According to a report from ProPublica, Julie Kirchner, the former executive director of an anti-immigrant hate group, has been tapped to serveas the new ombudsman of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service, meaning she’s tasked with providing “assistance to immigrants who run into trouble with the agency, such as immigration applications that take too long to process or applications that may have been improperly rejected.” Seriously, what could ever go wrong here?
As the nation’s immigration agency, USCIS handles a wide range of legal immigration matters, including applications for citizenship and green cards. The agency can also grant legal status to those in extreme circumstances, such as refugees and asylum seekers. In addition, the agency is in charge of adjudicating applications from undocumented immigrants who were brought to the country illegally as children, sometimes referred to as “dreamers” or DACA recipients.
In other words, this is a paper-pushing, application-processing agency. It’s not supposed to be political, but good god, Kirchner’s appointment makes it exactly that—and more. Just look at her group’s record.
Republican leaders have called a vote on a plan to replace the health care law, signaling surging confidence that they're on the cusp of earning enough support to pass it. Though it's still unclear if House Speaker Ryan and his team have commitments from the 216 members necessary to pass the bill, scheduling a vote suggests they believe they're closer than ever.
Closer than ever means just that; while whip counts currently show the vote failing by a handful of votes, Ryan and the rest of the Republican leadership clearly think they will be able to wrangle the additional needed votes for this new, worse version of the bill between now and tomorrow.
The Republican effort is still projected to balloon the deficit, send premiums for many groups of patients skyrocketing, and guts a host of key protections for Americans with preexisting conditions. They’re hurrying the vote through before the Congressional Budget Office has a chance to produce revised numbers for just how much it will cost or how many Americans will lose coverage because of it.
If it passes, House Republicans will pass the mess to a Senate.
House Republicans are hell-bent on ripping away our health insurance. Call your member of Congress at 202-224-3121, and demand they vote NO on a renewed Trumpcare that is worse than the one before. Remind them they work for you.
Mike Pence has just done a tremendous job on this order. He's the best.
Mike Pence has just done a tremendous job on this order. He's the best.
As Donald Trump readies to sign an order that many expect will give religious people sweeping latitude to discriminate against LGBTQ Americans, civil rights groups are preparing to immediately launch a legal challenge. Dominic Holden reports:
Depending on how a final order is worded, legal groups say they are prepared to try blocking it in federal courts on constitutional grounds, thereby hoping to hand Trump another high-profile defeat like those he has faced so far with his travel bans.
“We will fight this with everything we have,” Lambda Legal senior counsel Camilla Taylor said Tuesday, adding, “We are prepared to sue in a very short timeframe if the executive order closely resembles the leaked drafts.”
She said the group has already assembled plaintiffs for their lawsuit.
An original draft of the order, which was spearheaded by distinguished homophobe Mike Pence and leaked to The Nation in early February, was widely viewed by civil rights advocates as violating the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment and the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. It gave broad license to discriminate to both individuals and organizations (including for-profits) that have religious or moral objections to LGBTQ-identified people, same-sex marriage, abortion, and pre-marital sex. Sarah Posner originally reported:
The draft document specifically protects the tax-exempt status of any organization that “believes, speaks, or acts (or declines to act) in accordance with the belief that marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman, sexual relations are properly reserved for such a marriage, male and female and their equivalents refer to an individual’s immutable biological sex as objectively determined by anatomy, physiology, or genetics at or before birth, and that human life begins at conception and merits protection at all stages of life.”
Looks like Baton Rouge is bracing itself for a new round of protests in the Alton Sterling case. Sterling was killed by police last year after selling CDs in front of a convenience store.
Looks like Baton Rouge is bracing itself for a new round of protests in the Alton Sterling case. Sterling was killed by police last year after selling CDs in front of a convenience store.
Is anyone really surprised that the Justice Department decided not to charge the cops who killed Alton Sterling last year in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, for selling CDs outside of a convenience store? With a white supremacist like Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III in charge of the DOJ, there is almost no chance that black lives taken by the state will receive any kind of justice. So this isn’t at all surprising—just another grim reminder that this administration has no plans for police reform or to work on repairing the historical tensions between police and communities of color. But for some of us, coming just one day after news that a police officer in Balch Springs, Texas, shot and killed yet another black person, this time unarmed 15-year-old honor student Jordan Edwards, this hurts—a lot.
The Justice Department has decided not to bring charges against the officers involved in the death of Alton Sterling, whose videotaped shooting by police in Baton Rouge last summer prompted unrest across the city, and is planning to reveal in the next 24 hours that it has closed the probe, according to four people familiar with the matter.
As of Tuesday afternoon, the Sterling family had yet to be informed by the Justice Department of the decision, and it is unclear how and when the department will announce its findings.
The family of Alton Sterling is devastated by this news and rightfully so. They had been told that they would be notified about a decision prior to any public announcement. So this news serves as a double whammy—both that the officers would not be charged and that they are finding out at the same time everyone else is. And as you can imagine, it’s a lot for them to take.
Family members said they had been told they would get news of the decision before it was publicized. CNN has not independently confirmed the media reports, which cited unnamed sources. [...]
One of Sterling's aunts said she, too, had not heard from federal authorities. But she was upset by the reports that said the officers would not be charged.
"It's not right. Lord have Mercy. Oh my God," Sandra Sterling told CNN.
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee clearly feels the Quist-mentum, writes Huffington Post:
Congressional Democrats are going all in on Rob Quist, the Montana musical legend and Democrat who’s up against GOP tech millionaire Greg Gianforte in Montana’s special election.
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is investing an additional $400,000 in Quist’s campaign to fill the Montana congressional seat left vacant when former Rep. Ryan Zinke was sworn in as the interior secretary, DCCC spokeswoman Meredith Kelly told HuffPost.
The new donation brings the DCCC’s total investment in Quist to $600,000.
In addition to the DCCC pumping fresh money into Quist's bid, a new ad was released by a new venture called Fight Back PAC, which seeks to harness the energy of small-dollar donors. You can watch their ad below the fold.
Republicans have been touting the MacArthur amendment to Trumpcare, the one that allows states to opt out of pre-existing conditions protections and essential health benefit requirements, as a great thing that lets states determine what works best for their own residents. Except it doesn't. The ripple effect of one state making the decision to give up these protections could be national, argues Brookings fellow Matthew Fielder. Not just for Obamacare customers, but for people with employer coverage, too.
In particular, a single state’s decision to weaken or eliminate its essential health benefit standards could weaken or effectively eliminate the ACA’s guarantee of protection against catastrophic costs for people with coverage through large employer plans in every state. The two affected protections are the ACA’s ban on annual and lifetime limits, as well as the ACA’s requirement that insurance plans cap enrollees’ annual out-of-pocket spending. [...]
Understanding why a single state’s waiver could undermine the ACA’s protections against catastrophic costs nationwide requires delving into the details of how these ACA provisions work. In brief, the ACA generally banned private insurance plans from imposing annual or lifetime limits on the dollar amount of care they would cover and required plans to cap enrollees’ annual out-of-pocket spending. [...] However, the ACA’s ban on annual and lifetime limits only applies with respect to care that is considered essential health benefits. Similarly, the ACA only requires that plans cap enrollees’ annual out-of-pocket spending on care that is considered essential health benefits. Thus, as the definition of essential health benefits narrows, the scope of these requirements narrows as well. [...]
The breadth of these requirements therefore depends crucially on which definition of essential health benefits applies to any particular plan. For individual and small group market plans, the applicable definition is simply the definition that applies in the state of issuance. But the situation is more complicated for large employer plans, which accounted for around 86 percent of total enrollment in private employer plans in 2015, corresponding to around 110 million enrollees nationwide. These plans are not subject to essential health benefit requirements when determining what types of health care they must cover; the definition of essential health benefits matters only for determining the scope of the required protections against catastrophic costs. These plans are also particularly likely to cover individuals working in multiple states. In light of these complexities, current regulations and guidance permit large employer plans to apply any state’s definition of essential health benefits for the purposes of determining the scope of the ban on annual and lifetime limits and the requirement to cap out-of-pocket spending.
House Republicans are hell-bent on ripping away our health insurance. Call your member of Congress at 202-224-3121, and demand they vote NO on a renewed Trumpcare that is worse than the one before. Remind them they work for you.
Trump said he will be sooooo honored to meet brutal dictator Kim Jong Un. Is anybody surprised? Trump has a crush on every strongman leader out there, and wants not only to meet them and kiss them, but possibly to be them.
President Donald Trump may pull the United States out of the Paris Agreement on climate change as early as next week, sources with knowledge of the plans told HuffPost on Tuesday.
President Obama hustled through the approval of the agreement to push it past the threshold for implementation. As of now 144 of 197 parties have ratified the agreement.
Honestly, the Paris agreement has no enforcement, and no penalties. It’s more a matter of committing to do the right thing, with each country setting its own targets and determining the best way to reach those goals.
The Paris Agreement requires all Parties to put forward their best efforts through “nationally determined contributions” (NDCs) and to strengthen these efforts in the years ahead. This includes requirements that all Parties report regularly on their emissions and on their implementation efforts.
It’s as far from a draconian one-world government as can be imagined, and with everyone participating, it’s hardly a particular hardship on the United States. That’s especially true when the United States is already halfway to reaching its targets thanks to declining use of coal to generate electricity. The increasing market advantages of renewable energy and conservation made possible by LED lights and improved appliances are driving us toward the targets without requiring extraordinary efforts or costs. So … why bother to do anything at all?
Remaining in the Paris Agreement could strengthen environmental lawsuits against the White House over its climate agenda, such as the rollback of the Clean Power Plan, the sweeping Obama-era regulation to cut emissions from the utility sector, the lawyers argued, according to a source with direct knowledge of the meeting.
A Texas lawmaker broke down during a passionate speech condemning Senate Bill 4, “arguably the most draconian anti-civil rights, anti-immigrant state bill in modern political history,” according to immigrant rights advocates. Democratic state Rep. Gene Wu called the issue “painful for me because I am an immigrant:”
“My parents are immigrants. I represent a district filled with immigrants. Some are here as refugees, some are here as citizens, some are here without papers. But they are all my people.”
SB 4, which is expected to be signed into law by Texas’s anti-immigrant governor, basically amounts to a “supersized version of Arizona’s infamous, ‘show me your papers’ law” that will only encourage racial profiling and terrorize the most vulnerable by allowing immigration enforcement at domestic violence shelters and other sensitive locations. Rep. Wu has been among the many advocates who slammed the proposal, including another House lawmaker who went on a four-day fast. United We Dream, the largest immigrant youth-led organization in the nation, called SB 4 “a white supremacist’s field day.”
Trump loses, Democrats win, and House Speaker Paul Ryan goes right back to trying to repeal healthcare reform
Trump loses, Democrats win, and House Speaker Paul Ryan goes right back to trying to repeal healthcare reform
Good news; the government won't be shutting down, at least not this particular month. By a 309-118 margin, the House just voted to pass the short-term $1.1 trillion omnibus spending bill to fund federal operations through the summer.
Though the House is in Republican hands, more Democrats voted for the bill than Republicans. Democrats approved the bill 178 to 15; Republicans were divided, with 131 voting for and 103 against.
The bill had been seen by Democrats as a massive victory, protecting Planned Parenthood funds while nixing support for Trump's demanded "border wall."
We'll be back here in September, but for now? Presuming the Senate approves the bill as expected, the government stays open.
Are House Republicans ready to throw themselves under the bus for these two?
Are House Republicans ready to throw themselves under the bus for these two?
The House is back in chaos over Zombie Trumpcare, with rumors that members will come back to the floor either Thursday or possibly even tonight—Wednesday. Which only makes partial sense: they want to get out of town as soon as possible for another week of vacation, but when they get home they'll face some really irate constituents.
Leadership is trying to get this through before there's an assessment from the Congressional Budget Office, but they can't hide from all the experts and the health care industry groups who are saying that the latest iteration of the bill does far too little: "'The amendment at hand focuses on high-risk pools, but the $8 billion amount is a pittance,' said Robert Graboyes, a healthcare expert at the conservative Mercatus Center. 'Spread over five years, it’s a fifth of a pittance.'"
They also can't hide from the big guns, like the American Medical Association, which has a blistering assessment of the latest effort.
x
Just in:
AMA says that despite changes, new bill would still cost millions coverage and strip protections for preexisting conditions: pic.twitter.com/Osee5Ag2P2
"Serious harm to patients and the health care delivery system […] Millions of Americans will lose their health insurance as a direct result of this proposal."
CALL!!! House Republicans are hell-bent on ripping away our health insurance. Call your member of Congress at 202-224-3121, and demand they vote NO on a renewed Trumpcare that is worse than the one before. Remind them they work for you.
You almost have to admire the attention to detail, as Trump's team of "alt-right" hacks and cronies seek to dismantle any notion of collective human decency.
The White House used to have a senior National Security Council post called "special assistant to the president for multilateral affairs and human rights." This staffer coordinated, developed, and helped implement government policy related to human rights and humanitarian relief. This included a host of matters, including refugee assistance, human trafficking, and the law of war (think drones, Guantanamo, and torture). A main responsibility was, of course, pushing for human rights abroad—not always an easy task when doing so might clash with other priorities of an administration. [...]
Under Trump, the title for this position has been changed to "special assistant for international organizations and alliances." Note "human rights" has been excised.
The new denizen is an ex-Navy admiral turned military business consultant, because of course he is, and it sounds like the office will be moving away from worrying about irritating things like human rights in order to take a more, shall we say, "corporate" approach to international relations. Under Team Trump the administration has been shifting U.S. rhetoric to be more favorable to authoritarians with a flair for jailing or murdering those that oppose them, from the steady tick-tock of Russia's political assassinations to Duterte's campaign of street-by-street murders. Having human rights be removed from the job description in favor of organizations and alliances is, if nothing else, on the nose.
Whether shifts like this are the Trump team attempting to interpret the whims of their rudderless boss or whether the Bannonites are taking the initiative to excise humanitarian concerns from U.S. policy on their own is of course subject to debate—put me down firmly on the side of suspecting Trump neither knows nor cares about any of these changes, because why would he—the effect is the same.
.jpg)
