Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Biden administration’

Biden administration reopens Trump-era migrant children housing facility


Despite excoriating former President Donald Trump on the campaign trail over immigration policies affecting children separated from their families at the border, President Joe Biden appears to be adopting the same approach to the issue as his predecessor. According to the Washington Post, the Biden administration has officially reopened a housing facility for migrant children along the U.S.-Mexico border in Carrizo Springs, Texas, capable of holding hundreds of children.

“Dozens of migrant teens boarded vans Monday for the trip down a dusty road to a former man camp for oil field workers here, the first migrant child facility opened under the Biden administration,” the Post reported on Monday. “The emergency facility — a vestige of the Trump administration that was open for only a month in summer 2019 — is being reactivated to hold up to 700 children ages 13 to 17.”

The move has been in the works since earlier this month, CNN reported, characterized by an administration spokesperson to the outlet as a necessary evil as immigration officials grapple with an overflow of illegal crossings taking place at the country’s southern border.

“Fully remedying [Trump’s] actions will take time and require a full government approach,” a senior administration official said, urging patience.

Government officials similarly told the Post that the camp is needed to temporarily house children amid the coronavirus pandemic and the current surge of border crossings. Never mind the fact that Biden’s lax immigration policies instigated the border surge in the first place. In both cases, Biden administration officials are attempting to put a nice spin on the move. But what’s happening in this case is obvious, at least to CNN reporter Priscilla Alvarez, who acknowledged, “While administration officials have condemned Trump’s actions, they’re still relying on them as they sort out next steps.”

Despite the administration’s best efforts to cast the move in a positive light, progressive immigration lawyers and advocates are also calling it out for what it is.

“It’s unnecessary, it’s costly, and it goes absolutely against everything Biden promised he was going to do,” Linda Brandmiller, a San Antonio-based immigration lawyer who represents unaccompanied minors, told the Post. “It’s a step backward, is what it is. It’s a huge step backward.”

“When I read they were opening again, I cried,” said Rosey Abuabara, a San Antonio immigration activist. “I consoled myself with the fact that it was considered the Cadillac of [migrant child] centers, but I don’t have any hope that Biden is going to make it better.”

Mark Weber, a spokesman for the Department of Health and Human Services, the agency that handles migrant children, also made clear that the good care given to the children at such facilities has been consistent between administrations, though the Trump administration got a particularly bad rap from left-wing media.

That fact is especially pertinent given the Post’s coverage of the new development under Biden. In its report this week, the facility is described in delicate terms, a far cry from the “kids in cages” language used by the Post during Trump’s presidency, as noted by Fox News.

“Headlines from 2018 include, ‘The American tradition of caging children,’ and ‘The real reason we’re locking children in cages,'” Fox News recalled.

Kids in Cages: Biden Opens Gated Compound for Illegal Immigrant Children — Democrats and AOC Silent

It’s just like the good ol’ days under Barack Obama.

The Biden administration opened a gated migrant facility for illegal immigrant children this past weekend in Carrizo Springs, Texas. The camp will hold up to 700 illegal immigrant children. The facility was open for one month during the Trump years and then it was shut down. Democrats were very, very upset about caged kids during Trump’s tenure. They completely ignored it under Obama.

The need to hold illegal alien children in compounds is the direct result of reversing President Trump’s highly successful border policies, which they described as “hardline.” And now, here we are again.

USA Today has more on the facility.

The facility in Carrizo Springs, Texas, will house up to 700 migrant children within the next two weeks, according to a statement Tuesday from the Office of Refugee Resettlement, the agency within the Department of Health and Human Services that is responsible for migrant children. The temporary Influx Care Facility will be used for children ages 13 and older who have been medically cleared of COVID-19, the statement said.

The move came after President Joe Biden signed a raft of executive orders aimed at unwinding the Trump administration’s hardline immigration policies, including establishing a task force to reunify children separated from their parents or guardians at the border under former President Donald Trump’s “zero tolerance” policy.

Advertisement – story continues below

As he seeks to fulfill his campaign promise to swiftly undo Trump’s immigration actions, Biden is facing hurdles because of the rise in migrant apprehensions at the Southwest border and reduced capacity at facilities over COVID-19 concerns.

Democrats lied over and over about the kids in cages meme during the Trump years.
Now they’ll just ignore it.

More…

Dummy AOC took the lie to new heights.

It’s not an issue when Democrats are in charge.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Biden’s HHS nominee Xavier Becerra is ‘worse-case scenario’ for people of faith, pro-life groups warn


Reported By Ryan Foley, Christian Post Reporter 

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra speaks outside the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., November 12, 2019. SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images

Republican senators and pro-life groups have raised concerns about President Joe Biden’s pick for Health and Human Services secretary, Xavier Becerra, who they warn has a record of using his power to go after his enemies, including people of faith and pro-lifers.

Over 60 pro-life advocates sent a letter to ranking members of the U.S. Senate HELP and Finance Committees urging them to reject Becerra, calling him an “enemy to every pro-life policy and law” who “has demonstrated complete disregard for the religious and moral convictions of those opposed to the brutal act of abortion.”

The letter was spearheaded by the pro-life lobbying group Susan B. Anthony List and signed by leaders such as Southern Baptist Convention Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission President Russell Moore, Ethics and Public Policy Center President Ryan Anderson and the heads of other pro-life organizations.

“On the issue of abortion, Xavier Becerra has a decades-old track record of siding with the abortion lobby whenever possible and using the power of whatever office he is in to try and force others to share his enthusiastic support of abortion up until the moment of birth,” said Kristan Hawkins, president of the pro-life campus organization Students for Life of America.

Hawkins, who signed the letter, moderated a panel last Wednesday that featured Sens. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., Steve Daines, R-Mont., and SBA List President Marjorie Dannenfelser. Hawkins maintained that the confirmation of Becerra to the position of secretary of HHS was something that “every single pro-lifer should be concerned about.”

Becerra, who formerly served as a congressman in the U.S. House from California, currently serves as the state’s attorney general and must be confirmed by the Senate before he can serve as Biden’s HHS secretary. Hawkins said that as secretary of HHS, Becerra would oversee “over $87 billion of our taxpayer funds and discretionary budget authority and over $1.2 trillion in mandatory funding.” 

Dannenfelser added that when “every other state that did something bold” by passing pro-life measures, “he would lead all the other AGs in trying to shut down every pro-life measure that every other state was doing.” She also recalled how Becerra prosecuted David Daleiden, the pro-life activist journalist who exposed Planned Parenthood’s selling of aborted baby body parts.

“When he was told just very recently … by the Trump administration that we’ll take $200 million away of Medicaid funding unless you comply with the Weldon Amendment that would require you to obey the consciences of Californians and … not force health care workers and taxpayers to pay for abortion, he (Becerra) said I’d rather give up that funding … for California than to enforce the Weldon Amendment,” she continued.

“He was the one who was spearheading all of the amicus briefs to the … courts to make sure that during COVID, that there could continue to be mail-order abortions, chemical abortions,” Dannenfelser added.

Hawkins expressed disgust that Becerra “was uniting 20 other attorney generals across the country to sue the FDA to dispense the abortion pills without a doctor ever seeing a woman, without a woman ever getting a blood test because that was his number one priority amidst  the COVID pandemic.” 

Cotton, who previously served in the House with Becerra, said he “knew what a far-left radical he was,” but “only once he became California’s top law enforcement officer did he have the power to act unilaterally on those radical ideas.”

“The common thread of Xavier Becerra’s tenure as attorney general of California is that he abuses the law to target his enemies, which curiously enough always seem to be people of faith and pro-lifers and other social conservatives. If he’s done it with the power he has as attorney general of California, of course he will do it with the vastly greater power he would have as the Secretary for Health and Human Services,” Cotton warned.

While “any nominee to HHS by this president is going to be bad,” according to Dannenfelser, Becerra is the “worst-case scenario.”

“I do think it’s important to put a marker down and say there is some line that we must draw, that an advocate, an extreme abortion absolutist advocate as the head of HHS, is a bridge too far even for an administration like this. … We choose this nominee to say … no and send a message when the Senate is so close, the House is so close, that whoever is heading HHS needs to be closer to those margins than this person is,” she said.

Cotton agreed with Dannenfelser that “we’re not going to get a great secretary of Health and Human Services out of Joe Biden.” He predicted that if efforts to stop Becerra’s confirmation to the post are successful, Biden’s subsequent nominee “will have watched what happened to Xavier Becerra though and recognize that if he crosses these far-left radical lines, that he is apt to face political blowback as well.”

Much of the panel’s conversation focused on outlining a strategy that pro-life Americans can use to persuade elected officials to oppose Becerra’s confirmation in light of the balance of power in Washington.

Democrats hold a narrow 50-50 majority in the Senate, with Vice President Kamala Harris serving as the tie-breaking vote. Any effort to block Becerra’s confirmation would require the support of all 50 Senate Republicans and at least one Senate Democrat.

According to Cotton, “Some Democrats may be troubled by some of the most extreme steps he’s taken or the most extreme ideas of the far-left when it comes to advocating for abortion, but there’s a whole host of reasons to oppose Xavier Becerra in addition to his extreme views on abortion.”

He cited Becerra’s lack of experience in the health care industry as well as his support for Medicare for All as reasons that might lead some of the more moderate Democrats in the Senate to oppose his confirmation.

“So there are ample grounds to oppose Xavier Becerra’s nomination. We don’t need 51 senators to all agree on why they say no; we just need 51 senators to say no,” Cotton said.

Dannenfelser mentioned pro-life Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., as the most important senator that pro-lifers should contact and urge him to oppose Becerra’s confirmation. She also highlighted the importance of contacting Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, pro-abortion Republicans who might be more disposed to support Becerra’s confirmation than the rest of their Republican colleagues.

She also listed Sens. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., and Jon Tester, D-Mont., as lawmakers who pro-lifers should try to convince to vote against Becerra’s confirmation. Tester represents a state that routinely votes Republican in presidential elections, while Sinema represents a swing state that narrowly voted Democratic in the 2020 presidential election.

Daines, the other senator on the panel, suggested that Sen. Bob Casey, R-Pa., could be receptive to arguments against Becerra because “he has sided with us in the past on some critical pro-life votes.”

Casey serves on the Senate Finance Committee, which, owing to the close margin in the Senate, has an equal number of Democrats and Republicans. Should Casey vote with all Republicans to oppose Becerra’s confirmation, that would be enough to prevent his nomination from going to the full Senate.

Becerra will appear before the Senate Committee on Health, Labor, Education and Pensions on Tuesday and an additional hearing will take place in the Senate Finance Committee on Wednesday. While Casey also serves on the Senate Committee on Health, Labor, Education and Pensions, so do Murkowski and Collins, the two Republicans most likely to support his confirmation.

During the Trump administration, a small number of former president’s cabinet nominees were opposed by all members of the opposing political party and at least one member of his own party. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos was opposed by all 48 Senate Democrats as well as Collins and Murkowski.

DeVos was confirmed to the position, but Vice President Mike Pence had to cast the tie-breaking vote. Trump’s first nominee to serve as director of the Office of Management and Budget, Mick Mulvaney, was opposed by all 48 Democrats and Collins.

So far, Biden’s cabinet nominees have been confirmed with varying degrees of bipartisan support. With several confirmation votes pending, the cabinet member who received the slimmest margin of support was Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, who was supported by all 50 Senate Democrats and six Senate Republicans.

With Becerra’s confirmation hearings expected to take place this week, Ethics and Public Policy Center President Ryan T. Anderson issued a statement warning about the consequences of Becerra’s confirmation: “Xavier Becerra is simply unqualified to be Secretary of HHS. He has no relevant medical expertise, rendering him particularly unsuited to assume this position amid a pandemic.

“Indeed, his only health care qualifications seem to be his attacks on pro-life medicine, his persecution of the Little Sisters of the Poor, and his defense of an unlawful California abortion mandate. President Biden promised to heal and unify the country, but his nomination of an ideological culture warrior like Becerra will only drive us further apart,” he added.

EPPC Senior Fellow Roger Severino, who previously headed the HHS Office for Civil Rights  during the Trump administration, recalled, “When I was head of Civil Rights at HHS, I twice held Becerra in violation of laws protecting conscience in health care resulting in a $200 million disallowance of HHS funds to California.”

He called the idea of Becerra leading the HHS “the very agency that investigated him and found he broke the law” an “astounding conflict of interest.”

Don’t say ‘aliens’: Biden admin instructs officials to use ‘inclusive language’ to describe people in the country illegally


The Biden administration has instructed Department of Homeland Security officials to use more “inclusive language” to describe people residing in the country illegally, such as dropping the word “alien” and replacing it with “noncitizen,” according to a memo recently issued by immigration authorities.

The changes are reportedly part of an effort by the Biden administration to portray itself as more welcoming on immigration than the previous administration under President Trump, which would use terms such as “illegal aliens” to describe people who bypassed U.S. laws and security perimeters to enter and remain in the country.

According to Axios, an email sent Tuesday to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services officials described how the agency’s acting director, Tracy Renaud, had signed a memo encouraging “more inclusive language in the agency’s outreach efforts, internal documents and in overall communication with stakeholders, partners and the general public.”

The memo, obtained by BuzzFeed News, instructed officials to stop referring to people as “illegal alien,” “alien,” or “undocumented alien” in internal and external communications, but instead use the terms “noncitizen,” “undocumented noncitizen,” or “undocumented individual.”

It also urged USCIS officials to discontinue their use of the term “assimilation” in exchange for “integration” and begin referring to those who apply for benefits like green cards as “customers,” BuzzFeed reported. USCIS is a subsidiary agency which operates within the DHS.

Interestingly, besides planned use in the agency’s internal communications and any communications it has with the public, the wording changes are not set to affect forms or operational documents where using the previous terminology is deemed most appropriate. That fact indicates the changes are nothing more than a messaging makeover. Though, by continuing to soften language associated with illegal immigration, the administration undoubtedly hopes to move public opinion on the matter toward greater acceptance of illegal entry and favor for open borders.

The words being replaced in the agency’s messaging are in fact the most accurate technical terms to describe issues at hand. Even BuzzFeed acknowledges that the term “alien” is routinely found within U.S. Code and is “regularly referenced in the immigration system and in court rulings to describe everyone who is not a US citizen.”

Speaking with Axios, Robert Law, a former Trump administration official who now works at the Center for Immigration Studies, noted, “By statute, ‘alien’ literally means a person not a U.S. citizen or national.”

“That is not offensive, and neither is ‘assimilation,'” he said.

Former White House interpreter says Biden administration canceled, humiliated her after she was outed as a Trump supporter


Heather Mewshaw, a former White House sign language interpreter who served in both the Trump and Biden administrations, says the Biden administration humiliated and canceled her after reports emerged that she is a Trump supporter who formerly translated speeches for conservative social media groups.

Mewshaw, a 41-year-old married mom of four from Glen Burnie, Maryland, says she hasn’t been offered a return engagement at the White House after Time published an “exposé” on her personal politics titled “Joe Biden’s Sign Language Interpreter Has Ties to Far Right,” according to a Monday report from the New York Post.

Mewshaw said that she has been the subject of harassment and threats following the release of the Time report, prompting her to fear for her own and her family’s safety. The Post reported that the harassment is because she provided “American Sign Language translation for the Hands of Liberty Facebook group and its defunct predecessor, Right Side ASL.”

“Those videos include one featuring former Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani that’s titled ‘What Really Happened on January 6th?’ — the day of the deadly storming of the U.S. Capitol by Trump supporters — and another, since removed, that features controversial Dr. Stella Immanuel, who has prompted treating COVID-19 with hydroxychloroquine, which the FDA has banned for that purpose,” the Post said.

In a statement to the outlet, Mewshaw said, “The goal of my activity — at the White House or with Hands of Liberty — is that it’s all about access. The thing is, I was cancelled and humiliated publicly and it was unjust and unfair.”

Mewshaw insisted that while she is a Trump supporter, she simply translates to provide information access for deaf people, and said that her critics “don’t want this content to be interpreted because they don’t believe in it.”

“Deaf people just want a chance to decide for themselves what information is out there,” she said according to the outlet.

A spokesperson for the Biden White House declined to comment on the reports and referred the Post to a previous statement that said, “The President and this administration have made a commitment to having an ASL interpreter at every press briefing and are working to follow through on that commitment every single day.”

A portion of Mewshaw’s full statement says:

My role as a Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf (RID) certified American Sign Language (ASL) interpreter is to facilitate communication between Deaf and non-signing parties in an effective, accurate and impartial way. The Deaf community, along with their allies, continue to fight for the right to have equal access to information that the general public enjoys without hardship.

Regarding my interpreting at The White House. I worked there as an independent contractor. I interpreted five (5) briefings for The Trump Administration in November and December 2020. On January 25, 2021, I interpreted for The Biden Administration at a press briefing. Press Secretary Jen Psaki announced that all future daily White House press briefings would have an ASL interpreter and she even introduced me to the world. That announcement is a huge advancement for the rights of the Deaf community and is to be commended. I was honored to be the interpreter that day.

To my surprise, the remarkable win of having an ASL interpreter at every White House press briefing has been overshadowed, by a few who, without evidence or merit, chose to cast aspersions against my ability to be objective and impartial because of my involvement in a conservative social media group. These unfounded claims about me were picked up by the media and numerous articles were written about this erroneous conclusion.

As a child of Deaf parents, abbreviated as CODA in the Deaf community (child of a Deaf adult), I have spent my whole life participating in the fight for the rights of Deaf people to have access to the same information as hearing people. In fact, my first language was ASL as it was my primary form of communication with my parents. As a CODA, I am in-between two worlds, the Deaf and the hearing, and I am in a unique position to unite those two worlds together.

Many videos on social media are not interpreted nor captioned. The ability for anyone to upload a video from their devices instantly brings an increased access challenge in this digital age. Groups formed on social media to interpret this video content for the Deaf community, however conservative content was generally not interpreted. Therefore, Michael Thompson, who is Deaf, created Hands of Liberty (HOL), formerly known as Right Side ASL, to fill the gap. HOL is an all-volunteer group, providing ASL access to videos requested by the Deaf community for free. The group has received over 2,000 video requests to date, since its inception in June 2020. The videos requested are of a variety of topics including but not limited to; speeches from the Presidential candidates, White House press briefings, Congressional hearings, television news segments and viral content. These interpreted videos support the Deaf community’s right to participate in all aspects of society and the right to informed choice. For me personally, my interpreting of a video requested through HOL does not necessarily equal an endorsement of the content of that video.

The mostly negative media coverage of me in recent weeks has been a disservice to the ASL interpreting profession. The message being conveyed is that ASL interpreters must have a certain set of beliefs or values that align completely with the consumers. We must remember that an ASL interpreter is relaying the message of another person and not their own. ASL interpreters are to be respected as objective professionals, irrespective of their own belief systems. There are examples of a double standard when it comes to ASL interpreters who openly identify as liberal activists working at events for conservative figureheads/politicians. These ASL interpreters are lauded by the media and their peers for having the ability to be objective and impartial. However, despite my undisputed professional work on January 25, 2021, I have been targeted and defamed by some in the Deaf community and the media because I worked as a Deaf advocate with HOL.

My work as an ASL interpreter has been, is and always will be effective, accurate and impartial. That is a core tenant of my certifications with the RID. My past work, my credentials, my unvarnished reputation, and 21 years of working as an RID certified ASL interpreter speaks for itself.

CBO: Biden’s $15 Minimum Wage Would Result in a Loss of 1.4 Million Jobs


Reported By Grant Atkinson, The Western Journal | Published February 8, 2021

President Joe Biden has already cost America plenty of jobs with his radical climate policies. Now, his proposal to raise the minimum wage is set to add even more job losses. According to the Washington Examiner, a Congressional Budget Office report found that increasing the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour would cause a net loss of 1.4 million jobs in just four years.

“Higher wages would increase the cost to employers of producing goods and services,” the report said.

“Employers would pass some of those increased costs on to consumers in the form of higher prices, and those higher prices, in turn, would lead consumers to purchase fewer goods and services. Employers would consequently produce fewer goods and services, and as a result, they would tend to reduce their employment of workers at all wage levels.”

One of the reasons Democrats have been pushing for a higher minimum wage is because they argue that the current federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour is not enough to live off of.

There are three problems with applying this argument in order to raise the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour.

First, most minimum wage jobs were not meant to be full-time careers. On the contrary, their purpose was often to create opportunities for younger people to get into the workforce before they start a full-time career.My parents, myself and many of my friends started minimum wage jobs in our teenage years in order to get work experience. While working those jobs, I received an education in an effort to one day start a full-time career.

Some people do attempt to live off of minimum wage jobs, which is fine. But the idea that minimum wage jobs must be enough to comfortably live off of was never a rule, but rather a talking point for the left.

Second, increasing the minimum wage to $15 will cost 1.4 million jobs. Part of the reason for that is the fact that $15 is almost double the current amount.

If the Biden administration were to propose increasing the minimum wage to $9 or $10, that would be more practical. Yet even at the current rate, it’s likely that those 1.4 million people would rather make $7.25 an hour than none at all.

Lastly, the report said that raising the minimum wage would encourage companies to begin “accelerating investments in automation and machine labor.” The premise here is pretty simple. If the minimum wage gets too high, it will eventually be cheaper for companies to invest in machines that can do everyday tasks that humans once did. The fast-food industry, one of the main minimum wage job providers, has already begun this process with electronic ordering kiosks that require no interaction with employees.

Again, this results in minimum wage employees losing more jobs. In an attempt to try and help minimum wage workers, Biden’s policy would instead send many to unemployment lines.

In addition to the job losses, raising the minimum wage to $15 would cost the U.S. a whole lot of money.

“The incremental wage hike would also contribute an additional $54 billion to the federal deficit because of anticipated increases in the costs of goods and services and increased spending on unemployment insurance,” the Washington Examiner said.

Instead of addressing that problem, progressive Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders decided to just dismiss it altogether.

“I find it hard to understand how the CBO concluded that raising the minimum wage would increase the deficit by $54 billion,” Sanders said in a statement.

“Two years ago, CBO concluded that a $15 minimum wage would increase the deficit by less than $1 million over ten years.”

Never mind the fact that the CBO is non-partisan or that Sanders has no counter-evidence. He just doesn’t believe it. In fact, he went so far as to argue that the CBO’s report was a win for Democrats because it showed evidence that they could raise the minimum wage via budget reconciliation rules.

 

“The CBO has demonstrated that increasing the minimum wage would have a direct and substantial impact on the federal budget,” he tweeted.

“What that means is that we can clearly raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour under the rules of budget reconciliation.”

It apparently does not matter to him that the direct impact is a negative one, only that it gives progressives a right to pass the measure using budget reconciliation. For people that claim to care so much about others’ well-being, the left is showing a blatant disregard for the livelihoods of 1.4 million Americans.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: