A case for term limits

It is hard to imagine that our Founding Fathers, many of whom were private businessmen that put their own business on hold while forming our government,  envisioned career politicians holding office for 20, 30, and 40 years.  Perhaps that is why when writing our Constitution, numerous restriction were put in…Read More

Share

It is hard to imagine that our Founding Fathers, many of whom were private businessmen that put their own business on hold while forming our government,  envisioned career politicians holding office for 20, 30, and 40 years.  Perhaps that is why when writing our Constitution, numerous restriction were put in place on eligibility to serve in Congress, but none related to length of service.  In the 19th Century, the turnover rate of Congress was consistently 45-50% as members served their duty and returned to the private sector. Since 1990 the turnover rate has averaged less than 7% every two years in Congressional elections despite record low approval ratings.  Why?

 

Finances:  According to the FEC 2012 reports, the House incumbents raised $237 million to the challengers $19 million.  House members receive on average $1 million per year (including franking privilege) for staff and office expense.  Staff is often used in an election cycle for campaign purposes under the guise of “constituent outreach”. Challengers are at a distinct disadvantage from Day 1.

Lobbyist: With the advent of PAC’s and Super PAC’s, much of the campaign finance imbalance can be attributed to the influx of outside influence monies.  It’s no secret that on the first day in office, members of Congress are already beginning their solicitations for contributions to the next election.

What would term limits accomplish?

 Restoration of a Congress where votes are cast based on what is best for our country rather than what is best for reelection chances.  Look no further than our last gov’t shutdown crisis where many members voted out of fear of being “primaried” rather then what they truly felt was in our country’s best interest.

Reduction in pork barrel spending.  Candidates who are facing term expiration will no longer feel the pressure to “bring home the bacon” and curry favor with their constituents.

Reduction of lobbyist and crony capitalism.  The need to continually feed a candidate monies to keep them in office is reduced if there is an expiration date.

 

Arguments against term limits.

 

Elections are a form of term limits;  As outlined above, the incumbents have a significant advantage over challengers. Much of that advantage is derived from tax payer monies.

It reduces Congressional experience;  Congress is no place for on the job training.  If a member of the House or Senate needs 6-10 years to gain experience, they are truly in the wrong position.

 

Summary:

The GOP’s 1994 Contract With America contained an item called Citizens Legislature Act that called for a maximum (12) years service yet was never enacted.  Today, 22 years later, many of those same legislators are still in office

In 2012, the Senate brought to the floor a bill to adopt an Amendment to the Constitution limiting the number of terms a Senator could serve.  It was defeated 75-24 in one of the rare bi-partisan votes.

Many groups, both left and right are once again advocating for Congressional term limits.  We need to offer support to each of these groups regardless of ideology.

Share
Read Less

Voter Integrity

The North Carolina Board of Elections recently discovered recipients of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) waivers, which allows some illegal immigrants to remain in the U.S., were also illegally registered to vote. The Board of Elections crosschecked their voter rolls with DACA recipients and found hundreds were registered…Read More

Share

The North Carolina Board of Elections recently discovered recipients of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) waivers, which allows some illegal immigrants to remain in the U.S., were also illegally registered to vote. The Board of Elections crosschecked their voter rolls with DACA recipients and found hundreds were registered to vote even though they are not U.S. citizens. Click Here to read more.

Share
Read Less

Pork Barrel Spending & Crony Capitalism

Citizens Against Government Waste has released its 2016 report detailing wasteful subsidies and spending by the federal government.  The report identifies wasteful spending that cost $644 billion over 1 year and $2.4 trillion over the next 5 years most of which amount to crony capitalism.   Items range from defense…Read More

Share

Citizens Against Government Waste has released its 2016 report detailing wasteful subsidies and spending by the federal government.  The report identifies wasteful spending that cost $644 billion over 1 year and $2.4 trillion over the next 5 years most of which amount to crony capitalism.   Items range from defense contractors making M1  tank modifications that the Army says aren’t needed to sugar subsidies that guarantee corporate farms a minimum price that is TWICE the worlds average.  Click Here for the complete report

Share
Read Less

Refugee Resettlement Program Facts -Updated

The Refugee Resettlement Program is not in the interest of American citizens and should be discontinued.  (Click here to download complete Americans First Fact Sheet) Basically, the entire program involves: • The massive influx…Read More

Share

The Refugee Resettlement Program is not in the interest of American citizens and should be discontinued.  (Click here to download complete Americans First Fact Sheet)

Basically, the entire program involves:

• The massive influx of people, many from dysfunctional societies, who are chosen by the UN in cooperation with the federal government.

• Claims of refugee status are in many cases completely fraudulent and refugees have included terrorists, such as the Iraqi terrorists in Bowling Green, Kentucky, and the Boston Marathon bombers who came as asylees under similar standards.

• Refugees are not assimilating into our society, but instead are living off welfare programs and imposing costs on state and local governments already in financial trouble. Fayette County’s public school system is facing deficits of millions of dollars, in large part because of the costs imposed by refugees and illegal aliens, many of whom don’t speak or write English and have to be provided with translators.

• Our government currently has to borrow money just to keep our own citizens fed and housed. But church affiliated groups are receiving federal government money to pay big salaries to their executives and are bringing more and more refugees here and dumping them into our social safety net that our own citizens need (and helping refugees take jobs from our own citizens). Then the church groups just repeat the process to get even more money.

• Refugees are bringing in communicable diseases, engaging in crime, and many have no conception of religious, political or sexual tolerance.

• Refugees are settled in areas where the people administering the program aren’t affected by the problems they create.

 

WHAT CAN OUR CITIZENS DO TO STOP THIS?

1. Write or call your representatives and senators and tell them to stop this program.

2. Tell your churches to get out of this racket and stop using taxpayer money.

 

Consider the following troubling facts about the federal refugee resettlement program:

 

  1. THE PROGRAM IS BEING EXPLOITED BY CHURCH GROUPS WHO SIPHON FEDERAL MONEY THAT ENRICHES THEIR ADMINISTRATORS AND WHO THEN DUMP THE REFUGEES INTO OUR WELFARE SYSTEM AFTER A FEW MONTHS AND THEN THEY REPEAT AND EVEN EXPAND THE PROCESS.
  2. Catholic Charities of Louisville’s latest IRS Form 990 from 2012 shows they took in $13,493,000 in government grants out of just over $18 million in total funding. This was an increase from 2011 when they had $11,349,920 from GOVERNMENT GRANTS! The vast majority of their funding comes from TAXPAYERS! They paid out approximately $3,700,000 in salaries and benefits in both years.
  3. The United Nations in conjunction with the US State Department determines who qualifies as refugees and where they should be settled in the US without any input from the citizens of the communities in which they are settled. Local communities have no control over who gets settled there.
  4. Refugee resettlement is a self-perpetuating global enterprise. The Refugee resettlement bureaucracy is funded entirely by the federal government and has a direct interest in settling more and more refugees so its budget is constantly increasing.
  5. The program is rife with fraud and corruption at all levels. UN personnel often sell access to the program and once here refugees make false claims of family relationship in order to facilitate wider immigration.
  6. Terrorist organizations are using the program as a means to get their people into the US. Two Iraqis who were settled in Bowling Green were convicted of terrorist activities. The Boston Marathon bombers came here as asylees.
  7. Membership in a U.S.-registered Islamic terrorist group is not a bar to entry under the program as long as the refugee was not a “direct participant” in “terrorist” activity.
  8. Economic distress is not supposed to be a basis for claims of refugee status. But congress and the UN can name whatever group they want to be a refugee or asylum seeker. For instance Congress passed a law declaring China’s one-child policy to be an example of persecution based upon a political view. Not surprisingly the Chinese now head up the list of successful asylum seekers.
  9. Many communicable diseases are being brought here, TB in particular. TB among the foreign-born now accounts for about half of the TB in America.
  10. Refugee access to welfare on the same basis as a S. citizen has made the program a global magnet.
  11. Refugee “self-sufficiency” is supposed to be an important measure of success and a basis for assigning future refugees to agencies. But the definition of “self-sufficiency” has been steadily defined downward and today is virtually meaningless. A refugee can be considered “self-sufficient” while benefitting from a wide array of welfare programs, including Medicaid, Food Stamps, Public Housing and Social Security.
  12. Welfare use is staggering among refugees, but welfare usage is never counted by officials as part of the cost of the program. When it is included, the total cost of the refugee program soars to at least $10 billion a year.
  13. At a time when some American citizens are being are pushed off of time-limited welfare programs, many refugees are going on life-time cash assistance programs. For instance, 12.7% of refugees are on SSI – a lifetime entitlement to a monthly check. Of Refugees, 57.7% are on government medical assistance such as Medicaid, about 25% have no health insurance at all, 70.2% are receiving food stamps, and 31.6% are in public housing.
  14. Forty seven percent (47%) of loans made to refugees for transportation to the S. are currently unpaid, leaving an unpaid balance of approximately $450 million.
  15. Refugee resettlement is profitable to the organizations involved in it. They receive money from the federal government for each refugee they bring over. They have almost no real responsibilities for these refugees. After 4 months the “sponsoring” organization is not even required to know where the refugee lives.
Share
Read Less

Export-Import Bank Update

As Americans First pointed out last September, Congress had kicked the can down the road on reauthorizing the Export-Import Bank, which sole purpose is to provide taxpayer backed government loans to foreign companies.  The issue is now before Congress again (click here) and…Read More

Share

As Americans First pointed out last September, Congress had kicked the can down the road on reauthorizing the Export-Import Bank, which sole purpose is to provide taxpayer backed government loans to foreign companies.  The issue is now before Congress again (click here) and has support across party lines. Americans First is strongly opposed to this re-authorization that puts U.S taxpayer money at risk only to benefit large corporations such as Boeing and Caterpillar who receive the lions share of the benefits.  Congress should learn from the lessons of Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac that using taxpayer money as loan guarantees is an unwise process.

This program is rife with fraud. Only days after passing the extension last September, a Memphis, Tn. based firm admitted to fraudulently obtaining a loan and paid a $3.5 million dollar fine.  Tell Congress NO to re-authorizing the Export-Import Bank.

Share
Read Less

Impact of EPA CO2 Reduction Mandate

According to the Congressional Budget Office, policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will also reduce employment. CLICK HERE to read the report. In particular, job losses in the industries that shrink would lower employment more than job gains in other…Read More

Share

According to the Congressional Budget Office, policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will also reduce employment. CLICK HERE to read the report. In particular, job losses in the industries that shrink would lower employment more than job gains in other industries would increase employment, thereby raising the overall unemployment rate. And if that isn’t harmful enough, according to the U.S. Labor Dept, the lowest 20% income earners will suffer the most. This segment spends over 23% of household income on energy. This nonsensical attempt to reduce CO2 emissions in the U.S. which accounts for less than 17% of worldwide emissions, will have little to no affect on global emissions all the while devastating American jobs and households.

Share
Read Less

Americans First Uncovers Illegal Non-Citizen Voters

Americans First recently undertook an extensive investigation and uncovered non-citizens who are registered to vote.  Our inquiry sampled only 2 of 120 counties in Kentucky.  After reviewing our findings, the Kentucky Attorney General office confirmed that several of those identified in our investigation were indeed non-citizens.   Click here for…Read More

Share

Americans First recently undertook an extensive investigation and uncovered non-citizens who are registered to vote.  Our inquiry sampled only 2 of 120 counties in Kentucky.  After reviewing our findings, the Kentucky Attorney General office confirmed that several of those identified in our investigation were indeed non-citizens.   Click here for more info Americans First Press Release re Illegally Registered Non-Citizen Voters

Share
Read Less

The Best Way To Protect American Lives

The Paris attack is merely the latest evidence of the insatiable thirst of Islamic radicals for Western blood. It is self-evident that keeping foreign radicals out of America is the most effective way to safeguard the lives of our citizens. And the surest way to keep them out is a…Read More

Share

The Paris attack is merely the latest evidence of the insatiable thirst of Islamic radicals for Western blood.

It is self-evident that keeping foreign radicals out of America is the most effective way to safeguard the lives of our citizens. And the surest way to keep them out is a moratorium on all immigration.

To critics who argue this would keep out harmless immigrants as well as terrorists, the alternatives pose too great a risk.

Proponents of admitting refugees claim that proper screening can identify potential terrorists. But there is no evidence screening will be effective, as FBI Director Comey recently admitted to Congress. Moreover, history proves “effective screening” is nothing more than an illusion. The 911 hijackers and Boston Marathon “bomb brothers” were all screened, yet still murdered our citizens. At least one of the Paris attackers was a Syrian admitted to Europe as a “refugee”.

Here in Kentucky, two Iraqi “refugees” were screened yet later convicted of a terrorist conspiracy. A moratorium would render moot flaws inherent in the screening process. An immigration moratorium would avoid the expense of weeding through the criminal history of foreigners, many of whom can present no reliable evidence of their background or even from where they come. It would also avoid discriminating among people from different countries and of different religions.

Reducing the terrorist threat may also involve military action. But foreign radicals are widely dispersed throughout Muslim countries, and have now penetrated Western Europe. No doubt many are already living among us. The FBI has confirmed it is currently investigating more than 1,000 ISIS operatives or sympathizers in the US, including active investigations in Kentucky. Keeping any more of them out of America with an immigration moratorium is more directly effective to protect us.

An immigration moratorium will also save taxpayer dollars since our government will no longer have to provide social services to the newly arrived. In 2012, 51% percent of households headed by an immigrant (legal or illegal) self-reported use of at least one welfare program. Resources that are currently spent screening and supporting immigrants can be redirected to help our own citizens and fight illegal immigration. Our federal government currently has to borrow billions just to feed and house our own people.

Then there is the financial scam of “church” affiliated refugee assistance groups who receive hundreds of millions of tax dollars to bring in refugees, siphon off money to pay exorbitant salaries to their executives, and then dump the refugees into our social safety net. These groups then repeat the process to get even more federal money. An immigration moratorium would put a stop to this fiasco.

An immigration moratorium will also have tangential benefits. Stopping immigration will reduce the oversupply of labor and thus naturally raise wages for working class Americans, particularly for workers at the lower end of the wage scale who compete against immigrants for jobs.

An immigration moratorium is not without precedent. One effectively existed from 1924 to 1965 during which our country had some of the largest gains in working class incomes and standards of living in its history.

As proponents of an immigration moratorium, we wish foreigners well and want them to thrive in their own countries. Private charities can assist the truly needy in their own countries. But America does not have the resources to support more immigrants.

To those who argue we have a moral obligation to take in refugees and immigrants– our government has a greater moral and legal obligation to protect our citizens. Our country has no obligation to endanger the lives of our people by admitting foreigners by the tens of thousands.

Refugee sympathizers and open-borders advocates have no right to salve their consciences by endangering Americans.

The primary responsibility of our government is to protect Americans from preventable harm.

There is little to no upside to American citizens from more immigration. And an immigration moratorium is the most effective step our government can immediately take to safeguard the lives of American citizens.

 

Share
Read Less

Trans Pacific Partnership

Our friends at the Public Citizen have written extensively about the current TPP trade agreement that Americans First opposes (click here) and have provided great details about the harm to American citizens this deal poses.

Share

Our friends at the Public Citizen have written extensively about the current TPP trade agreement that Americans First opposes (click here) and have provided great details about the harm to American citizens this deal poses.

Share
Read Less