Pew Study: Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak

/in , , , /by

D’Vera Cohn, Paul Taylor, Mark Hugo Lopez, Catherine A. Gallagher, Kim Parker and Kevin T. Maass from Pew Research released their study of gun homicide rates in the U.S. since 1993.

According to the research team, “Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.”

U.S. Firearm Deaths

  • In 2010, there were 3.6 gun homicides per 100,000 people, compared with 7.0 in 1993, according to CDC data.
  • In 2010, CDC data counted 11,078 gun homicide deaths, compared with 18,253 in 1993.5
  • Men and boys make up the vast majority (84% in 2010) of gun homicide victims. The firearm homicide rate also is more than five times as high for males of all ages (6.2 deaths per 100,000 people) as it is for females (1.1 deaths per 100,000 people).
  • By age group, 69% of gun homicide victims in 2010 were ages 18 to 40, an age range that was 31% of the population that year. Gun homicide rates also are highest for adults ages 18 to 24 and 25 to 40.
  • A disproportionate share of gun homicide victims are black (55% in 2010, compared with the 13% black share of the population). Whites were 25% of victims but 65% of the population in 2010. Hispanics were 17% of victims and 16% of the population in 2010.
  • The firearm suicide rate (6.3 per 100,000 people) is higher than the firearm homicide rate and has come down less sharply. The number of gun suicide deaths (19,392 in 2010) outnumbered gun homicides, as has been true since at least 1981.

U.S. Firearm Crime Victimization

  • In 2011, the NCVS estimated there were 181.5 gun crime victimizations for non-fatal violent crime (aggravated assault, robbery and sex crimes) per 100,000 Americans ages 12 and older, compared with 725.3 in 1993.
  • In terms of numbers, the NCVS estimated there were about 1.5 million non-fatal gun crime victimizations in 1993 among U.S. residents ages 12 and older, compared with 467,000 in 2011.

U.S. Other Non-fatal Crime

  • The victimization rate for all non-fatal violent crime among those ages 12 and older—simple and aggravated assaults, robberies and sex crimes, with or without firearms—dropped 53% from 1993 to 2000, and 49% from 2000 to 2010. It rose 17% from 2010 to 2011.
  • Although not the topic of this report, the rate of property crimes—burglary, motor vehicle theft and theft—also declined from 1993 to 2011, by 61%. The rate for these types of crimes was 351.8 per 100,000 people ages 12 and older in 1993, 190.4 in 2000 and 138.7 in 2011.

Context

  • The number of firearms available for sale to or possessed by U.S. civilians (about 310 million in 2009, according to the Congressional Research Service) has grown in recent years, and the 2009 per capita rate of one person per gun had roughly doubled since 1968. It is not clear, though, how many U.S. households own guns or whether that share has changed over time.
  • Crime stories accounted for 17% of the total time devoted to news on local television broadcasts in 2012, compared with 29% in 2005, according to Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism. Crime trails only traffic and weather as the most common type of story on these newscasts.

Rubio: Thomas Perez would be a disastrous Labor Secretary

/in , , , /by

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) issued the following statement announcing his opposition to the nomination of Assistant U.S. Attorney General Thomas Perez to be the next U.S. Secretary of Labor:

“After carefully reviewing Thomas Perez’s, record, views and conduct during his confirmation process, it is clear to me he should not be confirmed to be America’s next Secretary of Labor.  For a Cabinet position that oversees the country’s workforce, our nation deserves a proven administrator who is committed to maximizing opportunities for the American worker, not a liberal activist who has pushed the boundaries of public office to advance his agenda.

“Before joining the Obama Administration, Mr. Perez built a long record as a committed liberal activist and politician, particularly in the areas of labor and immigration.  It was that record that gave many senators pause over his initial nomination to be Assistant U.S. Attorney General.  Those who voted against his confirmation then feared that he lacked the capacity to put his political agenda aside when he became a federal official tasked with enforcing the law.  Unfortunately, his record as Assistant U.S. Attorney General confirmed those fears.

“During his tenure at the Justice Department, Mr. Perez has been associated with some of the Department’s most controversial decisions and appears to have engaged in selective and politically motivated applications of the law.  The Department of Justice’s own Inspector General recently concluded that the division led by Mr. Perez continues to suffer from ‘polarization and mistrust.’

“As the son of immigrants, Mr. Perez rose from modest beginnings to the highest levels of government through his obviously sharp intellect and impressive work ethic.  Many Americans, especially those of us of Hispanic descent, celebrate his success and his personal story as yet another example of all that’s possible in America no matter where you or your family came from.  Unfortunately, intellect and work ethic are not sufficient qualifications for a cabinet secretary.

“Mr. Perez’s far left views and troubling record at the Justice Department simply do not qualify him to lead the Labor Department, and I will strongly oppose his confirmation.”

Allen West Joins Call For Benghazi Select Committee

/in , , , , /by

US News and World Report reports:

Over the past few months, 135 Republican lawmakers, or “a majority of the majority,” have said a select committee is needed to further investigate the 9/11 attacks on Benghazi, Libya.

Now, that committee has the support of a very vocal former lawmaker, too. Tea partier Allen West, who represented Florida in Congress before he narrowly lost his seat to a Democratic challenger last November, sent a letter Thursday night to Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Va., who introduced legislation for a select committee. In the letter, shared with Whispers, West writes:

“As a former Member of Congress who also served in uniform, I know how important it is that we learn the truth about why military support was never sent to the Americans under fire at the U.S. annex in Benghazi last September …. We owe it to the families of the four victims and the survivors — some of whom sustained serious injuries and were still at Walter Reed hospital months after the attack — to fully investigate this terrorist attack and the Obama Administration’s questionable response in the days and weeks that followed.”

House committees released an “interim progress report” on Benghazi last Wednesday, but a number of Republican lawmakers said the report raised more questions than gave answers – and some even alleged a government cover-up.

The cost of amnesty

/in , , , , , , , /by

A new study by the Heritage Foundation on the cost of amnesty will reveal the following:

The immigration debate is about to get a lot more concrete.

Lawmakers need to be honest about the cost of their proposed immigration plans—and a new study due out today from The Heritage Foundation calculates the cost to taxpayers of granting amnesty to unlawful immigrants.

Yesterday on ABC’s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos,” Heritage President Jim DeMint said:

The study you’ll see from Heritage this week presents the staggering costs of another amnesty in our country and the detrimental effects, long-term, that that will have. There’s no reason we can’t begin to fix our immigration system so that we won’t make this problem worse. But the bill that’s being presented is unfair to those who came here legally; it’ll cost Americans trillions of dollars; it’ll make our unlawful immigration system worse.

Watch Jim DeMint talk about the cost of amnesty on “This Week”

DeMint previewed the study, conducted by Heritage senior research fellow in domestic policy Robert Rector, who studied the cost of amnesty under a similar proposal in 2007. DeMint said:

The way that we calculated the cost, and I read the study over the weekend, I don’t think anyone can argue with it. If you consider all the factors related to the amnesty—and believe me, this is comprehensive, that it will have a negative long-term impact on our gross domestic product. We just want Congress for once to count the cost of a bill. They are notorious for underestimating the cost and not understanding the consequences.

Heritage’s Jason Richwine, the senior policy analyst in empirical studies, says the new report will be a “resounding rebuttal to the claim from amnesty supporters that a long waiting period between the initial amnesty and citizenship will eliminate any major costs to taxpayers.”

This window of ineligibility for many government services has led supporters to argue that an amnesty will not be costly. There are two problems with this argument. First, households headed by illegal immigrants today consume some government services and pay far less in taxes….The second problem with the view that amnesty would not be costly because of the waiting period is rather obvious: After the waiting period is over, lifetime costs will be substantial.

To make sure that costs are counted accurately, Richwine says, “The estimates for the final period in our research will be calculated beginning 14 years after the initial amnesty, which is the point at which recipients could become naturalized citizens.”

Heritage’s cost analysis is unique. DeMint dismissed the idea that the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) could be trusted with calculating the bill’s costs, because it is bound by the way that Congress asks it to add the numbers. He said:

CBO said Obamacare wouldn’t cost us anything—they’re basically puppets of the Congress and the assumptions that they put in the bill. Heritage is the only organization that has done an analysis of the cost. Unlawful immigrants make up about 2 percent of our GDP, and they consume most of that. If you consider all the factors of amnesty and unlawful immigration, the cost will be in the trillions of dollars over the lifetime of these unlawful immigrants.

DeMint said that Members of Congress must read the Gang of Eight immigration proposal to make sure they know what is on the table.

“I think if people read the bill, that it will be blocked,” he said. “Because once you get into it, just like Obamacare, it is not the way it’s being advertised.”

To read the full study click here.

Read the Morning Bell and more en español every day at Heritage Libertad.

A Call to Courage Over Benghazi

/in , , , , , /by

The following op-ed is posted with permission of the author Joseph R. John, Captain, USN (Ret), a 1962 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy and Chairman, Combat Veterans For Congress:

Admiral James A. Lyons, US Navy (Ret.) USNA ‘52, USN (Ret) former Commander-in-Chief, Pacific Fleet and the former Senior US Military Representative to the UN

After eight months of stonewalling the Congress, an article by Admiral James A. Lyons, US Navy (Ret.) titled “A call to courage over Benghazi” calls for Congress to take action to force the Obama Administration to provide the American people with the truth about what happened leading to the attack in Benghazi on September 11, 2012. The article is a further attempt to shed light on the heroic actions of two Navy SEALS who saved 32 American lives during the assault on the Benghazi Consulate.

That attack was perpetrated by over 150+ Al Qaeda and affiliated terrorists, from Ansar al-Shariah, in a well-coordinated and premeditated commando style assault on the US Consultant. US Ambassador Stevens, two heroic Navy SEALs (Glen Doherty and Tyrone Wood), and the Ambassador’s aide were assassinated.

The two Navy SEALs were not part of the Ambassador’s security detail, yet the White House intentionally misreported their status as such.

They were killed in the Consul Annex. They had previously jumped into the breach to try to save the lives of the Americans in the Consulate. Despite urgent and desperate calls for help from Libyan Ambassador Chris Stevens sent directly to then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, she and her staff ignored Ambassador Stevens repeated cries for help, and let him twist in the wind for 8 hours, until he was delivered to a hospital with severe wounds, where he finally died about 4 hours after the attack began.

The article was forwarded by ADM James A Lyons, Jr., USNA ‘52, USN (Ret) former Commander-in-Chief, Pacific Fleet and the former Senior US Military Representative to the UN. He is calling for the establishment of a Select Committee in the House of Representatives to investigate and respond to the attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi. To date 122 Congressmen have signed on to House Resolution 36 calling for the establishment of a House Select Committee on the Benghazi Attack.

House Speaker John A. Boehner has been stonewalling the establishment of such a Select Committee.

Everyone in the Benghazi Consulate knew in the very beginning of the attack at, 9:40 PM on September 11th, that the attack was a well-planned and premeditated attack by Al Qaeda terrorists with heavy weapons, RPGs, and mortars, and Ambassador Stevens reported that fact, over and over again the Consulate and the Navy SEALs kept requesting support, to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the White House Situation Room, and to Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta.

Yet for a period extending for over 2 weeks after the terrorist attack, UN Ambassador Susan Rice, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and Obama in his speech to the UN (2 weeks after the attack) kept repeating that the attack was the result of a Libyan civilian demonstration against a YouTube video on the Internet that went bad—we do not think anyone in Libya has ever seen that that fathom video.

THE TIMELINE:

On March 28, the Libyan Ambassador Chris Stevens requested additional security of Secretary Hillary Clinton; she turned him down on April 12th.

On May 3rd, the State Department turned down a request for a Security Team from the Libyan Embassy.

On May 22nd Terrorist attack Red Cross Office in Benghazi (the Red Cross Office in Benghazi was closed after the attack); at that time, the US Consulate was warned of a pending attack. On June 6th, terrorists attacked the US Consulate and blew a hole through Consulate wall.

On June 6th, Ambassador Stevens was told his Security Team contract would “not” be renewed. June 22nd, Ambassador Stevens warned the State Department that extremist groups were operating openly in Benghazi.

On June 7th, Ambassador Stevens asked the State Department for two Security Teams to protect US personnel in Benghazi (the request was rejected). On June 10th, the British Ambassador survived an assassination attempt on his convoy and Al Qaeda Terrorists openly rallied in Benghazi (the British Consulate in Benghazi was closed after the assassination attempt).

On July 9th, Ambassador Stevens mad a request for 13 more security personnel to protect the Benghazi Consulate. Instead, to protect the embattled diplomatic mission in Benghazi, the State Department hired the Libyan Militia Group, the February 17th Martyrs Brigade, that had clear Al Q’ieda sympathies; they were hired to protect the Consulate, even though it had prominently displayed the black Al Q’ieda flag on its Facebook page for many months.

On July 21th, the Regional State Department Security Officer warned the State Department that the risk to the US Consulate in Benghazi was HIGH.

On August 2nd, Ambassador Stevens sent another urgent cable directly to Secretary of State Hilary Clinton requesting a “protective bodyguard detail” for him because he was in danger.

On August 5th, the State Department ordered the “removal” of Ambassador Stevens Security Team.

On August 15th, there was an emergency meeting in the US Consulate in Benghazi on security matters.

On August 16th, the Regional Security Officer sent a direct E-mail to Secretary of State Clinton warning of the dire security situation developing in Benghazi.

On September 8th, the Benghazi Security Officer warned the Department of State and the Secretary of State of imminent attacks.

On September 10th, the Al Qaeda Leader, Ayman al-Zawahri publically called for Libyans to avenge the death of Osama Bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahri’s deputy, Abu Yahya al-Lib, on September 11, 2013, the anniversary of the Al Q’ieda terrorist attack on the Twin Towers in New York.

On September 11th:

Ambassador Stevens warned the State Department via cable of the deteriorating security situation in Benghazi, and meets with a Turkish diplomat at 7:30 PM in the Benghazi Consulate.

At 8:00 PM, Al Qaeda terrorists set up check points around the Benghazi Consulate. At 8:30 PM. Ambassador Stevens ended his meeting with the Turkish diplomat.

At 9:40 PM, terrorist fire the first shots in the coordinated attack on the Benghazi Consulate, and Ambassador Stevens called Hicks in Tripoli to tell him that he was now under attack by terrorists, and asked for help.

At 9:59 PM, the Pentagon ordered a surveillance drone to overfly the Benghazi Consulate; from that point on, the White House Situation Room, the CIA, the State Department, and the Pentagon could view live video feed of the ongoing attack in Benghazi (the live feed continued for 8 hours with a second relief surveillance drone).

At 10:05 PM, the Benghazi Consulate was in flames for all to see on live video feed, and messages were being transmitted between the White House, the State Department, the CIA, and the Pentagon.

At 00:06 AM on September 12th, Ansar Al-Sharia claimed responsibility for the attack on the Consulate.

At 1:00 AM, on September 12th, the body of Ambassador Stevens was transported to the hospital by friendly local Libyans for medical attention; that was 3 hours and 20 minutes after the attack began.

At 4:00 AM, on September 12th, two Navy Seals were killed on the roof of the Consul Annex; that was 6 hours and 20 minutes after the attack began.

On September 12th, at 3:00 PM Washington, DC time, about 3 hours after the Navy SEALs were killed, Obama departed for a Las Vegas fundraising rally.

THE MILITARY SUPPORT THAT WAS AVAILABLE:

It is a well-known fact that F-16 fighter aircraft based in Aviano, Italy could have arrive over the scene of the attack on the Consulate in 90 minutes, and could have retaliated against the Al Qaeda terrorists to save the lives of those under attack. In addition, there was also a 130-man US Marine Corps Marine Force Recon Team at Sigonella, Italy that was on the tarmac, ready for deployment, which could have arrived at the compound within 2 hours. General Carter Ham, Commander African Command, was relieved of his command, when he ignored the White House’s order to “stand down”, and tried to send a military reaction force to save the lives of the Americans under attack, which was only several hours away.

General Petraeus at CIA put out an urgent request for military assistance to the White House, in order to save American lives, but the White House ignored his request. The entire attack was viewed by live video feed from two separate drones overflying the on-going attack for 8 hours; one of those drones could have been armed and to strike the terrorist. For 8 months 32 survivors of the attack, whose lives were saved by the two Navy SEALS, have relayed their fear of intimidation from the Obama Administration; they hired attorneys and informed congressmen that they have been threatened and were warned not to testify as to what actually happened leading up to, during, and following the Benghazi attack. The Foreign Emergency Support Team that is required to be called up by the Secretary of State, to arrive a US Mission within 48 hours to preserve and protect all forensic evidence after an attack for FBI investigation, was never called up by then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and 8 months later, the Foreign Emergency Support Team still has not been called up.

THE COVER-UP:

Even before the attack in Libya ended, intelligence officials pieced together the puzzle of the events unfolding in Benghazi, and concluded that Q’ieda-linked terrorists were responsible for the attack; the Obama administration asked to modify the findings. Senior Obama Administration Officials in the State Department, the National Security Council, the CIA, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the White House, sought to cover-up the emerging picture and downplayed the significance of the attack just before the national election. On September 15, three days after the Navy SEALs were killed by Al Qaeda, and everyone in Obama’s National Security apparatus knew the attack was perpetrated by Al Qaeda terrorists; Obama publicly blamed the attack on Libyan civilians, who he said were demonstrating against a YouTube video on the Internet.

The next day, on the morning of September 16th, UN Ambassador Susan Rice in 5 Sunday morning TV network programs, stated the attack was by Libyan civilians demonstrating against a YouTube video on the Internet, even though she knew that Al Qaeda terrorist executed the attack. On the same day, Susan Rice kept repeating the same lie, over and over again, the Libyan President reported to the world press that the attack that killed US Ambassador Stevens and two Navy SEALs was planned and executed by terrorist. Four days later, on September 20th, once again Obama blamed the attack on civilians demonstrating against a YouTube video on he Internet. On September 25st, even though he knew it was a lie, Obama, in a speech at the UN, blamed the attack on Libyan civilians who were demonstrating against a YouTube video on the Internet. On October 10th, the State Department said they had no previous warnings of the September 11th attack on the Benghazi Consulate.

The former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mullen, who headed up the Accountability Review Board, the Obama Administration’s Official Investigation of the Benghazi terrorist attack.

His official report, alleged that for over an 8 hour period, no military assistance was available or could be deployed in time to oppose the Al Q’ieda terrorist attack. That unconscionable and flagrant lie by Mullen has been proven to be a false whitewash  and was only inserted in the report, to give the Obama Administration’s political cover for the deceitful and shameful failure by a Commander-in-Chief’s dereliction of duty; he ignored repeated and desperate requests for help from Ambassador Stevens and the two Navy SEALs, requesting protection of their lives and the lives of State Department personnel under attack in Benghazi by Al Qaeda terrorists. The then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, then Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, the current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey, the current head of the CIA John Brennan, and the National Security Agency have all been involved in a massive cover-up; they all knew full well that F-16 fighters support was just 90 minutes away and that other military reaction teams were just several hours away.

Mullen knows that his statement that military protective support was not available was a cover-up. Mullen’s report covered up the murder of two Navy SEALs. He disgraced the Navy uniform he once wore.

RELATED COLUMNS:

Clinton kept counterterrorism out of loop, Benghazi testimony will show

24 September 2012: Body of lies from Benghazi to Barack
5 October 2012: Diplomatic Deception
8 October 2012: Lemmings… At the precipice of WW III
23 October 2012: Death Race Damascus: 13 Days in October
26 October 2012: The hidden real truth about Benghazi
29 October 2012: Obama’s October surprise – exposed by Benghazi?
1 November 2012: Abandoning America’s honor
5 November 2012: Obama’s real world game of Risk
10 November 2012: Cover-up at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
11 November 2012: The “secret” information by Paula Broadwell
13 November 2013: Sex, Lies and Obama Ben Ghazi – A Shakespearean tragedy
27 November 2012: Benghazi explained: Interview with “Intelligence Insider” (Part I)
29 November 2012: Benghazi explained: Interview with “Intelligence Insider” (Part II)
11 December 2012: Benghazi explained: Interview with “Intelligence Insider” (Part III)
2 December 2012: Behind the lies of Benghazi
4 December 2012: Chemical weapons reports in Syria, exactly as warned
19 December 2012: The wretched absurdity of the Benghazi Report
8 January 2013: Flashing red lies of Benghazi
24 January 2013: Running down the clock on Benghazi
21 February 2013: Brennan: From Barack to Benghazi
25 April 2013: Benghazi Report: Trinkets of Treason

The complete Benghazi timeline courtesy of the American Thinker in spreadsheet form:

For a larger view click on the image.

The Gang of Eight Immigration Bill, Explained in One Info-graphic

/in , , , , , /by

The Heritage Foundation reports, “Senators return to Washington next week to debate the Gang of Eight’s comprehensive immigration bill. Heritage President Jim DeMint has said the bill is ‘unfair, it costs too much, and it’s going to make the problem worse’.”

The below video is testimony before the US Senate by the ICE Union Chief, Chris Crane, in his testimony on the 884 page new Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act (S. 744). The ICE Union won an initial court victory in its lawsuit against the Obama Administration. Federal Judge Federal Judge Reed O’Connor told the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that they had no power to refuse to deport illegal aliens.

Crane testifies before the Senate expressing his concern that law enforcement was shut out of the negotiations on the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act.

Crane testified the Act is flawed as currently written because it:

(1) does not provide for tamper proof Federal ID cards to keep track of illegal aliens

(2) does not have any provision to arrest and remove 400,000 criminal Illegal Aliens who are fugitives from justice with felony warrants

(3) does not deal with the inability of the federal government’s bureaucracy to process 18+ million Illegal aliens when the federal government hasn’t even been able to process 900,000 Veterans disability claims over a 4 year period

(4) does nothing to make Universities report (which should be under threat of felony criminal charges) the names and locations of the hundreds of thousands foreign students like the terrorists who were involved in the Boston bombing who no longer attend college classes

(5) does nothing to provide a means to cover the $6 trillion cost of the flawed 884 page Act according to research by the Heritage Foundation (the Senate Bill intentionally misled the American people by saying it would cost $22.5 billion)

(6) doesn’t cover the cost because the Senate bill provides for charging each of the 18+ million illegal aliens $500.00 when the real cost per illegal is $335,000.00

(7) intentionally misleads the American people by saying the Act would not be enacted until the border was secured when there is no provision to guarantee the border is secure after 29 years of failed promise (THE ONLY ORGANIZATION THAT CAN BE TRUSTED TO VERIFY THE BORDER HAS BEEN CLOSED IS THE ICE UNION)

(8) flagrantly discriminates against nearly 4 million unemployed Veterans by giving employers a $3000 tax credit for employing illegal aliens and relieves them from having to cover illegal aliens under the Obama Health Care law without giving those same benefits to unemployed US citizens

(9) does absolutely nothing to locate the many terrorists in the US among the 18+ million illegal aliens like the Chechen terrorists, the Times Square bomber, the first World Trade Union bombers in 1993, and Major Hassan who had all been affected by the Islam jihadists outreach program underway in the US by remaining under the radar scope of CIA and the FBI’s Watch Lists (the requirement in the Act for a tamper proof Federal ID card requiring fingerprints would help locate those terrorist suspects)

(10) does not provide provisions to prevent 80 million unskilled relatives of the 18+ million illegal aliens form coming into the US which would destroy the fragile US Welfare system & bankrupt the Republic

(11) does not have a provision to deport anyone who fails in their application (Mohammed Salameh who applied for amnesty in 1984 but was turned down was a co-conspirator in the in the first World Trade Center attack in 1993)

(12) does not provide annual quotas to process applicants so the crush of applicants won’t bring the process to a full stop, and does not have provisions in it to do a thorough background investigation of applicant from high threat countries/regions.

Heritage put together an info-graphic that explains some of the major problems with a ‘comprehensive’ approach to immigration reform. Forward this to a friend to share these concerns.

What's Wrong withthe Gang of Eight's Bill?

Read the Morning Bell and more en español every day at Heritage Libertad.

Florida GOP says Dems ‘grandstanding’ over Medicaid expansion

/in , , , , , /by

Representative Dennis K. Baxley, FL District 23

Joe Saunders of BizPac Review reports, “Point made. Now, let’s get this session over with. That was the message Tuesday from two key Republicans about House Democrats’ decision to slow down business in protest over the GOP’s refusal to accept federal funding for Medicaid expansion under Obamacare. Slowing floor action to a crawl, House Democrats under Minority Leader Perry Thurston invoked the state Constitution Tuesday to force line-by-line readings of bills before they could be discussed on the House floor.”

“By purposefully slowing deliberations at this critical juncture, I and other House Democratic Caucus members seek to bring greater public attention to our desire for legislative passage of the health coverage expansion plan that the Florida Senate approved [Tuesday,]” Thurston said in a statement.

“The maneuver marred what had so far been a reasonably congenial session, said state Rep. Dennis Baxley, a veteran legislator and chairman of the House Judiciary Committee,” notes Saunders. Read more.

Avik Roy from Forbes reports, “On April 11, the GOP-controlled Florida House of Representatives passed an innovative, consumer-driven replacement for Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion, one that could be a national template for free-market health reform. But Republicans in the state Senate rejected the House plan, electing instead to expand Medicaid, as Obamacare prescribes. Senate Republicans’ inexplicable decision makes it likely that free-market reform will fail in Florida, an outcome that could easily have been avoided.”

“The House, led by Speaker Will Weatherford and PPACA Committee Chairman Richard Corcoran, passed a bill in which uninsured adults with children would receive $2,000 a year—plus their own contribution of $300—to fund a health savings account called a CARE account, which recipients could use for any health expense of their choice. They could use it to buy catastrophic coverage, or a high-end concierge primary care physician, or anything in between. In order to benefit from the subsidy, recipients would have to meet work requirements similar to those in the landmark, bipartisan 1996 welfare-reform law,” notes Roy.

Army officers career ruined in the name of Islam

/in , , , , /by

In light of the recent terrorist bombing in Boston, national attention is refocused on the case of Thomas More Law Center client, Army Lieutenant Colonel Matthew Dooley (pictured above).  In 2012, LTC Dooley was fired from the National Defense University’s Joint Forces Staff College for teaching an elective course on Radical Islam because it was offensive to Muslims.

LTC Dooley was reassigned to a weapons integration unit at Fort Eustis, VA.  In this new position, Dooley again received an outstanding Officer Evaluation Report (OER).  Click here to read LTC Dooley’s most recent OER.

Moreover, LTC Dooley’s case went before the Army Command Selection Board comprised of three generals and two colonels.  The board recommended he be retained on the Battalion Command selection list.

However, political correctness again ruled the day.  Gen. Lloyd J. Austin, the Army Vice Chief of Staff, ordered Lt. Col. Dooley’s name removed from the command list.

In the Sunday April 28th article, Washington Times reporter Rowan Scarborough reported on these latest developments.   Click here to read the entire article.

ABOUT THE THOMAS MORE LAW CENTER

Thomas More Law Center is renowned as a national nonprofit public interest law firm, based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, the Thomas More Law Center’s mission is to restore and defend America’s Judeo-Christian heritage and moral values, and to preserve a strong national defense, and a free and sovereign United States of America.  In courtrooms throughout our Nation, Law Center lawyers fight for the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, the sanctity of human life, and a strong national defense. The Law Center does not charge for its legal services, and relies on tax-deductible donations from concerned patriotic Americans and charitable foundations. To learn more click here.

Common Core: Subversive Threat to Education? (+ video)

/in , , , , /by

Karen Bracken ( http://tnacc.weebly.com ) presented Common Core: Subversive Threat to Education on 18 April 2013 at the Chattanooga TEA Party meeting. Introduction is by Mark West, President of the Chattanooga TEA Party.

Bracken states, “Jeb Bush is deeply embedded in this [Common Core] process”.

Karen Bracken with former Florida Governor Jeb Bush.

ABOUT KAREN BRACKEN:

I am almost 64 years old and the grandmother of 4 almost grown grandchildren.  Gladly I won’t have to worry about Common Core affecting them.  But lord knows the indoctrination of our children has been going on in our public school system for many years.  But at least I won’t have to worry about my grandchildren getting sucked up in to Common Core.  BUT they will have children someday and I just felt I had to do something.  I am already very active in my community.  I have a national Agenda 21 coalition, a Tennessee Legislative Team, speaking engagements on Agenda 21 and Common Core, local and state politics and just day to day life.  My goal is to educate people about what is happening in our country.  What shocks me most is how many people refuse to admit or to see what is taking place.  It is a true indication that our public school system has been failing students for many years.  I learned about Communism in school.  I learned what it was and how it destroys free will, free thinking and freedom in general.   Whether we want to admit it or not Communism is what we are fighting in our country right now.  It might have names like Agenda 21, Sustainable Development, Smart Growth, Biodiversity, Common Core but at the end of the day it is Communism just dressed up in a new wrapping.  They keep changing the names when people start to catch on.  Think about it.  We had Global Warming and when it was exposed for the lie it is they changed the name to Climate Change in order to keep the hoax alive.  I pray ever day that people get their heads out of the sand and stand up for our country because once freedom is lost it can never be regained.  Our children are what they want.  They know that in one generation they can brainwash enough children to finally get what they want.  The total destruction of America and freedom.  Remember “Freedom is never more that one generation away from extinction.”  Ronald Reagan.

To learn more about Karen Bracken visit her website by clicking here.

Southern Poverty Law Center Exposed!

/in , , , , /by

Joel Gehrke from the Washington Examiner reports:

Family Research Council (FRC) officials released [the below] video of federal investigators questioning convicted domestic terrorist Floyd Lee Corkins II, who explained that he attacked the group’s headquarters because the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) identified them as a “hate group” due to their traditional marriage views.

“Southern Poverty Law lists anti-gay groups,” Corkins tells interrogators in the video, which FRC obtained from the FBI. “I found them online, did a little research, went to the website, stuff like that.”

The Washington Examiner’s Paul Bedard reported that Corkins, who pleaded guilty to terrorism charges, said in court that he hoped to “kill as many as possible and smear the Chick-Fil-A sandwiches in victims’ faces, and kill the guard.” As Bedard explained, “the shooting occurred after an executive with Chick-Fil-A announced his support for traditional marriage, angering same-sex marriage proponents.”

Robert Spencer from Jihad Watch states, “The SPLC, the well-heeled propaganda machine that smears conservatives for cash, is an integral part of the ongoing Leftist effort to demonize and destroy legitimate conservative voices — like our American Freedom Defense Initiative, which they also classify as a “hate group” — by lumping them in with the likes of the KKK. The SPLC turns a blind eye to the real hate that comes from the Left and Islamic supremacists, and offers with its hate group listings not only an incitement to violence, but a handy tool that lazy Leftist mainstream media journalists use to try to intimidate people away from supporting our message of human rights. The SPLC richly deserves its place on AFDI’s Threats to Freedom Index.”

Tom Trento, well known SE Florida radio talk show host, did a five part series on the SPLC. Trento states, “The TrentoVision Team launches an investigation into the so-called, Southern “Poverty” Law Center to find out why the Obama Administration works so closely with this “filthy rich” front group for the radical left! Our special guest is Tony Perkins, President of the prestigious Family Research Council. August 2012, Tony was the target of a radical homosexual activist who wanted to kill him and 14 others at FRC. Throughout this five-part series we will look at the finances, pro-gay agenda, pro-Islamic jihad agenda and the all around anti-American activities of the SPLC.”

Below is part one with special guest Tony Perkins, Executive Director of the Family Research Council, of a five part series on the SPLC:

Watch the other four parts of the series:

Monday April 22 – SPLC overview, with Tony Perkins, President, Family Research Council

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PI-Z1Y4G88Y

Tuesday, April 23 – Peter Sprigg, Homosexual Activism at the SPLC, Family Research Council

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_gHRA_0EwU

Wednesday April 24 – Gen. General Boykin, SPLC & the Muslim Brotherhood, Family Research Council

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6eI5kC6Y8E

Thursday April 25 – Charlotte Allen – SPLC finances – The Weekly Standard

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eniTNIVlkTo

Friday April 26 – Ken Klukowski, FRC and Andrea Lafferty, Traditional Values Coalition, TOPIC?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9iOrvwzzqk

Florida legislature passes ethics and campaign finance reform bills

/in , , , , /by

Dan Krassner, executive director of the independent government watchdog group Integrity Florida issued the below statement on the passage of historic ethics reform and campaign finance reform bills by the Florida Legislature:

“Lawmakers are beginning the process of cleaning up the government and restoring trust with Floridians. Senate President Don Gaetz and House Speaker Will Weatherford promised sweeping ethics and campaign finance reform and they have delivered. After a 36-year drought, Florida lawmakers should be commended for advancing good government reforms in our state Capitol. Integrity Florida is grateful to see most of our research recommendations included in the ethics and campaign finance legislation that has been passed. While there is still more work to do to make ethics laws stronger and to fix a broken campaign finance system, Florida is finally moving in the right direction on these issues.”

“Integrity Florida wishes to thank Phil Claypool, the retried executive director of the Florida Commission on Ethics for his contributions to our research and expert legal analysis throughout the legislative process. We greatly appreciate our ethics reform coalition partners, including Progress Florida, The Tea Party Network and Common Cause Florida for their great work to improve the ethics reform bill. Former State Senator Paula Dockery paved the wave for ethics reform to be realized by advocating for the issue for many years and we are honored for her guidance and contributions to the cause,” stated Krassner.

Highlights of the ethics reform legislation (SB 2 and SB 4):

  • The public would have four new ways to start ethics complaints through U.S. Attorneys, State Attorneys, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) and the Governor’s Office. Those four entities could refer credible complaints to the Florida Commission on Ethics. While not the full self-initiation of investigations that the ethics commission should have, this process is a good step to fight corruption and reduce frivolous complaints since these agencies would provide an additional vetting process for higher quality complaints to reach the ethics commission. Integrity Florida encourages U.S. Attorneys, State Attorneys, FDLE and the Governor to create “report corruption hotlines” via phone, web and email to collect anonymous tips from the public to address public corruption.
  • Financial disclosure forms will be posted online in a searchable database for the public to access.
  • The Florida Commission on Ethics will begin moving towards an electronic filing system for financial disclosure to make the process smoother for filers and to provide better quality information for the public to access in an easier to read format.
  • More ethics training for public officials will be required.
  • Fine enforcement will be enhanced by allowing the ethics commission to garnish wages of officials owing fines to the commission and it extends the collection period from five to twenty years.
  • Voting conflict standards and disclosures have been strengthened.
  • Expands ethics code restrictions on gifts from vendors to state officials.
  • Strengthens revolving door rules to limit legislators from lobbying for two years after they leave office.
  • Creates new restrictions to prohibit officials from obtaining crony jobs based on their public office.

Highlights of the campaign finance legislation (HB 569):  

  • Raises contribution limits to $3,000 for statewide candidates and $1,000 for legislative and local candidates.
  • Requires 24-hour disclosure of contributions and expenditures in the final days of state-level campaigns and a more rapid filing schedule for campaign reports year-round for candidates and committees.
  • Streamlines independent committees by eliminating committees of continuous existence.
  • Directs the Florida Division of Elections towards creation of an enhanced statewide campaign finance database. 

Related Integrity Florida research:

Corruption Risk Report: Florida Ethics Laws
June 6, 2012

Corruption Risk Report: Financial Disclosure
July 30, 2012

Florida’s Broken Campaign Finance System – Integrity Florida Report to the Florida House of Representatives Ethics & Elections Subcommittee
January 16, 2013

Florida’s Senators far apart on recent gun legislation

/in , , , /by

According to Congress.org Senators Bill Nelson (D) and Marco Rubio (R) are polar opposites when it comes to votes on gun legislation. The following is a list of bills recently considered in the US Senate and how Florida’s Senators voted on each.

Legislation – Concealed-Carry Reciprocity Amendment – Vote Rejected (57-43)

This proposal from Minority Whip John Cornyn of Texas would allow someone with a permit to carry a concealed weapon the right to carry it in any state which has a concealed-carry law. The amendment states that permit holders from other states must abide by the laws of states in which they are located, though it would prohibit states from placing restrictions on individuals with out-of-state permits, treating such individuals as if they carried an “unrestricted” permit. The remainder of the failed amendments included proposals to reinstate and expand a ban on so-called assault weapons; to ban ammunition magazines holding more than ten rounds; and to prevent veter ans from being deemed “mental defectives” – thus losing their ability to own firearms – without a court decision. Two amendments did pass muster. The first, offered by Wyoming Republican John Barrasso, would penalize states and localities for publicizing gun ownership data. The second, from HELP committee leaders Tom Harkin, D-Iowa and Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., would overhaul the nation’s mental health system. (Roll Calls 100-105)

Sen. Bill Nelson voted NO
Sen. Marco Rubio voted YES

Firearms Legislation – Background Checks Amendment – Vote Rejected (54-46)

The Senate voted on a flurry of amendments to the first major legislative response to last December’s massacre in Newtown, CT. In a sign of the difficulty facing proponents of stronger gun laws, most of the amendments were defeated, beginning with a proposal by pro-gun senators Joe Manchin, D-W.Va. and Pat Toomey, R-Pa. to strengthen background checks. The Toomey-Manchin amendment would have expanded the current system to include all sales at gun shows and on the Internet. Though initially hailed as a critical breakthrough, the amendment’s prospects died a slow death in the days leading up to the actual vote, as fence-sitting senators from both parties declared their oppos ition one by one. Ultimately five Democrats opposed the amendment – Max Baucus of Montana, Mark Begich of Alaska, Mark Pryor of Arkansas, Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, and Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada. (Reid voted “no” for procedural reasons which would allow him to call up the amendment for a vote at a later date.) Baucus, Begich and Pryor all face difficult re-elections next year in states that favored Mitt Romney in the 2012 presidential contest. Four Republicans supported the amendment – Susan Collins of Maine, Mark Kirk of Illinois, John McCain of Arizona, and co-sponsor Toomey.

Sen. Bill Nelson voted YES
Sen. Marco Rubio voted NO

Firearms Legislation – Republican Substitute Amendment – Vote Rejected (52-48)

The second failed amendment was a Republican substitute offered by Judiciary committee ranking member Chuck Grassley of Iowa. Most Republicans have decried Democratic proposals for reducing gun violence as threatening to Americans’ Second Amendment rights and have emphasized in their own proposals a “law and order” approach. This is reflected in the Republican alternative, which would make it a federal crime to purchase guns on behalf of those legally barred from owning them; expand the scope of mental illnesses barring some individuals from owning firearms; and create a special task force focused on attempted firearms purchases by felons and fugitives. Nine Democ rats supported the Republican proposal, while two Republicans opposed it.

Sen. Bill Nelson voted NO
Sen. Marco Rubio voted YES

Firearms Legislation – Straw Purchases Amendment – Vote Rejected (58-42)

Judiciary Chairman Pat Leahy, D-Vt. co-sponsored an amendment that would make it a federal crime to buy guns on behalf of someone legally barred from possessing them, a practice called straw purchasing. The amendment fell just two votes short of adoption. (In a concession to the reality of a likely Republican filibuster, Majority Leader Reid agreed to raise the threshold for adoption of all amendments to 60 votes instead of the usual 51.)

Sen. Bill Nelson voted YES
Sen. Marco Rubio voted NO

Senator Nelson has a mixed record in support of the Second Amendment. The Political Guide reports:

In 2004, Senator Nelson supported the Assault Weapons Ban and stated that AK-47s and assault rifles are for killing, not for hunting. He asserted that law enforcement at every level of government is against terminating the assault weapons ban. He also stated that he was a defender of the constitutional right to bear arms and a defender of the right to have guns of all kinds except when getting to the common sense that it is not worth it in our society to be able to purchase AK-47s. In addition to supporting the Assault Weapons Ban, Senator Nelson voted in favor of the Protection in Lawful Commerce Act.”

This issue is not going away according to President Obama. Let us see how Florida’s Senators vote on future Second Amendment related legislation.

Pinellas County politicians wasting money defending themselves in lawsuit to limit their terms

/in , , , , /by

Philip Blumel from Florida Term Limits Blog reports:

May 2nd is approaching and four Pinellas County commissioners are worried. In December, a circuit court judge refused to dismiss the suit against them for violating their legal term limits. Now they face a judge again on May 2 in the final hearing of the case.

In 1996, 73% of Pinellas voters passed 8-year term limits but these renegade commissioners refused to insert the term limits amendment language into the charter as required by law. Then when term limits went into effect 8 years later, they refused to step down.  After all, the language isn’t in the charter!

Citizens were outraged and, after friendly court decisions around the state including a unanimous Florida Supreme Court decision that term limits are constitutional, they filed suit. The three plaintiffs on the people’s side represent diverse political, ethnic, professional and geographical faces of Pinellas County. This is appropriate as term limits are not a Republican versus Democrat issue but one of the people versus unchecked political power.

Shortly after the adverse decision in December, the commissioners doubled their legal team adding four additional lawyers. Yes, that’s right, they spending an enormous amount of the people’s money to fight the clearly expressed will of the people. And why? To directly benefit themselves.

In addition to lawyering up, commissioner Ken Welch publicly declared in February that he is seeking another position in local government and may not serve his full term. One of the reasons, he said, is that the judge may decide he cannot serve his full term. The plaintiffs hope part of the reason also is that he knows resigning is the right thing to do. Fellow scofflaws Karen Seel, John Morroni and Susan Latvala should follow Welch’s lead.

Citizens may attend the hearing at 1:30 p.m. on Thursday, May 2nd at the Pinellas County Courthouse, 315 Court Street, Courtroom C, Clearwater.For more detail on the case, go here.

Of Florida’s 20 charter, or “home rule” counties, 12 have term limits. Miami-Dade voters just approved 8-year limits last November. In all but one of the dozen, the popular term limits laws are respected and enforced. It is hoped that on May 2 the citizens will triumph and a decade of political corruption in this beautiful county will be swept away.

(Pictured, the three plaintiffs Maria Scruggs, H. Patrick Wheeler and Beverley Billiris.)

City of Sarasota: No to new businesses, yes to panhandling

/in , , /by

Sarasota City Commissioners

The City of Sarasota Commission voted to impose a moratorium on new bars, taverns and nightclubs. This action led City Attorney Robert M. Fornier to write a letter (below left) to the Commission to “determine if there is legally sufficient justification to impose a moratorium”. For many residents this moratorium is looked upon as a back door way of imposing a noise ordinance within the city limits.

Click on image for a larger view.

There is a City Commission election on May 14th and one of the hot button issues is a noise ordinance. After a March runoff there are three candidate vying for two city commission seats. Two of the candidates, Richard Dorfman and Susanne Atwell have said they will vote against the noise ordinance. Susan Chapman favors the noise ordinance. The City Commission postponed a vote on the noise ordinance until after the election. This moratorium will only add to the controversy.

Sarasota artists have created a Facebook page and Noise Ordinance website allowing citizens to post comments about the proposed ordinance.

Photo courtesy of Channel !0 News Tampa, FL.

The City Commission in February allowed panhandling. 

Lee Williams from the Sarasota Herald-Tribune reported, “The City of Sarasota and the American Civil Liberties Union have signed a consent decree that stops police from ‘interfering with the exercise of First Amendment rights’ when dealing with the homeless. The decree, a 60-day injunction, prohibits police from interfering with panhandlers — someone standing on a sidewalk soliciting assistance — unless they impede traffic, pedestrians or create an unsafe situation.”

Panhandlers are becoming more visable and aggressive within the City of Sarasota. Citizens have complained and yet the current City Commissioners have decided that panhandling is a free speech right.

This consent decree with the ACLU led to multiple panhandlers showing up at major intersections and soliciting handouts from passers by and those in cars at stop lights. According to Linda Hersey from Sarasota Patch, “Most of the Patch readers who responded to a post about panhandling on city streets are frustrated by the numbers of people with a hand out, asking for money. Sarasota city commissioners plan to fast track a proposed ordinance that would curb panhandling on Sarasota streets.”

Currently in the City of Sarasota a select group of businesses are being targeted, while panhandlers are welcomed. At least until the Commission meets again?

The price of apathy towards public affairs is to be ruled by evil men

/in , , , /by

Not every election that is important is held in November of each year. There are many local races for public office and referendums that are voted on in out-of-cycle elections. There is a growing  concern that out-of-cycle elections ultimately suppress the vote. Cases in point are two elections being held in May 2013. One is in Sarasota, Florida and the other in Los Angeles, California.

PRNewswire reports, “Entravision Communications Corporation (NYSE: EVC), a diversified Spanish-language media company, today announced a multi-platform campaign to encourage Los Angeles Latino voters to participate in the upcoming runoff election for Mayor, being held May 21, 2013. With only 16% of registered voters turning out for the Primary Nominating Election that was held in March, Entravision is committed to using its radio and digital assets in Los Angeles to raise awareness of the upcoming election and instill the importance of participating in the democratic election process.” [My emphasis]

Sarasota Today, in an Editorial titled “Why I vote (even though I am apathetic)“, notes, “Ap·a·thy. lack of interest of concern. P·a·rty. a large group of people. This is the reason some people believe causes such a low turnout in our City Elections (which are held in March and May). Apathy is what takes us from a 75% voter turnout in November to a 17% voter turnout  four months later in March. Although I disagree with the premise, I am going to accept that this must be true (mostly because I am sick of fighting about it – and I just want to find a solution).” [My emphasis]

It appears citizens from Sarasota to Los Angeles are taking an interest.

PRNewswire reports:

“At Entravision, we believe that the Los Angeles Mayoral election is extremely important to the future of the city. As an active member of the community, it is our civic duty to encourage as many citizens as possible to exercise their right to vote,” said Walter F. Ulloa, Entravision’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. “With this election being only the third time in the last 75 years that an incumbent mayoral candidate has not been on the ballot in Los Angeles, this election offers a unique opportunity for citizens to vote with their voice and help shape the future for the city. By leveraging Entravision’s multiple media properties in Los Angeles, we will provide a valuable service to the community and help encourage voter participation for this special election.”

Sarasota Today coined the phrase “Apathy Party”. The Sarasota Today editorial analyzes the impact of the Apathy Party:

So here is my attempt at giving specific examples of why you (assuming you don’t vote) should consider leaving the Apathy Party.

Reason 1: You are more likely to lose your job due a decision made by a City Commission, than by the President of the United States.

Here is my reasoning. If you are young and live in Sarasota most likely you are in the “service” industry. You probably work in hospitality, retail or the restaurant business. All three of these industries (which are the largest in the City) depend HEAVILY on tourism. So, if the City Commission votes to install parking meters or by chance bans live music – then the tourists will probably not come downtown anymore. So when tourists leave, revenue leaves – and businesses suffer. When business suffers – people lose jobs. The City Commission makes decisions each month that effect local businesses short term and long term. If you think voting in the national elections will change your life – you should really pay attention to local elections.

It’s math.

City makes “anti-business” decisions = Businesses fail = Jobs Lost = Bad Tourism Experience = Bad Economy.

City makes “smart business” decisions = Businesses grow = More Jobs = Good Tourism Experience = Healthy and Diverse Economy

Reason 2: Your wallet will be more effected by the policies supported by the City, than by the Federal Government.

I always hear that people “vote with their wallet”. If that is true, than you definitely want to reconsider voting in local elections. Everyone’s income has taken a hit due to a horrible economy. Although things are improving, we still need to find ways to save money month-to-month. Tax Loop Holes don’t help anyone except big corporations. So how does the local government help us save money? Let’s start with the big one – rent. If you are like most people, rent is your biggest expense (or if you are a home owner – you property taxes and loan payment). The City of Sarasota has had a “no-growth” policy that has back-fired on our economy and it is lowering property values and raising taxes – and thus it is making your rent higher. For example, our zoning code only allows a developer to build 50 units per acre for a 10-story building. If you do the math – you can quickly see that these are BIG EXPENSIVE units – which means BIG rent. These restrictions are everywhere throughout the city – even in deprived neighborhoods like Rosemary District.  Since it is close to impossible to build a 10-story building with 50 unites and make it financially work – nobody builds. When nobody builds – there is less taxes going into the City’s revenue base. So, the City has to raise taxes and the buildings that exist in downtown raise rent (because they can due to lack of inventory).

It’s math.

It is math. Historically, off-cycle elections have lower voter turnout. Lower voter turnout leads to the few dictating to the many. It is not time for the many to be heard?