Californians Double Down on Progressivism. Here’s Why It’s a Problem for Red State Neighbors.

Jarrett Stepman The Daily Signal

Much of the nation saw political shake-ups on Tuesday. Not so in California.

The Golden State continued its trend of drifting increasingly to the left.

Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, easily defeated Republican businessman John Cox to become the state’s 40th governor, and Sen. Dianne Feinstein retained her Senate seat. She was up against another Democrat due to the state’s “jungle primary” system.

Democrats also picked up seats in Congress and the state Legislature, while progressives generally prevailed on the litany of state ballot initiatives. A proposition that would have repealed the new state gas tax went down in defeat.

A big question now is whether Newsom will continue to drag California to the left, doubling down on the radicalism of the Legislature, which even liberal Gov. Jerry Brown kept in check to a certain extent.

That California is becoming a one-party state with increasingly left-wing policies is well known. But the ripple effect from this is that Californians are leaving the state for redder pastures—red states with more hospitable tax and regulatory regimes such as Texas, Arizona, and Nevada.

As I wrote in July: “A study from the Bay Area Council, a public policy organization, found that 46 percent of San Francisco residents have plans to move out of the area, a jump of 12 percent since 2016. Of those who participated in the survey, 61 percent said they planned to leave the state, with Texas being a primary destination.”

But why would a Californian—excuse my bias as a Bay Area native—leave that beautiful state, with its incredible weather, awe-inspiring landscapes, and endless forms of entertainment?

Loony straw bans are only the tip of the iceberg. Progressive policies have made large swaths of the state almost impossible for a middle-class family to live in. Finding the state unaffordable, more and more middle-class Californians are leaving in droves, or at least say they want to leave when they get the opportunity.

Progressive policies—high taxes, building restrictions, and overbearing environmental regulations—drove up the cost of living and made housing unaffordable.

This is not to mention the open border and sanctuary city policies that only add to the impression that California is becoming an increasingly lawless state ofsurging crime.

Some California refugees understand this, but sadly, many others don’t. Or they ignore the fact that their policy preferences are the true cause of the dysfunction that has hampered what is perhaps the best piece of real estate in the union.

This is a big problem for neighboring states that receive an influx of voters who have felt the crunch of progressive policies, yet continue to vote for Democrats. They seem to be unfazed by the fact that the policies they fled were Democratic policies to begin with.

That’s why Americans, even those who have no desire to replicate California’s worst policies, need to pay attention to what happens in the left coast’s laboratory of terrible ideas.

They could, literally, be coming to a town near you.

Senate Election Results Give Republicans Opportunity to Confirm More Judges Faster

From the Daily Signal  Thomas Jipping 

The 2018 election results are encouraging, if for no other reason than that more progress can be made in filling judicial vacancies.

First, a snapshot of where things stand right now.

President Donald Trump has made almost 40 percent more nominations to life-tenured positions than the average for his five predecessors of both parties at this point. The pace of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s hearings for judicial nominees is also way ahead of the usual pace.

The Senate’s record for confirming those nominees, however, is not as robust. Previous posts (see here, here, and here) have detailed the strategies by Senate Democrats to make the confirmation process cumbersome rather than efficient.

The Senate has confirmed 84 judges, or 54 percent of his nominees, so far in the 115th Congress. That compares to an average of 73 percent of the nominees confirmed at this point for Presidents Ronald Reagan to Barack Obama.

Unfortunately, we are in the longest period of triple-digit judicial vacancies in more than 25 years. During his first two years in office, with a Senate of his own party, President Bill Clinton cut judicial vacancies nearly in half. Today, even with a Senate of his own party, vacancies are 13 percent higher than when Trump took office.

But the Senate has a great opportunity to help alleviate this grave situation.

The Judiciary Committee has already approved 32 judicial nominees, which today wait for a vote by the full Senate. Sixteen more have had a hearing and need only a committee vote to join that list.

Confirming those would bring the total confirmation rate to 85 percent of Trump’s nominees—still below Clinton’s 95 percent at this point, but on a par with Clinton in the percentage of the judiciary he had appointed during their respective first two years in office.

The 2018 election provides even more hope. Expanding the Republican majority in the Senate may also improve their majority on the Judiciary Committee, with more flexibility in achieving and maintaining the quorum needed to do business. And thanks to Democrats in 2013, ending debate on nominations now requires only a simple majority.

Expect partisan opposition to Trump’s judicial nominations to continue.

More than half of his nominees have faced various levels of Democratic opposition on the Senate floor, compared to an average of just 8 percent of the previous five presidents’ nominees facing any opposition. Of the 1,458 total votes cast on the Senate floor against Trump judicial nominees, only two came from Republicans.

Even if Democrats continue their blindly partisan approach, a larger Republican majority will ensure that Trump’s qualified judges will continue to be approved.

The 2018 election result may affect the confirmation process in another way. Different parties controlling the Senate and House decreases the likelihood of significant or comprehensive legislation on any subject. While that is not a positive prospect, at least on issues that genuinely need sound legislation, it means there will be less competition for the Senate’s attention.

The Democrats’ strategy of making each step of the confirmation process as time-consuming as possible is more effective when floor time is scarce. More floor time available for confirmations can neutralize that strategy.

Obama spent eight years appointing judges who have departed radically from the defined, modest role that America’s Founders designed for the judiciary. Trump is steadily putting the judiciary back on course by consistently appointing judges who know their proper place in our system of government and who will be impartial, rather than political, in how they decide cases.

The Senate can still make progress toward that goal in the remaining days of the 115th Congress, and the 2018 election expands the opportunity for improving the judiciary in the next two years.

Think national, vote local

By Bob Livingston

Think national, vote local 

(This is the fourth and final installment of a four-part series on how conservatives should view the upcoming national midterm election. You can read the first installment here, the second here,and the third here.)

Ninety-nine percent of the people who go into politics in Washington go into politics for politics' sake. They want a job for life. It takes someone dedicated to personal liberty and small government to go to Washington and lobby that their own job should be less important, and that their power should be reduced.

Most go to the District of Corruption to have their power increased and their prestige increased, and even the most well-intentioned usually get sucked into the vacuum of politics.

Ron Paul once told an audience, "When young people come to me in my office and say 'I understand what's going on, and I want to be a congressman,' I say 'Don't set that as your goal.' You don't want to be in politics for the sake of politics. Always have the goal of not saying 'What do I have to do to please the majority who wants more government and vote that way?' but to use [politics] as a tool to influence people to believe precisely in the principle of property rights and very limited government."

National politics has become a Kabuki theater battle between parties. Instead of representing the interests of the voters and upholding the Constitution, politicians appear to battle over partisan issues while both sides grow government and take away our liberties. When it comes down to it, American politics is not Republican versus Democrats. It's government versus the people.

I'm not one for flag worship, but I was very sympathetic toward the "tea" in the Tea Party's adopted name which is an acronym for "taxed enough already." But the Tea Party movement was quickly co-opted by opportunistic Republicans, and the anger of Americans at restricted freedoms has been turned on other Americans rather than the government at which it should be rightfully directed.

Even the most well-intentioned liberty lover is usually consumed and turned over to the dark side once he gets to Washington. Should you get elected to office and decide that you are going to fight for liberty, to have any power you must get a seat on a committee or become its chairman. To do so, you must build coalitions and "play ball" with the people already in power.

It's then that it becomes no longer about representing your home state citizens. You have to raise money for the party, millions and millions of dollars, and even more money to keep your seat every two years. Then you have to bow to the party's leadership.

In doing so, with every ounce of energy you have spent raising money for the party and keeping your seat and bowing and scraping before the likes of Mitch McConnell or Paul Ryan, you lose sight of the goal of reforming government, or arguing for freedom and limited government, and you become a pawn of the Deep State instead. Now you are bought and paid for by big government.

We've reached a point where I don't feel that voting does any good in national politics. Remember that it's important to the actors in, and plans of, the Deep State that you vote. That alone should give you pause. Lew Rockwell likes to say, "Voting is the sacrament of the state religion." They want you to participate in increasing their power.

Today, voting means you accede to more and bigger government. You are vilified and looked down on for not voting. Witness the rise of the "I voted" buttons you will see everywhere on Election Day. Oh how they want to make our country like the socialist utopia where voter participation is 100 percent! The opposite of the yellow star during WWI. Those who don't wear an "I voted" sticker are supposed to feel ashamed.

I am not telling you not to vote. If you feel there is a candidate in your area that you want to support, then you should indeed vote. As I mentioned here, conservative voters should concentrate on finding candidates for state and local elections who will uphold the Constitution and are willing to take a bold stand for state's rights and against federal tyranny.

If you feel you must take on national issues, remember that McConnell and his CINOs (conservatives in name only) want you to think they will put "strict constitutionalists" on the federal bench. Is now-Justice Brett Kavanaguh one of those? Not only did Kavanaugh help write the unconstitutional and privacy-killing Patriot Act, but there doesn't seem to be a lot of evidence that he is in fact a constitutionalist, despite every right-leaning media outlet telling you that it's so.

This is why you must concentrate on electing people you feel will push for term limits and the repeal of the 16th and 17th Amendments which would end the unconstitutional income tax system and necessarily end the Federal Reserve, and restore selection of senators to the states where the Founders intended (no, elected office isn't a job, and "experience" and "qualifications" don't enter into the equation. These weren't meant to be long-term positions).

A return to sound money and republicanism is what will save the nation. Yet, you should be aware of what most votes at the national level mean these days. For example, no one can become president of the U.S. without the approval of the Council on Foreign Relations... not even Donald Trump. The CFR and globalist banksters like Goldman Sachs and the world's central banks control America's and the world's political processes.

These "Third Way" proponents have chosen their candidates to be manifestations of an organized and militant religion that is at total war with Christianity and liberty.

The goal of this religion is to amalgamate humanity into a proxy for "social justice" and "democracy," a euphemism for tyranny over and oppression of the American people. Individuality and choice must be destroyed to make each of us a permanent vassal of the state. The state builds its political power on deception and false pretense finally leaving the people with no inner imperative to question or oppose the New Order.

We can't oppose them by choosing from among them. If you vote, choose wisely. 

Video click below
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=4&v=h_n91jY2KxM

COMMENTARY BY

Genevieve Wood@genevievewood

Genevieve Wood advances policy priorities of The Heritage Foundation as senior contributor to The Daily Signal. Send an email to Genevieve.

What’s the difference between a conservative and a progressive?

Here are three examples.

No. 1: Conservatives and progressives have different views about individuals and communities.

Conservatives ask: “What can I do for myself, my family, my community, and my fellow citizens?”

Progressives ask: “What is unfair?” “What am I owed?” “What has offended me today?” “What must my country do for me?”

The traditional American ethic of achievement gives way to the progressive ethic of aggrievement.

As opposed to a variety of individuals making up one American community, progressives seek to place individuals in a variety of competing communities. The first creates unity. The second, identity politics.

No 2.: Conservatives and progressives have different views about diversity and choice.

For progressives, different ethnicities and gender identities are welcomed but a variety of opinions and ideas are not.

Just look at two areas of public life dominated by the left. On college campuses free speech is under attack. If you’re a conservative working at a social media company or using one of their platforms to share your views, you may find your job eliminated or your account deleted.

And when it comes to choice, progressives love the word, but they don’t want it to apply to our decisions on education, health care, and even how and where we live out our religious faith.

Conservatives take a different approach.

Parents, not the zip code they live in, should choose the school that is best for their child.

We all need health care, but we don’t all need the same kind or same amount. And while people should be free to live as they choose, no one should be forced to endorse or celebrate those choices if it violates their religious beliefs.

Conservatives say people should have choices. Progressives say one political solution fits all.

No. 3: Conservatives and progressives have a different view of “We the People.”

Whether it’s the Second Amendment, immigration, or putting limits on abortion, if we the people don’t pass laws progressives approve, they turn to judges, executive orders, and government bureaucrats behind closed doors to overturn the will of voters.

Whatever one may think about the wisdom of hiking the minimum wage, banning plastic straws, or removing controversial historical monuments, conservatives believe voters closest to the issues should be the ones making such decisions for their communities—not lawmakers in Washington or a panel of judges fives states away.

To sum it up, conservatives believe in individual rights, not special rights. Conservatives believe in allowing Texas to be Texas and Vermont to be Vermont. And conservatives believe we the people can vote with our feet about where we want to live and what laws we want to live under.

Think national, vote local

By Bob Livingston

Ninety-nine percent of the people who go into politics in Washington go into politics for politics' sake. They want a job for life. It takes someone dedicated to personal liberty and small government to go to Washington and lobby that their own job should be less important, and that their power should be reduced. Most go to the District of Corruption to have their power increased and their prestige increased, and even the most well-intentioned usually get sucked into the vacuum of politics. Ron Paul once told an audience, "When young people come to me in my office and say 'I understand what's going on, and I want to be a congressman,' I say 'Don't set that as your goal.' You don't want to be in politics for the sake of politics. Always have the goal of not saying 'What do I have to do to please the majority who wants more government and vote that way?' but to use [politics] as a tool to influence people to believe precisely in the principle of property rights and very limited government." National politics has become a Kabuki theater battle between parties. Instead of representing the interests of the voters and upholding the Constitution, politicians appear to battle over partisan issues while both sides grow government and take away our liberties. When it comes down to it, American politics is not Republican versus Democrats. It's government versus the people. I'm not one for flag worship, but I was very sympathetic toward the "tea" in the Tea Party's adopted name which is an acronym for "taxed enough already." But the Tea Party movement was quickly co-opted by opportunistic Republicans, and the anger of Americans at restricted freedoms has been turned on other Americans rather than the government at which it should be rightfully directed. Even the most well-intentioned liberty lover is usually consumed and turned over to the dark side once he gets to Washington. Should you get elected to office and decide that you are going to fight for liberty, to have any power you must get a seat on a committee or become its chairman. To do so, you must build coalitions and "play ball" with the people already in power. It's then that it becomes no longer about representing your home state citizens. You have to raise money for the party, millions and millions of dollars, and even more money to keep your seat every two years. Then you have to bow to the party's leadership. In doing so, with every ounce of energy you have spent raising money for the party and keeping your seat and bowing and scraping before the likes of Mitch McConnell or Paul Ryan, you lose sight of the goal of reforming government, or arguing for freedom and limited government, and you become a pawn of the Deep State instead. Now you are bought and paid for by big government. We've reached a point where I don't feel that voting does any good in national politics. Remember that it's important to the actors in, and plans of, the Deep State that you vote. That alone should give you pause. Lew Rockwell likes to say, "Voting is the sacrament of the state religion." They want you to participate in increasing their power. Today, voting means you accede to more and bigger government. You are vilified and looked down on for not voting. Witness the rise of the "I voted" buttons you will see everywhere on Election Day. Oh how they want to make our country like the socialist utopia where voter participation is 100 percent! The opposite of the yellow star during WWI. Those who don't wear an "I voted" sticker are supposed to feel ashamed. I am not telling you not to vote. If you feel there is a candidate in your area that you want to support, then you should indeed vote. As I mentioned here, conservative voters should concentrate on finding candidates for state and local elections who will uphold the Constitution and are willing to take a bold stand for state's rights and against federal tyranny. If you feel you must take on national issues, remember that McConnell and his CINOs (conservatives in name only) want you to think they will put "strict constitutionalists" on the federal bench. Is now-Justice Brett Kavanaguh one of those? Not only did Kavanaugh help write the unconstitutional and privacy-killing Patriot Act, but there doesn't seem to be a lot of evidence that he is in fact a constitutionalist, despite every right-leaning media outlet telling you that it's so. This is why you must concentrate on electing people you feel will push for term limits and the repeal of the 16th and 17th Amendments which would end the unconstitutional income tax system and necessarily end the Federal Reserve, and restore selection of senators to the states where the Founders intended (no, elected office isn't a job, and "experience" and "qualifications" don't enter into the equation. These weren't meant to be long-term positions). A return to sound money and republicanism is what will save the nation. Yet, you should be aware of what most votes at the national level mean these days. For example, no one can become president of the U.S. without the approval of the Council on Foreign Relations... not even Donald Trump. The CFR and globalist banksters like Goldman Sachs and the world's central banks control America's and the world's political processes. These "Third Way" proponents have chosen their candidates to be manifestations of an organized and militant religion that is at total war with Christianity and liberty. The goal of this religion is to amalgamate humanity into a proxy for "social justice" and "democracy," a euphemism for tyranny over and oppression of the American people. Individuality and choice must be destroyed to make each of us a permanent vassal of the state. The state builds its political power on deception and false pretense finally leaving the people with no inner imperative to question or oppose the New Order. We can't oppose them by choosing from among them. If you vote, choose wisely.

Planned Parenthood Says It Puts Women First. This Missouri Clinic Proves Otherwise.

Monica Burke   The Daily Signal

Planned Parenthood claims to put women first, yet the atrocious health code violations found at a Missouri clinic earlier this month suggest otherwise.

The abortion giant was campaigning against newly proposed regulations on Missouri abortion clinics when state inspectors discovered a clinic in Columbia, Missouri, was already in violation of existing state regulations.

The clinic’s license was due to expire in October, so in anticipation, the state health department made its routine inspection of the facility in August. In that inspection, the department discovered disgusting and dangerous health violations such as moldy equipment and bodily fluid on recently used equipment.

The state informed Planned Parenthood of these health violations and expected the organization to correct them immediately.

Not only did the clinic fail to do so, it continued operating for over a month without correcting the violations.

When the state visited the clinic again on Sept. 26, 2018, they discoveredadditional violations. They found “bloody single-use plastic tubing attached to the machine’s glass suction canister that was never disposed of after the last abortion procedure on Sept. 21,” along with machines covered in mold and bodily fluid. The department also found rusty machines and exam room tables with chipped paint, making them impossible to sanitize.

Unfortunately, this is not the first time state officials have discovered intolerable conditions inside an abortion facility.

In 2013, Kermit Gosnell was found guilty of multiple counts of murder and involuntary manslaughter after authorities uncovered the disgusting conditions of his Philadelphia abortion facility in 2010. The gruesome detailsare the subject of a new film, “Gosnell: The Untold Story of America’s Most Prolific Serial Killer.”

>>> Podcast: ‘Gosnell’ Filmmaker Shares Why This Story Had to Be Told

After the unsanitary conditions of Gosnell’s clinic became public knowledge, abortion advocates claimed that he was a perfect example of why “women should have easier access to abortion so that they don’t have to seek care from an unqualified provider.”

It appears that Planned Parenthood never got the memo.

The Columbia Planned Parenthood was found operating under filthy conditions a mere eight years after the FBI discovered the harrowing conditions of Gosnell’s clinic. An dunfortunately, this is not an isolated incident.

Planned Parenthood found itself in hot water after authorities discovered similar conditions at its St. Louis location. This clinic was cited in 2009, 2013, 2015, and 2016 for highly unsanitary conditions and unsafe practices, totaling 210 health code violations in 39 different classes.

The violations included allowing two untrained employees to assist with surgical procedures, reusing single-dose medication vials for multiple patients, and failing to provide infection control training to staff.

Even where Planned Parenthood meets basic state-mandated requirements, they are providing fewer and fewer services to fewer and fewer women.

From 2015 to 2016, they provided fewer cancer screenings, breast examinations, HPV vaccinations, and prevention services to 100,000 fewer women at fewer locations than they did the year prior. From 2016 to 2017, prenatal services dipped too, down to 7,762 from 9,419 in 2015-2016.

By contrast, community health centers, which provide health care to women without entangling themselves in the abortion industry, outnumber Planned Parenthood locations 20 to 1. They also serve eight times more individuals that Planned Parenthood

However, one procedure for Planned Parenthood is on the rise: They performed several thousand more abortions in 2015-2016 than in the previous year: an uptick from 323,999 to 328,348. And the subsequent year they performed another 321,384 abortions, while only providing 3,889 adoption referrals, according to their own report.

That’s 83 abortions for every one adoption referral.

Despite plenty of rhetoric to the contrary, Planned Parenthood does not put the needs of women first, as their declining outreach and continued health care violations attest. Abortion remains Planned Parenthood’s bottom line.

These most recent health violations at Planned Parenthood in Columbia remind us that if we want quality health care for women, we must look at the abortion industry in the hard light of day.

The Storm Brewing at the Border

Originally published at Fox News  By Newt Gingrich

A perfect storm is brewing in the Southern Hemisphere and making its way north to the United States.

Heroin, fentanyl, and other opioids already pour through America’s southern border and this infiltration is one of three elements that will feed the perfect storm. Every day, 115 Americans die from opioid overdoses and tainted drugs passing through our southern border.

The second element is MS-13, the brutal gang that is a drug courier of choice to the Mexican drug cartels for distribution of these drugs within the United States.

When these two elements are mixed with the third element – the caravan of 7,000 to 10,000 people, mostly men, seeking to break through our southern border – you complete a toxic combination leading to a perfect storm. MS-13 gang members have already been found in the mass migration (although some have claimed they are no longer affiliated with the gang). It is not hard to spot them with their MS-13 tattoos. It is only a small leap in logic that MS-13 will be using the caravan as a cover to increase their drug and human trafficking operations.

This combination magnifies the threat to America’s national security. A border wall is needed more than ever. This must not be the partisan issue that some have made of it. Saving our children’s lives from the scourge of deadly drugs is not a partisan issue. Imagine one airliner crashing every day and killing 115 passengers. This would be a national emergency that would eclipse partisanship. The death of 115 Americans by overdose every day should also eclipse partisanship.

As Marlon Miller of the Department of Homeland Security explained to the House Committee on Homeland Security on June 19, “[a] significant quantity of bulk Mexico-sourced heroin, and Chinese-sourced fentanyl transiting through Mexico, . . . is smuggled across the shared border with Mexico via the land border ports of entry.”

According to The San Diego Union-Tribune, in March 2017, 18 kilograms of fentanyl hidden in a semi-truck load of bell peppers was seized at a checkpoint in Sonora, California. Later that year, another semi-truck traveling to Tijuana from Mexico City was seized carrying 30,000 fentanyl-laced pills and 63 kilos of powder containing the drug. U.S. Customs and Border Protection seized 355 kilograms of fentanyl in fiscal year 2017 at San Diego ports of entry alone. In April of this year, Nebraska state troopers seized 118 pounds of fentanyl, enough to kill more than 26 million people, during a routine traffic stop.

To have lasting effects against the opioid crisis, we must cut off the supply chain — and this means securing our borders. But it’s not the drugs alone we need to stop. The criminals who control this drug trade are some of the worst, most brutal gangsters ever to come into our country. MS-13 and drug cartels are made up of violent criminals who are not striving to achieve the American dream — they are trying to kill it. It is widely reported that members of these gangs rape, behead, and bury their victims. These gangs move into a neighborhood or city and take control. They get their victims hooked on drugs and keep them coming back for more.

MS-13 has roughly 10,000 members in at least 42 states and the District of Columbia, according to the most up-to-date FBI estimates. Attorney General Jeff Sessions has even asked for the gang to be labelled a terrorist group, with polling suggesting that the American public supports this reclassification.

Of course, securing the border, alone, will not solve the opioid crisis. This is why President Trump recently took an important step by signing the SUPPORT for Patients and Communities Act. This is a bipartisan piece of legislation that passed the Senate 99-1. It takes a multi-faceted approach that is necessary for solving this crisis, one that deals with treatment and recovery, interdiction, and deterrence.

Yet, securing our border remains the biggest step we can take to ensure that illicit opioids never enter our communities in the first place. I am not talking about completely shutting down immigration for all refugees, migrant workers, and other people who try to immigrate legally. In fact, I have championed legislation to welcome such hardworking and law-abiding immigrants. I am talking about keeping out gang members and criminals who want to destroy lives and entire communities. If we are serious about this issue, we need to stop talking about abolishing ICE and start securing the border.

We need to stop the caravan. We need to build the wall.