Democrats’ push for $50,000-per-year journalist tax credit sparks GOP ‘media collusion’ accusations

Democratic efforts to include a special $50,000-per-year journalist tax break within President Biden’s $3.5 trillion spending package have sparked accusations of “media collusion.”

Sen. Ron Johnson argued the tax credit would create an improper relationship between the federal government and the nation’s leading media outlets. Such relationships, according to the Wisconsin Republican, could be exploited for propaganda purposes.

“Not only is this proposal a grotesque waste of taxpayer money,” said Mr. Johnson, “it would be a dangerous precedent of government collusion with the media. Biden’s collusion with the press has already caused enough damage to freedom of speech and freedom of the press.”

Democratic lawmakers within the House Ways and Means Committee have crafted the tax credit as part of their 881-page proposal they say will ensure Mr. Biden’s big-spending legislation is fully funded.

The tax credit would allow “local news” outlets to receive a quarterly tax credit, “equal to 50%” of a journalist’s wages up to a cap of $12,500-per-quarter.

Overall, eligible outlets could receive as much as $50,000 annually per journalist in tax breaks through the program in its first year. In subsequent years, the credit would drop to 30% of a journalist’s wages per quarter.

Democrats propose to let the tax credit expire after five years unless Congress votes to renew. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates the credit could wind up costing taxpayers more than $1.3 billion through 2031.

Republicans say that it amounts to a giveaway to the “mainstream news media,” which is often noted for its antagonistic relationship with conservatives.

“Freedom of the press does not contemplate government funding of it,” Mr. Johnson said.

GOP lawmakers also question the criteria the federal government will use to define which news organizations are eligible.

As written any “local newspaper publisher” that serves “the needs of a regional or local community and who employs no more than 750 employees” would be eligible. The criteria are broad enough to cover major newspapers with a national reach.

Democrats dispute such claims, saying the bill is meant to benefit local news outlets, especially those that have seen ad revenues fall because of the coronavirus pandemic.

“Local journalism is a bedrock pillar of communities across the United States,” said Rep. Anne Kirkpatrick, an Arizona Democrat who helped author the tax credit. “Unfortunately, journalistic endeavors throughout the country face major economic struggles that put the future of many publications in serious jeopardy.”

Mrs. Kirkpatrick has introduced the bill in prior years, oftentimes with the backing of Democratic leadership and outside groups, like the AFL-CIO. Despite the support, the bill has never made significant progress because of GOP opposition.

That might change this time because of the unique circumstances Democrats are undertaking to pass Mr. Biden’s $3.5 trillion spending package into which the tax credit for journalists is being folded.

Democrats plan to force through the massive spending bill without support from a single Republican. They will use a special procedure known as budget reconciliation that allows some tax and spending measures to avert the 60-vote filibuster threshold and pass by a simple majority of 51 votes.

Sign up for Daily Newsletters

 





Source link

GOP fundraising platform lowers fees in 2022 push for majority

The Republican digital fundraising platform WinRed is dropping the fee it charges groups and candidates for its services as the GOP gears up to challenge the Democrats for control of Congress in 2022.

WinRed announced Thursday its new fee structure would save Republican candidates and political groups money on every dollar raised, ostensibly leaving more money to spend against the Democrats in midterm elections next year. Additionally, WinRed claims its cost adjustments are going to put the Democrats, long the leaders in digital fundraising, at a competitive disadvantage — because the GOP conduit now charges slightly less per dollar raised than does ActBlue, its online liberal counterpart.

“We are excited to announce that WinRed is lowering our prices,” said Gerrit Lansing, the organization’s president. “The best fundraising platform in politics will continue to expand and grow.”

Republicans were late to the digital fundraising gold rush, with WinRed launching a little more than two years ago. ActBlue has been around since 2004, giving Democrats a major head start in a fundraising arena that has arguably become more important than collecting cash from wealthy contributors and bundlers. Since June of 2019, WinRed has processed nearly $2.5 billion in donations. Over 17 years, ActBlue has processed more than $9 billion.

DCCC RAISES $10 MILLION AMID BIDEN SLIDE FOR BEST OFF-YEAR AUGUST IN HISTORY

WinRed is moving from a cost structure that charges candidates and groups 3.8% of every dollar raised plus a flat, per-transaction fee of 30 cents, to a simple levy of 3.94% against every dollar raised. With the average contribution on the conduit amounting to $35 to $40, WinRed officials estimate clients will save 15% per donation in fees.

Meanwhile, WinRed claims it is saving clients even more because, unlike ActBlue, it does not solicit the small-dollar, grassroots donors who use its portal to raise money for itself. WinRed claims these solicitations by ActBlue scoop up money that would otherwise go to candidates and groups, drying up donors in the process. In this way, the Republican platform believes its clients have yet another leg up on their Democratic competitors.

ActBlue, a nonprofit organization, explains the process and where the money goes much differently.

The group describes soliciting money for itself as “tipping,” saying on its website it uses these donations to pay its bills while redistributing the 3.95% fee it charges on every dollar raised back to clients.

“We want as many campaigns and organizations on the left to be able to use our grassroots fundraising tools as possible, which is why there is no cost for groups to use our tools,” ActBlue’s website says.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

“We pass along a 3.95% processing fee on contributions to the groups using our platform. ActBlue does not make money off of donations,” the ActBlue website adds. “Completing a contribution involves costs related to processing your credit card. We’re legally required to pass along processing costs to the campaign so that we do not make in-kind contributions to them.”

ActBlue declined to comment.





Source link

Conservatives Push Back on FEC’s Twitter Ruling

This week, conservatives have been strongly pushing back on Twitter against the Federal Election Commission after it ruled that the social media platform did nothing wrong and didn’t violate federal election law when it censored the New York Post’s bombshell story last fall on the contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop and detailed a series of stinging allegations against both Hunter and his father during the height of the latter’s presidential campaign.

According to the ruling, the FEC said the platform “credibly explained” why it blocked the bombshell story and defended the move as a business practice, but again, some on Twitter aren’t buying it.

Sean Davis, a co-founder of The Federalist, responded to a tweet from Sean Cooksey, FEC Commissioner, saying that “[m]edia entities can control the content they publish and make editorial decisions without making a political contribution or expenditure.”

Cooksey had argued Twitter was not responsible for the censorship because it operates as a “media publisher.”

“This same principle allows a newspaper to choose to let one candidate write an op-ed but not another, or a radio show to invite one candidate for an interview but not her opponent,” Cooksey added. “That’s part of press freedom and is not a campaign contribution.”

Davis pushed back. “This logic will lead to every Super PAC reincorporating as a ‘media entity.’” he said. “No oversight, no disclosure, no prohibition on rank propaganda in service of one party. Why bother with FEC nonsense when you can just claim to be a new CNN?”

Gaston Mooney, President at Blaze Media, also criticized the FEC.

“Is Tweeter [sic] a media company?” he asked. “Wouldnt they argue they are not for section 230 immunity? If they are a media company then blocking a NY Post story is the least of their problems…the child pornography would be top of the list.”

Meanwhile, the Republican National Committee has said that it may appeal the FEC decision, calling Twitter’s behavior “illegal” and the ruling “disappointing.”

When the decision first came down, The New York Times tweeted and wrote that the decision concerned “unsubstantiated” claims on Hunter’s laptop. Not surprisingly, it was thoroughly lampooned.

The FEC opinion can be read here.

Conservatives are under attack. Contact Twitter: (415) 222-9670 or mail to 1355 Market Street Suite 900 and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on “hate speech” and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us at the Media Research Center contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.





Source link

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez & Dan Bongino: Grifters Push Demagogic Rhetoric on Tax Policy

The mortgage has to be paid somehow, and politics beats the hell out of most rackets.




NRPLUS MEMBER ARTICLE

T
he thing to keep in mind is, none of the half-bright grifters really means it.

If you will forgive an over-egged metaphor, our contemporary Republicans and Democrats are not opposite poles of the political planet but a binary star system, both orbiting the same point: the pursuit of money, power, and status. They are, in fact, so fundamentally similar that without the cultural cues that are today the main means of political communication, it would be impossible to tell them apart.

Consider the apparatchik of the moment, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and her big night at the Met Gala. To say that it





Source link

Biden Continues to Push Climate Policy in Visit to National Renewable Energy Lab

President Joe Biden made the final stop of his West Coast trip Tuesday in Colorado to continue pushing for his $1 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill and his $3.5 trillion spending plan.

Biden toured the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, Colorado, observing wind turbine testing and new battery technologies at the facility before making his address.

“We have to make the investments to slow our contributions to climate change today not tomorrow,” said Biden.

Biden also surveyed areas in California affected by wildfires Monday and visited areas impacted by flash flooding on the East Coast last week to promote the bills, using the weather events to demonstrate the need for his climate agenda.

Biden is also touting the infrastructure bill as a creator of union jobs and an improvement for the electric grid.

“We need a modern electric grid. One that is much higher capacity, more resilient transmission, you know, and has more storage capacity,” Biden said, “using advanced batteries so it can hold onto surplus energy generated when the sun is not shining and the wind is not blowing.”

The infrastructure bill passed the Senate last week in a bipartisan vote that included 19 Republicans. It now heads to the House.

Meanwhile, House Democrats announced plans Monday for a tax hike on corporations and the wealthy to fund Biden’s massive $3.5 trillion budget proposal, which in addition to investments in climate policy, also includes far reaching changes to health care, child care, and the expansion of social programs.

The changes to the tax code would be the most significant since the Republican tax cuts in 2017. They include a 39.6 percent rate for individuals earning more than $400,000, or $450,000 for couples, with a 3 percent tax on Americans with adjusted income beyond $5 million a year. The corporate tax rate would go up from 21 percent to 26.5 percent on incomes beyond $5 million.

Democrats are trying to push the budget resolution through without Republican support, but Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) said over the weekend he would not vote for the $3.5 trillion bill, saying there’s “no way” to meet the Sept. 27 deadline set by Democrats.

Biden was asked by reporters Tuesday if he would sign a reconciliation package with slimmed down measures to address climate change. “I’m up for more climate measures,” Biden said.

When asked if Biden would be willing to walk back his $3.5 trillion ask, principal deputy press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters during the flight to Colorado there were no calls between Biden and Manchin to read out, but added the White House is in constant communication with members on the hill and their staff.

The speech comes as Biden’s approval rating has taken a dip in the wake of the vaccine mandates he announced last week and the U.S. exodus from Afghanistan, according to Gallup and Ipsos polls.

Nick Ciolino covers the White House.



Source link

North Carolina Democrats Renew Push to Expand Unemployment Benefits

North Carolina Democrats are part of a group calling for a reform of the state’s unemployment system in the wake of federal pandemic unemployment benefits ending.

Sen. Wiley Nickel, D-Wake, and advocates from the North Carolina State AFL-CIO and the North Carolina Budget and Tax Center urged the General Assembly on Monday to pass legislation to raise the amount and the duration of unemployment benefits in North Carolina.

“The loss of critical federal benefits puts thousands of North Carolina families in jeopardy,” Nickel said during a virtual news conference. “Workers deserve to know that they can rely on the system that they paid into when they’re in crisis. Right now, we’ve got over 200,000 North Carolina families who have federal unemployment benefits that just ended.”

The federal program ended Sept. 6. Nickel said it takes away $1,200 from North Carolinians to pay for food and rent each month amid the COVID-19 pandemic. State Republicans pushed for the federal program to end early because it has led to staffing shortages throughout the state, they said. They filed legislation to stop the additional $300 a week in benefits. Gov. Roy Cooper vetoed the measure.

Cooper has pushed for an expansion of the state’s unemployment benefits program, which Democrats said is one of the country’s worst.

Republican leaders, including State Treasurer Dale Folwell, said the additional unemployment benefits created an “unemployment crisis” in the state.

“I get calls every day from small businesses saying they can’t get people to work because it’s more profitable for them to stay home,” Folwell said in a Sept. 2 news release. “They can’t compete against the federal government. And the workers that show up are paying taxes so the others can stay home.”

According to the U.S. Department of Labor report provided by the Senate Minority Leader’s Office, North Carolina’s unemployment program was ranked last among other states, with 20 percent of unemployed workers receiving jobless benefits. The state ranked third to last for the amount and duration of benefits, the labor department report said.

Nickel and Sens. Paul Lowe Jr., D-Forsyth, and Mike Woodward, D-Durham, have filed Senate Bill 320, which would increase the state’s maximum benefit payment from $350 a week to $500 a week. It also would extend the duration of the program from 12 weeks to 26 weeks.

Nickel also recommended giving part-time workers unemployment benefits and giving employers a “tax holiday” from unemployment insurance taxes for a year. The holiday could cost the state $300 million from its unemployment trust fund. The state currently has $2.7 billion in its trust fund, which comes from unemployment insurance premiums from employers and then paid out to jobless workers.

SB 320 was filed March 18 but has not been reviewed in the Senate.

By Nyamekye Daniel

The Center Square was launched in May 2019 to fulfill the need for high-quality statehouse and statewide news across the United States. The focus of our work is state- and local-level government and economic reporting. www.thecentersquare.com



Source link

Parents push back against Jesuit school’s ‘strong-arm tactics’ to make students get vaccinated

PHOENIX, Arizona (LifeSiteNews) – A Jesuit high school is facing backlash from hundreds of parents after clamping down with what are being described as “discriminatory” and “coercive” policies in an effort to pressure students to get vaccinated. 

Brophy College Preparatory, an all-boys Jesuit high school in Phoenix, Arizona, has mandated that its students either receive the COVID-19 shot or be subjected to testing twice weekly and special quarantine requirements, while refraining from school overnight retreats. The school did not announce its new policy until after tuition was withdrawn for the new school year. 

Steven Smith, director of Catholics for Preservation of Life, calls the measures “coercion and strong-arm tactics.” He noted to LifeSiteNews that boys who don’t receive the jab are “essentially ban[ned]” from “extra-curricular activities that give vitality and meaning to their high school experience.” 

Even though the vaccinated students will come into contact with unvaccinated students during overnight field trips, such as tournaments, students not jabbed against COVID-19 are prohibited from attending these outings. This includes trips to the school’s retreat campus, where “Kairos” and “Magis” retreats are held, as well as team and club retreats and father-son retreats.  

“So if your team is going to an out-of-city match or tournament or game, you will not be able to travel with your team, despite the fact that you’ve worked so hard to make it to where you are, even if you’re the number one player,” Dr. Ann Andonyan told LifeSiteNews.  

Andonyan is a board-certified emergency physician with over 20 years’ experience, who has been taking care of COVID patients for the last 18 months at a “designated COVID hospital.” She is a member of a core group of parents who have been engaged in efforts to have the school relax its coercive policies and replace them with fair and consistent ones.

One Brophy parent, Jeff Burch, told LifeSiteNews that the policy is “discriminating” against kids because of “their own personal medical decisions.” His own son, who has an autoimmune condition, could be at high risk of injury from the jab.

Brophy has not publicly issued any caution that there is no available safety data on the COVID-19 jab’s effects on people with certain health conditions, such as weakened immune systems and autoimmune disease. Nor has the school issued any statements accepting liability for possible injury to students that could result from the COVID-19 shot. 

School disruptions for the unvaccinated

It is not just the school’s banning unvaccinated students from retreats that lead Burch and Andonyan to describe its policies as discriminatory.  

The unvaccinated must also submit to COVID-19 tests twice weekly. Brophy now offers rapid tests for these students, who must wait in a line with a wait time of up to 25 minutes long, Andonyan revealed. The students must come early in the morning or use their lunch time accordingly. She added that missing class to be tested will be marked as an unexcused absence. 

The unvaccinated teens are also subjected to schooling disruptions dependent upon the result of their COVID test. If the students test positive for the virus, or come into “close contact” with someone confirmed to have tested positive, including a household member, they must quarantine at home for ten days.   

“It’s a big concern for most of these kids because most of these kids are high achieving, academic, accelerated, they’re taking multiple AP classes. If you’re missing class it’s very hard to keep up and do well and keep your grades up if you’re not in class and listening to lectures and participating,” said Andonyan. 

The vaccinated, on the other hand, are not required to quarantine if they come into close contact with someone who tests positive for COVID. 

The school maintains that “Available data and guidance clearly and consistently show that unvaccinated individuals are at greater risk of symptomatic infection, severe illness, and for transmitting the infection to others.” 

This is, Andonyan said, “Despite the fact that the CDC has said that viral loads in vaccinated and unvaccinated people and risk of transmission of the virus from vaccinated and unvaccinated people is the same.”  

The CDC has indeed recently admitted that vaccinated people can “transmit the virus,” citing the finding that there is “no significant difference in the viral load” between the vaccinated and unvaccinated. 

On August 24, Reuters reported “rising breakthrough infections” among the fully vaccinated. The CDC itself published data in late July revealing that about three-fourths of people infected in a Massachusetts COVID-19 outbreak were fully vaccinated. 

Brophy ignores vaccine risks

The school has continued to insist that its policy is based on “science,” as Brophy president Adria Renke and principal Bob Ryan claimed in an opinion piece for azcentral.  

In fact, they go so far as to declare, “we will not be bullied to accept a list of demands that are untethered to real science or rational thought.” 

However, not once in this piece did Adria Renke and Bob Ryan cite a piece of data justifying their policies, let alone name a specific reason for them, other than that they are “purpose-driven and practical,” and that CDC guidelines state vaccinated students do not have to quarantine if exposed to COVID-19.”  

Nor did they refute any of the many points made during an online presentation by the Truth for Health Foundation for Brophy parents on the risks of the COVID-19 jab that explains the overwhelming resiliency of children in the face of the virus.

According to the panel of renowned medical and scientific experts, assembled for the purpose of equipping parents to make informed decisions about COVID-19 vaccination, children have virtually zero risk of dying from COVID-19, but do have significant risk of bodily harm from the jab.

Renowned Texas cardiologist and internist Dr. Peter McCullough pointed out that myocarditis, or heart inflammation, due to the jab had already affected “thousands” of children. 

Truth for Health Foundation founder Dr. Lee Vliet also noted that the lipid nanoparticles that surround the mRNA technology in the shots “have been known to cause inflammatory damage to ovaries and testes since at least 2012,” impacting human fertility and hormones, and therefore “all aspects of our health.”

Some are defending Brophy’s policy by arguing that compliance is ultimately a matter of free choice. One man wrote on the Brophy Facebook page, “None of your kids are required to attend Brophy. If you don’t share the values, find another place that does. Both you and Brophy will be better off for it.”

However, by the time Brophy announced their new policy, parents had already paid their tuition, and other comparable schools were full.

Burch elaborated, “When the policy was announced, families had already committed to Brophy. We had either declined other schools or the other schools that were viable options were too full and no longer accepting students. We really had no options.”

800 parents, alumni push back

In the interest of protecting their children’s health, a considerable number of parents are resisting the pressure to have their children jabbed, and some have banded together to try to dialogue with the school in an effort to convince them to revise their policies, according to Andonyan. She says there are “hundreds of like-minded parents,” and that they have garnered massive support in an effort to engage with the school. 

During the span of one day, 800 people, including parents, alumni, and 19 Arizona state legislators, signed a letter requesting that the school revise its policy to allow for appropriate exemptions, and, among other requests, to make the policy consistent so that, for example, the unvaccinated would be allowed to participate in overnight activities with a negative COVID-19 test, just as they are allowed to participate in school with a negative COVID-19 test.  

The letter revealed that “the families of at least 100 students are actively considering withdrawing over these serious issues,” in addition to other students who had already been withdrawn. The school has not yet responded to the letter.  

— Article continues below Petition —

34097 have signed the petition.

Let’s get to 35000!

Thank you for signing this petition!

Add your signature:

  Show Petition Text

With the FDA’s decision to officially approve the Pfizer COVID jab, calls to vaccinate schoolchildren and more university students will become louder and more insistent.

But, America’s children and young people must be protected from unknown future side-effects of these drugs, and parents’ rights must be respected!

Please SIGN this urgent petition which demands that COVID vaccine mandates for schools and universities be prohibited in every U.S. state.

This petition will be sent to the leaders of every state legislature and to every governor in the United States, urging them to pass emergency legislation banning vaccine mandates for primary, secondary and university students.

Students simply have the right to be educated without being forced to violate deeply held principles and their own bodily integrity!

But, unfortunately, some private schools, like the Jesuit-run Brophy College Prep School in Phoenix, Arizona, have already mandated the COVID vaccine for their students, in spite of massive parental opposition. If parents or students reject the vaccine, students face intrusive weekly testing and exclusion from extra-curricular activities.

Also, more and more universities have actually started to disenroll unvaccinated students. But, even where that is not happening, not taking the vaccine often subjects students to masking, extra testing and additional administrative obstacles.

And now, with the Pfizer jab approval, Joe Biden’s Surgeon General, Vivek Murthy, is threatening more mandates.

While it is true that the FDA approval for the Pfizer jab only pertains to those over 16 years of age, the pharmaceutical industry and some state actors have been pushing to get approval for pre-teens!

So, it stands to reason that the Federal government will try to impose vaccines on schools, for those 16 and over, as well as on all university students. But, eventually, such mandates could even apply to younger and younger schoolchildren.

That’s why state legislatures and governors must fight back against any attempt to coerce school students to take a COVID vaccine against their will!

Science and logic should dictate public health policy. And both say that mandatory vaccination for children and university students is not only unnecessary, but very likely dangerous for the future health of America’s youth.

The CDC reports that the rates of death, injury, and hospitalization are very, very low for children and adolescents and that COVID transmission in schools, both from student to staff and between students, is also very low.

And a European CDC study concluded that “no evidence has been found to suggest that children or educational settings are primary drivers of COVID transmission.”

So, right now, we know that schoolchildren are at very low risk of becoming very ill as a result of COVID, or of even transmitting the virus.

But, we don’t know how a hastily-prepared, unstudied vaccine will affect the health of millions of America’s youth in the future.

Gambling with their future, and the future of our nation, should not even be entertained for one second!

Please SIGN and SHARE this urgent petition urging state legislatures to ban COVID vaccine mandates for schools and universities – both public and private. Urge them to respect parents’ rights, informed consent and bodily integrity.

Thank you!

FOR MORE INFORMATION:

‘Ivy League schools mandate COVID-19 vaccines for fall’ – https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/ivy-league-mandates-covid-19-vaccines-for-the-fall/

‘FDA approval of Pfizer jab isn’t about our health, it’s about mandating the shots’ – https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/fda-approval-of-pfizer-jab-isnt-about-our-health-its-about-mandating-the-shots

Far from acknowledging any risk associated with the shot, Brophy has refused to engage in dialogue altogether, and has even attempted to suppress the expression of concerns over the mandate. Andonyan revealed that the school has removed all posts on its Facebook page expressing concerns over its COVID policies, and it has even blocked some parents entirely from their page. 

The school does not issue policy exemptions for students who cannot receive the shot for health reasons, and it has not issued any cautions that some students may be more at risk of injury from the shot than others. Instead, “All students are encouraged to be vaccinated,” as the FAQs on its return-to-school policy reads. 

The lack of medical exemptions was clarified by Jeff Burch, the father of a student with an auto-immune disorder. Burch tried to confirm that his son’s options were “being treated like a second-class citizen, or get the shot.” 

According to Burch, after speaking with school administration and describing the concerns and requesting a medical exception, “The answer was basically that there would be no medical exceptions made.” 

The school insisted that they had given the students “options,” but Burch told LifeSiteNews, in reference to the options:  

“The options that were given were clearly designed to influence students to get vaccinated and the school has repeated publicly on multiple occasions that the hope was the students would get vaccinated,” he said, referring to Principal Bob Ryan’s public admission that his policy has “pushed” some parents “over the line” to have their children jabbed. “So the options that were given are not equal options.” 

“What concerns us as a family is the health of my son and the possibility of an adverse reaction to the shot. It is clear that there is no evidence to show how this shot would affect my son. There is no science at all in his case. So, if there is no scientific evidence but there is clear risk, why would we give him the shot? Why would a school with no information at all about his case have an opinion and recommend the shot? The response from the school so far is that options have been provided. And again we are back at the option that discriminates against kids that are not vaccinated and will be excluding students from certain activities.”

The testimony of one anonymous Brophy mother adds weight to the assertions of Burch, Andonyan, and Smith that the school is employing “coercion” and “strong arm” tactics. She explained in an audio recording posted on the “Concerned Parents of Brophy” Facebook page that her son “has become withdrawn” and “is struggling with peer pressure to get the shot.”

She continued, “My son is really pretty stressed, wondering if at any moment he will be notified he has to quarantine and try to figure out how he will learn from home with no instruction, during one of his most challenging academic years preparing for college.”

She added that she recently found her son “distraught” because he couldn’t apply to lead one of the school retreats, since only the vaccinated students are eligible for such retreats.

“He’s struggling with the idea that implies, are the vaccinated more religious or spiritual than the unvaccinated?”

Far from it, according to one Jesuit priest known to LifeSiteNews, who has described the school’s COVID policies as “showing a cowardice,” and contrary to the Jesuit spirituality.

Dr. Mark McDonald, who is board certified in children and adult psychiatry, advised Brophy parents during a panel discussion, “You will not win this battle simply by information. Because you are not fighting an informational enemy. You need to fight it with force. What I mean is, you need to organize, you need to go and make your voices heard in a powerful way at your local schools and your school boards. And you need to demand — not argue, but demand — that the masks and the vaccines stop,” he continued.   

“And if you are not successful, you need to pull your children out of school and you need to do it now. If all Americans yanked their kids from school, that would put an end to this. No more medical exemptions, no more religious exemptions that will buy you two or three weeks, but eventually they’re going to come for you. You need to pull your children out of school, and you need to do it as a group.”



Source link

North Carolina Democrats renew push to expand unemployment benefits

North Carolina Democrats are part of a group calling for a reform of the state’s unemployment system in the wake of federal pandemic unemployment benefits ending.

Sen. Wiley Nickel, D-Wake, and advocates from the North Carolina State AFL-CIO and the North Carolina Budget and Tax Center urged the General Assembly on Monday to pass legislation to raise the amount and the duration of unemployment benefits in North Carolina.

“The loss of critical federal benefits puts thousands of North Carolina families in jeopardy,” Nickel said during a virtual news conference. “Workers deserve to know that they can rely on the system that they paid into when they’re in crisis. Right now, we’ve got over 200,000 North Carolina families who have federal unemployment benefits that just ended.”

The federal program ended Sept. 6. Nickel said it takes away $1,200 from North Carolinians to pay for food and rent each month amid the COVID-19 pandemic. State Republicans pushed for the federal program to end early because it has led to staffing shortages throughout the state, they said. They filed legislation to stop the additional $300 a week in benefits. Gov. Roy Cooper vetoed the measure.

Cooper has pushed for an expansion of the state’s unemployment benefits program, which Democrats said is one of the country’s worst.

Republican leaders, including State Treasurer Dale Folwell, said the additional unemployment benefits created an “unemployment crisis” in the state.

“I get calls every day from small businesses saying they can’t get people to work because it’s more profitable for them to stay home,” Folwell said in a Sept. 2 news release. “They can’t compete against the federal government. And the workers that show up are paying taxes so the others can stay home.”

According to the U.S. Department of Labor report provided by the Senate Minority Leader’s Office, North Carolina’s unemployment program was ranked last among other states, with 20% of unemployed workers receiving jobless benefits. The state ranked third to last for the amount and duration of benefits, the labor department report said.

Nickel and Sens. Paul Lowe Jr., D-Forsyth, and Mike Woodward, D-Durham, have filed Senate Bill 320 , which would increase the state’s maximum benefit payment from $350 a week to $500 a week. It also would extend the duration of the program from 12 weeks to 26 weeks.

Nickel also recommended giving part-time workers unemployment benefits and giving employers a “tax holiday” from unemployment insurance taxes for a year. The holiday could cost the state $300 million from its unemployment trust fund. The state currently has $2.7 billion in its trust fund, which comes from unemployment insurance premiums from employers and then paid out to jobless workers.

SB 320 was filed March 18 but has not been reviewed in the Senate.





Source link

House Republicans Push Democrats for Vote on Rent Relief Bill

Republicans on the House Financial Services Committee filed a discharge petition in an attempt to force a floor vote on a bill they said would help distribute rental assistance to low-income renters quicker.

Committee Ranking Member Patrick McHenry, R-N.C., said Democrats forced the hand of Republicans who first introduced the legislation, the Renter Protection Act, in June. Chairwoman Maxine Waters, D-Calif., hasn’t pushed the committee to consider the bill, which is supported by every Financial Services Committee Republican.

dailycallerlogo

A discharge petition is a legislative maneuver that enables a minority party in the House to bypass committee approval and force a floor vote on a piece of legislation. The petition requires signatures from a majority, or 218, of representatives to be successful.

“This whole process has been unacceptable,” McHenry said during a committee hearing Friday. “It has been two months since the federal eviction moratorium expired and several weeks since the Supreme Court struck down President [Joe] Biden’s last-minute extension. Here we are again, asking, why isn’t the program working, and how can we fix it?”

“Since it appears our bill won’t get a fair shake in this committee, this morning I filed a discharge petition for the Renter Protection Act,” he continued. “I would encourage every member to sign on.”

Late last month, the Supreme Court blocked the Biden administration’s eviction moratorium, which was extended to October weeks earlier. But the Treasury Department and state governments have distributed just a fraction of the more than $46 billion in Emergency Rental Assistance Congress appropriated in December and March.

The government’s failure to efficiently disburse funds to low-income tenants who fell behind on rental payments during the pandemic coupled with the Supreme Court decision potentially exposed millions of Americans to immediate eviction.

“Congress promised relief to renters and property owners impacted by the pandemic,” McHenry said in a statement Friday. “Due to the Biden Administration’s mismanagement and Congressional Democrats’ inaction, American families have been left twisting in the wind.”

The Republican leader also criticized a bill to combat the eviction crisis that Waters introduced after the high court’s ruling. McHenry said Democrats’ legislation would only mean “more red tape, more bureaucracy, and more delays.”

“Republicans have been offering a commonsense solution for months—the Renter Protection Act—to fix the [Emergency Rental Assistance] programs, make mom-and-pop property owners whole, and end the threat of eviction,” the North Carolina Republican said. “This discharge petition will force Congress to finally keep the promise we made to renters and property owners almost one year ago.”

A spokesperson for McHenry said Republicans haven’t yet reached 218 signatures, but expect to get more once the House is back in session.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities for this original content, email [email protected]

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email [email protected] and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state. 





Source link

Gregory Meeks Blocked Push to Punish Chinese Disinformation Efforts

House Foreign Affairs Committee chairman Gregory Meeks appears to be thwarting Republican proposals to combat China’s malign influence on our shores. Why?




NRPLUS MEMBER ARTICLE

H
ouse Foreign Affairs Committee chairman Gregory Meeks (D., N.Y.) quietly blocked an attempt late last month to place sanctions on the United Front Work Department (UFWD), a bureau that oversees the Chinese Communist Party’s foreign-influence network, Republican officials tell National Review.

In recent years, alarm about the UFWD’s efforts to influence how Western democracies view China has grown. Last year, a report by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute warned that the lack of publicly available information about the United Front network — which comprises the UFWD and other affiliated entities and individuals working to influence foreign opinions of China — has led





Source link