|
nChrist
|
 |
« on: July 23, 2017, 05:12:34 PM » |
|
________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 7-21-2017
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________
Mid-Day Digest
Jul. 21, 2017
IN TODAY’S EDITION
Ben Carson will reinterpret rather than rescind a racist Obama housing rule.
NAFTA renegotiation will kick off soon as administration outlines priorities.
Social Security is in bad shape. We know that. But do our elected leaders?
Daily Features: Top Headlines, Cartoons, Columnists and Short Cuts.
THE FOUNDATION
“Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition.” —Thomas Jefferson (1781)
TOP RIGHT HOOKS
Carson Waffles on Race-Based Housing Rule1
In 2015, Barack Obama’s Department of Housing and Urban Development sought to cement race as the primary guiding principle behind the Fair Housing Act via the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing rule2 (AFFH). This imposition by Big Brother was soundly criticized by many conservatives, including the good Doctor Ben Carson, who is now HUD secretary. He once derided the rule as doomed to fail for its attempt to “legislate racial equality.”
Fast forward two years and now Dr. Carson finds himself as the head of HUD with the power to rescind Obama’s onerous AFFH rule, but he has decided to leave it in place. This week, Carson reiterated that he rejected the “extra manipulation and cost” created by the AFFH rule, and he then stated, “So we just have to reinterpret it, that’s all.” Why not just get rid of it? Carson pointed to a ruling by the Supreme Court, saying, “I probably am not going to mess with something the Supreme Court has weighed in on. In terms of interpreting what it means, that’s where the concentration is going to be.” And how would Carson reinterpret it? He didn’t say. Several congressional Republicans, led by Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), have called on Carson to end the rule.
Carson’s waffling on this issue looks bad, especially on a rule that was strategically designed as justification for a race-based, politically motivated government power grab. Reinterpretation of the AFFH rule implies that Carson has embraced the greater authority the rule grants him even though he has rejected Obama’s racist aims in creating it. Instead, Carson needs to be draining the DC swamp of leftist social engineering regulations like the AFFH that have proven to do nothing but limit Americans’ Liberty.
Renegotiating NAFTA3
On the campaign trail, Donald Trump promised to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) or leave it entirely, calling it the “worst trade deal maybe ever signed anywhere.” There are certainly elements4 of NAFTA that could use renegotiation, but overall, it’s a positive deal for the U.S. In April, Trump’s advisers talked him down from the ledge5, in part because of how much his constituent farmers benefit from the trade agreement. This week, the administration released its Summary of Objectives for the NAFTA Renegotiation6.
The administration says, “The new NAFTA must continue to break down barriers to American exports. This includes the elimination of unfair subsidies, market-distorting practices by state owned enterprises, and burdensome restrictions of intellectual property. The new NAFTA will be modernized to reflect 21st century standards and will reflect a fairer deal, addressing America’s persistent trade imbalances in North America. It will ensure that the United States obtains more open, equitable, secure, and reciprocal market access, and that our trade agreement with our two largest export markets is effectively implemented and enforced.”
U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer will reportedly focus on intellectual property, financial service, telecommunications and e-commerce — all areas where the U.S. has a competitive advantage. Since NAFTA was enacted in 1993, The Wall Street Journal notes, “Farm and ranch exports to Mexico and Canada have more than quadrupled.” Removing any remaining obstructions like Canadian tariffs on American poultry, eggs and wine would be a good move for the administration. To make a larger point, Trump shouldn’t opt for a tit-for-tat deal with more barriers. He would do far better pushing for more open markets from our neighbors.
Top Headlines7
Why GOP health care failure jeopardizes tax reform. (PoliZette8.)
Top Dems slow rolling ethics probe to delay investigation into Obama leaks. (The Washington Free Beacon9)
Dems see huge field emerging to take on Trump. (The Hill10)
Soros gave $20.7 million to alleged Russia-funded climate groups in U.S. (NewsBusters11)
Venezuelan president reportedly considering asylum as pressure grows on regime. (CNS News12)
The laughable hypocrisy of Katie Couric lecturing others on the dangers of “fake News.” (Washington Examiner13)
DOJ takes down largest dark net marketplace in history. (CNS News14)
Voter fraud database tops 1,000 proven cases. (The Daily Signal15)
Minnesota schools adopt transgender toolkit for kindergartners. (The Washington Free Beacon16)
McDonald’s employee refuses to serve uniformed police officer, gets fired. (Richmond Times-Dispatch17)
Policy: How housing assistance leads to long-term dependence — and how to fix it. (Manhattan Institute18.)
Policy: America needs more pipelines. (U.S. News & World Report19)
For more, visit Patriot Headline Report20.
FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS
Social Security Is Still a Looming Disaster21
By Brian Mark Weber
Did Donald Trump collude with Russia in order to gain an advantage in the presidential election? Will Republicans repeal or replace ObamaCare? And will Congress ever get around to the border wall, tax cuts and a host of other important issues? Seems like everything is on the radar right now except the one thing that everyone in Washington should be talking about: Social Security reform.
But don’t worry. If you’re under 50, you still have some time to hope that Congress and the president will wake up and deal with this monumental entitlement problem.
How bad is it? A lot worse than we think. The Social Security Administration’s annual Trustees Report indicates that Social Security’s unfunded obligation is now $11.5 trillion. The Heritage Foundation’s Romina Boccia reminds us22, “In the absence of congressional action, benefits could be delayed or indiscriminately reduced across the board by 25 percent. Once the Social Security trust fund is depleted, the program will only be able to pay 75 percent of scheduled benefits, based on payroll and other Social Security tax revenues projected at that time.”
For now, Social Security will continue to make its payments to those who have reached retirement age. But by 2035, the trust fund will run dry and Social Security will have to rely on payments into the system. Unfortunately, the number of people paying will be insufficient to fund those who are retiring.
As of now, there are few solutions being offered. In 2016, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Sam Johnson (R-TX), introduced23 the Social Security Reform Act of 2016. But the program merely tinkers with the system already in place, leaving it susceptible to the same problems that plague it today.
But politicians of both parties need to be thinking about more than just current retirees. Millennials are paying attention to Social Security and are anxious to do something about it.
David Barnes writes24 in the Washington Examiner, “My generation demonstrates both the capacity and desire to plan and save for retirement but, as the payroll tax eats up more of our hard-earned income, Social Security is actually hindering our ability to do so. Revamping the antiquated Social Security program would allow millennials to save substantially more and protect our country’s financial future. My generation has been saddled with a head-spinning nearly $20 trillion in federal government debt. And Social Security, the single largest federal program, is a huge driver of this debt, costing nearly $929 billion25 in 2016, close to a quarter of every dollar the government spent.” |
