Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon from A.F. Branco
On the Brink
Trump is saving healthcare from the brink of disaster caused by Obamacare, while the democrats continue to demonize and obstruct.
Cartoon by A.F Branco ©2017.
Bryan Fischer Host of “Focal Point” 
The surprisingly thin margin by which the House passed the first step in repealing Obamacare shows there are many Republicans on Capitol Hill who did not learn the lessons of the 2016 election. The House vote was 217-213, with 23 Republicans joining 193 Democrats in voting “no” — to keep Obamacare alive.
These Republicans are often described as “moderates,” but in truth they are usually just ambitious politicians hoping to protect their jobs. How else could you explain why so many Republicans who had promised to repeal Obamacare over the course of the last seven years did not vote to do so? Nervous Republicans are usually afraid of the spin from the Democrats and their media allies. But why?
“There is no way Republicans are going to be punished for doing what they said they were going to do,” said Alex Conant, a GOP consultant for Marco Rubio, speaking on Fox News on Friday.
Many of these squishy Capitol Hill Republicans pose a threat to other key aspects of President Donald Trump’s agenda. The building of a border wall, reform to refugee and immigration programs, and tax reform could all be watered down or blocked if enough Republicans go weak-kneed.
Here are three GOP congressional moderates that stand out:
Rep. Will Hurd (R-Texas)
Hurd is trying to lead the pack of Republicans opposed to Trump’s agenda. Democrats and media are beating a path to his door to assist him.
On Friday, Politico Magazine wrote a long piece on Hurd, portraying him as “the future of the GOP.” The one problem? He may not win his next election. Hurd represents the one district in Texas, out of 36, that is competitive between the two parties. And it voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016.
The district, in southwest Texas, is rural and includes 820 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border. Hurd doesn’t support Trump’s border wall, however, even though scores of illegal aliens pour across this very border every month.
Hurd, like most self-styled moderates hoping to win re-election, likes to nuzzle with the Democrats. Hurd and Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-Texas) famously took a bipartisan road trip back to Washington in mid-March. Not long after the trip, O’Rourke said he would run against Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas). Hurd let himself get used by Democrats — and it likely won’t be the last time.
Yet it was Hurd’s unflinching refusal to vote for repeal that will perhaps deflate his hopes for re-election. It’s hard to win re-election in a swing year if your base abandons you; turnout in the midterms is key.
Rep. Leonard Lance (R-N.J.)
Lance losing in 2018 wouldn’t be a great loss for the GOP. Lance has a dismal 64 rating from the American Conservative Union (ACU), and only a 68 (out of a possible 100) lifetime rating — not terrible for a Northeastern Republican, but not great either. Lance is known for voting regularly to keep government programs fat and happy. He is also a big supporter of unions, voting against repeal of regulations that raise costs and benefit unions.
The ACU got so fed up with Lance in 2012 that it endorsed his opponent in the Republican primary. Lance could be the most likely Republican House incumbent to draw a well-funded GOP challenger in 2018.
Lance has also been especially aggressive in dissing Trump.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)
Murkowski is a moderate Republican senator under pressure now that Obamacare has passed. It’s showing. Murkowski snapped at CNN reporter Manu Raju on Friday as he pressed her to specify whether she supported the repeal legislation passed in the House.
“Will you please be respectful?” Murkowski said.
Murkowski has a 54 rating from the ACU. As an incumbent, she famously lost her Republican primary in 2010 but won the general election as a write-in. She won her 2016 race more easily.
The pressure now is understandable. There are only 52 Republicans in the Senate, out of 100. The GOP can only lose two of them in repeal.
But Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) commands much more power and influence of his smaller, more manageable caucus in the Senate than House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) does in the House. If McConnell wants a repeal bill, he will likely get at least 50 votes for it.
Alex Pfeiffer | Reporter | 8:22 PM 05/04/2017
Anne Reed AFA Journal
What Did You Say? 
That’s a question few Americans would ever want to confront, yet many Americans living abroad are now having to answer. A little-known tax law, known as the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, has resulted in some foreign banks no longer serving Americans.
The law, signed in 2010 by President Barack Obama, was intended to make it harder for Americans to keep money overseas and out of the reach of the IRS. The primary target was rich Americans allegedly hiding money from tax collectors.
To find tax avoiders, foreign banks are conscripted by the U.S. government to serve as a compliance arm of the IRS. As a result, many of these stranded Americans have had to make the undoubtedly difficult decision to give up their citizenship just to continue to access their banking services.
Last year, 5,411 people renounced their U.S. citizenship, the largest number of published expatriates in one year, continuing a four-year streak of record-breaking numbers.
The Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act requires foreign financial institutions, such as banks, to identify and report to the United States most types of transactions for all American clients.
These new regulations are enforced by the threat of applying a 30 percent withholding tax on revenues generated in the United States by the noncompliant foreign financial institution. The reporting burden and withholding penalty faced by foreign banks trying to comply with the new regulations has made it easier for some Americans to renounce their citizenship than to find a bank that is willing to bear the bureaucratic costs of complying with the law.
These penalties are not just hitting the rich, and they are not just harming tax dodgers. The cost of complying with this law hits every American living overseas, not just those targeted by the original legislation.
Middle-class Americans living abroad who are fully compliant with U.S. tax laws are losing their mortgages, business bank accounts, and personal banking services. The Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act has unintentionally ruined some Americans’ livelihoods.
To add insult to injury, the cost of implementing this law may soon outpace the money that it brings in.
Furthermore, the direct cost to taxpayers does not include the compliance costs to financial institutions. A legal challenge to the law in 2015 estimated compliance costs alone were on track to total more than the 10-year revenue estimates. These regulatory costs can discourage international business, slow investment, and hamper the global economy.
The root of the problem is more than just compliance costs, it’s the U.S. government’s presumption that it is entitled to your money even if it’s earned in another country.
The U.S. is one of just a few countries that claims taxing rights on labor income earned abroad. Such a system of worldwide taxation hurts the American economy and makes it much harder for Americans to live abroad
Hopefully, relief from this law is around the corner. Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., recently released a bill that would repeal the onerous regulations.
Congress and the IRS should focus on the U.S. domestic tax system and leave Americans living abroad alone. The Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act is yet another example of continued government overreach. Hopefully, tax reform will bring with it relief for all Americans—including those living overseas.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Adam Michel