By Sam Pohl

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Thursday, May 23, 2019

CONTACT:
Sam Pohl, gro.P1558670462OGsax1558670462eT@ss1558670462erp1558670462

Governor, Lieutenant Governor, and Speaker Discuss Texas House Bill 3
Property Tax Relief in Sight

AUSTIN, TX – Governor Greg Abbott, Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick, and Speaker of the Texas House Dennis Bonnen held a press conference on Texas House Bill 3 today. The bill would deliver much needed property tax relief along with a 2.5% cap on property taxes, transformational generational school finance reform, professional development training for educators, efficiency audits for schools, and more.

Republican Party of Texas Chairman James Dickey commented:

“With HB 3, Texas’ Republican leadership has delivered $5 billion in statewide property tax relief.”

In addition, they delivered meaningful school finance reform. The bill offers $2 billion for a merit-based pay formula, creates a professional development training program for educators, reduces ‘robin hood’ transfers, and focuses funding on the classrooms. HB 3 will not only help educators – it will focus more funds in the classroom on the needs of individual students.

“Texans needed and deserved tax relief. Thankfully, our Republican legislators have been able to provide a solution that both cuts taxes and improves the structure and long term path of Texas’ school financing,” said Dickey.

###

The post Governor, Lieutenant Governor, and Speaker Discuss Texas House Bill 3 appeared first on Republican Party of Texas.

…read more

From:: Texas GOP – Feed

By Sam Pohl

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Thursday, May 23, 2019

CONTACT:
Sam Pohl, gro.P1558670462OGsax1558670462eT@ss1558670462erp1558670462

The Texas Born-Alive Infant Protection Act Passes
A Victory for Pro-Life Texans

AUSTIN, TX – Today, House Bill 16, the Texas Born-Alive Infant Protection Act, passed 84-57 with two present not voting, and is on its way to Governor Greg Abbott’s desk. This important piece of legislation would protect children born alive after failed abortion attempts by creating felony charges against doctors and imposing a fine of at least $100,000 for “failing to provide the appropriate medical treatment” for these children. Republican Party of Texas Chairman James Dickey commented:

“We are thankful that this important piece of legislation is on its way to the Governor’s desk. It’s truly astounding that anyone would advocate killing a child who is born alive. That’s something the Democrats who voted against this bill will have to explain to their constituents. There should never be a question about whether or not to protect innocent life.”

Republican State Representative Jeff Leach is the author of HB 16 while State Representatives Greg Bonnen, Stephanie Klick, Tom Oliverson, and Geanie Morrison were joint authors. There were 76 coauthors. Senator Lois Kolkhorst carried Senate Bill 23, the Senate companion. Senators Dawn Buckingham, Donna Campbell, Joan Huffman, Jane Nelson, and Angela Paxton were joint authors. There were nine coauthors.

Chairman Dickey concluded:

“We applaud Representative Jeff Leach, Senator Kolkhorst, and all of our Republican legislators for accomplishing legislation that protects those who cannot protect themselves. This legislation is a victory for all who support life.”

###

The post The Texas Born-Alive Infant Protection Act Passes appeared first on Republican Party of Texas.

…read more

From:: Texas GOP – Feed

By Jarrett Stepman

Have American millennials only known hardship? That seems to be the takeaway from a recent Wall Street Journal article.

The report highlighted how millennials, some of whom are now reaching middle age, lag far behind previous generations in terms of financial security.

“American millennials are approaching middle age in worse financial shape than every living generation ahead of them, lagging behind baby boomers and Generation X despite a decade of economic growth and falling unemployment,” read the article.

The piece highlighted a number of factors hurting millennials, such as the financial crisis of 2007, delayed homeownership, and mounting student debt, with little professional payoff for many.

At the same time, key sources of wealth like property value and the stock market continue to help older Americans, who are also beginning to receive government entitlements like Social Security.

This creates a relatively bleak picture for millennials, who are soon expected to become the nation’s largest generation. But it’s also not cause to get carried away, like Time reporter Charlotte Alter. In a tweet last March, she suggested that millennials have never experienced the blessings of prosperity:

“[email protected] and I were born the same year. She was a Dunkaroos kid—I liked fruit roll-ups. People our age have never experienced American prosperity in our adult lives—which is why so many millennials are embracing Democratic socialism.”

Alter also said that New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s “adulthood was defined by financial crisis, debt & climate change. No wonder she and her peers are moving left.”

It’s interesting that these concerns from millennials coincide with new data from Gallup, which shows that 4 in 10 Americans support socialism. According to the poll, the youngest cohort of voting-age Americans—ages 18-24—showed by far the most support for socialism at 58%. This was 18 points higher than the next age group of …read more

From:: Daily Signal – Feed

By Tara Ross

Electoral College foes have been trying to get their way in Nevada
for a decade. Have they finally succeeded?

Nevada’s state senate approved National Popular Vote legislation on Tuesday. The measure is now awaiting approval from Gov. Steve Sisolak, a Democrat.

The governor’s signature will add Nevada to a growing movement to
ditch the Electoral College. Worse, Maine
and Oregon
could be close behind: National Popular Vote’s plan has already been approved
by both states’ senates.

After years of stagnating, National Popular Vote has obtained
support from four states in just one short year—or five states, if you count
Nevada.

If Hillary Clinton had won the Electoral College in 2016, would this
be happening? So far, National Popular Vote has been approved by blue
states—and only blue states. Many
Democratic state senators seem driven by Clinton’s loss: Democrats couldn’t win
the Electoral College. Now the system must go.

Straightforward change has proven difficult, so they resort to
dishonest tricks: In Minnesota, NPV’s compact was hidden
in an elections omnibus bill. That didn’t work, so it was
hidden, again, in an appropriations
bill.

In many states, committee hearings are scheduled at the last
minute, making it difficult for Electoral College defenders to testify. In
Maine, NPV supporters resurrected a bill, despite the “ought
not to pass” vote it earned in a legislative committee. Other state
legislators and journalists have been invited to junkets in Hawaii,
Aruba, or Key West.

Somehow, Electoral College defenders are never invited to these
“educational” sessions. In fact, the fight over America’s presidential election
process is beginning to more closely resemble Kindergartners bickering on a
playground—and the process has about as much integrity.

“That’s not faaaaiiir! I don’t like those rules. I’m better than
you. I’m taking my ball and going home.”

Even the structure of the National Popular Vote legislation is
dishonest.

The Constitution provides that America’s state-by-state
presidential election system cannot be changed without the consent of
three-quarters of the states (38). …read more

From:: Daily Signal – Feed

By Lauren Evans

In a special episode of “Problematic Women,” Heritage Foundation President Kay Coles James joins us to talk about the Women’s Suffrage Centennial Commission.

President Donald Trump appointed James to the bipartisan commission formed to celebrate the passage of the 19th Amendment, which secured women’s right to vote. In this week’s podcast, we discuss the history of the movement, what “suffrage” really means, and the importance of celebrating this historic event.

We also break down the left’s continued unhinged comments about abortion, with Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., calling for taxpayer-funded, no-restriction abortions and comedian Jim Carrey’s depiction of Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey being aborted.

Finally, has the #MeToo movement harmed or helped women? According to CBS News, male managers are now more hesitant interacting with their female employees at work—we discuss. Listen to the podcast below, or read the transcript of our full interview with Kay Coles James.

This is a lightly-edited transcript.

Lauren Evans: Mrs. James, so why are we talking about [the Women’s Suffrage Centennial Commission] now?

Kay Coles James: Well, you know, I was so honored when President Trump asked me to be his representative to the women’s suffrage commission.

It was a commission that was established by Congress to bring a bipartisan group of women together to plan how we’re going to educate and to celebrate women having the right to vote in our country. It will be the 100th year, centennial, this celebration year.

Having joined that commission, I was honored that this bipartisan group asked if I would, in fact, chair this commission.

Given the importance of this issue, the significance of it—what it means to me as an American and as a woman in this wonderful country—it is indeed an honor.

And serving beside and along with some folks who I just admire …read more

From:: Daily Signal – Feed

By Kenny Xu

We all thought those online quizzes
that give you a score based on “how privileged you are” were funny. Except now,
the score is real—and it will affect your life dramatically if you’re an
anxious high schooler applying to college.

A new report by The Wall Street Journal describes the efforts of The College Board, the private organization behind the SAT, to implement an “adversity score” to track the hardship of a test-taker’s circumstances.

The adversity score will consider “15 factors,” according to
the report, including
the student’s socioeconomic status, the neighborhood crime rate, and parental
education level.

Race won’t explicitly be a factor, so the College Board can
avoid lawsuits over racial discrimination and preferences, which are illegal by
federal statute. However, scholars who have commented on the new feature have
acknowledged that “the purpose is to get to race without using race,” in
the words of Anthony Carnevale, director of Georgetown University’s Center of
Education and the Workforce.

Notably, students will not be told what their adversity
score is, thereby rendering them oblivious to a critical factor in the college
admissions process—and powerless to address any perceived inaccuracy.

Distorting the
Student’s Narrative

This policy change comes at a time when SAT opposition movements have become increasingly vocal, and college admissions has come under heightened scrutiny due to the recent college bribery scandal involving Lori Loughlin and Felicity Huffman.

Of course, many colleges and universities already have their
own ways of determining how underprivileged a student is, and accordingly, how
much they should consider these factors in admitting said student. There is, in
fact, an ongoing lawsuit against Harvard University for using exactly this sort
of “privilege scale,” of which race
is a factor, according to the plaintiffs.

But the addition of the adversity score on the SAT is the
boldest and most explicit move yet by the top college admissions …read more

From:: Daily Signal – Feed

By Michelle Malkin

We no longer live in a constitutional republic. We live in
an idiocracy.

Only in modern-day America, under the Democratic-controlled
U.S. House of Representatives, is the basic proposition that federally
subsidized public housing should benefit American citizens and legal residents
slammed as “despicable” and “damaging.”

Those are the hysterical words used by Democratic Rep.
Carolyn Maloney of New York City to condemn the proposal discussed by Housing
and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson on Tuesday to ban government aid to
residents of the agency who shelter illegal immigrants.

The rule change would end a Clinton-era regulation that
allowed immigrants to obtain aid without having to disclose whether they were
here legally. The Trump plan could free up an estimated 32,000 public housing
slots, according to the department, as 1.6 million applicants nationwide wait
to be considered.

Democratic Rep. Juan Vargas of San Diego County couldn’t
believe Carson could be so “mean-spirited” in prioritizing
law-abiding people over law-breaking ones.

Democratic Rep. Maxine Waters of Los Angeles called the
illegal alien prohibition “cruel.”

Only in America are American public servants, who are sworn
to uphold American laws and the U.S. Constitution, hounded by open borders
liberals about putting Americans first.

Instead of being forced to defend their own twisted and treasonous priorities, Democrats got an assist from open borders tools in the media making hay of Carson’s unfamiliarity with some stupid real estate acronym.

The squirrel-chasers at Newsweek sputtered: “Ben Carson doesn’t know what an REO property is, thinks he’s being asked about Oreos.” Politico clucked, “Ben Carson confuses a real-estate term and a cookie.”

Fake news narrative set: He’s dastardly, dumb, and hates
immigrants!

Carson had patiently explained at the House Financial
Services Committee hearing that families with illegal immigrants would still
have up to 18 months to defer eviction and find somewhere else to live or to
move back to their home countries.

But that (undeserved) generosity was met with still more
unhinged cries of “What about the children?” …read more

From:: Daily Signal – Feed

By Frederico Bartels

The House Appropriations defense subcommittee has slashed the Pentagon’s reprogramming authority by 75% in the approved defense appropriations bill reported out on May 15.

The
subcommittee, led by Rep. Pete Visclosky, D-Ind., reduced the ability of the
Defense Department to shift unused resources from lower to higher priorities
within the department from $4 billion or about 0.5% of the budget to $1
billion, or about 0.13% of the 2019 budget.

The
move comes as a response to the Trump administration’s use of reprogramming
authorities to move
resources from the Pentagon to the Department of Homeland Security to help
tackle the challenges
at the southern border.

If it were to make it into law, this loss of reprogramming authority would create serious obstacles in properly managing the defense funds as the Pentagon executes its budget.

As
expressed
by Robert Hale, former comptroller at the Pentagon:

Restriction or elimination of reprogramming would significantly harm the [Department of Defense’s] ability to manage its money to meet national security needs effectively.

To meet congressional timelines, the [Defense Department] must formulate its budgets two or more years before all funds are obligated.

Inevitably, needs change, creating higher priorities for some projects and lowering them for others. In these cases, reprogramming permits effective management. In different circumstances, reprogramming can avert crises.

This
loss of authority is among the most impactful changes in the legislation, since
it would hamstring the Pentagon by taking away what little budget flexibility
it has.

Additionally, the House appropriators decided to fund the eight F-15X legacy fighters requested in the president’s budget.

That
was despite John Venable, senior research fellow in defense policy at The Heritage
Foundation, making
the persuasive case that it’s not a wise investment, because it
wouldn’t survive in high-threat environments, and it’s not cheaper than the
F-35.

Conversely, the lawmakers did decide to purchase an additional 12 of the “most dominant and lethal multi-role …read more

From:: Daily Signal – Feed

By Kevin Pham

With the debate over health care heating up again, Medicare for All once more is a hot topic. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., has sponsored a new version of his Senate bill that promises to free Americans from health care concerns.

But
at the core of the Sanders bill is still the vast and fundamentally illiberal
restriction on choice for both patients and providers.

One
key provision of the bill would outlaw health care plans that duplicate
coverage. Section 107 states bluntly that “it shall be unlawful for— (1) a
private health insurer to sell health insurance coverage that duplicates the
benefits provided under this Act.”

In
other words, it will be expressly illegal for any private company or employer
to provide health benefits that compete with the government.

The
Sanders bill, however, is gracious enough to allow insurers or employers to
provide any benefit not covered in the legislation.

This
provision to outlaw private plans that duplicate government coverage, allowing only
the sale of supplemental plans, is similar to Canadian Medicare, which covers
all Canadian citizens.

In
Canada, approximately 30 percent of health care spending is private spending, with 12.4 percent
coming from private insurers. The Canadian system, however, does not include dental,
vision, and prescription drug coverage that is part of the Medicare for All
package. The Sanders bill would leave almost no room for the private sector at
all.

Where
Canadian health care leaves significant room for private health care plans, Medicare
for All would preclude a substantial amount of private coverage in America,
leaving essentially cosmetic surgery and experimental drugs excluded by the secretary
of the Department of Health and Human Services, per Section 203(b) of the bill.

Under
this regime, the government would take near complete control over the 18
percent of gross domestic product that is health spending. Private spending,
which amounts to about 45 percent of national health expenditures, would collapse.

If
Medicare for All passes, you will not …read more

From:: Daily Signal – Feed

By Katrina Trinko

Integration used to be a major goal of the civil rights movement. But today, in many places, resegregation is the growing trend—particularly on college campuses. A new National Association of Scholars report finds that 7 out of 10 colleges surveyed are having separate graduations for those of certain racial or ethnic backgrounds. Dion Pierre of the National Association of Scholars joins us to discuss. Read the interview, posted below, or listen to the podcast:

We also cover these stories:

• President Donald Trump is expected to tap Ken Cuccinelli for a top immigration job.
• According to a new Gallup poll, 4 in 10 Americans embrace some form of socialism.
• Alabama’s public television network refuses to air children’s TV show episode featuring same-sex wedding.

The Daily Signal podcast is available on Ricochet, iTunes, SoundCloud, Google Play, or Stitcher. All of our podcasts can be found at DailySignal.com/podcasts. If you like what you hear, please leave a review. You can also leave us a message at 202-608-6205 or write us at moc.l1558670462angis1558670462yliad1558670462@sret1558670462tel1558670462. Enjoy the show!

Katrina Trinko: Joining us today is Dion Pierre, a research associate at the National Association of Scholars. You recently wrote an op-ed for The College Fix, which was really fascinating. I’m just going to read a portion of it now.

“At the National Association of Scholars, we surveyed 173 colleges and universities across the country, and found that 71%—125 of them—have some version of an ethnically separate graduation. In fact, Harvard also has a separate ‘Latinx’ graduation. Brown has its ‘Blackalaureate.’ Columbia has both ‘Black Graduation’ and ‘Raza Graduation.’ These ceremonies are held in addition to the mainstream, campus-wide commencements and attendance is voluntary, but they’re so popular nowadays most students take them for granted.”

Tell us, what’s going on? Why have these race-specific …read more

From:: Daily Signal – Feed