mid-1990s, Campbell was a contributing editor to Oakland-based Maoist-leaning CrossRoads magazine, which sought to “promote dialogue and build new alliances among progressives and leftists … to bring diverse Marxist and socialist traditions to bear, while exploring new strategies and directions for the progressive political movements.”
In the mid-2000s, Campbell was a contributor to a Bay Area socialist blog called Educational Justice, described as being “from a collective of progressive education activists—stuff about teaching, thinking, parenting, social justice, desegregation, self-determination, economic justice, music, creativity, and building progressive movements for our future.”
Other contributors included Tom Edminster, a teacher’s unionist and DSA member; Karen Zapata of Teachers 4 Social Justice; and Eric Mar, a Freedom Road Socialist Organization supporter and, like Campbell, a member of Progressives for Obama.
As a young man, Campbell was one of several communist or socialist organizers with Cesar Chavez’s United Farm Workers union, an experience he now wants to impart to America’s youth.
Campbell has served on DSA’s leadership body, the National Political Committee, and has also served on the DSA’s Latino Commission and Anti-Racism Commission. In 2017, Campbell was co-chair of the DSA Immigrant’s Rights Committee. Campbell is steeped in Marxist racial politics.
More Voters
The DSA’s interest in education is completely political. Inspired by Italian Communist Party theoretician Antonio Gramsci, DSA seeks to infiltrate U.S. society’s main opinion-forming institutions to change the popular consciousness in a socialist direction. In the more short-term, DSA is committed to both expanding the Latino vote and pushing it to the left to give its allies in the Democratic Party an unchallengeable majority in national elections.
Campbell’s DSA comrade, Eliseo Medina, was also active in the United Farm Workers union under Chavez. Medina transferred to the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), rising to executive vice president. As one of the most influential advocates for amnesty for illegal immigrants in the country, Medina served as an informal immigration adviser to then-President Barack Obama.
When Obama was still a senator, he
declared at a campaign stop while
addressing SEIU, “Before immigration
debates took place in Washington, I
spoke with Eliseo Medina and SEIU
members.”
At the America’s Future Now! conference in Washington on June 2, 2009, Medina addressed attendees on the necessity of “comprehensive immigration reform.”
Speaking of Latino voters, Medina explained their importance to the socialist project:
“When they voted in November, they voted overwhelmingly for progressive candidates. Barack Obama got two out of every three voters that showed up.
“So I think there’s two things that matter for the progressive community:
“Number one: If we are to expand this electorate to win, the progressive community needs to solidly be on the side of immigrants. That will expand and solidify the progressive coalition for the future. …
“Number two: [If] we reform the immigration laws, it puts 12 million people on the path to citizenship and eventually voters. Can you imagine if we have, even the same ratio, two out of three?
“If we have eight million new voters … [we] will create a governing coalition for the long term, not just for an election cycle.”
Campbell wants to use his influence on the education system to play his part in DSA’s revolutionary program.
Educational Change
In the early 2010s, Campbell set up a network to change the California history and social studies textbooks, which had mainly been written by objective historians appointed by Gov. Ronald Reagan.
Wrote Campbell:
“I have spent more than six years working on this project—and it was well worth it. The important changes we achieved were produced by years of collective advocacy, lobbying, letter writing, and organizing. After being blocked in our efforts in 2008, we created the Mexican American Digital History site, then organized a statewide network of scholars and community activists to pressure the State Board of Education.
“At each stage, we had to explain why this tedious process of changing the Framework was important. We received assistance from civil rights groups and Latinos in the Democratic Party. Similar and parallel campaigns were organized within the Filipino, Hmong, South Asian, and LGBT communities.”
According to Campbell, this work will result in a new “progressive” path of learning for California’s school children:
“History and social science textbooks in public schools in California and most of the nation are racist, class-biased, and ignore LGBT history. This condition will change in California in 2017 when new textbooks are adopted.
“Under a unanimous decision by the California Board of Education made on July 14, 2016, California students will finally be encouraged to know the history of Latino civil rights leaders like Cesar Chavez and Dolores Huerta and Filipino labor leaders like Larry Itliong, as well as an accurate and inclusive history of LGBT activists as a part of the history of California and the nation. These topics are currently substantially absent from public school textbooks.”
That’s right—now young Californians can learn all about Campbell’s old boss Chavez, a man who trained for six years in Chicago with the father of “community organizing” himself: Saul Alinsky. They’ll also learn about Chavez’s right-hand woman Dolores Huerta, a longtime DSA comrade and general communist hang-around.
Chavez worked with a lot of Communist Party USA supporters, including Filipino labor organizer Larry Itliong—who will also be profiled in the new curriculum.
This is supposedly all about fairness and giving minorities equal treatment. Teaching kids about communists, it seems, will make them better students and more engaged citizens—especially the more than 1 in 10 students who Campbell claims are homosexual:
“In the current books … the 51 percent of students who are Latino, the 11.5 percent who are Asian, and the estimated 11 percent of students who are LGBT, do not see themselves as part of history, for many their sense of self is marginalized.
“As I argued in a prior book, marginalization negatively impacts their connections with school and their success at school. This has resulted in a nearly 50 percent dropout rate for Latinos and some Asian groups and LGBT students.”
Campbell then goes on to reel off a whole list of leftist individuals and the radical events they inspired, including the occupation of Alcatraz Island in San Francisco Bay by communist-inspired militants, the communist-inspired American Indian Movement and the standoff at Wounded Knee in South Dakota, the Marxist-led La Raza Unida Party, and the communist-led Chicano Moratorium against the Vietnam War.
And, of course, the 11 percent of California’s children who are allegedly LGBT shouldn’t feel left out. Their far-left champions are profiled, too: “California activists like Harvey Milk and Cleve Jones were part of a broader movement that emerged in the aftermath of the Stonewall riots, which brought a new attention to the cause of equal rights for homosexual Americans.”
Coincidentally, these educational priorities may end up helping DSA’s revolutionary electoral strategy. According to Campbell:
“School marginalization also contributes directly to low-level civic engagement. An accurate history would provide some of these students with a sense of self, of direction, of purpose. History and social science classes should help young people acquire and learn to use the skills, knowledge, and attitudes that will prepare them to be competent and responsible citizens throughout their lives. …
“And, while California and the nation have a general problem with low civic engagement among young people, it is also true that the state has a very specific problem with the rate of Latino and Asian voter participation in civic life.
“Rates of voting and voter registration provide a window into civic engagement. The proportion of state voter registration that is Latino and Asian has remained far below the proportions of these groups in the state’s overall population. …
“We know that we can do better. California has the largest school population of any state, with more than 6,226,000 students in school in 2015, more than 11 percent of the United States total.”
So, not only will millions of California school children be moved to the left by Campbell’s pro-communist propaganda, but they will also likely vote in significantly higher numbers.
This will, of course, consolidate the left’s already iron-grip on California politics, but will likely affect other states as well.
One well-placed Marxist operative can negatively influence millions, even hundreds of millions, of people.
Every pro-American school board in the country should immediately review and probably ban all history and social studies textbooks coming out of California.
Trevor Loudon is an author, filmmaker, and public speaker from New Zealand. For more than 30 years, he has researched radical left, Marxist, and terrorist movements and their covert influence on mainstream politics.
Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
Barack Obama Launches ‘Redistricting U’ Campaign for ‘Fair Maps’
1:52
Former President Barack Obama on Monday unveiled a new initiative to influence redistricting efforts across the United States.
The initiative, Redistricting U, will send activists to provide free training and tools to volunteers involved in redistricting efforts and guide groups on how to “be leaders in the movement for fair maps.”
“Training is at the heart of organizing. It’s why I’ve always made it a priority – from my 2008 campaign until now,” Obama wrote in a tweet announcing Redistricting U, which is part of the All On The Line campaign.
In February, Obama’s Organizing For Action and former Attorney General Eric Holder’s National Redistricting Action Fund joined forces to create the All On The Line campaign — aimed at thwarting the use of so-called gerrymandering across the country.
Training is at the heart of organizing. It’s why I’ve always made it a priority – from my 2008 campaign until now. And it’s why I’m proud to announce @allontheline’s in-person training initiative, Redistricting U. Join us: allontheline.org/redistrictingu
“The movement for fair maps will determine the course of progress on every issue we care about for the next decade,” Obama said. “And we can’t wait to begin organizing when the redistricting process starts in 2021. We need to build this movement from the ground up – right now.”
“The movement for fair maps will determine the course of progress on every issue we care about for the next decade. And we can’t wait to begin organizing when the redistricting process starts in 2021. We need to build this movement from the ground up — right now,” Obama said in a statement on the initiative’s website.
“It’s why I made it a priority in my 2008 campaign and throughout our larger movement for change in the years since,” the former president added.
The initiative is part of a larger push by the Obamas for voting reform. In 2018, former first lady Michelle Obama created the When We All Vote initiative aimed at increasing voter turnout across the country.
The Left and the Democratic Party are now so committed to open borders and illegal immigration that they cannot reverse course without a major upheaval within their ranks. Do they really give a damn about the African American population, native born or naturalized Hispanics, and the low-income white working families? Or, are the potential votes of the illegal population more important? With the spending plans outlined above how will they buy off these groups as there will be no money or jobs? How will they avoid the inevitable friction and potential hostility with so many in the marketplace and a limited number of jobs in the low-income sector?
Can the Democratic Party Govern America?
I recently had a lunch meeting with a client of 25 years who is a lifelong member and financial supporter of the Democratic Party. While we managed to avoid politics as best we could, the inevitable subject of Donald Trump and the Democratic presidential field reared its head. Once my friend got past the usual left-wing talking points about Trump, I asked him a simple question. Given the current state of the American Left and their domination of the Democratic Party would the Democrats be able to govern a nation of 330 million people the size of the continent of Europe if they assumed all the reins of power in Washington D.C.? I was met with a blank stare and a stammered “I really don’t know.”
So, for the benefit of my friend and his fellow Democrats and leftists some further questions to help them answer that fundamental inquiry.
This same cabal that would be charged with governing the nation has, for the past three and a half years, marginalized, physically confronted and repeatedly accused 63 million Americans who voted for Donald Trump of being not only racists but fascists and white supremacists, as well as homophobic, xenophobic and among the most vile people on the face of the earth. What will be their intentions for these rightfully incensed citizens? Ignore them and hope they go away (which they will not)? Or succumb to their base in order to stay in power and continue to vilify nearly half of the voters in 2020, thus potentially fomenting serious ongoing confrontations and retaliation.
Over the years 154 million fundamentalist, evangelical or Catholic Christians have been denigrated, mocked and pilloried for their beliefs as religious liberty is under continual assault by the Left and the Democratic Party. What can this segment of society look forward to under a government committed to promoting unfettered abortion and infanticide as well as a determination to purge society of its basic Judeo-Christian foundation? It is almost certain that the hierarchy of the party, in order to placate their base, will continue, by litigation, administrative decrees, and intimidation, to force their secularism on the nation. How will they respond to what will be increasing anger and resentment by 48% of the population?
In a nation of 330 million people there will always be those who will commit mass murder. When and if the current iteration of the Democratic Party takes over, these occurrences will increase. The left has always blamed rhetoric and guns as the primary causation. Thus, when mass murders occur, a Democratic Party in power will have no choice but to appease their left-wing voters (the bulk of their base) and continue to ignore underlying factors such as societal breakdown and mental illness and actively focus on limiting speech and gun control.
Currently 235 million Americans either own or could see themselves owning a gun. How will the Democrats in power go about confiscating guns in a nation of 3.8 million square miles? Utilize a national registry of all gun owners? Outlaw all semi-automatic weapons? Impose onerous taxes and insurance requirements making gun ownership unaffordable? Pass open-ended red flag laws allowing virtually anyone to file a complaint against someone, ostensibly based in their suspicions, thus allowing the police to seize the guns of the accused? As for speech, will certain words, phrases and organizations, as determined by the Left, be considered inciteful and dangerous and thus outlawed? How will the Democrats deal with the inevitable resistance and potential violent pushback from upwards of 72% of the nation’s citizenry?
Once in power, the Democrats are committed to Medicare for all, reparations for African Americans, and new environmental programs amid a myriad of spending programs. The estimated average annual cost of these proposals exceeds $6 Trillion over and above current spending. At present the federal government spends $4.7 Trillion (which includes $1 Trillion of deficit spending). Income taxes account for 50% of all government revenue and Social Security and Medicare withholding account for 36%. Thus, individuals account for 86% of all revenue. In order for the Democrats to pay for these programs, revenue from individual taxpayers would have to be increased by 200%.
As the Democrats have promised not to touch Social Security and Medicare withholding, all the increase would have to be in the income tax arena. Based on the most recent IRS analysis the effective average income tax rate would have to be 80% on the top 10% of income tax filers, a rate of 65% on the next 40%, and a rate of 40% on the bottom 50% of filers. This does not include Social Security and Medicare withholding of another 8 to 12 percentage points plus an average state income tax rate of 8.5 percentage points. Further, the corporate tax rate would have to be increased from a current rate of 21% to 60%.
How would the Democrats enforce these new rates as people either refuse to pay or go into the underground economy? How would they pay for massive unemployment and welfare benefits as a result of an avalanche of layoffs and business closures? What are their plans for the recession and potential depression that would ensue? From whom would the government borrow money and at what exorbitant interest rate? Would they successfully coerce the Federal Reserve into printing trillions of dollars in new money creating massive uncontrolled inflation?
On the other hand, if they do not initiate some if not all of these programs, how do they placate their base and voters without blaming it on the other side as they are wont to do -- thus further antagonizing and pitting segments of society against each other.
Recently the Democratic Party has become the party of open borders and amnesty as well as ultimate citizenship for upwards of 22 million illegal immigrants and with open borders at least another 2-4 million more every year. The vast majority of these illegal immigrants are functionally illiterate and lacking in employable skills.
Currently 30% of all working families (or nearly 50 million Americans) are essentially unskilled and low income but above the poverty threshold. 60% of these are families headed by racial/ ethnic minorities. African-Americans, while 13% of the population (41 million), account for nearly 30% of low income working families. Another 39 million Americans live below the poverty level. Thus, a total of 89 million live in low-income families or in poverty. Yet the Democratic Party, that claims to be the champion of minorities and low-income families, is pushing to ultimately legalize upwards of 22 to 30 million unskilled illegal immigrants (equal to 55 to 73% of the current African American population) which will devastate low income working American families.
The Left and the Democratic Party are now so committed to open borders and illegal immigration that they cannot reverse course without a major upheaval within their ranks. Do they really give a damn about the African American population, native born or naturalized Hispanics, and the low-income white working families? Or, are the potential votes of the illegal population more important? With the spending plans outlined above how will they buy off these groups as there will be no money or jobs? How will they avoid the inevitable friction and potential hostility with so many in the marketplace and a limited number of jobs in the low-income sector?
In summary, while the current American Left dominated Democratic Party and its propaganda arm, the mainstream media, may be good at sowing confusion, communicating overt falsehoods and vilifying their opponents in order to win elections, they cannot and will never be able to successfully govern a nation of 330 million people the size of the continent of Europe. If they ever fully control all the levers of power, this nation will, in due course, cease to exist.
Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.), and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) speak at a press conference at the U.S. Capitol on July 15, 2019. (Holly Kellum/NTD)
Marxists Work to Reinforce ‘The Squad’ in 2020
August 19, 2019 Updated: August 19, 2019
Share
Commentary
Not content with Reps. Rashida Tlaib, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , Ilhan Omar, and Ayanna Pressley—the far-left congresswomen collectively known as “The Squad”—the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) and allied Marxist groups are targeting multiple congressional seats with far-left candidates in 2020.
No one is safe. The DSA and its pro-China allies, the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) and Liberation Road (formerly Freedom Road Socialist Organization, or FRSO), are targeting dozens of seats currently held by Republicans, moderate Democrats, and even by insufficiently Marxist members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. Most will not make it past the primaries, but some have at least a reasonable chance of being elected.
Here are four serious far-left contenders who could be reinforcing “The Squad” in January 2021.
Cori Bush
Cori Bush is targeting Missouri’s 1st Congressional District, which encompasses St. Louis, Florissant, and Ferguson. Her Democratic primary opponent is William Lacy Clay Jr., a veteran of both the Congressional Progressive Caucus and the Congressional Black Caucus, who has represented the district since 2001, succeeding his father William Lacy Clay Sr. In 2018, Bush stood against Clay Jr., losing by about 20 percentage points.
A native of St. Louis, Bush is a registered nurse, an ordained pastor, an activist, and a “community organizer.” She first came to prominence during the Ferguson anti-police protests of 2014, where she played a significant, if largely covert, role.
During a BlogTalkRadio show broadcast in August 2015, Bush was reporting “on the ground” as she described the scene days after “shots rang out” in Ferguson: “I’m right on the ground. I’m right here in the middle of it, so there’s chanting behind me. As a matter of fact, I was riding in a car … circling the neighborhood with flags and with our masks on.”
Prominent in the activist community, Bush was a recipient of the 2015 “Woman of Courage” Award from the Emmett Till Legacy Foundation and the 2016 Delux Magazine “Power 100” Award, according to her website. She was named one of the ‘Top 50 Women of St. Louis” by Gazelle Magazine, and an “Unsung Human Rights Hero” by the St. Louis Coalition for Human Rights in 2017. She also received the 2018 “Community Activist” award from the Missouri Association of Black Ministers. In 2017, she was elected the first vice-chairperson of the Missouri Democratic Party Progressive Caucus.
District 1 is heavily Democratic, so if Bush can manage to beat Clay Jr., she will almost certainly win the seat.
Working in her favor is her close connection to two of Missouri’s most influential Marxist groups: St. Louis DSA and the local CPUSA. These groups can muster nearly 1,000 activists and have already elected many local officials, including several state representatives. Early this year, St. Louis Communist Party leader Tony Pecinovsky (supported by Bush and running as a Democrat) lost a race for St. Louis Board of Aldermen Ward 14 with a respectable 48 percent of the vote.
Bush is a regular at the local Communist Party HQ—the St. Louis Workers Educational Society. During her 2018 campaign, Bush celebrated her birthday at an event in St Louis. Guest speakers included DSA member Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
In July 2017, Bush joined a Sit-In to Save Health Care at Republican Sen. Roy Blunt’s office in Clayton, Missouri. Bush was joined by members of the St. Louis DSA, Socialist Alternative, and the St. Louis Workers’ Education Society.
Bush already has the endorsement of Justice Democrats—famous for selecting and electing Ocasio-Cortez in 2016.
Albert Lee
Albert Lee is targeting Oregon’s 3rd Congressional District, which encompasses all of deep blue Portland. The very safe Democrat district has been held since 1996 by Earl Blumenauer, a long-time member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. Blumenauer beat his last Republican opponent 73 percent to 20 percent, so if Lee can win the primary, he’s almost guaranteed a seat in Congress.
Lee is currently the Dean for Business and Computing at the Sylvania Campus of Portland Community College.
He is active in TriMet’s Transit Equity Advisory Committee, the City of Portland’s Citizen Review Committee, the executive board of the Giving Tree NW, Health Care for All Oregon, the NAACP, Korean American Coalition of Oregon, and the Democratic Party of Oregon. He is a member of Portland DSA and the DSA front BerniePDX/Our Revolution, and on the board of directors of the far-left Asian Pacific American Network of Oregon—all groups with considerable electoral experience.
Currently, Lee is seeking Portland DSA’s endorsement. If he gets both local and national DSA endorsement, Lee will have an army of small donors and several hundred free doorknockers and phone-bankers on his team.
While the incumbent Blumenauer has ties to some DSA veterans, that may not do him much good. The DSA is likely to throw the old Jewish white “progressive” under the bus in favor of the young Korean/black socialist.
Lee is supporting Paige Kreisman in her run for Oregon Assembly District 42. Kreisman is a self-proclaimed Marxist-Leninist and member of both the DSA and CPUSA.
Lee is also supporting Doyle Canning, who is running for Congress in Oregon’s 4th District against Congressional Progressive Caucus co-founder Peter DeFazio. Canning has long been associated with FRSO/Liberation Road activists.
Mike Siegel
Mike Siegel is contesting Texas’s 10th Congressional District, which stretches from just north of Austin almost to Houston, against incumbent Republican Michael McCaul. In 2018, Siegel lost to McCaul by only four points in what is normally a safe Republican district, so the second time around, he may be even more of a threat.
Siegel is an assistant city attorney in Austin. He has worked as a public school teacher with Teach for America and co-founded two nonprofit education organizations.
Siegel’s far-left credentials are impeccable. He’s the son of Oakland, California-based activist/attorney Dan Siegel, once the West Coast leader of the Communist Workers Party, a group known for its blind loyalty to China and North Korea.
At Cornell University, Mike Siegel was president of the far-left National Lawyers Guild student chapter. He also served as an intern at the equally radical Center for Constitutional Rights, researching issues such as civil liability for military contractors. He also worked as legal coordinator for the “Winter Soldier: Iraq and Afghanistan” conference presented by the FRSO front group Iraq Veterans Against the War.
In 2018, Mike Siegel was heavily supported by several DSA-controlled groups including Our Revolution–Central Texas, Left Up to US, and Texas Alliance for Retired Americans. Austin DSA membership coordinator Jacob Aronowitz also served on Mike Siegel’s 2018 staff.
By July 2019, the Siegel campaign had garnered a number of key national and local endorsements, such as: far-left California congressman Ted Lieu; DSA front organization Progressive Democrats of America; International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers; National Union of Healthcare Workers; and leftist Mike Floyd of the Pearland ISD school board.
Austin DSA and neighboring Williamson County DSA can muster over 1,000 members between them. Austin DSA is currently supporting one of its own comrades, Heidi Sloan, against Republican Roger Williams in District 25. However, they will almost certainly support Siegel as well if they think he has any chance of defeating McCaul.
Eva Putzova
Eva Putzova is contesting the Democratic primary in Arizona’s District 1, which encompasses all of the northern and eastern part of the state. Her opponent is incumbent “moderate” Democrat Tom O’Halleran, who in 2018 defeated his Republican opponent by about 8 points.
Putzova, a Slovakian immigrant, has been very active in public life in Flagstaff. She was elected to the Flagstaff City Council in November 2014 to a four-year term. She also served on the Board of Directors of Flagstaff Arts Council, the Audit Committee, the Economic Collaborative of Northern Arizona, and the Northern Arizona Intergovernmental Public Transportation Authority.
In 2016, she led a successful local citizen initiative, “raising Flagstaff’s minimum wage to $15 by 2021, implementing one fair wage by 2026, and establishing local labor standards enforcement,” according to her former councilmember bio.
Putzova was also a “board member of Friends of Flagstaff’s Future—a multi-issue organization that advocates for a socially and environmentally just Flagstaff.” She has also “contributed to the goals of local commissions and committees, including the Regional Plan Citizen Advisory Committee, Coconino Community College Citizen Review Panel, Citizen Review Commission for Flagstaff Regional Five-Year and Long-Range Transit Plan, and the Greater Flagstaff Economic Council.”
Currently, Putzova works as the director of communications for Restaurant Opportunities Centers United, a far-left labor organization with ties to FRSO/Liberation Road.
For several years, Putzova has been active in the Flagstaff branch of Progressive Democrats of America, a national organization closely affiliated with the DSA. The national organization is supporting Putzova, one of their earliest endorsements of the 2020 election cycle. She is also close to Our Revolution—Flagstaff Progressives, which on a national scale is also heavily dominated by DSA members.
Putzova is also very close to Flagstaff DSA, which will likely support her in her upcoming battles with O’Halleran and any Republican challenger.
We Ain’t Seen Nothing Yet
While many U.S. voters have been shocked by the antics of “The Squad” and the Democrats’ increasingly obvious shift to the hard left—we ain’t seen nothing yet.
The Democrats have been edging left since the 1960s. The socialist shift accelerated dramatically under President Barack Obama and went into overdrive with the Bernie Sanders campaign of 2016.
Currently, the DSA, CPUSA, and FRSO/Liberation Road are contesting for ground in the Democratic Party at every level, from county commissions and education boards to the House of Representatives and even the U.S. Senate. It’s only a matter of time until they completely dominate a once-great political party.
Whether Bush, Lee, Siegel, and Putzova win or not in 2020 is largely immaterial. There are hundreds more like them standing in line, waiting for their shot.
The Trump administration and the Republican Party are right to campaign against socialism and communism in 2020. Only by waking up millions of U.S. voters to the imminent Marxist threat can we have any hope of saving this great republic.
Trevor Loudon is an author, filmmaker, and public speaker from New Zealand. For more than 30 years, he has researched radical left, Marxist, and terrorist movements and their covert influence on mainstream politics.
Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
No comments:
Post a Comment