What’s interesting in the news today?
1. Let the bailouts begin! More illegal changes to ObamaCare. And more money out of the taxpayers pockets.
From TheChicagoTribune “The Obama administration has quietly adjusted key provisions of its signature healthcare law to potentially make billions of additional taxpayer dollars available to the insurance industry if companies providing coverage through the Affordable Care Act lose money.
The move was buried in hundreds of pages of new regulations issued late last week. It comes as part of an intensive administration effort to hold down premium increases for next year, a top priority for the White House as the rates will be announced ahead of this fall’s congressional elections.”
“On Capitol Hill, Republicans on the Senate Budget Committee began circulating a memo on the issue and urging colleagues to fight what they are calling “another end-run around Congress.”
Obama administration officials said the new regulations would not put taxpayers at risk. “We are confident this three-year program will not create a shortfall,” Health and Human Services spokeswoman Erin Shields Britt said in a statement. “However, we want to be clear that in the highly unlikely event of a shortfall, HHS will use appropriations as available to fill it.”
Sure. I mean all their numbers have been dead on so far, right? 🙄
______________________________________________
2. Meanwhile, the investigations into state exchange failures begins.
From OregonLive “The federal criminal investigation of Oregon’s health insurance exchange took a step into public view Tuesday when the U.S. Attorney’s office issued broad subpoenas seeking information from Cover Oregon and the Oregon Health Authority.
While the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s interest in the exchange debacle had been previously reported, the legal demands dated May 13 indicate things may have moved beyond a preliminary inquiry to a full-blown investigation.
The investigation, led by federal prosecutors and the FBI, is seeking documents, memos, and emails between the two state entities that oversaw the botched health exchange with U.S. authorities in charge of dispensing federal money for the project.
Oregon has spent $250 million and three years on an ambitious IT project that failed to produce a fully functional exchange. Instead, what was produced was bug-ridden and largely unfinished, documents show.”
______________________________________________
3. I’m shocked. It appears that proponents of expanding immigration laws haven’t been honest about the need.
From NationalReview “The idea that we need to allow in more workers with science, technology, engineering, and math (“STEM”) background is an article of faith among American business and political elite.
But in a new report, my Center for Immigration Studies colleague Karen Zeigler and I analyze the latest government data and find what other researchers have found: The country has well more than twice as many workers with STEM degrees as there are STEM jobs. Also consistent with other research, we find only modest levels of wage growth for such workers for more than a decade. Both employment and wage data indicate that such workers are not in short supply.
Reports by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI), the RAND Corporation, the Urban Institute, and the National Research Council have all found no evidence that STEM workers are in short supply. PBS even published an opinion piece based on the EPI study entitled, “The Bogus High-Tech Worker Shortage: How Guest Workers Lower U.S. Wages.” This is PBS, mind you, which is as likely to publish something skeptical of immigration as it is to publish something skeptical of taxpayer subsidies for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
RAND’s analysis looked backward in time and found, “Despite recurring concerns about potential shortages of STEM personnel . . . we did not find evidence that such shortages have existed at least since 1990, nor that they are on the horizon.”
It’s unnecessary and it will make things harder for unemployed Americans.
______________________________________________
4. The National Association for the Abortion of Colored People?
FromLifeNews “A pro-life legal group is having to go to court to help the state of Arizona protect its law it passed to ban race-based abortions. Here’s the ironic rub: the NAACP filed a lawsuit against the bill, which stops abortions done specifically if the baby is African-American (or any other specific race or gender).
It makes one wonder if the NAACP, which, for years has held a pro-abortion position and which recently won a court order to silence a black pro-life who was writing at LifeNews to expose it’s abortion advocacy, should be called the National Association for the Abortion of Colored People.
Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys filed a friend-of-the-court brief Monday with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit urging it to reject the NAACP’s lawsuit against an Arizona bill that prohibits sex- and race-based abortions.”
“A district court dismissed the lawsuit in October of last year, but American Civil Liberties Union attorneys representing the Maricopa County branch of the NAACP and the National Asian-Pacific American Women’s Forum appealed that decision.”
______________________________________________
5. I’m sure it was just a slip of the tongue, right?
From TheWashingtonExaminer “A State Department official struggled to discuss the religious import of Boko Haram’s ideology, despite the group’s repeated attacks on Christians, a rhetorical hesitancy that created tension during a rather bipartisan House hearing on the threat from the terrorist group.
Rep. Jeff Duncan, R-S.C., asked whether Boko Haram specifically targets Christians.
“I wish there was such discrimination in Boko Haram attacks,” State Department undersecretary Sarah Sewall replied during a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing. “Boko Haram attacks everyone who is Nigerian. Boko Haram is an equal-opportunity threat for all Nigerian citizens.”
That answer irritated Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., who chairs the subcommittee panel on global human rights. “You said you wish they would differentiate or discriminate — they were so discriminating. Yes, they’ll hit other Nigerians, they’ll hit other westerners, but Christians are their main target,” he countered.”
______________________________________________