Need Assistance-Make yourself illegal and get the benefits

Obama Raids Health Programs to Pay for Illegal Immigrants

Posted By Brendan Kirby On November 30, 2016 @ 11:34 AM In Poli | Comments Disabled

The Department of Health and Human Services informed Congress this week that it will raid heath programs for Americans to pay for thousands of children and teenagers flooding the southwest border.

Barbara Clark, a deputy director of the department, sent a letter to congressional staffers indicating that HHS Secretary Sylvia Burwell intends to shift $167 million to pay for housing, health care, schooling, recreation, and other services for unaccompanied minors until the current temporary spending bill expires Dec. 9.

“HHS cannot continue to provide the services we are statutorily bound to provide and avoid a scenario where children are potentially stranded at the border without additional funding from the Congress.”

Clark wrote that the budget outlook for the rest of the fiscal year that began Oct. 1 is dire unless Congress provides $1-2 billion on top of the proposed $1.2 billion budget increase for the Office of Refugee Resettlement, the agency charged with placing children and teens with sponsors in the United States.

“With ORR’s balances depleted, and having exhausted the additional funding available through the full exercise of the secretary’s transfer authority, ORR is not able to meet our legal and humanitarian obligations to shelter these children,” she wrote. “HHS cannot continue to provide the services we are statutorily bound to provide and avoid a scenario where children are potentially stranded at the border without additional funding from the Congress.”

As of Nov. 27, the number of illegal immigrant children in the care of the Office of Refugee Resettlement was about 11,200. Critics of President Obama’s immigration policies long have questioned the administration’s approach to the unaccompanied minor surge, which has averaged 255 a day in the month of November.

The administration has reunited many of those illegal arrivals with family members. The Associated Press reported that 80 percent of youths arriving illegally from February 2014 to September 2015 went to sponsors who themselves are illegal immigrants.

Due to backlogs in immigration courts, it can take years for the asylum claims of those youths to be adjudicated. The Office of Refugee Resettlement, meanwhile, loses track almost half of those minors, according to a recent report ^[1] by the Center for Immigration Studies.

Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies at the Washington-based think tank, said the policy effectively completes a journey often started by smugglers paid to deliver youths from Central America to the United States.

“They don’t have any basis for staying here,” she said, pointing to government data indicating that officials ultimately reject the vast majority of asylum claims.

Vaughan said many parents pay smugglers to bring their children to America.

“We should not be rewarding that by paying for these children to stay,” she said.

The temporary spending measure passed by Congress included $171 million for the Department of Heath and Human Services to spend on services for illegal immigrant youths until lawmakers pass a permanent budget. The agency also has a surplus of $90 million left over from 2016, for a total of $261 million currently available, according to the Center for Immigration Studies.

Clark wrote that the department will still be short $40 million to $165 million for the unaccompanied minors. Under federal law, Burwell has authority to redirect 1 percent of any program’s budget without authorization from Congress.

“What Burwell did was took a little bit from almost every account,” Vaughan said.

^[2]Restoring Immigration Law and Order in 100 Days ^[2]Advocacy group sketches comprehensive blueprint for Trump transition team ^[2]

Vaughan said it is perverse to take money away from vital programs for Americans to pay the costs of illegal immigrant children with no right to stay. She said swift action to return those children shortly after they arrive will deter more people from paying smugglers.

"The responsible thing to do is to change the policy," she said. "HHS is not picking the pockets of people on Wall Street. These are important programs."

Health programs taking a hit include:

• $14 million from the Health Resources and Services Administration, including $4.5 million from the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program and $2 million from the Maternal and Child Health program.
• $14 million from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, for contagious disease prevention and treatment and other critical public health programs.
• $72 million from the National Institutes of Health, for research on cancer, diabetes, drug abuse, mental health, infectious diseases, and much more.
• $8 million from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, for treatment and prevention programs.
• $8 million from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.
• $39 million from the Children and Families Services Program.
• $4 million from the Aging and Disability Services Programs.
• $3 million from the Public Health and Social Services Emergency Fund, including more than $1 million from the Pandemic Influenza and BioShield Fund.

Article printed from LifeZette: http://www.lifezette.com

URL to article: http://

Fidel Castro, a true communist and destructor of lives and country.

So the dictator who persecuted, maimed, shot, murdered and imprisoned hundreds of thousands of Cubans, died and it shows how world leaders and our great leader responded, including many democrats and the mainstream media. 

Cubans did not flee their homeland by boat, sail board, rafts or any other means because they believed Cuba was a freedom loving country where the government did not persecute their citizens and the economy was booming and life could not be any better.  

In listening to the liberals, socialist/Marxist Democrats you would think that people were fleeing our country to get to Cuba.  The liberal media and other democratic politicians would not describe Castro for what he was and for the destruction he brought upon his country and citizens and other South American countries.  Venezuela to name just one that is on the verge of total collapse that may bring a citizen uprising and the potential for their slaughter as the government attempts to maintain their power and corruption.  In Venezuela, the one thing that stands out is the government power brokers are not wanting for anything and will do whatever they can to maintain their power.  They know if the people gain control, their lives will cease.  

It is becoming apparent from all the anti-Trump election demonstrations in schools, that these students are being taught how great the isms are, socialism, Marxism and communism.  These same professors that are teaching this crap, as well as the  communist throughout the democratic party realize any success that the Trump administration has in turning around the sluggish economy where businesses and people know better over the government bureaucrats who have never held a real job or operated a business will show their radical positions for what they are and what they have been attempting to do for the past 8 years, the destruction of our country.  

Of course, we all know how tolerant the left is and how cooperative they will be towards the Trump administration.  If you believe that crap, I know a bridge in Brooklyn for sale.  Failure is what they are hoping for so they can resume the destruction of our country and move towards a one world government and our constitution be dammed.  

Since the beginning of time, their ideology has never succeeded, but they are under the illusion they know better.   

Makes you wonder if Sen. McCarthy was right on about 50% of his allegations on the rise of communism in our country.

Why the Electoral College is important. Our Founders knew this. If we did not know, we do now. Your vote counts.

Hillary’s Popular Vote Holdouts on Collision Course with History

Posted By Laura Ingraham On November 27, 2016 @ 10:45 AM In Poli | Comments Disabled

After complaining for months that our electoral process takes too long, now some commentators apparently want it to take even longer. Lawrence Lessig has written an article for The Washington Post saying that members of the Electoral College should ignore what they were actually elected to do, and should take it upon themselves to give the presidency to Hillary Clinton.

His argument is that since Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, she is the “people’s choice.” Other commentators have made similar claims, and given the general angst and unhappiness that fills so much of the commentariat these days, we can expect this meme to float around for years to come. So let’s clarify a few points right now:

The Founders deliberately set up the country so that it would be extremely difficult for one bloc of states to permanently dominate the federal government.

1.) No one, including Hillary Clinton, was trying to win the popular vote. If the candidates had been trying to win the popular vote, almost everything about this election would have been different. The candidates might have picked different running mates. They might have emphasized different issues. They almost certainly would have campaigned in different states, run different commercials, and held different events. Does anyone think the Trump campaign would have largely ignored California and New York if he needed to win the popular vote? Of course not. He played under the rules as they are written in our Constitution — the same rules that governed the Clinton campaign — and he won. Trying to declare Hillary Clinton the winner because she won the popular vote is like saying that we should decide football games by which team has the most yards, or a baseball game by which team has the most hits. You could decide football and baseball games that way — and maybe we should — but we don’t. Similarly, we decide Presidential elections by Electoral College votes, not by popular votes — and we’ve been doing it that way since 1789. Trying to change the rules in the middle of an election would be bad enough; trying to change them after the election is an irresponsible attack on the whole political system.

2.) Now let’s look at that popular vote more closely. As of today, according to The New York Times, Hillary Clinton has 62,391,335 votes from all states. She has 1,969,920 votes from the five counties that make up New York City, and 1,893,770 votes from Los Angeles County, California. Donald Trump has 61,125,956 votes from all states, including 461,174 votes from the five counties that make up New York City, and 620,285 votes from L.A. County. In other words, Hillary beat Trump 3,863,690 to 1,081,459 in New York and L.A.; he beat her by 60,044,497 to 58,527,645 in the rest of the country. So Hillary’s margin in the popular vote rests entirely on her margin in two large cities — neither of which was contested by the Trump campaign.

3.) Of course, some people may think it’s fine to let New York and Los Angeles play such a large role in our presidential elections. And those people are entitled to seek a constitutional amendment to get their way. But it’s important to understand that we have very good reasons for our current system. The United States is not just a union of individuals — it is also a Union of States. (I’d have thought that the name “United States” gave that away, but apparently the point is too subtle for some observers and must be made more explicitly.) Under our system, the states are not merely provinces to carry out instructions from Washington; they are the building blocks of the nation, with legal power and meaning of their own. Back in the days when American children were still taught civics, they learned that one of the biggest problems facing the Founders was the issue of how to balance the interests of the large states and the small states. This is a brutally difficult issue with no perfect solution, and in the end we were left with a set of compromises. One of those compromises is that when it comes to the presidential election, we vote by states. The larger states have an advantage, in that they generally get more electoral votes than the small states. But the smaller states have an advantage in that the number of electoral votes they can cast is slightly larger than their percentage of the population.

4.) I can understand that this compromise may not seem fair to people in New York and L.A. But does anyone really believe that New York and L.A. don't already have a disproportionate impact on our government? They have the media, they have a huge percentage of the big donors, and they have major corporations and banks. Los Angeles County has 10 million people — approximately the same population as Georgia. Anyone who thinks that Georgia has as much influence over our national life as Los Angeles County simply isn't paying attention. In other words, New York and L.A. already have a disproportionate share of influence — the Electoral College merely evens things out somewhat.

5.) The folks in New York and L.A. may not think this is fair to them — they may insist that in addition to their disproportionate financial, cultural, and social power, they want their full share of political power when it comes to picking the president. Again, they are free to seek a constitutional amendment if they want — but they should consider the possibility that the Founders have treated them better than they realize. It is in everyone's interest to have a compromise that gives all parts of the Union a sense that they have a stake in the government. The moment Middle America feels that it can do nothing to influence Washington — that all decisions are made for a few big cities on the East and West Coasts — that's the moment people start looking to leave the Union altogether. In recent years, Canada has had problems with separatism in Quebec; Spain has had problems with separatism in Catalonia; Scotland has threatened to leave the United Kingdom; and the United Kingdom has voted to leave the European Union. Meanwhile, we Americans have been spared these problems — in large part because of compromises that (usually) allow us to feel that the system treats everyone fairly. Tearing up those compromises, and putting the very future of the Union itself at stake, would be foolish for all concerned.

6.) It is particularly mistaken for the anti-Trump voters in the East and West coasts to take such a view today. For years, the U.S. economy has been organized in a manner that unfairly favored highly educated Americans, many of whom are concentrated in the nation's largest cities. The wealthy people in places like New York and L.A. took those benefits, and then showed no sympathy for the steelworker who lost his job in Ohio, the Catholic nun worried about freedom of religion in Missouri, or the young military veteran looking for a job in West Virginia. One of the main reasons that Donald Trump will be the next president is that he was the only candidate in 2016 who made a plausible argument that he would govern on behalf of all Americans, rather than just a favored few with advanced degrees. In other words, if there was ever a time in American history where we can see why the smaller states and rural areas are at risk from being tyrannized by our largest cities, and why they need special protections in our Constitution, that time is now.

^[1]Frantic Media Becoming ‘Unglued’ Over Trump ^[1]Just two weeks into the transition, CNN and mainstream press are cursing, flipping out ^[1]

None of this is to say that Trump should disregard the voters in places like New York and Los Angeles. That would be a big mistake. George W. Bush should have tried harder to reach voters in the blue states; he didn't, and it cost his party enormously. Similarly, Barack Obama should have paid more attention to people in so-called "flyover country"; he didn't, and now his party is paying the price.

The Founders deliberately set up the country so that it would be extremely difficult for one bloc of states to permanently dominate the federal government; they intended national leaders to reach out to the whole nation, and not limit themselves to a faction, even a faction that represents a bare majority. So Trump should spend the next four years talking to Americans in New York, in New England, in Chicago, in Los Angeles, and the Silicon Valley — in all parts of the country where he faces significant opposition. He has outlined an agenda that should bring benefits for all Americans, and he should show that he cares about all Americans — including the ones who didn't vote for him this time. But in the meantime, his opponents would be smart to spend less time complaining about our system, and more time trying to understand it.

Article printed from LifeZette: http://www.lifezette.com

URL to article: http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/hillarys-popular-vote-holdouts-collision-course-history/