Showing posts with label SENATE. Show all posts
Showing posts with label SENATE. Show all posts

Thursday, October 24, 2013

DIANNE FEINSTEIN TO PROFIT AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE


Going Postal
Snopes - TRUE



That company is CRI and it belongs to a man named Richard Blum.   Richard Blum is the husband of Senator Dianne Feinstein and is shown with her in the picture above. (Most voters and many of the government people who approved the deal have not made the connection between the two because they have different last names).

Senator Feinstein and her husband stand to make a fortune (EST at between $950 million and $1.1 billion!!) from these transactions. His company is the sole real estate on the sale. CRI will be making a minimum of 3% and as much as 6% commission on each and every sale.  All of the properties that are being sold are all fully paid for. They were purchased with U.S. taxpayers dollars.
 
Northwoods Patriots - Standing up for Faith, Family, Country

Monday, September 2, 2013

AMNESTY – WHAT ARE SENATORS THINKING OF?



US Civil Rights Commissioner:  Amnesty means special, not equal treatment
Breitbart – Matthew Boyle – 9/1/2013

Peter Kirsanow, a member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, told Breitbart News that Attorney General Eric Holder’s claims that amnesty for illegal immigrants is a civil rights issue “profoundly ahistorical.”

“If you take a look at the basis of the civil rights movement, it was to have blacks treated in all respects the same as whites or everybody else,” Kirsanow (pictured) said in a phone interview. “What amnesty is doing is setting aside a special class of individuals who are going to put forward and treated more favorably than others. In other words, they’ve already broken the law and are being given amnesty.  

"In terms of immigration policy... it would severely affect the rights of blacks generally and all low-income Americans. What it is going to do is displace those individuals from the labor market.”

“We had a hearing before the Civil Rights Commission on the effects of illegal immigration on black employment levels, both wage levels and unemployment rates,” Kirsanow said. “What we had were a number of experts from just about every sphere you can think of: business, academia and immigration experts in general. They spanned the ideological spectrum. We had individuals from the far left, individuals in the middle, individuals on the right.

"They disagreed in some respects about certain policy prescriptions but they were unanimous in their conclusion, backed by copious amounts of data," he recalled, "THAT ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION HAD A DELETERIOUS EFFECT ON THE WAGE AND EMPLOYMENT LEVELS OF BLACK AMERICANS. AND IT’S NOT A SMALL EFFECT. IT’S A CLEARLY SIZABLE EFFECT.”

"This is such a complex matter that they needed perspectives from so many different places. What we had was a bill that was gigantic. It was almost the size of Obamacare and yet it was released barely 36 hours before our testimony. 
"In other words, we were testifying in an information vacuum on a momentous piece of legislation. Only after there was a bit of hue and cry did Senate leadership understand that they needed to open up the testimony to more witnesses.”

Northwoods Patriots - Standing up for Faith, Family, Country - northwoodspatriotscomm@gmail.com

Saturday, July 6, 2013

SENATE IMMIGRATION FIASCO - NOT WHAT AMERICANS WANT

10 Takeaways from the Senate immigration fiasco
Townhall – Hugh Hewitt – 6/29/2013


Senator John Hoeven of North Dakota. It is pretty clear he got terrible advice on how statutes actually work when interpreted by the courts, and worse advice on what the fence meant to border security conservatives. We too often assume that legislators actually know how the laws they think they are drafting will actually work.
There wasn't a member of Congress in the early '70s who knew how the Endangered Species Act, the Clean Water Act, and Clean Air Acts would turn out to be twisted engines of anti-growth extremism, and as the Hoeven interview made clear, one of the authors of the key amendment actually thought he was mandating a fence that would work when he was doing exactly the opposite.

1. The need for real reform is enormous . . .

2. . . . . Without real border security, the humanitarian situation will only deteriorate further. The solution begins with a strong fence.

3. . . . If the illegal immigrant population is regularized, it cannot be eligible for Obamacare (the cost would be staggering). Neither should this ineligibility become a reason for employers to prefer the newly regularized over citizens and legal residents with green cards.

4. The demand for a fence is real, and it must be mandated with specific language. It must extend across tribal lands where necessary, it must contain citizen standing to sue for enforcement, it must trump all contrary laws which contain citizen standing provisions that could be used to block it, and it must have detailed construction specs and mapping. The fence is the first line of defense against a recurrence of this problem, . . . Put in writing on a map where and why the double-layered fencing will be built and the where and why it won't be built. In no other business in the world would such sloppiness on such a key issue be tolerated.

5. No bill is better than a terrible bill. . .

6. Senator Marco Rubio remains a GOP superstar . . . . The immunization process is painful, but Rubio's a pretty tough character.

8. . . . The border fence remains the physical expression of a national resolve to stop not just illegal immigration, but also terrorism and trans-national crime.

10. . . . at the close of the first chapter of the immigration reform debate, one written largely by Chuck Schumer.

Northwoods Patriots - Standing up for Faith, Family, Country - northwoodspatriotscomm@gmail.com

Tuesday, June 25, 2013

IMMIGRATION - MORE VOTES THIS WEEK

Immigration / Amnesty – More votes this week in the U.S. Senate
The fate of S.744 will be determined by the end of the week, Please continue to call to keep the pressure on the Senate!
1) final vote on Schumer-Corker-Hoeven amnesty amendment (50 votes needed),
2) motion to limit debate on Leahy manager's amendment (60 votes),
3) final vote on Leahy manager's amendment (50 votes), and
4) motion to end debate on the bill (60 votes).
Baldwin (D-WI) 888-995-8349 / Johnson (R-WI) 888-995-8349
https://www.numbersusa.com/content/

Northwoods Patriots - Standing up for Faith, Family, Country - northwoodspatriotscomm@gmail.com

Saturday, May 25, 2013

SENATOR RON JOHNSON'S STAFF-LISTENING SESSIONS WEEK 5/28/2013 - 5/30/2013 ON IMMIGRATION

SENATOR JOHNSON'S WEEK AHEAD IN WISCONSIN
I will be attending events in Stillwater, MN and Durand, WI. Both events are open to the public.  The details are as follows:
I will be at Durand High School where I will discuss the federal budget and other current policy matters.
Date                 Tuesday, May 28th, 2013
Time                 6:00 pm CT - 7:30 pm C
Location            Durand High School, 604 7th Avenue East, Durand, WI 54736

With Amendments, Senate immigration bill soars pass 1,000 pages
Washington Examiner – Conn Carroll – 5/24/2013

JOHNSON ANNOUNCES STAFF IMMIGRATION BILL LISTENING SESSIONS

I announced earlier this week that my staff would be available for mobile office hours at the dates and locations listed below. These office hours allow constituents to meet with my staff to request assistance with a federal agency or regarding other federal matters.

Tuesday, May 28th, 8:00 am - 9:30 am
UMOS, Inc., Board Room
2701 South Chase Avenue, Milwaukee, WI 53207

Tuesday, May 28th, 9:30 am - 10:30 am
Curtiss Community Center (Old School)
1107 North Meridian, Curtiss, WI 54422

Tuesday, May 28th, 11:00 am - 12:30 pm
Rochester Village Hall, Large Meeting Room
300 West Spring Street, Rochester, WI  53167

Tuesday, May 28th, 12:15 pm - 1:30 p
Woodville Village Hall
102 Main Street, Woodville, WI 54027

Tuesday, May 28th, 2:30 pm - 4:00 pm
Janesville Municipal Building, City Council Chamber (Room #417)
18 North Jackson Street, Janesville, WI 53548

Tuesday, May 28th, 5:00 pm - 6:30 pm
Maple Bluff Village Hall
18 Oxford Place, Madison, WI 53704

Wednesday, May 29th, 9:00 am - 10:30 am
Blue River Village Hall
201 Clinton Street, Blue River, WI 53518

Wednesday, May 29th, 10:00 am - 11:00 am
Centro Hispano
810 West Badger Road, Madison, WI 53713

Wednesday, May 29th, 11:30 am - 1:00 pm
Green TTEC Building
1110 Leed Parkway, Plain, WI 53577

Wednesday, May 29th, 3:00 pm - 4:30 pm
Lions Log Building
601 Pine Street, Warrens, WI 54666

Thursday, May 30th, 9:00 am - 10:30 am
Northern Great Lakes Visitor Center, Multipurpose Room
29270 County Highway G, Ashland, WI 54806

Thursday, May 30th, 2:00 pm - 3:30 pm
Oneida County Courthouse
1 South Oneida Avenue, Rhinelander, WI 54501

Thursday, May 30th, 5:15 pm - 6:45 pm
Elderon Community Center
1490 Cherry Drive, Eland, WI 54427

Friday, May 31st, 8:00 am - 9:30 am
Bellevue Public Safety Building, Chamber Room
3100 Eaton Road, Bellevue, WI 54311

Friday, May 31s, 11:00 am-12:30 pm
Rosendale Village Hall
211 North Grant Street, Rosendale, WI 54974


Friday, May 31st, 2:00 pm - 3:30 pm
North Prairie Village Hall, Board Room
130 North Harrison Street, North Prairie, WI  53153

Northwoods Patriots - Standing up for Faith, Family, Country - northwoodspatriotscomm@gmail.com

Saturday, April 20, 2013

LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS: IMMIGRATION CAN'T BE ENFORCED

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVGp5ed-dlM&feature=youtu.be
12-minute video 

Senators and Representatives asking the "Gang of Eight" why they seem to be proposing a bill that's almost 1000 pages long, THAT CAN'T BE ENFORCED by law enforcement agencies!

Doesn't every major city in America have gangs?  And aren't gangs usually a bad thing?

Northwoods Patriots - Standing up for Faith, Family, Country - northwoodspatriotscomm@gmail.com

Saturday, April 13, 2013

DO YOU WANT A FREE HOUSE?


I was in my neighborhood restaurant this morning and was seated behind a group of jubilant individuals celebrating the coming implementation of the health care bill. I could not finish my breakfast. This is what ensued:

They were a diverse group of several races and both sexes. I heard a young man exclaim, "Isn't Obama like Jesus Christ?  I mean, after all, he is healing the sick."

A young woman enthusiastically proclaimed, "Yeah, and he does it for free. I cannot believe anyone would think that a free market wouldn't work for health care."

Another said, "The stupid Republicans want us all to starve to death so they can inherit all of the power. Obama should be made a Saint for what he did for those of us less fortunate."

At this, I had more than enough. I arose from my seat, mustering all the restraint I could find, and approached their table. "Please excuse me; may I impose upon you for one moment "

They smiled and welcomed me to the conversation. I stood at the end of their table, smiled as best I could and began an experiment.

"I would like to give one of you my house. It will cost you no money and I will pay all of the expenses and taxes for as long as you live there. Anyone interested?"

They looked at each other in astonishment.  "Why would you do something like that?" asked a young man, "There isn't anything for free in this World."

They began to laugh at me, as they did not realize this Man had just made my point.

"I am Serious, I will give you my house for free, no money whatsoever. Anyone interested?"

In unison, a resounding "Yeah" fills the room.

"Since there are too many of you, I will have to make a choice as to who receives this money-free bargain."

I noticed an elderly couple was paying attention to the spectacle unfolding before their eyes, the old man shaking his head in apparent disgust.

"I tell you what; I will give it to the one of you most willing to obey my rules."

Again, they looked at one another, an expression of bewilderment on their faces.

The perky young Woman asked, "What are the rules?"

I smiled and said, "I don't know. I have not yet defined them.  However, it is a free home that I offer you."

They giggled amongst themselves, the youngest of which said, "What an old Coot. He must be crazy to give away his home. Go take your med's, old Man."

I smiled and leaned into the table a bit further.  "I am Serious, this is a legitimate offer."

They gaped at me for a moment.

"I'll take it you old fool.  Where are the keys?" boasted the youngest among them.

"Then I presume you accept 'ALL' of my terms then?"      I asked.

The elderly couple seemed amused and entertained as they watched from the privacy of their table.  "Oh yeah!  Where do I sign up?"

I took a napkin and wrote, "I give this Man my home, without the burden of financial obligation, so long as he accepts and abides by the terms that I shall set forth upon consummation of this transaction."

I signed it and handed it to the young Man who eagerly scratched out his signature.

"Where are the keys to my new house?" he asked in a mocking tone of voice.

All eyes were upon us as I stepped back from the table, pulling the keys from pocket and dangling them before the excited new homeowner.

"Now that we have entered into this binding contract, witnessed by all of your friends, I have decided upon the conditions you are obligated to adhere to from this point forward. You may only live in the house for one hour a day. You will not use anything inside of the home. You will obey me without question or resistance.  I expect complete loyalty and admiration for this gift I bestow upon you. You will accept my commands and wishes with enthusiasm, no matter the nature. Your morals and principles shall be as mine. You will Vote as I do, think as I do and do it with blind faith. These are my terms. Here are your keys."

I reached the keys forward and the young man looked at me dumbfounded.

"Are you out of your mind?  Who would ever agree to those ridiculous terms?" the young man appeared irritated.

"You did when you signed this contract before reading it, understanding it and with the full knowledge that I would provide my conditions only after you committed to the agreement."

The elderly Man chuckled as his Wife tried to restrain him. I was looking at a now silenced and bewildered group of people.

"You can shove that stupid deal up your ass old Man.  I want no part of it!" exclaimed the now infuriated young man.

'You have committed to the contract, as witnessed by all of your friends. You cannot get out of the deal unless I agree to it. I do not intend to let you free now that I have you ensnared. I AM THE POWER YOU AGREED TO. I AM THE ONE YOU BLINDLY AND WITHOUT THOUGHT CHOSE TO ENSLAVE YOURSELF TO. IN SHORT, I AM YOUR MASTER."

At this, the table of celebrating individuals became a unified group against the unfairness of the deal.

After a few moments of unrepeatable comments and slurs, I revealed my true intent.

"WHAT I DID TO YOU IS WHAT THIS ADMINISTRATION AND CONGRESS DID TO YOU WITH THE HEALTH CARE LEGISLATION. I EASILY SUCKERED YOU IN AND THEN REVEALED THE REAL COST OF THE BARGAIN. YOUR FOLLY WAS IN THE BELIEF THAT YOU CAN HAVE SOMETHING YOU DID NOT EARN, AND FOR THAT WHICH YOU DID NOT EARN, YOU WILLINGLY ALLOWED SOMEONE ELSE TO THINK FOR YOU. YOUR FAILURE TO RESEARCH, STUDY AND INFORM YOURSELF PERMITTED REASON TO ESCAPE YOU. YOU HAVE ENTERED INTO A TRAP FROM WHICH YOU CANNOT FLEE. YOUR ONLY CHANCE OF FREEDOM IS IF YOUR NEW MASTER GIVES IT TO YOU. A FREEDOM THAT IS GIVEN CAN ALSO BE TAKEN AWAY. THEREFORE, IT IS NOT FREEDOM AT ALL."

With that, I tore up the napkin and placed it before the astonished young Man.  "This is the nature of your new Health care legislation."

I turned away to leave these few in thought and contemplation -- and was surprised by applause.

The elderly Gentleman, who was clearly entertained, shook my hand enthusiastically and said, "Thank you, Sir. These kids don't understand Liberty."

He refused to allow me to pay my bill as he said, "You earned this one. It is an honor to pick up the tab."

I shook his hand in thanks, leaving the restaurant somewhat humbled and sensing a glimmer of hope for my beloved Country.

Remember ...  Four boxes keep us free:
  • The Soap Box
  • The Ballot Box
  • The Jury Box
  • The Cartridge Box

THIS SHOULD GO AROUND THE UNITED STATES SO PEOPLE CAN SEE JUST WHAT IS GOING ON.  MAYBE EVEN THE POLITICALLY BLIND ONES WILL LEARN SOMETHING FROM IT.

"Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the American Government take care of him; better take a closer look at the American Indian."- -  Henry Ford


Northwoods Patriots - Standing up for Faith, Family, Country - northwoodspatriotscomm@gmail.com

Friday, April 12, 2013

REPUBLICANS VOTE PLACE SECOND AMENDMENT AT RISK


16 Republicans who voted to kill Rand Paul’s gun control filibuster before it started
Cain TV – Robert Laurie – 4/11/2013

Your 2nd Amendment rights are headed for an up or down vote.
This morning, Senators Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, and Mike Lee released the following statement:

This morning the Senate will vote on the motion to proceed to the firearms bill (S.649). It is expected that the Toomey-Manchin provision announced yesterday will replace the current language regarding background checks. Yet, as of this morning, not a single senator has been provided the legislative language of this provision. Because the background-check measure is the centerpiece of this legislation it is critical that we know what is in the bill before we vote on it. The American people expect more and deserve better.

Unfortunately, the effort to push through legislation that no one had read highlights one of the primary reasons we announced our intention to force a 60 vote threshold. We believe the abuse of the process is how the rights of Americans are systematically eroded and we will continue to do everything in our power to prevent it.


So much for "shall not be infringed."

Here are the GOP members who sided with their Dem opponents. It's basically a who's who of the RINO world.

Lindsey Graham (SC)  (202) 224-5972
Lamar Alexander (TN)  (202) 224-4944
Kelly Ayotte (NH)  (202) 224-3324
Richard Burr (NC)  (202) 224-3154
Saxby Chambliss (GA)  (202) 224-3521
John McCain (AZ)  (202) 224-2235
Tom Coburn (OK)  (202) 224-5754
Susan Collins (ME)  (202) 224-2523
Bob Corker (TN)  (202) 224-3344
Jeff Flake (AZ)  (202) 224-4521
John Hoeven (ND)  (202) 224-2551
Johnny Isakson (GA)  (202) 224-3643
Dean Heller (NV)  (202) 224-6244
Mark Kirk (IL)  (202) 224-2854
Pat Toomey (PA)  (202) 224-4254
Roger Wicker (MS)  (202) 224-6253

If you live in their districts, feel free to give them a call tell them what you think of their decision


Northwoods Patriots - Standing up for Faith, Family, Country - northwoodspatriotscomm@gmail.com

Monday, April 8, 2013

IMMIGRATION ISSUES THAT MUST BE RESOLVED


10 QUESTIONS FOR THE GANG OF EIGHT

Senator Jeff Session - 10 QUESTIONS FOR THE GANG OF EIGHT – 4/8/2013
Some Of The Many Questions That Must Be Answered Before Legislation Is Produced

Due to the enormous complexity of immigration reform and the profound consequences for American workers, taxpayers, and society at large, many have advocated for a step-by-step approach rather than a comprehensive one. The last attempt at comprehensive legislation was riddled with flaws and loopholes that made it unworkable—serving the special interests but not the national interest. Dozens of crucial questions remain for the Gang of Eight that must be resolved before any proposal can properly be called comprehensive. The American people have a right to know the answer to each of them—and to express their views during a thorough period of public hearing and review. The public must know exactly what’s in any far-reaching proposal before anyone votes on it. With that in mind, here are 10 questions for the Gang of Eight:

1.  Is this bill enforcement first or legalization first?
After the last attempt at comprehensive legislation was rejected by the public in 2007, a national consensus emerged that any successful reform of our immigration system begins with securing the border and achieving enforcement of current federal law first—before creating any new legal status or amnesty. When the Gang of Eight first emerged, “enforcement first” was a publicly stated principle. Yet, on the March 31st edition of Meet the Press, Gang of Eight member Senator Chuck Schumer said: “We’ve come to a basic agreement, which is that first, people will be legalized. In other words, not citizens, but they’ll be allowed to work, come out of the shadows, travel. Then, we will make sure the border is secure. And we have specific metrics that are in the bill. I’m not going to get into what they are…” Following that statement, ICE officer and National ICE Council president Chris Crane explained that “the plan of the Gang of 8 appears to be legalization or amnesty first and then enforcement. That’s the big problem for us… Here’s my promise to America, if we don’t take care of the enforcement part of this first it will never happen. The only thing that will happen is that 11 million illegal aliens will be legalized.”

2.  What are the concrete metrics used to measure border security?
Since 2004, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has been required to maintain “operational control” the border, i.e., the Department must be able to detect, identify, classify, and then respond to and resolve illegal entries along our U.S. borders. According to a 2011 GAO report, the federal government has only 6.5 percent operational control of the southwest border. The stunning revelation that this administration had left the border highly vulnerable caused DHS to abandon that metric. Recently, Administration officials admitted that they have no standard by which to measure border security and have no plan to establish one, apparently because the Administration is concerned that it will discourage Congress from passing a large-scale amnesty. Meanwhile, Secretary Napolitano publicly dismissed the Gang of Eight’s idea of a border security “trigger” as “not the way to go.” According to recent news reports, the Gang of Eight is contemplating a trigger that simply asks DHS to submit a plan “to achieve within a decade 90 percent apprehension and 100 percent real-time surveillance.” Once that plan is simply submitted, illegal immigrants would be offered amnesty and, like 1986, there will be no way to guarantee that the enforcement will ever take place. Even the rejected 2007 legislation included a stricter trigger, requiring DHS to certify 100 percent operational control of the border.

3.  Does the bill complete the border fence and secure all ports of entry?
In 2006, Congress mandated 700 miles of physical double-layer border fencing. To date, only 36.3 miles of that fencing have been completed. Additionally, DHS has failed to comply with Congress’ nearly 20-year-old mandate that the government implement a biometric exit system to track visa overstays, which account for an estimated 40 percent of the illegal population in the country today. After the attacks of September 11th, the 9/11 Commission identified the absence of such a system as a national security threat. Importantly, GAO has specifically stated that without a biometric exit system, “DHS cannot ensure the integrity of the immigration system by identifying and removing those people who have overstayed their original period of admission.” Any comprehensive immigration reform must adhere to Congress’ mandate that a biometric exit system be implemented at all ports of entry—air, land, and sea.

4.  Who gets amnesty and how many?
The rhetoric of comprehensive reform often emphasizes that those illegal immigrants who have made lives for themselves in this country should be given amnesty. But no one knows who is actually eligible for amnesty under this bill and how many will be legalized. Questions include: the age of those eligible for amnesty; how long they have been in the country and how recently they illegally entered; whether they can petition to bring their family members from abroad; how many people will be legalized in total once all future family migration is taken into account; and how verification of identities, date of arrival, employment, and other information will occur. News reports have indicated that some people will have an accelerated path to citizenship, but precisely who and how many is unknown. Reports further indicate that the plan will grant citizenship to 300,000 people in the country with temporary protected status. Also at issue is what happens to those who do not apply for the so-called probationary legal status (or those who apply and fail to meet the criteria) and whether they will be identified and deported (and within a time certain) or will not be deemed an administrative “priority.”
  
5.  How will the bill impact American workers and wages?
In 2007, the last time a comprehensive bill was considered and rejected, the unemployment rate was 4.5 percent. Today it is nearly 8 percent, and the labor force participation is at a 30-year low. Economic growth remains tepid. Youth unemployment is 25 percent. A record number of Americans are on welfare. A large-scale amnesty combined with a dramatic increase in the future flow of immigration—including chain migration—will certainly have a negative impact on the wages and employment of American citizens. 

Already, the U.S. allows approximately 700,000 guest workers to enter the country each year. It has been roughly estimated that this bill will increase that number to over a million per year—and that increase in guest workers would be in addition to the increase in the future flow of immigration generally and the legalization of those now unlawfully present. As The Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol recently pointed out, “at the end of the day simple economics say: if there is an extra supply of a couple hundred thousand low-income workers, that probably doesn’t help the job prospects. Especially for those Americans who have been hurt the most over the past 20-30 years: which is lower-middle working class, not college educated workers.” 

Imagine the real-world consequences of immediately introducing into the workforce millions of newly legalized workers—both to compete with out-of-work Americans and to continue holding jobs that would otherwise be available to citizens and to legal immigrants who waited years for the opportunity to seek work in the United States. Another area of concern for American workers is whether the bill will require that all employers use E-Verify within one year and re-verify current employees within three years, resume worksite inspections, and create and enforce sufficient penalties for the continued hiring of illegal labor.

6.  Is the guest worker program truly temporary?
According to the AFL-CIO (one of the primary parties to the Gang of Eight negotiations), guest workers can petition for green cards within one year, which means the program is yet another pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants and accompanying chain migration. A true guest worker program is just that: it requires that a participant’s stay in the country is limited, precludes them from bringing family, and requires that they return to their home countries each year for a defined period of time.

7.  Does the bill put a stop to sanctuary cities and resume cooperation with local law enforcement?
Dangerous sanctuary city policies—which this administration has ignored while suing states that are trying to support federal law enforcement—require local law enforcement to disregard requests by federal authorities to detain criminal aliens for a short time until they arrive and release them back into the community where they commit more crimes against citizens and immigrants alike. In addition, despite initially touting its effectiveness and success, the Obama Administration has dismantled the 287(g) program, a force multiplier through which federal law enforcement train state and local law enforcement in federal immigration law. To be effective, any comprehensive reform must specifically prohibit sanctuary city policies and reinstate and enhance programs like 287(g).

8.  How does the bill guarantee that the Administration will not ignore future laws as it has with the laws already on the books?
With the stroke of a pen, the Obama Administration has unilaterally waived entire portions of federal immigration law through a so-called deferred action policy and the unprecedented abuse of prosecutorial discretion. ICE officers—the ones responsible for enforcement of federal immigration law in the interior of the country—have been left with no choice but to sue the Administration to protest these actions as unlawful and unconstitutional. Any attempt at comprehensive reform must end this abuse of executive power, address these constitutional concerns, and explain how promises of future enforcement will be met when the Administration refuses to enforce current law.

9.  How does the bill ensure that federal public charge law is enforced and that illegal immigrants do not access the welfare state through the granting of green cards and citizenship?
Federal law explicitly bars entry to those likely to rely on federal assistance. Yet an estimated one in three immigrants currently receive some form of federal welfare. An inquiry from the Ranking Members of Senate Budget, Finance, Judiciary, and Agriculture Committees revealed that federal public charge law is currently unenforced and is, in fact, actively undermined by the federal government. The president of the ICE Council said of this statutory protection for taxpayers: “We are not permitted to enforce that statute. Period.” DHS confirmed it was unable to identify a single public charge within the United States in 2012 (having checked records through August). With respect to those illegal immigrants who would receive amnesty under the bill, sponsors have likened their initial probationary legal status to non-immigrant visas. Under a faithful reading of current law, no legal applicant would be eligible for a non-immigrant visa if they are likely to live off public assistance at any future point. Yet the Gang of Eight’s framework does not mention a public charge screening process (which is different from a work requirement) for illegal aliens seeking legal status—effectively establishing a lower threshold for illegal immigrants than for legal immigrants. Additionally, current green card holders are eligible for a vast array of federal benefits, including Medicaid, food stamps, and cash welfare, indicating that today’s low-income illegal population will become eligible for these benefits once they attain green cards as the proposal outlines.

10.  What is the long-term cost of the bill?
The true cost of the bill will occur outside the 10-year budgetary window, as illegal immigrants become eligible for green cards and ultimately citizenship. Once they become eligible for green cards, they will also be eligible for myriad public assistance, welfare, and entitlement programs. Tellingly, the four Democrat members of the Gang of Eight voted against restrictions on illegal immigrants’ access to Medicaid and Obamacare. The long-term cost, on net, for Obamacare alone is likely to be around $2 trillion, with Medicare and Social Security expected to account for another $2.5 trillion. These are net costs—in other words, the amount paid in to the U.S. Treasury by the newly amnestied population is expected to be dramatically less than the amount paid out.


Northwoods Patriots - Standing up for Faith, Family, Country - northwoodspatriotscomm@gmail.com

Thursday, March 28, 2013

TOWNHALL - SENATOR RON JOHNSON


WISCONSIN SENATOR RON JOHNSON
WILL CONDUCT A TOWN HALL

MONDAY APRIL 1, 2013
6:00 – 7:00 p.m.
Eagle River Inn
5260 Hwy. 70 W
Eagle River, WI

PLEASE INVITE:
Your family and friends
County Board Members
All local officials

PLEASE BRING:
Your questions
Your concerns
Your suggestions


Thursday, March 7, 2013

FILIBUSTER – CONTAGEOUS COURAGE



Paul, Lee, Cruz Take Over Senate
Senate Conservatives.com – 3/7/2013

STAND WITH RAND

"I rise today to begin to filibuster John Brennan’s nomination for the CIA. I will speak until I can no longer speak. I will speak as long as it takes, until the alarm is sounded from coast to coast that our Constitution is important, that your rights to trial by jury are precious, that no American should be killed by a drone on American soil without first being charged with a crime, without first being found to be guilty by a court."

Three of the Senate's finest were on all on the floor together, defending the Constitution and fighting for our freedoms.

These three patriots took over the Senate yesterday and forced their colleagues and the media to listen to their arguments. They did what all Republicans should do — they stopped worrying about being labeled obstructionists and fought for their principles.

As each hour passed, more and more senators began coming to the floor to support the filibuster. It was a powerful demonstration of what happens when conservatives genuinely fight for what they believe in. Their arguments become compelling and their courage becomes contagious.

Paul Rand:  Drones could be targeted at Americans eating dinner at home
http://www.prisonplanet.com/rand-paul-drones-could-be-targeted-at-americans-eating-dinner-at-home.html
Prison Planet - Steve Watson - 3/6/2013

Rand Paul filibustering over drones:  I will not let Obama 'shred the Constitution'
http://washingtonexaminer.com/rand-paul-filibustering-over-drones-i-will-not-let-obama-shred-the-constitution/article/2523425
Washington Examiner - Joel Gehrke - 3/6/2013





Northwoods Patriots - Standing up for Faith, Family, Country - northwoodspatriotscomm@gmail.com

Saturday, August 25, 2012

CONGRESS ABDICATES THE CONSTITUTION—GIVES RAW APPOINTMENT POWER TO PRESIDENT

Congress surrenders to the President on Senate Hearings
Tea Party Economist – Gary North – 8/22/2012
The Senate must confirm appointments made by every President. This retains the Senate’s CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY.
The Senate persuaded the House to go along with a joint surrender to the President. It exempted 170 appointments from any hearings. These people run the bureaucracies and cannot be fired.
No more advice. UNIVERSAL CONSENT.
The name of the law is the Presidential Appointment Efficiency and Streamlining Act of 2011.  The Senate passed the bill 79-20, in June 2011. The House passed it by 261-116 last month. Obama signed it on August 10.
Joe Lieberman – U.S. Senator – Connecticut – 7/31/2012
A list of positions exempted from Senate confirmation appears below.
Department of Agriculture
Assistant Secretary for Administration
Rural Utilities Service Administrator
Directors (7), Commodity Credit Corporation
Department of Commerce
Chief Scientist, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Officer Corps, NOAA (321)
Corporation for National and Community Service Managing Directors (2)
Department of Defense
Assistant Secretary of Defense (Networks and Information Integration)
Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs)
Director of the Selective Service System
Members (6), National Security Education Board
Council of Economic Advisers
Members (2)
Department of Education
Assistant Secretary for Management
Commissioner – Education Statistics
Members (15), National Board of Education Sciences
Department of Health and Human Services
Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Public Health Services Corps (2536)
Department of Homeland Security
Assistant Administrator, Grants, FEMA
Administrator, U.S. Fire Administration
Director, Office of Counternarcotics Enforcement
Chief Medical Officer
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs
US Agency for International Development
Assistant Administrator for Management
Department of Justice
Director, Bureau of Justice Statistics
Director, Bureau of Justice Assistance
Director, National Institute of Justice
Administrator, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
Director, Office for Victims of Crime
Department of Labor
Assistant Secretary for Administration and Management
Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs
Director, Women’s Bureau
Office of National Drug Control Policy
Deputy Director
Deputy Director, Demand Reduction
Deputy Director, State and Local Affairs
Deputy Director, Supply Reduction
Department of State
Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs
Assistant Secretary for Administration
Department of Transportation
Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs
Deputy Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration
Administrator, St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation
Department of Treasury
Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs
Assistant Secretary for Management
Treasurer of the United States Administrator,
Community Development Financial Institution Fund
Department of Veterans Affairs
Assistant Secretary for Management
Assistant Secretary for Human Resources and Administration
Assistant Secretary for Public and Intergovernmental Affairs
Assistant Secretary for Operations, Security and Preparedness
Appalachian Regional Commission
Alternate Federal Co-Chairman
African Development Bank
Governor Alternate Governor
African Development Fund
Governor Alternate Governor
Asian Development Bank
Governor
Alternate Governor
Institute of American Indian and Alaska Native Culture and Arts Development
Members (13), Board of Trustees
Mississippi River Commission
Commissioners (7)
National Council on Disability
Members (15)
National Institute for Literacy Advisory Board
Members (10)
National Museum and Library Services Board
Members (20)
National Science Board
Members (24)
Northwoods Patriots - Standing up for Faith, Family, Country
northwoodspatriotscomm@gmail.com

Saturday, August 18, 2012

HARRY REID: INVEST EARLY--CHANGE LAW FOR PROFIT

WHERE DOES HARRY REID’S WEALTH COME FROM?
The New American – Brian Koenig – 8/16/2012
Underscoring such hypocrisy, the Las Vegas Review-Journal revived a 1974 statement in which Reid stated, “Any man or woman who will not be completely candid about his or her finances does not deserve to be in public office.” Responding to the charge, Reid averred, “In 1974, I wasn’t in Congress.”
Is there something the senator is hiding? According to Woodruff, Reid may have a few financial skeletons he’s trying to keep in the closet. She explained:
In 2004, the senator made $700,000 off a land deal that was, to say the least, unorthodox. It started in 1998 when he bought a parcel of land with attorney Jay Brown, a close friend whose name has surfaced multiple times in organized-crime investigations and whom one retired FBI agent described as “always a person of interest.” Three years after the purchase, Reid transferred his portion of the property to Patrick Lane LLC, a holding company Brown controlled. But Reid kept putting the property on his financial disclosures, and when the company sold it in 2004, he profited from the deal — a deal on land that he didn’t technically own and that had nearly tripled in value in six years.

During the 2010 congressional race, senatorial rival Sharron Angle asked Reid how he earned is wealth. His response? “I did a very good job investing.”
Northwoods Patriots - Standing up for Faith, Family, Country - northwoodspatriotscomm@gmail.com

Tuesday, July 17, 2012

WHY WON’T SENATE VOTE TO REPEAL OBAMACARE?

Harry Reid Blocks Senate ObamaCare Repeal Vote http://politicaloutcast.com/2012/07/harry-reid-blocks-senate-obamacare-repeal-vote/
Political Outcast – Gary DeMar – 7/13/2012

A vote was taken the other day in the House of Representatives to repeal Obamacare.

The repeal bill went through on a 244–185 vote. Five Democrats ended up fleeing the liberal plantation. Reps. Mike Ross, D-Ark.; Dan Boren, D-Okla.; Mike McIntyre, D-N.C.; Larry Kissell, D-N.C.; and Jim Matheson, D-Utah, all voted yes to repeal.

The problem is that Harry Reid (D-NV) will not allow the vote to come to the floor in the Senate. Both houses have to approve the repeal. What is Harry Reid afraid of?

Northwoods Patriots - Standing up for Faith, Family, Country - northwoodspatriotscomm@gmail.com