Tag Archives: ethics

An Expanded Child Tax Credit?

Posted on by
Reply

The current law providing for a child tax credit requires those children to have Social Security Numbers in order for their parents to be able to claim the credit.

Saira Soto, a Deputy Executive Director for Children’s Defense Fund California, wants immigrant children who lack Social Security numbers also to qualify their parents for the credit.

In order to ensure a fair and just system that helps grow and boost our economy, and one that supports our children, immigrant families must be included.

Of course, immigrant families already are included in the present form of the child tax credit. It’s illegal alien families and non-citizen families in our nation legally who are not.

Soto knows this full well; her demand is an illustration of the dishonesty of the Left’s Free Stuff for Everyone movement.

Illegal Voting

Posted on by
Reply

An Illinois Progressive-Democrat wants to legalize it. Celina Villanueva (D-Chicago) is sponsoring a bill that would let illegal immigrants vote in school board elections.

The proposal could require the State Board of Education to create an affidavit helping non-citizens register for school board elections.
“For too long, these families have been systematically excluded from participating in our democracy even at the most basic level,” Villanueva said.

There are two key items here. One is that non-citizens are not part of our democracy, they are guests here, and so it’s entirely correct that they should have no say in how we citizens choose to govern ourselves. If they wish to become citizens, we should welcome them with open arms.

The other key is that illegal immigrants aren’t even here legally; they’re not guests, they’re interlopers.

That should be obvious even to a Progressive-Democrat.

Americans

Posted on by
Reply

Silverton, CO, mayor, Shane Fuhrman tried to do away with the practice of saying the Pledge of Allegiance at town Trustee meetings. His excuse was his claimed need to duck away from unspecified “direct and indirect threats” and supposedly inappropriate comments he heard “in and out of public meetings” and because of his vague and undefined “general divisiveness and issues created in our community.”

A Trustee demurred, and so did town attendees at the meeting. They stood and recited the Pledge.

These are some of the average Americans for whom the Left and its Progressive-Democratic Party have such contempt.

Responsibility

Posted on by
Reply

Recall that Texas’ Progressive-Democrats scuttled out of the end of Texas’ last legislative session, and that in response to their misbehavior, Governor Greg Abbott said he’d veto the part of Texas’ budget appropriations that funded the legislature. Last Friday, Abbott did precisely that.

Texans don’t run from a legislative fight, and they don’t walk away from unfinished business. Funding should not be provided for those who quit their job early, leaving their state with unfinished business and exposing taxpayers to higher costs for an additional legislative session. I therefore object to and disapprove of these appropriations.

Now hear the squalling by Texas’ Progressive-Democrat legislators.

…the budget article also funds rank-and-file staffers such as clerical and maintenance workers

Fox News cites them as saying. And House Democratic Caucus Chair Chris Turner:

Texas has a governor, not a dictator.

Never mind that it’s the minority Progressive-Democrats who are openly attacking democracy, attempting to impose their own diktats, by refusing to allow our State’s democratically elected legislature carry out its democratic duty by voting on a bill those Progressive-Democrats don’t like. Since they fear (probably accurately), they’d lose the vote, they moved to block the vote altogether. How dictatorial is that?

Regarding the rank-and-file staffers such as clerical and maintenance workers about whom those Progressive-Democrats so piously pretend to care, it’s those Progressive-Democrats’ misbehavior that has put the rank-and-file at risk. If they had allowed democracy to proceed, there would have been no need for Abbott to take such action.

The Progressive-Democrats know this full well.

Texas’ Progressive-Democrats are loudly—and offensively, I say—crying their crocodile tears.

An Illegal Offering?

Posted on by
Reply

The Biden administration intends to lease some Federal lands in the waters roughly between Long Island and New Jersey, ostensibly to build a wind farm there.

The problem with that intent is this:

The proposed “competitive lease sale”…the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) [an arm of the Interior Department] is seeking feedback on several mandates tied to the sale, including the requirement “to create good-paying union jobs and engage with all stakeholders and ocean users[.]”
The “announcement of new proposed lease stipulations puts a priority on creating and sustaining good-paying union jobs….”

And there’s the problem. In addition to President Joe Biden’s (D) administration picking and choosing winners and losers in this enterprise—unethical at best, and completely out of bounds for the government of a free nation—the openly stated requirement for union jobs is illegal to the point of unconstitutional.

Picking winners and losers: the lease sale is, by design, not at all a competitive offering. Open shop companies—companies that are not unionized—are deliberately excluded from even bidding on the contract. That also creates artificially inflated costs to us taxpayers for any of these leases through that lack of competition and through the unions getting a free hand to raise their wage demands.

Illegal, unconstitutional: those non-union companies are denied their statutory rights to competitively bid at all for these Federal contracts. Beyond that, those non-union companies are denied equal protection under the 14th Amendment by being denied an opportunity to compete at all, much less on an equal footing, for participation in the contracts.

All non-union employees of those companies, individually and severally, are denied their equal protection under the 14th Amendment by being denied any opportunity to earn a paycheck under those contracts solely on the basis of their not being union members.