Tag Archive for: legislation

House Passes BBB as Conservatives Win ‘Significant Commitments’ on Life, Transgenderism

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Congress has delivered President Donald Trump’s signature legislation, the One Big Beautiful Bill, but not without hours of mean-spirited Democratic delay and principled conservative negotiations that secured “major” commitments of executive action and future legislation to promote the pro-life, pro-family cause.

The House of Representatives passed President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act (H.R. 1) by a 218-214 vote on Thursday afternoon. All House Democrats voted no, joined by two Republicans: Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.). Massie, a libertarian-leaning Republican, opposes the bill’s high deficit and spending levels, while Fitzpatrick accused the White House of “withholding critical defense material” from Ukraine.

The bill narrowly passed the Senate Tuesday, when Vice President J.D. Vance cast the tie-breaking vote. Senators Susan Collins (R-Maine), Rand Paul (R-Ky.), and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) voted against the bill. It now goes to President Trump’s desk.

Democrats in both chambers tried, and failed, to prevent the bill from passing Congress by President Trump’s July 4 deadline. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) forced the Senate to read the full text of the 940-page bill aloud, which lasted nearly 16 hours. Schumer also poked at the president with a procedural motion to strip the act of its formal title, “The One Big Beautiful Bill Act.” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) stalled proceedings further on Thursday morning with an eight-hour, 44-minute-long filibuster that began at 4:53 a.m. Jeffries all-but admitted he aimed to slow the bill’s passage as a procedural irritant, saying numerous times throughout his speech, “I am going to take my sweet time,” followed by a sustained standing ovation from the small gaggle of Democratic hangers-on who stayed to listen.

“It takes a lot longer to build a lie than to tell the simple truth,” replied House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) in a brief rejoinder to Jeffries’s record-breaking speech. “Scripture has been cited a lot this morning — I think mostly out of context.”

“Today was about performance for some of them,” said Johnson. “Democrats deliver performances, and Republicans deliver results.”

The narrow passage reflected the concern of pro-life conservatives, who withheld their support until obtaining promises from GOP leaders to address the pro-life, pro-family provisions stripped out by the Senate.

As fiscal conservatives, border security conservatives, and national security hawks celebrated the passage of President Donald Trump’s signature One Big Beautiful Bill, pro-life and pro-family leaders wonder aloud why their concerns got eliminated or minimized by the legislation. Family Research Council President Tony Perkins said the debate’s primary focus on taxes “reminds me of Bill Clinton back in his 1992 campaign: ‘It’s the economy, Stupid.’ It’s not the economy; it is the moral foundation of a nation that matters.” Some conservatives went as far as to call the watered-down Senate version of the bill “morally bankrupt.”

The revised Senate version of the bill “does not defund transgender surgery for minors. That is a moral issue. It only cuts funding for abortion services for one year, not the 10 in the House bill. That’s morally bankrupt,” Rep. Keith Self (R-Texas) told “Washington Watch with Tony Perkins” Wednesday night.

While many pro-life advocates — including SBA Pro-Life America and Americans United for Life — called the bill’s one-year defunding of Planned Parenthood a step forward, some former insiders say the deep-pocketed abortion industry has the resources to wait it out. “While any taxpayer money diverted away from Planned Parenthood is a good thing, defunding our nation’s largest abortion provider for just one year is not the win many of us who believe abortion is abhorrent wanted it to be,” said former Planned Parenthood director and founder of And Then There Were None, Abby Johnson, in a statement emailed to The Washington Stand. “A year is enough time for many Planned Parenthood facilities to hold out to be re-funded. Some will close, but Planned Parenthood as an organization has millions of dollars, wealthy donors, and could support those clinics if they choose.”

Planned Parenthood, which received $792.2 million in taxpayer funding in 2024, reported total net assets of $2.52 billion. “Bottom line: it’s not enough and Republicans should permanently defund the abortion giant, not just for a paltry 12 months,” said Johnson.

“A one-year defunding of Planned Parenthood is no victory; it’s a disheartening concession,” Katie Brown Xavios, national director of American Life League, told TWS. “To receive only a token punishment for those who harm women and kill the innocent is unacceptable.”

Quena González, senior director of Government Affairs at Family Research Council, called the one-year interruption “just a very short pause on defunding” on Wednesday, noting that under the revised bill, “taxpayers will still be forced to underwrite experimental gender transition procedures.”

Family Research Council backed the House version of the bill and reserved the right to score against the Senate version. Ultimately, it reconsidered after House conservatives wrung several promises out of the Trump administration and Hill leadership.

“Last night, we facilitated negotiations and conservations on key policy issues that had been removed or modified from the House version,” announced FRC President Tony Perkins on Thursday morning. “[W]e believe we will see policy outcomes that offset the changes made by the Senate.”

House Conservatives: ‘We Gained, America Gained’

Leaders of the House Freedom Caucus quickly confirmed they had obtained promises for future executive action and legislation to defund abortion and transgender procedures, as well as other policy priorities. “We got significant commitments on spending reductions outside the framework of the bill,” Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.) told “This Week on Capitol Hill.” “We said, ‘Let’s talk about some offsets elsewhere. Let’s talk about some things the executive can do to mitigate some of the concerns about what the Senate did with our House bill,’” Harris told Perkins.

“We got a major commitment, a serious commitment on spending reduction,” as well as “a large commitment on social issues. We got an agreement that the administration will add adults to their transgender funding limitation. And we’re going to have a discussion with the administration on the egregious, cross-state trafficking in mifepristone,” he said. “We talked about looking at program integrity in food stamps and in Medicaid,” where improper payments and fraud cost “tens of billions of dollars a year.” And “on the Green New Deal/Green New Scam provisions, the administration has a pretty fair leeway to interpret some of the Senate changes” to provisions of the Biden administration’s so-called Inflation Reduction Act.

Harris also revealed the House Freedom Caucus extracted a promise from the speaker of the House to address the nation’s ever-expanding national debt. “The speaker has agreed to have another vote on a Balanced Budget Amendment, because the last one we had was in November of 2011, trillions of dollars of deficits ago,” he said.

The House Freedom Caucus left the negotiations satisfied. “Everything we did was perfectly in line with the president’s agenda. So he went along with it,” said Harris. “We gained, America gained.”

In a statement sent to The Washington Stand shortly after the vote, Rep. Self confirmed the House Freedom Caucus “moved the bill dramatically to the right on almost every front and at every stage of the process, including overnight, as a small group of us continued working with the White House to address critical policy and spending issues.”

The bill threatened to further divide the Republican Party, as many Republicans reluctantly embraced the bill as the best alternative capable of passing Congress. “People with the same principles, looking at the same facts can actually apply and analyze those facts a little bit differently and reach a little bit different conclusion,” Rep. Nathaniel Moran (R-Texas) told “Washington Watch” later on Wednesday. “This is not the end-all, be-all decision for every moral matter that we have to deal with in Congress. This is, at its core, a bill about taxes and liberty.”

Social conservatives have long seen taxes and defense spending prioritized, while promises of pro-life or pro-family action do not come to fruition. However, President Trump has repeatedly said he will govern by the motto, “Promises made, promises kept.”

In part, social conservatives in the Trump administration may be wary of submitting legislation for fear liberal Republicans will exercise their collective muscle in negotiations. Harris noted the Trump administration “didn’t want to have to send this bill back to the Senate,” where senators such as abortion-supporting Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) could assure the bill “would actually get worse.”

What Is in the One Big Beautiful Bill?

As The Washington Stand reported, the surviving provisions largely carry out President Trump’s legislative agenda:

  1. The revised bill increases the child tax credit to $2,200, indexed for inflation, down from $2,500 in the House bill. Without action, the child tax credit would have returned its pre-Trump level of $1,000.
  2. The bill creates “TRUMP” savings accounts for children, indexed to the stock market like a 401(k), with a $1,000 deposit from U.S. taxpayers upon the birth of each child. The bill also furthers school choice by expanding educational savings accounts.
  3. The bill makes permanent tax advantages from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, including expanded personal exemptions and incentives for business research and development. “For working families, The One, Big, Beautiful Bill prevents a looming $1,700 tax hike and instead puts more money in Americans’ pockets — including upwards of $1,300 for tipped workers and $1,400 for hourly workers working overtime. Families will see a nearly $11,000 boost in take-home pay,” House Ways and Means Chairman Jason Smith (R-Mo.) told TWS. “Households making under $100,000 will see a 12% tax cut compared to what they pay today. The average family of four will see nearly $11,000 more in their pockets each year. Real wages for workers will rise by as much as $7,200 a year,” Smith added on the House floor. The final bill gives qualifying senior citizens a $6,000 deduction, which the White House Council of Economic Advisers estimates will assure that 88% of seniors on Social Security have no federal income tax liability. It eliminates federal income taxes on tips up to the first $25,000, phasing out for those who earn $150,000 a year (or couples making $300,000). Taxpayers may also deduct up to $12,500 of overtime pay under the same condition; it lapses in 2028. The bill also lets people who buy cars made in America write off up to $10,000 in interest on the car’s loan.
  4. Enhancing border security. “This bill gives President Trump the tools he needs to finish securing the border by providing $175 billion in new funding. It will allow for completion of the border wall, fund ICE deportation efforts, and hire and train new border patrol agents,” agreed Rep. Mark Harris (R-N.C.) in a statement sent to TWS. It also taxes remittances to foreign countries. “It secures our border, funds the largest mass deportation operation in American history, and delivers the tax relief working families deserve,” Rep. Brandon Gill (R-Texas) told TWS.
  5. Securing national defense. The bill increases defense spending by roughly $160 billion, including $25 billion for a domestic “Iron Dome” missile defense system.
  6. Student loan reform. The bill imposes a $257,500 lifetime cap on student loan borrowing and reduces provisions that allow borrowers to delay paying back their students loans.
  7. Underwriting high-tax states and cities. The Senate version of the bill increases the state and local tax (SALT) deduction to $40,000 for the next five years.
  8. Slowing our exit from the Green New Deal. The Senate bill ends tax credits or subsidies for green energy projects, such as wind and solar power favored by the Biden administration, for projects constructed within a year of the bill’s passage and that go into service by the end of 2027. But the latest bill removed a proposed excise tax on companies in those industries that use more than a specified amount of components (such as solar panels or batteries) made in China. The Senate version generally slows down the GOP’s efforts to phase out the Left’s cherished credits.
  9. Slowing SNAP reform. The Senate bill delayed reforms to the much-abused Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, program in certain states.
  10. Reforming Medicaid. Medicaid recipients capable of work and who do not have a child at home must spend 80 hours a month in paid work, community service, or schooling/vocational training. The work requirements would save taxpayers an estimated $325 billion over the next 10 years. The bill also reduces the Medicaid provider tax from 6% to 3.5% starting in the 2028 fiscal year.

Despite some well-received economic news, conservatives say the bill still spends too much money and raises the debt ceiling to $5 trillion.

Rep. Mark Harris warned, “if Washington’s overspending addiction continues, the opportunity to put our country back on a path to a sound financial future is in jeopardy. In the coming months, Republicans must use every tool at our disposal to rein in government spending. This is not the end of our work.” (Emphasis in original.) Still, he said, “The country is much better off today than it was a few days ago. There’s certainty in the average working man and woman’s pocketbook that they’re not going to get a tax increase next year” — and greater faith “that the president is watching out for them.”

Nonetheless, Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) promised TWS that conservatives would not rest long before collecting the policy commitments they earned in exchange for supporting the amended legislation.

“Celebrate today,” said Roy. “Fight again tomorrow.”

AUTHOR

Ben Johnson

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘What Is an American?’ Why We Remember Heroes on Our National Holiday

A Historic Week at the Supreme Court

CIA: Intelligence Community’s 2016 ‘Russian Collusion’ Claims Suffered Political Bias, Procedural Anomalies

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

The 3 Most Important Votes of the ‘One Big Beautiful Bill’ Vote-a-Rama

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

President Donald Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill” moved closer to adoption overnight, as Senate Democrats attempted to load the bill with poison pill amendments in the “vote-a-rama.” During the lengthy amendment process, which began at 9 a.m. Monday morning and continues as of this writing, anyone may offer amendments to the 940-page bill. Senate changes have already made the bill less attractive to pro-life, pro-family conservatives. Yet the revised text also removes a controversial, 10-year moratorium on states regulating artificial intelligence.

“The president’s ‘One Big Beautiful Bill’ is quickly losing its glamour in the Senate. The bill now appears to be a contestant in a beauty pageant for a tractor pull,” said FRC Action Chairman Tony Perkins. “The Senate version currently defunds big abortion providers like Planned Parenthood for only one year, instead of ten. That’s a huge disappointment. The first Senate version defunded gender transition procedures in Medicaid (not in Obamacare, as the House did, nor in Medicare or in the tax code, as had been proposed). But the current version will subject even that slimmed-down provision to a 60-vote threshold, meaning the provision will not pass the Senate, and Americans will continue to pay for gender transition experimentation on vulnerable individuals.”

Perkins wondered only if Senate Republican leaders were “completely out-muscled by the parliamentarian, or worse yet, didn’t try to secure the key components of the House version.” Senate GOP inaction “shows an unacceptable lack of political will.”

“Will senators fight to defund abortion providers for the maximum-allowable 10 years? Will they fight to defund gender procedures that bring trauma and life-long harm, or will they be satisfied with a show-vote on gender transition procedures?” asked Perkins.

Here are three of the most important votes that took place over the last 24 hours.

1. The Senate Continues to Defund Planned Parenthood

The Senate version of the bill reduced the 10-year defunding of Planned Parenthood to only one year. But overnight, the Senate narrowly voted down an amendment to strike down even that brief funding interlude, on a 51-49 vote. Two “pro-choice” Republicans, Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, voted with the Democrats to fund the nation’s largest abortion business, which committed 402,230 abortions and received $792.2 million in taxpayer funding in 2024.

“The Republicans’ bill will cut millions of women off from birth control, cancer screenings, essential preventative health care — care they will not be able to afford anywhere else,” alleged Senator Patty Murray (D-Wash.). “It will take another step towards enacting the Republicans’ plan for a backdoor nationwide abortion ban. How does it do this? By defunding Planned Parenthood.” Republicans, she said, were “happy to cut off this life-saving care.”

But Kristen Day, executive director of Democrats for Life, rebutted the talking point. “Defunding Planned Parenthood is not one of them. Community Health Centers and Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) provide comprehensive healthcare, and there are more of them!” she said. “Let’s fully fund real healthcare.”

“Senate Democrats just failed in their attempt to remove the meager tip (10%) that Senate Republicans were offering to the taxpayers and pro-life Americans,” said Perkins.

Kristan Hawkins of Students for Life of America said, “Let me be clear: Defunding Planned Parenthood for one year would be one small step that we celebrate, while we will still fight for all those at risk by the Abortion Goliath’s predatory & violent business. One giant leap would be full debarment.”

2. Senate Nixes the 10-year Moratorium on States Regulating Artificial Intelligence (AI)

On a nearly unanimous vote, the Senate adopted a bipartisan amendment from Senators Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) and Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) to eliminate the One Big Beautiful Bill’s controversial, 10-year moratorium on AI regulation. If enacted, the provision would have struck down an estimated 75 existing state laws and barred any further protections for the next decade, including laws against AI-generated child pornography.

Blackburn and Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) had sought a compromise that would reduce the decade-long federal ban on state AI regulations to five years and allow states to protect children from exploitation, and safeguard people’s images and likenesses, provided those regulations did not impose an “undue or disproportionate burden” on artificial intelligence. “Find you a senator who looks at defunding gender transition procedures the way Ted Cruz looks at protecting AI,” joked Quena González, senior director of Government Affairs at Family Research Council, on social media.

But Blackburn eventually broke with Cruz, saying the proposed compromise did not do enough for “those who need these protections the most. This provision could allow Big Tech to continue to exploit kids, creators, and conservatives. Until Congress passes preemptive legislation like the Kids Online Safety Act and an online privacy framework, we can’t block states from making laws that protect their citizens.” On the House floor, Blackburn listed a litany of AI regulations Congress had failed to pass, which states have adopted. On Friday, 17 Republican governors urged congressional leaders to strike the AI moratorium, saying it “threatens to undo all the work states have done to protect our citizens from the misuse of artificial intelligence.”

Cruz withdrew his amendment a little after 4 a.m. Tuesday, paving the way for the House to adopt Blackburn’s amendment on a strongly bipartisan basis: 99-1. Senator Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) cast the lone no vote.

3. Democrats Extend Taxpayer-Funded Benefits to Criminal Illegal Immigrants

Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) offered an amendment that would have reduced federal Medicaid funding to states that cover illegal immigrants charged with serious crimes. Under Senate parliamentary procedure, the measure needed to clear a 60-vote threshold but passed with only 56 votes. One Republican, Susan Collins of Maine, voted against the measure. Meanwhile, five Democratic senators voted in favor: Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire, Catherine Cortez-Masto of Nevada, and Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock of Georgia. “Illegal aliens should be on a flight back to their home country, not on Medicaid (funded by American taxpayers)!!!” said Rep. Keith Self (R-Texas). On Monday, the Senate rejected an amendment from Blackburn that would have prevented states from allowing illegal immigrants to enroll in Medicaid.

The Senate also rebuffed numerous attempts to maintain or further extend Green New Deal tax credits and subsidies. Senator Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) spoke in opposition to many of the measures, branding taxpayer funding of “mature industries” as “wasteful.”

House conservatives laid much of the blame for the One Big Beautiful Bill Act’s lost beauty at the footsteps of Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough, a former Al Gore adviser. “The Senate parliamentarian over the last few days has said that a lot of our deficit reduction measures were invalid under the Byrd rule. They’ll have to be changed and modified,” Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.) told “Washington Watch” regular guest host Jody Hice on Friday. Many have asked for the Senate to overrule the parliamentarian, something Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) has repeatedly and recently refused to do. “I’ve asked for her to be fired. I don’t know why you would be the Republican leader of the Senate and have a parliamentarian who was hired by Harry Reid 12 years ago,” Rep. Greg Steube (R-Fla.) told “Washington Watch” Monday.

House conservatives said changing the original text of the bill too much risks upsetting the key agreements that allowed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act to pass the House, where Republicans also hold only a three-vote majority. “It was a very carefully negotiated compromise. And as they wander away from that, it becomes less and less likely that it’s going to succeed when it comes back out to the House,” said Harris. “We want this to succeed. We want President Trump to succeed. But the safest thing they could do is take our House bill and just pass it the way we pass it, or make some very small changes.”

“If they try to send it over to the House with a large increase in the budget deficit, then I think we’re going to have to go back to the drawing board,” warned Harris.

House leaders want the bill to meet President Trump’s deadline of July 4, making a speedy House vote likely. “I’ve been talking with [Senate Majority] Leader Thune constantly through the process and with individual senators, encouraging them to change the House product as little as possible,” Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-La.) told “This Week on Capitol Hill” Saturday.

“I will have to wait about 72 hours for the bill to lay over before we can vote. But the plan would be if it’s in shape that we could use it,” said Johnson. A prompt House vote “would also allow for the president to have a big, beautiful bill signing on Independence Day. And I certainly hope we can keep that deadline.”

As the Senate nears a final text, senators on both sides of the aisle can agree on one thing: They want the nearly day-long marathon known as “vote-a-rama,” to end. “It’s like an all-night party, but without the party,” quipped Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) in the wee hours of Tuesday morning.

“I just want to go home,” agreed Senator John Fetterman (D-Penn.). “I’ve already missed our entire trip to the beach.”

AUTHOR

Ben Johnson

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Policy Has Consequences: Anti-Family Polices in Cuba Are Affecting Real People

The War of the Machines: Peter Thiel, J.R.R. Tolkien, the Antichrist, and Technology

Two Polls Reveal Public Support Is Growing for Prayer, Chaplains in Schools

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Trump’s ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ Has ‘Excellent News for Families’: FRC Analyst

/in , , , , , , /by

Pro-family experts are touting multiple provisions of President Donald Trump’s “One Big, Beautiful Bill” aimed at fulfilling the administration’s promises to facilitate family formation, ease adoption, and benefit homeschool students or those who attend religious schools.

The House Ways and Means Committee passed the 389-page bill on Wednesday morning by a 26-19, party-line vote. “It’s sad that every single committee Democrat voted for the largest tax hike in American history and against additional tax relief for families, farmers, and small businesses,” Committee Chairman Rep. Jason Smith (R-Mo.) told The Washington Stand. The bill now moves to the House Budget Committee.

In its current form, the bill contains economic provisions pro-family advocates say they have supported for years.

Increasing the Child Tax Credit

The president’s signature economic bill from his first term, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (TCJA), doubled the Child Tax Credit (CTC) from $1,000 to $2,000 and raised the income families can earn as the credit phases out. Without renewal, the child tax credit would be cut in half at the end of this year. The “big beautiful bill” increases the child tax credit to $2,500 for the tax years 2025 through 2028 — the end of the Trump administration. The extra $500 CTC boost adjusts for the rampant inflation of the last Democratic administration, according to its advocates.

If Congress does not vote to maintain the increased CTC, the credit will return to $2,000; however, the bill makes that level permanent and indexes it for inflation each year, rounded to the nearest $100. The bill also requires both parents to have work-eligible Social Security numbers before claiming the credit.

“This is excellent news for families,” Quena González, senior director of Government Affairs at Family Research Council, told TWS. He singled out the bill’s proposal to increase the CTC as the fulfillment of a long-term policy goal of the organization’s. “FRC has long advocated for increasing the child tax credit. We advocated for it to be doubled the last time, and it is good to see it pegged to inflation and made permanent. In the current round of budgeting, where they’re trying to cut hundreds of billions of dollars, this is a really huge nod to the importance of family.”

Many who advocate for a pro-family tax code have singled out the child tax credit, which was created in 1997, as a way to aid struggling families while reducing the reach of government. “The relatively new child tax credit, which will slowly rise over the next several years to $1,000, should instead be immediately increased to at least $2,500 per child and indexed to inflation,” said Allan C. Carlson, then a distinguished fellow for family policy studies at FRC, during a Witherspoon Lecture more than two decades ago. Carlson has championed what he calls “a pro-family income tax” for decades.

AEI scholar Kevin Corinth made an identical proposal in February in AEI’s “Family Friendly Policies for the 119th Congress,” edited by Timothy P. Carney. “A supersized Child Tax Credit will ease the financial burdens on families raising children and those hoping to welcome new babies into the world,” agreed Patrice Onwuka of the Independent Women’s Forum.

Some of the big beautiful bill’s policies have reopened a rift on the Right, as some conservatives believe the government should make no fiscal policy promoting or discriminating against the nuclear family. Others blame tax credits for removing nearly half of all Americans from income tax rolls, shifting the tax burden onto a shrinking number of high earners.

González says the enhanced CTC will help secure America’s economic future by boosting the nation’s sagging demographics. “If you want to make the federal budget sustainable, you need a growing population to do that,” he contended. “This may be the first major policy move in that direction in years, or decades.”

Population levels are plunging globally, falling by more than half since 1950. The U.S. birthrate rose by less than 1% in 2024 to 1.626, according to provisional data released by the CDC last month, up from an historic low of 1.616 in 2023. Both levels are far below the 2.1 level needed for replacement. The pattern repeats throughout the West, where a birth dearth has stunted economic growth. “If we are unable to address our fertility crisis, the U.S. will face an existential economic crisis driven by a steep decline in fertility rates — one that could have an impact measured in the quadrillions of dollars,” wrote Jesús Fernández-Villaverde in The American Enterprise.

Child-Friendly Investment Accounts, Adoption Credits, and More

The “big beautiful bill” delivers numerous other tax policies desired by some pro-family advocates, according to a section-by-section analysis of the bill provided to The Washington Stand by the House Ways and Means Committee.

Make It Easier to Adopt a Child: One provision in the bill (Sec. 110107) gives parents a tax credit to write off up to $16,810 from their taxes in qualified adoption expenses. Under current law, the amount can be rolled over for five years. The new bill does not allow the tax to be rolled over but, beginning in 2025, it makes up to $5,000 of the credit refundable — meaning parents can receive that much money even if they do not owe taxes (have no tax liability); and the refundable amount is indexed for inflation. The credit phases out for those who have an adjusted gross income between $252,150 and $292,150. The bill also gives Native American tribal governments the same authority as states to deem an adopted child “special needs,” making the adoptive family eligible for the full $16,810 potential tax credit (Sec. 110108).

MAGA Accounts for Family Formation: The bill establishes a new category of Money Accounts for Growth and Advancement, or “MAGA accounts” (Sections 110115 and 110116). Beginning in 2026, those with children under the age of eight can contribute up to $5,000 a year (adjusted annually for inflation) to a MAGA account, which is invested in a diversified account that tracks the stock market, each year until the child turns 18. Friends, relatives, employers, and non-profits (including churches) may also make donations to these accounts and — provided the donations go to a broad class of recipients — nonprofits can make unlimited donations. For instance, a veterans organization could offer unlimited support for the children of gold star families.

For children born between 2024 and 2028 — the second Trump administration — the government will deposit $1,000 of taxpayers’ dollars into these MAGA accounts. Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) made a similar legislative proposal this week, introducing the Invest America Act on Monday.

When the child turns 18, he may take out up to half of its amount for college, vocational training, to start a business, or to purchase his first home. At age 25, he can withdraw the full amount for those purposes; at age 30, he can remove the full amount of the account for any reason.

The Trump administration has sought to promote family formation. “It is the task of our government to make it easier to have kids, to welcome them into the world,” Vice President J.D. Vance told the 2025 March for Life.

Encouraging School Choice and Homeschooling: The proposed “big beautiful bill” creates a new tax credit for those who contribute to charities that provide scholarships for elementary or secondary students to attend private or religious schools (Sec. 110109). It also allows parents, including homeschoolers, to withdraw funds from tax-advantaged 529 accounts to cover a broader array of educational expenses (Sec. 110110), including:

  • curriculum and curricular materials
  • books or other instructional materials
  • online educational materials
  • tutoring or educational classes outside the home
  • testing fees
  • fees for dual enrollment in an institution of higher education, and
  • educational therapies for students with disabilities.

Decreases Government Policies Encouraging Gambling: One provision modestly discourages gambling by reducing how much wagering losses a person can write off (Sec. 110014). Currently, gamblers can write off only gambling losses up to the amount of their winnings, and other gambling-related expenses in excess of the amount they won. The bill reduces all gambling-related deductions to the amount of his winnings.

González was not alone in praising those parts of the bill. “We are encouraged to see the House Ways and Means Committee increase their response to the needs of American families, especially support for young and growing families through the child tax credit and the foster and adoption tax credit,” said John Mize, CEO of Americans United for Life. “We at March for Life are grateful for the pro-life, pro-family reconciliation bill text released today,” according to a post on the annual pro-life event’s social media account. “These provisions will strengthen a longstanding family that benefits all American families,” said Concerned Women for America LAC. And ACLJ Action held that “this Child Tax Credit update sends a powerful message: We value children. We value parents. And we value the American family.”

The bill’s supporters note its overall fiscal impact, as well. “Instead of a $1,700 tax hike, working families still recovering from Biden’s inflation crisis will now receive on average a $1,300 tax cut and workers will get $3,300 more in real income back into their pockets,” said a press release the committee emailed to The Washington Stand Wednesday morning. “Permanence of the 2017 Trump tax cuts will save 6 million jobs, including 1.1 million manufacturing jobs.”

“This cornerstone of President Trump’s economic agenda will put the interests and needs of working families and small businesses ahead of Washington, bring jobs and manufacturing back to America, and usher in a new golden era of prosperity,” Rep. Smith told TWS.

How much of the bill will survive the Senate legislative process remains to be seen. Senator Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.) told Fox Business on Wednesday morning the bill will see Senate action “probably sometime in the early fall.”

AUTHOR

Ben Johnson

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Trump’s First Step Act Was a Monumental Success. His New Administration Has a Chance to Build On It.

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Every April since President Donald Trump signed the first proclamation in 2018, Second Chance Month has served as an annual reminder to recognize the potential of people with criminal records to turn their lives around. The First Step Act of 2018 remains one of President Trump’s most important legacies from his first term. It has been a tremendous success by virtually any measure, and it’s part of a critical but underserved area of legislative reform.

What’s more, it was bipartisan and remains extraordinarily popular.

Polling indicates that most Americans recognize our criminal justice system needs reform — perhaps because Americans also recognize that the success or failure of our criminal justice system has direct implications for them personally.

A striking 81% of likely voters in 2024 said they’d support reforms to the criminal justice system, with the numbers almost equally high across political affiliations. More than three-quarters of Republicans signaled support. Upwards of 80% of Democrats and Independents did as well.

That’s because Americans understand that a functioning criminal justice system has little to do with ideology. It’s about ensuring the institutions we rely on to keep us safe, free, and flourishing do what they were originally created to do.

Continuing to refine and modernize our justice system not only offers Trump a widely-supported opportunity to better the nation; it’s also a chance for him to further cement his legacy as a transformational reformer of American government.

There’s already a promising roster of legislation filed in Congress that would serve as a worthy follow-up to President Trump’s successes in 2018. Take the Federal Prison Oversight Act, the Clean Slate Act, and the Safer Supervision Act as examples. All three would serve as crucial steps toward lasting, system-level reform of our criminal justice system.

The Federal Prison Oversight Act created an oversight body to inspect and regulate federal prisons — but it hasn’t gone into practical effect yet, due in part to funding issues.

Safer, more effective, more accountable federal prisons wouldn’t only benefit the prison staff and population. It would benefit us all. After all, where do incarcerated men and women go after serving their term? They return to us as neighbors. As co-workers. As fellow citizens.

As such, we must ensure that our correctional facilities are, in fact, corrective, not merely punitive.

The American criminal justice system was never meant to become a multibillion-dollar taxpayer-funded industry. And it was never meant to be a self-perpetuating parallel state. It was intended to protect the common good, mete out justice, and return citizens to their communities after they had served a rightly-determined sentence in reparation for their crime.

We should hold people accountable for their mistakes, as we owe it to victims and the public to ensure there are consequences for causing harm. But when we make the path of a law-abiding life more attainable for those who have demonstrated their commitment to rehabilitation, we create a society that is safer and more prosperous for everyone. This should ring true to all of us, regardless of political inclination.

Employment is one of the biggest challenges for those reentering society from jail or prison. Workforce training programs tailored for those returning from incarceration should be expanded and fully funded. Technology offers promising new opportunities, with one study finding that the use of a virtual reality interface to train people in prison on job interviewing contributed to more job offers and lower recidivism upon release.

Tens of millions of Americans have a criminal record, including half of those who are unemployed. Too often, that record functions as a life sentence long after their official sentence has ended. When criminal records are barriers to employment, housing, and education, millions are kept from ever fully reintegrating into society.

One way to alleviate these barriers is to institutionalize automatic record-clearing for eligible individuals through “Clean Slate” laws, which automatically expunge or seal low-level records after a certain period of time for those whose arrests don’t result in convictions or who have remained crime-free. While a dozen states — like Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Utah — have enacted this policy, nationwide adoption would eliminate bureaucratic red tape preventing people from moving past their records and contributing more to society.

In addition to implementing job training programs and Clean Slate laws, Congress is also considering the Safer Supervision Act, which would help streamline and reform an overwhelmed and arcane system trying to execute and make decisions about post-incarceration supervision. The Safer Supervision Act would reduce the size of the government, reduce costs, and even reduce recidivism.

Second Chance Month is a useful tool to raise awareness, but it should be seen as the floor, not the ceiling. By implementing policies that support job-training, record-clearing, and community reintegration, we can see to it that second chances are more than just feel-good ceremonies for one month on the calendar. We as a nation — and Trump as our president — have a chance to make our justice system just again.

AUTHOR

Timothy Head

Timothy Head is the president and CEO of Unify.US and the former executive director at the Faith & Freedom Coalition.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

10 Beautiful Bills for a Better America

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

As Congress debates major issues regarding taxes, tariffs, and trade, it would be heartening for faith, family, and freedom Americans if it found time to pass topical bills that address other pressing concerns such as protecting unborn life, dismantling taxpayer-funded abortion, conscience protections, and more.

A number of these measures have been introduced in diverse forms in past Congresses indisposed to adopt them. Others are ideas whose time had not yet come. But in these still-early days of the 119th Congress, the two chambers of Congress, one of which had time for Senator Cory Booker’s (D-N.J.) around-the-clock oration, might well find room on their schedules to debate measures that accommodate conscience, support mothers and families, and protect an underappreciated national responsibility — the collection and analysis of social metrics.

Here are 10 measures that fit this general description, with the acknowledgement that they are only a sample of proposals that are within striking distance of adoption and worthy of congressional attention even in a crowded calendar.

Hawley Child Tax Credit Expansion

Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) champions an expansion of the child tax credit, a longtime bipartisan proposition, to $5,000 from its current value of $2,000 per child. The credit would reportedly be refundable against payroll taxes, be available during the year in which the child was conceived, and be paid out over the course of the year rather than remitted as a lump sum at tax time.

S. 4524, Lankford Conscience Protection Act of 2024

Reintroduced most recently in June 2024, legislation like this is urgently needed in an environment where existing federal conscience protections languished unenforced in the Biden years, and states like Illinois and Washington are moving to require physicians or pregnancy centers to refer for abortions against their convictions that these actions are morally and ethically wrong. S. 4524 would have reinforced several existing federal conscience laws and grant individuals and institutions a private right of action to assert their conscience claims in federal court. The proposed law would clarify that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) must investigate alleged conscience violations and can suspend federal funds for health-related services if the violators do not respect conscience.

H.R. 796, Miller Second Chance for Moms Act

Introduced on January 28, 2025 by Rep. Mary Miller (R-Ill.), this legislation would amend the basic federal food, drug, and cosmetics legislation to require the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to mandate a warning label be placed on the abortion drug mifepristone. The warning label would advise women of the availability of an abortion pill reversal (APR) protocol that can often rescue their baby after the woman has taken the drug. It would require the secretary of HHS to create or contract with a 24/7, toll-free hotline to advise women on how to access abortion pill reversal with referrals limited solely to providers of APR.

H.R. 7, Smith No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act of 2025

Introduced on January 22, 2025, Rep. Christopher Smith’s (R-N.J.) bill is an expanded version of previous anti-funding measures and now has 81 House of Representatives co-sponsors. The bill would make permanent the terms of the Hyde Amendment, which permits funding of abortion only in cases of rape, incest, or where a physical disorder, injury, or illness would threaten a woman’s life. It would apply to the full sweep of Hyde Amendment provisions applicable now to annual spending bills. H.R. 7 would also bar federal subsidies for the portion of health insurance premiums that pay for abortion coverage.

H.R. 271 and 272, Fischbach Defund Planned Parenthood and Protecting Life and Taxpayers Acts

These measures, introduced on January 14, 2025, would prohibit Planned Parenthood from accessing any discretionary or mandatory federal funds because of its immersion in the provision and promotion of abortion. The Protecting Life Act would require all federally-funded entities to certify that they will not carry out abortions or provide funds to any other entity that carries out abortions beyond the terms permitted by the Hyde Amendment. The Senate version of the Defund Planned Parenthood Act, S. 203, was introduced on January 23, 2025 by Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and has 11 co-sponsors. In addition, a coalition of 150 pro-life groups has called on Congress to cut funding for Planned Parenthood in the upcoming budget reconciliation bill.

S. 334, Risch American Values Act

This bill carries forward pro-life foreign assistance policy. Introduced on January 30, 2025 by Senator James Risch (R-Idaho), the bill would amend the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to ensure that no appropriated funds may be used to pay for abortion as a method of family planning or to motivate or coerce any person to be sterilized. The bill would also bar the use of funds to pay for biomedical research related to techniques of induced abortion or coerced sterilization. The bill has a dozen co-sponsors.

H.R. 627/S. 178, Norman-Ernst Ensuring Accurate and Complete Abortion Data Reporting Act of 2025

Introduced by Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) on the House side and Senator Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) in the Senate, this is a critical piece of legislation that will ensure the demographic and some health implications of induced abortion are tracked and analyzable to the extent possible in a national, public framework. The urgency of this legislation, which would redress a half century of voluntary and incomplete national reporting, is all the greater thanks to the rapid expansion of chemical abortion conducted with little to no medical evaluation or supervision. The bill notes the disturbing facts that not a single data point regarding abortion is publicly available for all 50 states, and that three states, constituting 15% of U.S. abortion volume, share no reports at all with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC).

H.R. 578, Roy FACE Act Repeal Act of 2025

Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) has led the fight against the much-abused Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, a law that was weaponized during the Biden administration to target right-to-life demonstrators with vindictive prosecutions and harsh penalties. President Trump, as one of his initial executive actions, pardoned men and women, including grandmothers, who had been sentenced to lengthy prison terms for engaging in protests, while making little or no progress in identifying or prosecuting individuals who attacked churches and pregnancy help centers. Absent repeal of this legislation, Roy says, biased enforcement will promptly resume in a future administration. “Data my office obtained from Merrick Garland’s DOJ showed that 97% of FACE Act prosecutions from 1994-2024 were against pro-life Americans.”

H.R. 722, Burlison, Life at Conception Act

The United States has seen a recent spike in abortions, beginning before the 2022 Dobbs ruling but continuing in its wake, with one source reporting that our nation’s abortion toll has risen to more than one million abortions per year. As Congress and the states look for ways to support mothers, the fact remains that for much of the country, the legal status of the unborn is a void that must be filled. It is lawful in much of the land to dismember a child in the womb; to destroy a child in the third trimester or a human embryo because it is affected by Down syndrome or is not the preferred sex; to set aside a child born alive and deny him or her life-saving care; to use public funds to pay for and promote abortion; to leave a woman alone in a bathroom to expel the new life from her womb; or to ship abortion drugs across state lines with little or no medical support.

To address these wrongs, legislation is needed that not only delivers unprecedented levels of support for men and women to act for the good of their child, but to safeguard each and every innocent life. The Life at Conception Act, with 73 co-sponsors, faces a steep challenge in this Congress but it too would be a beautiful bill, one with the added virtue of honoring our best hope for a better future for America.

AUTHOR

Chuck Donovan

Chuck Donovan served in the Reagan White House as a senior writer and as Deputy Director of Presidential Correspondence until early 1989. He was executive vice president of Family Research Council, a senior fellow at The Heritage Foundation, and founder/president of Charlotte Lozier Institute from 2011 to 2024. He has written and spoken extensively on issues in life and family policy.

RELATED VIDEO: Let Trump Be Trump! The President is Attempting the Near Impossible!

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2025 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

1.5 to 2.7 Million Illegals Likely to Vote in 2024: Experts

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Do you plan to vote this November? You’re not alone. Experts say somewhere between 1.5 million and 2.7 million illegal immigrants are likely to cast a ballot in the 2024 elections, impacting races from dog catcher to president of the United States.

The historic flood of illegal immigrants during the Biden-Harris administration has also padded voter rolls, thanks to controversial federal legislation from the Clinton administration. If illegal immigrants and other noncitizens vote in the same proportion as in previous U.S. elections, the number will range anywhere from one-and-a-half to nearly three million votes.

“A 2014 academic journal found that 6.4% of noncitizens voted in 2008,” Kerri Toloczko, executive director of Election Integrity Network and senior advisor to the Only Citizens Vote Coalition, told The Washington Stand. “There are about 24 million noncitizens in the U.S. right now. If they voted only at the same rate of 6.4% this year as they did in 2008, they would account for 1.5 million votes.”

That ponderous number of unlawful votes may just be the tip of the iceberg. “Based on the increased noncitizen activity at state DMVs, and the work of left-wing voter registration activists, this 6.4% could be much higher than it was in 2008. We could be looking at over two million unlawful noncitizen votes,” she told TWS.

Her estimate largely dovetails with a previous study showing 2.7 million noncitizens are likely to vote in the 2024 election.

The author of that study — James D. Agresti, the president and cofounder of the think tank and fact-check website Just Facts — confirmed to TWS that “the most comprehensive, transparent, and rigorous study on this matter found that about two to five million noncitizens are illegally registered to vote, and aggressive attempts to debunk the study have completely failed.”

Opponents of election integrity laws minimize the problem by claiming it is already illegal for foreigners to vote in U.S. elections. But, unlike other purported threats, the problem truly holds the power to undermine our democracy, election experts say. “The Left likes to use phrases like, ‘It’s not that widespread,’” Toloczko observed. “But how many does a moral relativist uninterested in upholding the law think is too many?” And “if every unlawful vote cancels out the vote of a lawful citizen voter, how many of those are acceptable?”

Would two million unlawful votes be “enough to possibly make a difference in House and Senate races, and even the presidency?” she asked. “You bet.”

Agresti noted that “the claim that noncitizens rarely vote is based on studies with absurd methodologies. For example, they measure the prevalence of this crime by merely counting convictions for it.”

This is “ridiculous,” Agresti told TWS. He compared the statistic to measuring the number of Americans who illegally use narcotics “based on guilty pleas and verdicts. The same applies to any other law that isn’t strictly enforced, like driving above the speed limit.”

The House of Representatives released a 22-page report in June documenting illegal immigrants voting in the United States. Under current law, 17 cities in California, Maryland, and Vermont as well as the District of Columbia allow noncitizens to vote. While the noncitizens are supposed to vote only in local elections, “mistakes” have been reported.

Toloczko highlighted documented cases of foreigners illegally voting in U.S. elections. “The federal government recently indicted a group of noncitizens from 15 different countries on federal voting charges. Texas recently purged 6,500 noncitizens from its voter rolls — 30% of whom had voting records,” Toloczko told TWS, expressing similar thoughts in The Stream.

Illegal immigration impacts U.S. elections in a second way: Counting noncitizens in the U.S. Census redistributes eight congressional seats and, with them, their Electoral College votes which elect the president, a team of immigration scholars found. America’s teeming illegal immigrant population gives additional congressional seats to California (3), Texas (2), New York, New Jersey, and Florida (one each); and it takes seats away from Alabama, Idaho, Michigan, Missouri, Minnesota, Ohio, Rhode Island, and West Virginia (one seat each). Illegal immigrants alone transfer one seat each from Ohio, Alabama, and Minnesota to California, Texas, and New York, the study from the Center for Immigration Studies found.

House Republicans have sought to address the problem by passing a number of border security and election integrity measures, including the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act (H.R. 8281), which would require local election officials to verify someone’s U.S. citizenship status before registering that person to vote. It passed the House of Representatives in July.

“States are prohibited from requiring documentary proof of U.S. citizenship” thanks to court interpretations of the 1993 National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), Rep. Andy Barr (R-Ky.) told Fox Business show “Mornings with Maria” on Tuesday. “Democrats who vote against that show what they are really up to: that they want noncitizens to vote and rig our elections.”

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-La.) has called the bill’s passage “a generation-defining moment.” Johnson favors attaching the election integrity bill to a must-pass continuing resolution to keep the government funded past the end of the fiscal year on September 30 and avert a government shutdown. Yet Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has declared the bill dead on arrival in the Senate. “What is he afraid of?” asked Senator Deb Fischer (R-Neb.) on Tuesday morning on Fox Business.

The underlying numbers behind the 1.5 to 2.7 million noncitizen vote count may undercount the extent of the problem. Yale University researchers estimated the size of the U.S. illegal immigrant population at 16 to 29 million in 2016, before the Biden-Harris administration enacted border policies that saw record-breaking levels of illegal immigration every year to date. While administration officials channeled illegal immigration into ports of entry and other means such as the CBP One app which reduce the number of entries on paper during this presidential election year, experts say the number of overall immigrants entering the U.S. has remained the same or increased.

Americans have increasingly groaned under the strain of illegal immigration. Video footage has shown members of the Venezuelan transnational criminal organization Tren de Aragua (TdA) rampaging through the Denver suburb of Aurora, Colorado, where they reportedly terrorize and extort residents of multiple apartment buildings.

The Biden-Harris administration has placed roughly 20,000 Haitians in the town of Springfield, Ohio — a town of 58,000 Americans — where they have proceeded to drive up housing costs, underbid American workers for jobs, and engage in a spree of car crashes. The problem has reportedly spread to the nearby town of Tremont. Ohio Governor Mike DeWine (R) recently sent the city millions of dollars and deployed a team of Ohio State Highway Patrol troopers to get the deadly traffic problem under control. Although the legacy media attempted to pin a large reported number of bomb threats against Springfield schools and other institutions on J.D. Vance and other politicians who have highlighted the city’s plight, DeWine verified that officials determined that all 33 threats were “hoaxes” that originated overseas.

Mayors of Aurora and Tremont say they were not consulted about the resettling of these foreigners in their cities.

A Axios/Harris poll released in April showed a majority of Americans support the mass deportation of illegal immigrants back to their countries of origin. Overall, 51% of U.S. citizens back the Trump-endorsed policy of deportations, including about half (46%) of all registered Independents. A surprisingly high 42% of Democrats support mass deportations, likely fueled by the increasing number of African Americans — who have voted as high as nine out of 10 for the Democratic presidential candidate — who see their neighborhoods impacted by a surging illegal immigrant population, especially in sanctuary cities. Their cities’ Democratic leaders often divert taxpayer funds, and deny taxpayer-funded services to U.S. citizens, in favor of illegal immigrants.

As the government funding drama plays out in the U.S. Capitol, America First Legal has filed numerous lawsuits contending that two provisions of federal law — 8 U.S.C. § 1373(c) and 8 U.S.C. § 1644 — already allow state and local officials to obtain information about applicants’ citizenship status before registration.

“The reason why [Democrats have] got that wide-open border is so they can get as many illegals in here and get them to vote, so they can dominate the American vote,” Rep. Mike Ezell (R-Miss.) told “Washington Watch” in July. “They want to dominate the House, the Senate, and the White House.”

“They want to get elected by any means necessary,” Ezell said.

AUTHOR

Ben Johnson

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

House Passes Bill to Protect U.S. Sovereignty

Harris Offers Few Policy Proposals during Rare One-on-One Interview

Taylor Swift’s Endorsement of Kamala Harris Had Minimal Impact, Poll Finds

Dem Senator Warns Report on Trump Assassination Attempt ‘Will Absolutely Shock the American People’

Reports Confirm Haitian Migrants are Eating Geese, Cats

It Only Took 20 Seconds for Black Immigrant Caller to Unravel Charlamagne’s Defense of Harris’ Role in Border Crisis

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

‘Sorely Needed’: Speaker Johnson May Attach SAVE Act to Government Funding Bill

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Congressional Republicans say House leadership will likely attach a bill to prevent illegal immigrants from voting in U.S. elections — a bill Republicans say is necessary for the “protection of citizenship and our national sovereignty”— to a must-pass government funding bill as a precondition for avoiding a government shutdown.

Multiple sources indicate Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-La.) will add the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act to a continuing resolution, or CR, which Congress needs to pass before October 1 to avert a government shutdown.

“I suspect you’re going to see a CR with the SAVE Act coming up in the next two to three weeks,” predicted Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) on “Washington Watch” Wednesday. “What the Speaker has discussed with us is a six-month continuing resolution. You and I both don’t love that,” Perry told the program’s guest host, former Congressman Jody Hice, “but that gets us into the Trump administration, God willing, if he were to prevail. But included with that would be attaching to that the SAVE Act, which requires states then to verify citizenship of every one of their voters. And that’s something that is sorely needed.”

Congressional Republicans see the bill as necessary to fix a loophole in federal law that may incentivize illegal immigrants to vote in U.S. elections. The SAVE Act amends the 1993 National Voter Registration Act (sometimes called the “Motor-Voter Law”), which stipulates that anyone who applies for a driver’s license must be offered the opportunity to register to vote. The form asks applicants to certify they are U.S. citizens, but a court ruling prevents officials from taking any steps to verify the applicant’s citizenship. The SAVE Act would require officials to assure the would-be voter’s U.S. citizenship before an illegal ballot gets cast.

Democrats object to the law as unnecessary and redundant, saying existing laws already bar non-citizens from voting. But Republicans say the current landscape does nothing to prevent illegal immigrants from voting. “Of course, it’s already illegal for people that are here illegally to vote, but that’s not to say it doesn’t happen, because no one is enforcing it,” explained Perry. “This would require states to actually enforce the law.” Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) wrote in an op-ed for Breitbart that Congress finds itself “in the historically unique position” of being able to leverage government funding for election security.

“Asking for proof of citizenship should not bother anyone. That’s the only way that we can protect the integrity of citizenship and the integrity of our elections,” Ken Blackwell, senior fellow for Human Rights and Constitutional Governance at Family Research Council, told Hice later in the show. “This is a situation that cries out for more … protection of citizenship and our national sovereignty.”

With just two months before the 2024 presidential election, Republicans see the election integrity bill, which has been endorsed by former President Donald Trump, as pivotal. Speaker Johnson called the bill “a generation-defining moment” in U.S. civic history. “We see it as a potential game changer,” said Perry. “We just want our elections to be fair, but determined by American citizens. And the fact that the Democrats oppose that should tell you everything you need to know.” The bill has the support of conservatives in both houses of Congress. “This is where the House Freedom Caucus and I stand: While we oppose passing any CR, if it’s forced upon us, we will fight to ensure the SAVE Act is part of the deal. It’s time to hold the line and demand accountability, because secure elections should be non-negotiable,” said Rep. Michael Cloud (R-Texas) in a statement emailed to The Washington Stand.

As concerns over illegal voting take center stage in Washington, the issue is winding its way through the nation’s courts, as well. On Wednesday, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) sued Bexar County after its commissioners pressed forward with a plan to send mail-in ballots to all county residents, regardless of their eligibility or citizenship status. “This program is completely unlawful and potentially invites election fraud,” said Paxton. The move comes after Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R) removed more than 1.1 million ineligible registrants — including 7,000 non-citizens — from the state’s voting rolls.

In neighboring Arizona, America First Legal sued all 15 county recorders for failing to remove illegal and ineligible voters from the system ahead of November’s election. The lawsuit contends that two provisions of federal law — 8 U.S.C. § 1373(c) and 8 U.S.C. § 1644 — allow state and local officials to obtain information about applicants’ citizenship, an authority which they have failed to use. “America First Legal will do everything in its power to fight mass illegal alien voting and foreign interference in our democracy,” said Stephen Miller, a former Trump aide.

The road ahead at the federal level is not without obstacles. Some in Washington oppose attaching the SAVE Act to the CR, and many House conservatives have expressed displeasure that the House must pass a CR rather than legislating discreet bills for each area of government. Two congressmen — Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Matt Rosendale (R-Mont.) — have announced they will vote against the bill. Perry said the speaker’s solution is the most practical response. “We’re going to be left with a couple options: a continuing resolution, which keeps spending the same amount of money [and the] same policy until the deal is worked out, or an omnibus, which would be terribly written in Chuck Schumer’s office by his staff, spending wildly” and codifying “terrible policy,” said Perry.

Democrats in both chambers have gone all-out to oppose the measure. A meager five House Democrats voted for the SAVE Act in July, with 198 opposed. (The Democrats who voted in favor were Reps. Henry Cuellar and Vicente Gonzalez Jr. of Texas, Don Davis of North Carolina, Jared Golden of Maine, and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington.)

Polls show the American people believe the Republicans have the better part of the argument. A whopping 87% of Americans support the bill’s goal of assuring only Americans vote in American elections. “I’m for those wanting a better life to get the opportunity to become a citizen the right way. But if you’re not American, you shouldn’t be voting. Simple as that,” said NFL great Brett Favre.

Despite overwhelming public support, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has pronounced any funding measure including the SAVE Act “dead on arrival.” And Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Patty Murray (D-Wash.) called the bill’s election integrity measures “outrageous partisan poison pills.”

“Chuck Schumer might say it’s dead on arrival,” but if the House passes the election integrity bill as part of the must-pass bill, the Democrat is “going to have no choice to either accept that, or he will be responsible for shutting down the government,” Perry told Hice. “If the government shuts down over the Democrats’ unholy obsession with noncitizen voting, that’s on Chuck Schumer,” said Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) in a social media post. Senator Rick Scott (R-Fla.) made similar comments Wednesday during comments to the Republican Jewish Coalition.

“Sure would be a strange reason to shut down the U.S. government,” noted Elon Musk, who became a legal immigrant to the United States in 2002.

But Blackwell does not believe the bill will cause a stand-off in Congress. “By actually shining some spotlight on this challenge, I think that we can we can pull the curtain down on this illegal action,” said Blackwell, who oversaw Ohio’s elections as Secretary of State (1999-2007).

Nothing is more important to American political life than safeguarding the integrity of the ballot, he said. “Every vote counts. And so protecting the integrity of the system by making sure that there’s no illegal vote that cancels out a legal ballot is prudent. We cannot sit on the sidelines. Each citizen of the United States has to demand this integrity, has to demand this sort of transparency, has to get involved. And we must continue to make sure that we have as many people as observers and workers at the polling places as possible at the precinct level.”

“We should not have a polling place in America that is not covered by two sets of eyes, bipartisan sets of eyes, so that we have transparency. So, make sure you go to your local party, go to your local county office, and ask how you can become involved as a worker or an observer,” he exhorted.

“We cannot let darkness prevail in this election,” Blackwell concluded.

AUTHOR

Ben Johnson

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLE: A ‘Conservative’ Case against Tennessee’s SAFE Act?

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

‘Clear and Real Threat’: Johnson Backs SAVE Act to End Non-Citizens Voting in U.S. Elections

/in , , , , , , , , /by

On Wednesday, the House of Representatives will vote on a bill to reverse “the ease with which illegal aliens can register and vote in our elections, including in every single swing state,” said Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-La.) on a video conference call attended by The Washington Stand.

The House will vote on the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, which requires states to verify that only U.S. citizens can register or vote in U.S. elections. The bill requires applicants to show proof of citizenship and grants states access to federal databases that can verify citizenship. It also orders the Department of Homeland Security to determine whether to initiate removal proceedings if a non-citizen unlawfully attempts to register to vote.

The bill attempts to fix a problem created by the 1993 National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), often dubbed the “Motor-Voter Law.” The bill, signed into law by President Bill Clinton, requires officials to offer to register those who apply for a driver’s license. While federal law says only U.S. citizens should register, a 2013 Supreme Court opinion held that “the NVRA forbids [s]tates to demand that an applicant submit additional information beyond that required by the [f]ederal [f]orm.”

The form asks applicants to swear on penalty of perjury that they are U.S. citizens — but requires no proof whatsoever.

“In effect, this law, the NVRA, requires states to use the honors system,” Florida Secretary of State Cord Byrd (R) told TWS. “There’s no mechanism to ensure that only those registering or voting are citizens,” Speaker Johnson told The Washington Stand. With the SAVE Act, “we can assure American citizens that their vote isn’t going to be canceled out by a non-citizen,” said Byrd.

“The purpose here was basically to mirror the existing language in the NVRA,” said the bill’s sponsor, Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), in response to a question asked by TWS, the only question asked during the video call. “We’re just literally amending existing law” to underline and facilitate the states’ responsibility to safeguard election integrity.

Speaker Johnson released a 22-page report late last month documenting the reality of non-citizens registering to vote, and actually voting, in U.S. elections, “As of May 2023, Virginia Department of Elections officials have removed 1,481 registrations,” said the report, and 23% had cast a ballot.

Non-citizens already legally vote in several areas nationwide. “A number of localities are blurring the lines of citizenship by allowing non-citizens to vote in local elections,” said Johnson. Cities and municipalities that allow non-citizens to vote legally include:

  • Oakland, California
  • San Francisco, California
  • Washington, D.C.
  • Burlington, Vermont
  • Montpelier, Vermont
  • Barnesville, Maryland
  • Cheverly, Maryland
  • Chevy Chase (Section 3), Maryland
  • Garrett Park, Maryland
  • Glen Echo, Maryland
  • Hyattsville, Maryland
  • Martin’s Additions, Maryland
  • Mount Rainier, Maryland
  • Riverdale Park, Maryland
  • Somerset, Maryland
  • Takoma Park, Maryland
  • Winooski, Vermont

“We are extremely grateful that the speaker of the House has taken it on himself to push this bill and say this is a significant problem,” said Election Integrity Network founder and Only Citizens Vote Coalition co-founder Cleta Mitchell, which hosted the call.

Speaker Johnson called the issue of non-citizens voting in the United States “a very clear and real threat” to U.S. election integrity. “We know that President Biden and his policies have invited more than 8.6 million illegals into the United States in three years. In fact, I’ve been on the record saying I think the number is more than 16 million.” When Border Patrol agents add in “gotaways,” they safely estimate a total of 10 million illegal border crossings during the Biden administration — more than the population of 41 states. To make matters worse, Johnson told TWS that Border Patrol agents revealed they are not permitted to count all gotaways, unless they “have clear sight and vision of them” fleeing into U.S. territory.

Yale University researchers estimated the total number of illegal immigrants in the U.S. at 16 to 29 million, in 2016.

“Democrats have said they want to make non-citizens voters. We have them on tape,” Johnson told TWS. Democrats, including Democratic socialist organizers, have long described amnesty for the illegal immigrants as the best mechanism to “create a governing coalition for the long-term.”

“The reason why they’ve got that wide-open border is so they can get as many illegals in here and get them to vote, so they can dominate the American vote,” Rep. Mike Ezell (R-Miss.) told “Washington Watch” guest host Jody Hice on Tuesday. “They want to dominate the House, the Senate and the White House. They want to get elected by any means necessary,” even “going against the rules,” Ezell told Hice.

After such an influx of lawless immigration, coupled with indifference to the citizenship of voter applicants, “among the other remedial measures we have to take, [the SAVE Act] is the most obvious one,” Johnson told TWS.

“Election integrity is a cornerstone to this country,” Ezell told Hice.

The bill enjoys strong support nationwide. A recent poll commissioned by Tea Party Patriots found 87% of all Americans, including more than three-quarters of Democrats, believe people should show proof of U.S. citizenship before registering to vote. Similarly, a bipartisan coalition of more than 500 state elected officials have signed a letter from the State Freedom Caucus supporting the SAVE Act.

Florida Secretary of State Cord Byrd (R) noted that in 2020, Florida amended its state constitution to say only a citizen can be eligible to vote with 80% support. “We can’t get 80% to agree if it’s night or day,” Byrd told TWS. “It has broad bipartisan support.”

Yet the Biden administration announced on Monday that the administration “strongly opposes” the bill, because “it is extraordinarily rare for noncitizens to break the law by voting in [f]ederal elections.”

“It is already illegal for noncitizens to vote in [f]ederal elections — it is a [f]ederal crime punishable by prison and fines. The alleged justification for this bill is based on easily disproven falsehoods,” Biden asserted. “Additionally, making a false claim of citizenship or unlawfully voting in an election is punishable by removal from the United States and a permanent bar to admission,” said Biden, who effectively ended deportations early in his term.

Biden’s statement implied he would refuse to take any action related to the border until the House Republicans submit to his agenda. “If House Republicans really want to do something about securing our border and fixing our broken immigration system, they should vote on the border deal that the [p]resident negotiated,” which would facilitate the entry of millions of non-citizens into the United States but do little to provide border security.

Biden and his fellow Democrats oppose the SAVE Act and “want to try to kill it, because they don’t believe in American sovereignty,” Roy told TWS.

Some members of the House seem “bent on destroying this country,” Ezell said. “As long as I’m breathing, I’m … going to continue to stand for the American people and do what’s right in the eyes of God. That’s my stand.”

AUTHOR

Ben Johnson

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This The Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Comer: Biden’s Intelligence Agencies ‘Have No Plan’ to Counter CCP’s Infiltration Program

/in , , , , , /by

The chairman of the House Oversight and Accountability Committee is warning that despite the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) unprecedented level of infiltration of U.S. institutions, intelligence agencies under the Biden administration appear to be unprepared, with “no government plan” to counter the threat.

“[W]e’ve known for years [that] they’re stealing our patents, they’re stealing our intellectual property,” House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) pointed out during Thursday’s “Washington Watch with Tony Perkins.” “They’ve engaged in creating spy centers all across America, not just at our public universities. By the way, China, we have learned, is funding anonymously a lot of our most liberal research universities, the ones which just so happen to be having all the campus protests against Israel.”

A report released Wednesday by the Network Contagion Research Institute (NCRI) confirmed that radical left-wing organizations heavily involved in the anti-Israel protests and encampments that have spread to numerous universities across the country have received considerable funding from a network with ties to the CCP. The report details how the Shut It Down for Palestine (SID4P) movement, which includes a coalition of three other left-wing organizations, “are linked through financial, personal, and ideological ties to CCP associates Neville Roy Singham and his wife, Jodie Evans.” Singham, who formerly served as a consultant to Huawei, a Chinese tech conglomerate, “is known for funneling hundreds of millions of dollars into pro-China progressive advocacy through his network.”

The report concludes that the CCP’s “foreign influence efforts” seek to support U.S.-based groups with a “revolutionary, anti-government, and anti-capitalist agenda” in order to “incit[e] unrest throughout the summer of 2024 and in the lead-up to the U.S. Presidential election.”

Comer went on to describe what his committee is doing to combat China’s infiltration efforts.

“[W]e also know that they’re spying on our military bases, and we’ve launched an investigation,” he explained. “We’re trying to learn every detail of how deep their spy rings go, how deep their theft rings go, as well as passing legislation. [O]ur committee yesterday [passed] the BIOSECURE Act, which targeted five Chinese companies that the United States can no longer do business with because they take our genetic data and our health care data and use it against us.”

As reported by the South China Morning Post, the bill was passed out of committee with almost unanimous bipartisan support. The legislation would restrict federal agencies from contracting with the Chinese biotech companies BGI Group, MGI, Complete Genomics, Wuxi AppTec, and Wuxi Biologics. As noted by Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.), BGI has been accused of “using DNA from millions around the world without their consent on genomic projects conducted by the Chinese military.” In addition, Wuxi AppTec allegedly stole the intellectual property of U.S. companies and ran genetic testing centers “in cooperation with the Chinese military.”

Despite the increasingly malicious activity directed at the U.S. by the CCP, Comer expressed profound disappointment in the performance and lack of initiative of the intelligence agencies under the Biden administration with regard to the threat.

“Right now, I have absolutely no confidence in our intelligence community whatsoever,” he emphasized. “… [W]hen they give a classified briefing to Congress, if you write that down and wait, their predictions never seem to happen. They’re always wrong in a lot of big things. … [W]ith respect to China, there’s no government plan right now to educate the heads of government cabinets, much less the heads of government departments and divisions as to what to look for, to realize when China has infiltrated your data system or when China has hacked into some type of computer program, or where China may have some employees that are there spying and taking sensitive or even classified information back to the CCP for China.”

Comer further highlighted the dangers of the U.S.’s growing financial dependence on China.

“[China] owns a lot of our debt,” he observed. “And one of the strategies that China uses in third world countries — and I fear that they may already be implementing this strategy in the United States — is a thing called ‘debt trap strategy,’ where they loan countries money on certain infrastructure projects … knowing they will never be able to pay it back. And then, like a bank, they go in and foreclose on that asset. … [A]nytime Joe Biden has a program to pay off student loan debt or has another stimulus program or … gives money to Ukraine, we’re borrowing from China, and I fear that in the back of China’s mind, they realize the United States is going to be just like some of these African [and] South American countries [who are] never going to be able to pay it back.”

“As Scripture says, we don’t want to be indebted because the borrower is slave to the lender,” Family Research Council President Tony Perkins remarked.

AUTHOR

Dan Hart

Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

17 State AGs Refuse to Allow Biden to Insert Abortion into Pregnant Workers Fairness Act

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by


As the Biden campaign continues to push abortion as its primary focus ahead of the November elections, the administration made yet another move to ensure that abortion remains front and center by moving to insert the issue into the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act earlier this month — a move that earned a strong rebuke and lawsuit from a group of 17 Republican state attorneys general.

In mid-April, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) announced that it was controversially adding abortion into its draft rules for the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, allowing workers to “ask for time off to obtain an abortion and recover from the procedure.” But critics say the legislation was never intended to address abortion and was merely meant to give pregnant women commonsense accommodations in the workplace, including time off for medical appointments, options to sit down and stand up while working, exemptions from heavy lifting, time off for postpartum recovery, bathroom, breastfeeding, food, and water breaks, considerations for morning sickness, and more.

In response, a coalition of 17 state attorneys general filed a lawsuit last week against the EEOC, claiming that the abortion rule is unconstitutional, among other concerns. “[U]nelected commissioners at the EEOC seek to hijack these new protections for pregnancies by requiring employers to accommodate elective abortions — something the Act clearly did not authorize,” said the AG coalition in a statement. “The EEOC’s rule constitutes an unconstitutional federal overreach that infringes on existing state laws and exceeds the scope of the agency’s authority.”

State attorneys general who signed onto the lawsuit include Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, and West Virginia.

Last week, Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall (R) joined “Washington Watch” to discuss why he joined the lawsuit against the EEOC’s actions.

The original text “is a wonderful, bipartisan supported [bill] — and we don’t say that very often with things that come out of Washington — to make sure that we accommodate pregnant women in the workplace because we want to have healthy pregnancies and children that come to birth,” he noted. “[L]et’s make sure that we fill a gap in federal law to ensure that pregnant women have those accommodations. … And now, the EEOC that was tasked by Congress to come out with some very specific aspects of what that looks like, now want to make sure that states like Alabama would have to violate state law to somehow or another accommodate a woman who wants an abortion. Alabama is not going to stand for that, along with the [16] other states that are a part of this coalition.”

Marshall went on to point out that even pro-abortion Democrats explicitly stated that the bill had nothing to do with abortion when it was passed, which still hasn’t stopped the Biden administration’s actions.

“One of the Democratic sponsors of this bill made it very clear on the floor of the Senate that this bill had nothing to do with abortion [and] assured his colleagues on both sides of the aisle the intention of this bill,” he observed. “And yet, despite its clear language, what we see is [the] Biden administration co-opting a valid, appropriate law to be able to enforce this pro-abortion agenda. I know we shouldn’t be surprised, but it’s one of the reasons why I’m so proud of my colleagues across the country on many pro-life issues, because we’re standing in that gap that we need in this country to make sure that we can push back on an administration that’s just simply gone too far.”

Marshall further made it clear that state attorneys general have a particularly important role to play in pushing back against the Biden administration’s tendency to try unconstitutional tactics to get its policies into place.

“This is an unelected, unaccountable group,” he underscored. “… [W]e’ve seen this on multiple fronts with this administration, whether it be attacking pro-life states like Alabama. We’ve seen it with this radical gender ideology that’s being pushed through multiple federal programs. It’s why, uniquely, attorneys general in this important time in our nation have the opportunity to be able to hold [the administration] in check.”

The Alabama attorney general additionally pointed to how state law will have strong legal footing against the measure in court.

“[W]hat we see also with this particular rule is an effort to impose a federal policy of this administration on a state like Alabama, whose law is abundantly clear that we are a pro-life state in our Constitution,” Marshall explained. “… [T]o somehow or another use an unaccountable body like the EEOC to circumvent valid state law and constitutional provisions, we think we’re on solid legal footing to be able to push back and to win. … The key right now is attempting to get that initial injunctive relief, to be able to hold this rule in abeyance before its full implementation. But we feel very confident about the work of our colleagues, grateful for the efforts of Tennessee and Oklahoma to lead this charge, but do feel strongly that we’re going to prevail.”

AUTHOR

Dan Hart

Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden Admin SCOTUS Case Against Idaho Pro-Life Law ‘Turns EMTALA on its Head’: Idaho AG

Planned Parenthood’s International Reach ‘Is the Perfect Picture of Ideological Colonialism’

RELATED POSCAST:  The Economy and Fertility Rates: Are They Connected?

EDITOR NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

AI Enters Politics: Pay No Attention to the Man Behind the Curtain

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

First they came for your drive-thru, then they came for your pastors. Now they’re here for your legislators.

The Associated Press reported recently that in Brazil, the first known artificial intelligence (AI) generated law was passed in October. City councilman Ramiro Rosário of Porto Alegre, Brazil apparently had some trouble crafting a city ordinance. Rosário, instead of shopping around for model legislation from another town or special interest group, did the most 2023 thing he could: he asked ChatGPT. The AP reports:

“Rosário told The Associated Press that he asked OpenAI’s chatbot ChatGPT to craft a proposal to prevent the city from charging taxpayers to replace water consumption meters if they are stolen. He then presented it to his 35 peers on the council without making a single change or even letting them know about its unprecedented origin.

“‘If I had revealed it before, the proposal certainly wouldn’t even have been taken to a vote,’ Rosário told the AP by phone on Thursday. The 36-member council approved it unanimously and the ordinance went into effect on Nov. 23.

“‘It would be unfair to the population to run the risk of the project not being approved simply because it was written by artificial intelligence,’ he added.”

When he was facing leadership challenges in the church due to his age, the Apostle Paul wrote to Timothy, “Let no one despise you for your youth.” Now we have Brazilian lawmakers speaking up for the oppressed AI, which apparently gets no respect. The councilman is not only the champion of the stolen water meter, he’s the voice of AI in government, speaking up for the little bot who has none.

I don’t fault an ill-equipped lawmaker for getting help doing his job, but it does say something about a society where a presumably elected official needs to resort to something that an adept 10-year-old can do. It raises the question, is the councilman even needed if his duties have been reduced to writing a query instead of writing legislation?

After President Lincoln had put Ulysses S. Grant in charge of the Union forces during the Civil War, there was worry among some as to whether the army could match Lee’s rebel forces. When someone asked about Grant’s chances, Doris Kearns Goodwin writes in “Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln,” that Lincoln told this anecdote:

“The question reminds of me of a little anecdote about the automaton chess player, which many years ago astonished the world by its skill in that game. After a while the automaton was challenged by a celebrated player, who, to his great chagrin, was beaten twice by the machine. At the end of the second game, the player, significantly pointing his finger at the automaton, exclaimed in a very decided tone, ‘There’s a man in it.’”

Putting aside the fact that there were apparently “automaton chess players” before the Civil War (who knew?), it was clear then that military and political operations were not automatic. Military operations required people. Political operations required people. Even mechanical chess players required people.

That remains true today. Politics — nasty business as it is — requires people. While we may joke about it being better off without them, we should think long and hard before we relinquish our leadership to something that doesn’t have to eat three squares a day. ChatGPT may be able to compose a water meter ordinance, but it won’t inspire people to use their water in a better way. People need to be led by people.

Just like the automated chess player, for ChatGPT there’s also “a man in it.” AI may have a body of silicon, precious metals, and transistors, but its intellectual framework of ones and zeros can never amount to a soul. AI may be able to write its own answers, and interpret what we want, but it can’t run without programming and someone feeding its server farms the electricity it needs.

No matter how much the hype-mongers of artificial intelligence may tell us to pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, there’s always a man in it. The question for us as we see the advent of AI applied to politics, is which man do we want? The one we elected, or the people doing the programming? It’s only a matter of time before we’re faced with this here in the U.S. And as much as we think a robot might do a better job than whichever current leader you’ve elected (I bet you can think of a few…), the solution is not to defer to some unelected artificial Oz behind the curtain. The solution is to elect better leaders.

AUTHOR

Jared Bridges

Jared Bridges is editor-in-chief of The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLE: Thwarting the Left’s Assault on America

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

GOP Lawmakers Introduce Bill That Would Bar Biden From Invoking A National Climate Emergency

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

Republican Texas Rep. August Pfluger and West Virginia Sen. Shelley Moore Capito introduced legislation Monday morning aiming to preempt any possible attempt by President Joe Biden to use emergency powers to circumvent congressional checks on his administration’s sweeping climate agenda.

“The Real Emergencies Act” would clarify that the president is unable to invoke emergency powers permitted by the National Emergencies Act, the Disaster Relief and Emergencies Act and the Public Health Service Act on the basis of a perceived climate change crisis. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and other left-wing congressional lawmakers have called for Biden to declare a national climate emergency to further his administration’s aggressive climate agenda.

“I am proud to join Senator Capito in introducing the Real Emergencies Act, which will prevent the White House from distracting from real emergencies – like skyrocketing inflation and record-high energy costs – by declaring climate change a national emergency,” Pfluger told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “Our legislation ensures that President Biden does not abuse the power of his office to pursue his anti-American energy agenda against the will of the American people.”

The Real Emergencies Act by Daily Caller News Foundation

Schumer said in January 2021 that a declaration of climate emergency would enable Biden to “do many, many things under the emergency powers of the President that wouldn’t have to go through – that he could do without legislation.” Schumer’s comments came as the Inflation Reduction Act had stalled in congress amid Democratic West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin’s initial refusal to support many of the bill’s provisions in an evenly-divided Senate.

The Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) similarly urged Biden to invoke emergency powers on the basis of a perceived climate emergency to “invoke authorities under the Defense Production Act and Trade Expansion Act, mobilizing domestic industry to manufacture affordable renewable energy technologies.” The CPC also demanded in the same March 2022 document that Biden unilaterally ban fossil fuel leasing on federal lands and halt all crude oil exports, some four months before Manchin eventually reached a July 2022 deal with Schumer to support the Inflation Reduction Act in the Senate.

With Manchin’s support secured, Biden was able to sign the Inflation Reduction Act into law in August 2022, about three months before Republicans regained control of the House in the 2022 midterms. As a candidate for the presidency in 2019, Biden delivered a personal “guarantee” that his administration would “end fossil fuels.”

Under the auspices of Biden’s COVID-19 emergency powers, the Biden administration imposed an indefinite pause on student loan payments as well as a federal eviction moratorium. Biden only ended the declared COVID-19 national emergency in April 2023, more than six months after admitting in September 2022 that the pandemic was “over.”

“The Biden administration has repeatedly governed by executive overreach when it comes to energy and environmental regulations, ignoring the law and doing so without congressional approval,” Capito told the DCNF. “The Real Emergencies Act would ensure the president cannot go further by declaring a national emergency, which would grant him more executive authority and grow the size of government all in the name of climate change.”

AUTHOR

NICK POPE

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden’s ‘Green’ Agenda Could End Up Sending Taxpayer Cash To Chinese-Owned Mines In Canada

New Email Contradicts Garland on Hunter Biden Probe as Impeachment Talk Heats Up

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

McCarthy Proves What He’s Made Of with Gritty Budget Win

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) hasn’t had an easy path. After painstakingly working through conservatives’ gripes with House leadership this January, he finally squeaked out the votes he needed to assume the third most powerful job in Washington. But even after that chaos died down, questions loomed. Was he cut out to be speaker? Would he bring the fractious, competing corners of the GOP together? In a staring contest with Democrats, could he win? The answer, Americans learned from a hard-won victory on the budget bill, is a resounding yes.

With just two votes to spare, McCarthy accomplished something that seemed improbable even 48 hours ago: he held his fragile coalition together and passed a bill that all but forces Democrats to the negotiating table. Under the House proposal, America would not default on its loans. But there were strings attached. In exchange for raising the debt ceiling and protecting the country’s credit line, conservatives are demanding a massive overhaul of spending and deep cuts to bloated programs.

For starters, Republicans would set a $1.47 trillion limit on discretionary spending — with a 1% increase built in for each year. In a blow to the Democratic messaging machine, even the AP admits that the legislation poses no threat to Social Security and Medicare, which has been Joe Biden’s favorite scare tactic about the bill. To the cheers of most conservatives, the proposal also scoops up all of the unused COVID relief money from the series of bills passed between 2020-2022. Another way the GOP carved out savings was to roll back the $71 billion boost in IRS funding.

According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), all of this would make a huge difference in the country’s bleak financial picture, slashing the deficit by a whopping $4.8 trillion in a 10-year span.

Fueled by coffee and power naps, Republicans worked past 4 a.m. Wednesday to hammer out the deal. That all-nighter paid off. The bill eked through by a 217-215 margin that afternoon, putting Republicans in an unusual place — the driver’s seat.

In a triumphant press conference after the vote, McCarthy threw down the gauntlet. “We have lifted the debt ceiling, so nobody could worry about whether the debt ceiling is going to get lifted. We did it. The Democrats have not. [If] the president wants to make sure the debt ceiling is going to be lifted, sign this bill.”

Although Rules Chairman Tom Cole (R-Okla.) made it clear that it’s “not the end of the road,” he insisted that “it’s a great personal and political victory for the speaker who got it done. He got a lot of people to vote for a debt ceiling increase who’ve never done that before.”

House Freedom Caucus Chair Scott Perry (R-Pa.) was equally complimentary, telling Family Research Council President Tony Perkins on “Washington Watch” that the vote was “quite honestly, another historic moment in modern times here in Congress.” “For most people, this is just another day in the saga of Washington. But … as far as I know in modern times, this has never happened before.” And one of the reasons it was possible, he said, is because conservatives put specific conditions on the speaker in January — things like single-subject bills. More debate. Free-flowing amendments. In other words, Congress is back to operating how the Founders intended, not as a graveyard of ideas where decisions were predetermined by a powerful few.

Even if you go back to the 2011 days of Cut, Cap, and Balance, Republicans never insisted on “real cuts in that first year.” But this isn’t your 2011 GOP. And while the prevailing wisdom in Washington may be that the House has to cave to Joe Biden and Senate Democrats without demanding concessions like meaningful spending reform, Perry insists, “We’re not going to cave.”

“We have a narrow majority,” he conceded, but “we have worked for months — right up until about 4:00 in the morning last night to get this to where we can pass it. And, it is the beginning of the conversation, but what it does is … it shows [Biden] that we can pass something and he has no choice except to negotiate.”

For Republicans, who only control one part of the legislature, this is a “landmark occasion,” Perry says. “We’re supposed to be in a completely defensive posture. [But] we are on offense. And I will also take some pride in this: 90% of this bill has been written by the House Freedom Caucus — and we are driving and pulling our entire conferences … to the Right, to the side of principles that [say] we cannot keep spending and bankrupting our country.”

In a movement that’s watched Republicans snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, Wednesday’s developments were groundbreaking. “I’ve watched this process for 20 years,” Perkins said. “I’ve even watched the Republicans when they were in the majority and they had the numbers. … But the reality is, even when Republicans had a large margin to work with, they never ever drove a stake in the ground and stood on principle. That is a sea change here in Washington, D.C.”

And McCarthy’s week-long speaker drama is a big reason why. Even then, FRC believed Republicans — and the speaker in particular — would emerge stronger from that emotional debate. It was there that the California leader proved he was willing to listen, to compromise, and to pursue the tough changes voters demanded. Now, Perkins insisted, we’ve had time to see that McCarthy was sincere. “We’ve seen a succession of decisions that the speaker has made. He’s stuck to his word. … And Republicans have [also] kept their word and done exactly what they said they were going to do when they elected this speaker.” So Democrats need to realize, he warned, “you guys aren’t going to cave.”

Already, that message seems to be sinking in. Far-left senators like Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) are calling on Biden to negotiate — and negotiate now. Moderate Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) agreed, pointing out, McCarthy’s bill is the “only bill actually moving through Congress that would prevent default.”

As NRO’s Noah Rothman explains, “The White House and Senate Democrats have so far operated on the assumption that Republicans were too disunited to be worth negotiating with.” Now, the script has flipped. “And with the Republican position strengthening and Democrats’ eroding, it seems like it’s only a matter of time before the White House consents to good-faith negotiations with their Republican counterparts. The sooner, the better.”

In the meantime, Perry has a message for those “weak-kneed senators over there that always work with the Democrats: … You need to stick with your Republican colleagues [and] do the work of the American people. … There’s a fighting spirit in this House of Representatives,” he insisted, “but … we do expect our senators to stand up and stand for us.”

AUTHOR

Suzanne Bowdey

Suzanne Bowdey serves as editorial director and senior writer at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

HICE: U.S. Government Seeks Permission to Spy on American Citizens

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

The phrase “Big Brother” has been used in reference to the government’s attempts to control the lives of Americans for decades. Following 9/11, amid an outcry for greater security, a chilling and intrusive surveillance of citizens took an unprecedented uptick in individual monitoring across the nation. In the wake of tragedy and horror, politicians pushed through the Patriot Act in the name of terrorism deterrence.

The Patriot Act ushered in a new era, and America would never be the same so far as individual privacy is concerned. While the intentions of the legislation might have been good, the consequences of its enactment have invaded the privacy of millions of Americans. It essentially gave the government a free pass to spy on people in their homes and beyond. Without any previous notification requirements, federal intelligence agencies could examine and have unhindered exploration into the financial records, medical histories, travel patterns, and more of individuals.

As is often the case with unrestrained government power, the overreaching scrutiny produced by the Patriot Act is no longer enough. There is a new and disturbing movement to provide Big Brother even more access into your private life. Senator Mark Warner (D-Va.) has introduced the RESTRICT Act, formally known as “Restricting the Emergence of Security Threats that Risk Information and Communications Technology” Act. This legislation would essentially expand the sentiments of the Patriot Act to the technology sphere, so that internet activity by citizens would be accessible to federal agents.

Thankfully, while there is a substantial bipartisan effort to block the use of TikTok in the United States over concerns about the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of the platform, some Washington politicians are withholding their support for the RESTRICT Act. For example, Ohio Senator J.D. Vance (R-Ohio) recently told reporters that he is very worried about “creating, effectively, a PATRIOT Act for the digital age.”

He is correct. Once unbridled access is given to the government to monitor internet activity, personal privacy will be but a memory of America’s past. Moreover, allowing the government and federal agencies access to personal devices and advanced technology usage by individuals could very well lead to domestic espionage. Such meddling should never be allowed. While efforts to block foreign adversaries from spying on Americans and the U.S. government operations should be made, efforts cannot be allowed to permit our own government to violate people’s constitutional right to privacy.

At a time when even the most sacred branch of government, the judiciary, is being politicized, it is crucial to avoid further intrusion into the lives of Americans. The RESTRICT Act would allow the government to pursue any person it deems as a “national security risk.” To this day, some protestors from January 6th, 2021 are still sitting in jail, having been denied their legal rights under the law. And potentially, other individuals advocating for their right to justice could be labeled as “national security risks” and have their privacy stripped away as well.

The U.S. government is already too big and intrusive. Further, a two-tiered system of justice is increasingly becoming more apparent and alarming. Do we really need to bolster government with unfettered access into the private data of American citizens? No! Not only is the RESTRICT Act a terrible idea but it is unconstitutional. The First Amendment grants freedom of personal and private religious belief. The Third Amendment protects privacy in our homes. And the Fourth Amendment guarantees that the “right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

Make no mistake, Americans have a right to privacy! The government does not possess sufficient legal “interest” to invade the most personal aspects of people’s lives.

Ultimately, at risk with the RESTRICT Act is personal and constitutionally protected liberty. Congressional leaders need to hear from constituents about this invasive legislation. For the sake of defending our God-given rights, we should reject this egregious attempt by government to enter our personal space and monitor our private lives. If allowed to become law, this Act could produce a government-run and politically driven “terrorist” of its own making. Don’t let that happen!

AUTHOR

Jody Hice

RELATED VIDEOS:

Senator Josh Hawley: The FBI is ‘infiltrating’ churches and spying on Americans

JORDAN FIRED UP! Judiciary Chair UNLOADS After Learning Biden DOJ Infiltrating Religious Orgs

RELATED ARTICLE: U.S. Would Run Out Of Missiles In A Week In Two-Front Conflict: ‘War Game’ Analysis

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Sen. Rand Paul, Rep. Chip Roy To Introduce Legislation To Eliminate Fauci’s NIAID

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

Republican Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul and Texas Rep. Chip Roy will introduce legislation Thursday that would eliminate the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID).

The Daily Caller first obtained a copy of the bill, which is titled the NIH Reform Act. The bill would specifically replace the NIAID with three separate national research institutes that would be led by directors subject to Senate confirmation and limited to no more than two 5-year terms.

The three new institutes would be the National Institute of Allergic Diseases, the National Institute of Infectious Diseases, and the National Institute of Immunologic Diseases. The directors of each new institute would be appointed by the president, subject to Senate confirmation, and limited to no more than two 5-year terms.

“We’ve learned a lot over the past few years, but one lesson in particular is that no one person should be deemed ‘dictator-in-chief.’ No one person should have unilateral authority to make decisions for millions of Americans,” Paul told the Daily Caller before introducing the legislation.

“To ensure that ineffective, unscientific lockdowns and mandates are never foisted on the American people ever again, I’ve introduced this bill to eliminate Dr. Anthony Fauci’s previous position as Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and divide the role into three separate new institutes. This will create accountability and oversight into a taxpayer funded position that has largely abused its power and has been responsible for many failures and misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic,” he added.

READ THE LEGISLATION HERE: 

(DAILY CALLER OBTAINED) — … by Henry Rodgers

“From the earliest days of the pandemic, unaccountable public health bureaucracies proved themselves far more adept at ruining lives than saving them. Never again should a single individual, like Dr. Anthony Fauci, wield unchecked power and influence over the lives of the American people. Breaking up Dr. Fauci’s taxpayer funded bully pulpit into three separate agencies — and requiring Senate confirmation for all their future directors — is one of many actions necessary to allow the American people to hold public health agencies accountable,” Roy, who introduced an identical House version of the bill, said in a statement.

The legislation is currently cosponsored by Utah Sen. Mike Lee, Tennessee Sen. Marsha Blackburn, Indiana Sen. Mike Braun and Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley.

 

AUTHOR

HENRY RODGERS

Chief national correspondent.

RELATED ARTICLES:

EXCLUSIVE: Sen. Rand Paul Demands NIH Preserve All Documents, Communications In Fauci’s Possession

Rand Paul Introduces Legislation To Repeal Federal Mask Mandate For Public Transportation

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.