Tag Archives: American Rescue Plan Act

Rewriting History For Political Purposes

Posted on by

The problem with inflation is that once the prices go up, they don’t always come back down to where they were. Although gas at the pump is comfortably low, a lot of other things that became more expensive under the Biden administration’s runaway inflation have not yet come down to their previous level. Americans are still feeling the impact of the Biden administration’s economic policies. It is wise to keep in mind that President Trump has only been in office since the end of January, and Rome wasn’t built in a day.

On Thursday, The Daily Caller posted an article giving us a preview of the rhetoric we will encounter in the run up to the mid-term elections.

The article reports:

CNN senior political commentator Scott Jennings reminded former Democratic New York mayoral candidate Michael Blake on Thursday that the affordability crisis began under former President Joe Biden.

Blake claimed that Democratic Iowa state Sen.-elect Catelin Drey defeated the Republican incumbent in the state’s special election because Republicans “cannot articulate a policy agenda” to make Americans’ lives more affordable. Jennings mocked Democrats for sounding the alarm on the affordability crisis when inflation soared to record levels under Biden.

“Well it doesn’t make me very nervous to hear Democrats, with a straight face, looking into a television camera and saying ‘boy, how did we get to this affordability crisis’ given that we all know how we got there over the last four years,” Jennings said.

When Blake blamed President Donald Trump for the inflation under Biden, Jennings said, “So you’re saying we had no affordability crisis during the Biden years? Where did the inflation come from?”

The article notes:

Prices rose more than 20% during Biden’s term in office, jumping from 1.4% at the beginning of Biden’s presidency to its peak of 9.1% in June 2022, the highest annual rate since 1981. Inflation fell below 3% for the first time in two years in July 2024.

Many economists blamed the soaring inflation on the Biden administration spending $1.9 trillion and $750 billion on the American Rescue Plan and the Inflation Reduction Act, which Biden signed into law early in his term.

The article concludes:

Jennings said that Democrats tend to perform better in special elections, which contributed to Drey’s victory.

“It’s absolutely true. Democrats now have more voters who are regular voters in non-traditional elections. Specials, off-year, what have you. That’s absolutely true, and so you’ve seen a pattern of Democrats doing better in these elections that don’t happen outside of a regular occurrence,” Jennings added.

It will be interesting to see where the economy is by next November, and if voters want to go back to the inflation numbers we had in the Biden administration.

How Obamacare Works

Posted on by

Today, The Washington Examiner posted an article about Obamacare. Yes, it is still with us thanks to the duplicity of the Republican Congress.

This is the current status of Obamacare:

Americans have until Jan. 15 to secure healthcare coverage through the Obamacare exchanges. This year’s open enrollment period has resulted in more people signing up than ever before.

More than 11.5 million people have enrolled in the exchanges as of Dec. 15, according to the Department of Health and Human Services. That’s an 18% increase from the same time last year. HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra boasted that the “unprecedented results” were the result of “unprecedented investments” in the program. Those “investments” include billions of dollars worth of new subsidies that have lowered what people have to pay out of pocket for coverage. But those subsidies simply mask the underlying cost of coverage, which has been rising for years. Ultimately, future taxpayers will foot the bill.

As part of the American Rescue Plan Act, which was signed into law in March 2021, Democrats made Obamacare subsidies more generous and extended them to enrollees making more than 400% of the federal poverty level — about $111,000 for a family of four — for the first time. Those expanded subsidies were scheduled to sunset at the end of 2022, but the Inflation Reduction Act extended them until Dec. 31, 2025. Last year alone, these more generous subsidies cost taxpayers $30 billion — about 50% more than the Congressional Budget Office originally estimated.

The article concludes:

In other words, the “unprecedented” number of signups during this open enrollment period isn’t a function of the affordability or quality of Obamacare plans. It’s a function of Democrats paying just about anyone to sign up.

Obamacare was the Democrats’ step toward socialized medicine. Socialized medicine results in poor care and long waits. Many Americans understand that and would not support a transition to socialized medicine, thus, Obamacare. We need enough people in Congress who care about the American people and their medical care to get rid of this abomination. That will probably take at least one more election.

What Difference Did It Make?

Posted on by

We are getting a lot of information right now about the censorship operation that Twitter was operating in order to protect the Biden campaign during the 2020 election. The information is not really surprising to those of us who were paying attention, but some of this is actually news to many Americans. On Saturday, PJ Media posted an article about the probable consequences of Twitter’s censorship.

The article notes:

Let’s begin with the premise that suppressing the content of Hunter Biden’s laptop affected the outcome of the 2020 Election. The Media Research Center (MRC) conducted one of the only polls about how the information on the computer would have affected the way people voted. MRC’s analysis found that full awareness of the Hunter Biden scandal would have led 9.4% of Biden voters to abandon the Democratic candidate. This would have flipped all six of the swing states Biden won to Trump, giving the former President 311 electoral votes.

By that analysis, if not for the fateful decision to censor the laptop story, which Gadde and Baker had a hand in, at least five major things would be different.

The article then goes on to list five of the things that would be different:

First and foremost, it is almost certain there would not be a war in Ukraine right now. President Trump placed sanctions on the Nord 2 pipeline during his term, despite German objections. All Biden had to do was stand up to outgoing German Chancellor Angela Merkel. After all, the entire purpose of NATO is to protect the European continent from Russian aggression. Letting Germany and other western powers become dependent on Russian energy goes directly against the mission.

When the Biden administration inexplicably lifted the sanctions in May 2021, it green-lit the pipeline that would bypass Ukraine, depriving the former Soviet nation of transit revenues and making it more vulnerable to Russian aggression. Even Ukrainian President Voldymor Zelensky knew it.

…Next, the Ukrainian war led to Russia and China becoming closer allies and leading the BRIC nations. This group includes Brazil and India. Many believe these nations will be dominant suppliers of manufactured goods, services, and raw materials by 2050. There have been reports that BRIC nations and their allies want to replace the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency. The Biden administration seems content to let this happen without a challenge. As the kleptocrats in our government, led by Joe Biden and Wall Street, lead us into managed decline, you can thank Gadde and Baker.

Third, our European allies would not be facing an energy crisis. The war in Ukraine needlessly destroyed Nord 1, which supplied much of the continent. Additionally, the Biden administration’s not-in-my-backyard energy policy leaves the U.S. unable to meet our own energy needs, let alone help Europe.

…The same NIMBY energy policy also makes the United States less safe. In a 2020 debate, Trump explained in about 10 seconds how U.S. energy independence strengthened our foreign policy. Now, Joe Biden begs some of the worst dictators in the world for oil, and they laugh at him. Biden also drains our strategic petroleum reserves to save Democrats from getting obliterated in the midterms, leaving us less prepared.

The article concludes:

Finally, as you struggle with inflation on food and gas, know that it never needed to happen. When Trump left office, the economy was recovering from the pandemic on a V-shaped trajectory. The American Rescue Plan, the infrastructure bill, and the Inflation Reduction Act blew more money into an economy overheated by pandemic relief. When the new administration allowed even more dollars to chase fewer goods, prices rose. So, when you are rolling your eyes over your grocery bill, thank Gadde and Baker. Their manipulation of Twitter helped Joe Biden do that.

The only constitutional solution to a stolen election is the next election. Please keep that in mind. For those of you that hate President Trump, remember the good he did for the average American. You may not like his style, but he accomplished more in four years than the past five presidents. In the interest of fairness and for the good of the country, he needs to be re-elected in 2024.

Where The Money Went

Posted on by

On Friday, Breitbart reported that blue states used some of the coronavirus relief money to implement CRT in their schools.

The article reports:

Democrats passed the American Rescue Plan (ARP) Act in March 2021, which President Biden signed into law shortly after. Republicans did not support the measure, but it passed in both chambers, as Democrats hold a majority. It included billions supposedly allocated to “safely” reopen schools.

In August, U.S. Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona said New York’s plan to use the funds to “support K-12 schools and students” laid “the groundwork for the ways in which an unprecedented infusion of federal resources will be used to address the urgent needs of America’s children and Build Back Better.” However, using the funds for CRT went far beyond just blue New York.

According to reports, “the law provided over $122 billion for the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ESSER), which helped multiple states implement ‘implicit bias’ and ‘anti-racism’ training, among other programs, according to research from One Nation shared with and verified by Fox News Digital.”

The Department of Education took its role a step further, offering “strategies” for using the funds to “address the impact of lost instructional time.” The department repeatedly emphasized “cultural responsiveness” and “equitable practices,” pointing to the Chicago Public School’s Curriculum Equity Initiative as a prime example. That included a “performance-based assessment system as part of the district-wide approach to culturally responsive and equitable teaching and learning.”

The money given to provide coronavirus relief should have been spent on sanitizing the schools to allow the children to return to school in a reasonable amount of time. The only reason for keeping the children out of school was that the teachers’ union feared the teachers would get sick. Measures should have been taken to provide for the safety of both teachers and students. The funds were not intended to implement new curricula. This is simply another example of Washington misusing taxpayer money. l

The Wrong Way To Go

Posted on by

On Monday, The Washington Free Beacon reported the following:

The Biden administration is set to fund the distribution of crack pipes to drug addicts as part of its plan to advance “racial equity.”

The $30 million grant program, which closed applications Monday and will begin in May, will provide funds to nonprofits and local governments to help make drug use safer for addicts. Included in the grant, which is overseen by the Department of Health and Human Services, are funds for “smoking kits/supplies.” A spokesman for the agency told the Washington Free Beacon that these kits will provide pipes for users to smoke crack cocaine, crystal methamphetamine, and “any illicit substance.”

What in the world is the administration thinking?

The article notes:

Sgt. Clyde Boatwright, president of the Maryland Fraternal Order of Police, said government resources are better spent on preventing drug abuse rather than making it safer.

“If we look at more of a preventive campaign as opposed to an enabling campaign, I think it will offer an opportunity to have safer communities with fewer people who are dependable on these substances,” Boatwright told the Free Beacon.

Funding for the “harm reduction” grant program is provided through Democrats’ American Rescue Plan, which the Senate passed along party lines after Vice President Kamala Harris cast a tie-breaking vote. Other equipment that qualifies for funding include syringes, vaccinations, disease screenings, condoms, and fentanyl strips. The grant program will last three years and includes 25 awards of up to $400,000.

An HHS spokesman declined to specify what is included in the smoking kits. Similar distribution efforts provide mouthpieces to prevent glass cuts, rubber bands to prevent burns, and filters to minimize the risk of disease.

It is against federal law to distribute or sell drug paraphernalia unless authorized by the government.

The idea of the government distributing drug paraphernalia is insane. I wonder if the Congressmen who voted for the Democrats’ American Rescue Plan knew what was in the bill. Illegal drug use is dangerous for a number of reasons–you have no idea what is in the street drug you are taking. If it contains fentanyl, even a small amount could be fatal.

This is a really bad idea that needs to be challenged quickly before it does major damage.

Racism From The Federal Government

Posted on by

Yesterday The Daily Signal posted an article about Christopher Baird, a dairy farmer near Ferryville in southwest Wisconsin. Mr. Baird is like many farmers; he has direct loans through the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Farm Service Agency.

The article reports:

But the dairy farmer isn’t entitled to a new FSA loan-forgiveness program provided as part of COVID-19 relief in the $2 trillion American Rescue Plan Act, legislation touted Wednesday night by President Joe Biden in his address to Congress. 

Baird is white. He joined four other white farmers Thursday in suing federal officials over being left out.

Only “socially disadvantaged” farmers may apply for some of the $4 billion in loan-forgiveness funds, which include direct payments to farmers of up to 20% of the value of the loan. Specifically, the law says those eligible must be “Black/African American, American Indian or Alaskan native, Hispanic or Latino, or Asian American or Pacific Islander.”

“There is a case for loan forgiveness for individuals,” Baird said, “but we shouldn’t be looking at the color of someone’s skin and saying, ‘This person needs more help or less help based on the color of their skin.’ That’s just wrong.”

Baird is among five white farmers from Wisconsin, Minnesota, Ohio, and South Dakota who are suing Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack and FSA Administrator Zach Ducheneaux, alleging racial discrimination and violation of their right to equal protection under the Constitution.

The other Wisconsin farmer who sued, Adam Faust, said the federal government shouldn’t provide taxpayer money “just based on race.”

Baird, Faust, and the three other farmers filed the lawsuit Thursday in the U.S. District Court in Wisconsin’s Eastern District. 

The article concludes:

In short, the complaint says, the way “to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”

The farmers suing the USDA argue that a program that excludes them is just more discrimination.

Faust owns a dairy farm near Chilton, in Calumet County. A double amputee, he milks about 70 cows and farms 200 acres for feed. Because he is white, Faust isn’t eligible for the loan-forgiveness program.

“There should absolutely be no federal dollars going anywhere just based on race,” Faust said. “The economic impact from COVID-19 didn’t hurt any race more than another as far as agriculture goes.”

Discrimination on the basis of race is wrong regardless of what race you choose to discriminate against. Hopefully this case will make its way to the Supreme Court where the law should be declared unconstitutional.

Where The Money Went

Posted on by

Yesterday The Daily Signal posted an article about how the money from the coronavirus stimulus package has been distributed.

The article reports:

The 591-page American Rescue Plan Act also changed Congress’ normal formula for appropriating money. Rather than scaling funding by population, the measure awarded taxpayer dollars based on which states had the highest unemployment rates in the fourth quarter of 2020.

That shifted $31 billion in funding, according to Open the Books’ analysis, so that 27 states gained by the allocation change and 23 states lost money they would have gotten from the normal formula.

“There is a $31 billion shift and it has shifted to blue states,” Adam Andrzejewski, CEO of Open the Books, told The Daily Signal. “The big winners were California, New York, Illinois, New Jersey. Obviously Florida, which kept their economy open [under] Gov. Ron DeSantis, they continue to flourish. They lost money on that allocation change.”

I would like to remind anyone reading this that no Republicans voted for this bill. When you look at how the money has been allocated, the reason for that becomes obvious. States that were fiscally responsible were short-changed. States with already bloated spending were rewarded. Essentially bad behavior was rewarded and encouraged.

The article cites a few examples of how the money was misspent:

DeSantis (Ron DeSantis, Governor of Florida) is a Republican. Under the congressional legislation, $10.1 million went to Key West, Florida, even though the state as a whole didn’t fare so well. Other wealthy conclaves receiving federal tax dollars include Oyster Bay, New York, which got $32.7 million, and Cambridge, Massachusetts, which got $65 million. 

The city topping Bloomberg’s Richest Places index with a median income of $525,000—Atherton, California—scored $1.3 million from taxpayers. Scarsdale, New York, which is No. 2 on Bloomberg’s list and the wealthiest city on the East Coast—got $2 million. The third city on the list, Hillsborough, California, got $2.1 million.

It is time to clean house in Congress.