This past week, one may have already heard the rule handed out by a few people with the Obama Administration, namely the Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius. For someone claiming to be Catholic, Secretary Sebelius is anything but that. I describe her as being “Catholic in name only.” This is the same governor who received contributions from Doctor George Tiller during both of her gubernatorial campaigns here in Kansas.
This rule mandates that all employers, even all those of a religious nature, must pay for contraceptives, abortifacients, and sterilization services. They are attempted to be required to pay for such drugs and services even if it means violating their very core values and beliefs.
This is a blatant and dangerous attack on everyone’s religious freedoms. For a President who claims to be Christian, he sure has a weird way of demonstrating his faith. This attack is just only one such example.
This attack has taken notice by various religious organizations. These organizations and media outlets include the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, EWTN Global Catholic Network, Priests for Life, the Southern Baptist Convention, and others.
This is such a serious violation of the freedom of religion as laid out in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that on February 9, 2012, both EWTN and Priests for Life filed lawsuits against the Obama Administration, specifically Secretary Sebelius. EWTN filed its suit in US District Court in Birmingham, Alabama. Priests for Life filed its suit in US District Court in Staten Island, New York.
Many Protestants and Jews are uniting with the Catholics in fighting this grave violation of the Constitution. We must come together to fight the tyranny that is the Obama Administration.
On Friday, President Obama tried to talk about his “compromise.” He claims that the employers won’t have to pay for it, but the insurance companies. He’s trying to force the insurance companies to pay for contraceptives even if their policies don’t cover it. He claims that contraceptives would be free. It is not free. The insurance companies would simply increase premiums, which would force employers to drop coverage, which in turn would force people to buy government plans. This clearly exceeds the Constitution on multiple fronts!
To help combat this, 172 representatives and 27 Senators have come together to cosponsor the Respect for Right of Conscience Act (HR-1179, S-1467). So far, Representatives Tim Huelskamp (KS-1), Lynn Jenkins (KS-2), Kevin Yoder (KS-3), Mike Pompeo (KS-4), along with Senators Pat Roberts and Jerry Moran are all cosponsors of this bill.
I urge you to contact your senators and representatives to cosponsor or support this very important piece of legislation. As aptly described in Mark Levin’s Ameritopia, this mandate is one of many attempts at utopia that will tear nations apart quicker than the blink of an eye.
by Mark Ciavola
Well, it has finally happened: Democrats in Southern Nevada have gone too far, and are now embarrassing themselves daily for the entire world to watch.
It all began on November 2, 2010 when Dr. Joe Heck was elected to Congress over Dina Titus, the darling of the liberal activist community in Las Vegas. Democrats began attacking Heck across various media, for not creating the jobs he promised – a promise he never made in the first place. Congressman Heck has always maintained that government cannot create jobs, something President Obama has yet to figure out. He has, however, made it clear that government needs to create an environment favorable for the private sector to create jobs.
Although many liberals never heard his entire view on this issue, because Dina Titus routinely cut it out of her attack ads, to make it seem as though Heck felt Congress had no role in putting people back to work.
Now being a sore loser is nothing new for the devoted liberal activist, but since then they have taken their activism to a whole new level – outright lies.
These activists are now claiming that Rep. Joe Heck charges constituents to see him, requires a fee for them to ask him questions, and refuses to hold a public town hall. They’ve even gone so far as to use the term “Pay-Per-View Congress” when referring to the cost to enter private events where Joe Heck is speaking.
One of the outfits spearheading this nonsense is The Nevada View, a Vegas-based “non-partisan” news website run by 32-year old President of the CSN “Young” Democrats, Justin McAffee, and contributed to by a whole host of liberal/progressive politicos. One such progressive is Andrew Davey, of the Nevada Stonewall Democrats, who wrote that members attending a private luncheon with Rep. Heck were “human shields.”
This is absolutely ridiculous, even for Democrats.
There is no doubt that Nevadans are suffering, and many cannot find work. Many have been out of work for years. For these activists to politicize that suffering, for ideological gain, is embarrassing.
The reality is that Rep. Heck has held numerous public town halls and other public events where constituents can hear him speak, ask him questions, and interact with him. And like any high-profile individual – elected official or otherwise – he also appears as a special guests at various private events.
When a Republican club has their monthly luncheon, and attendees are required to pay $25 to cover the cost of their meal, it is a private luncheon for their members. They invite high-profile speakers – including elected officials – and Democrats do the same thing.
When a band of screeching liberal hyenas show up to disrupt the event, they are told they must pay the $25 to attend the luncheon. The activists have now claimed that this practice boils down to Rep. Heck charging constituents to ask him questions.
This is absurd, and a patently false allegation. In fact, these “constituents” are purposefully exploiting an innocent practice as something heinous. It is disingenuous.
When the Lambda Business Association – Las Vegas’ LGBT Chamber of Commerce and heavily Democratic audience – holds its monthly $15 luncheon, they also require attendees to pay. Does anyone believe a group of Republican activists, wishing to disrupt a speech by a high-profile Democrat, would be allowed to enter without paying for the meal? Nor should they! It’s a private luncheon, and the organization has gone to great lengths to invite high-profile speakers for the benefit of their members – and need to cover their costs.
These liberal activists are attempting to turn this narrative into a legitimate news story, and KTNV-TV, Channel 13 in Las Vegas, was happy to oblige when protestors descended on another private event featuring guest speaker Rep. Joe Heck.
In the video, activists repeated their Democratic talking points:
“Where are the jobs he said he was going to produce?”
“He’s willing to vote for continued tax breaks for million- and billionaires, but he’s not willing to put any money into creating jobs.”
However, at no time did Joe Heck ever promise to “produce” jobs, unless they’re talking about his own small business – which he had to shelf when he became a Congressman.
The government cannot create jobs. Private industry must do so, and government needs to create a favorable environment to do so – or get the hell out of the way.
Period.
Joe Heck understands that, as someone who has actually created jobs in the private sector. How many of these activists have created jobs?
As for voting for continued tax breaks for the rich, this particular bullet point proves the speaker is not informed on the issue. For example, the Bush Tax Cuts – which Democrats want eliminated for “the rich” – provided a 4.6% cut for the highest income bracket in America, from 39.6% to 35%. However, it provided a much larger cut for the lowest income bracket, from 15% to 10% – and increased the standard deduction enough so that many in the lowest income bracket pay no federal incomes taxes at all.
Democrats continue to say the Bush Tax Cuts for “for the rich,” but the “rich” got 1/3 the cut the “working poor” got. The narrative simply does not hold up in the presence of facts.
As for tax policy, Rep. Heck voted for legislation in the House that would get rid of many deductions, subsidies, and loopholes.
In fact, during Congressman Heck’s visit to “Face to Face” with Jon Ralston last week he said, “We’ve sent [the Senate] 14 jobs bills from the House and all but one are sitting in a pile collecting dust.”
Are these liberal activists aware that the Harry Reid controlled Democratic U.S. Senate has blocked a myriad of bills that the Republican House has passed? Of course they are, but you won’t see that on TV. In fact, they wouldn’t have it any other way, since they favor Harry Reid’s policies – not Joe Heck’s.
But “dozens” of protestors (It looked like one dozen to me) in a district of over 1,000,000 Nevadans, is hardly representative of a district-wide opinion.
What these liberals fail to realize is that Las Vegas relies very heavily on tourist dollars – funds that are in short supply due to this prolonged economic malaise. This recession ended two years ago, yet no one has seen anything close to a recovery.
Increasing government spending and raising taxes on those who are surviving this crisis, will only result in LESS disposable income flowing into the Nevadan economy.
Piling on thousands of new regulations on business, and delaying the implementation of costly legislation like Obamacare, creates uncertainty – which stifles expansion and hiring.
Think about it: If you still owned a profitable business in this economic climate, would you be quick to hire if you had no idea how much that employee will cost you in Obamacare compliance three years from now? Or how much in payroll taxes you’ll have to pay the next time the Democrats in the Nevada legislature decide to DOUBLE it as they did during the recession in 2009?
Of course not. Business owners aren’t stupid. If they were, their business would have failed long ago.
Perhaps these liberal activists should be calling the White House, and asking President Obama: “Where are the jobs?”
It is President Obama who claimed unemployment would not exceed 8% if his $787 billion stimulus package was passed. Yet unemployment stands at 9.1% (14% in Las Vegas), and ZERO net jobs were created in August – an event that hasn’t happened since 1945.
It is President Obama who promised to cut the budget deficit in half, yet he has quadrupled it – adding more than a trillion dollars to our already sky-high national debt each year.
It is President Obama whose Party controls the White House and U.S. Senate – and refuses to support legislation passed by the Republican House.
It is President Obama who twice told businesses and individuals not to “blow a bunch of cash on Vegas.”
In the meantime, here’s a great video of Senator Harry Reid’s people turning away the public from private events – including turning away a UNLV student from attending a pizza party for UNLV students.
Yep, that happened.
by Mark Ciavola
Today, the U.S. Department of Justice filed an anti-trust suit to block AT&T’s impending merger with T-Mobile. There are many opinions from many people clogging up Facebook and Twitter feeds, but so many of these people don’t fully understand the issue or the facts involved in this case.
Having worked for AT&T Wireless in 2001, and having survived two mergers – one when Cingular (SBC) bought AT&T Wireless, and a second when SBC bought AT&T – I understand this issue all too well. So I thought I’d shed some light on the issue from the perspective of the companies, the employees, and the consumer.
The most important thing to be aware of here is T-Mobile’s current condition. The 4th largest wireless company in the U.S., T-Mobile has been forced over the years to keep their prices low in order to compete with larger companies like Verizon and AT&T. Furthermore, they have had to accept customers that Verizon and AT&T turn away because of credit requirements, leaving them with far more customers who don’t pay their bills. Fiscally, T-Mobile is not set up for long-term success, and their sale will happen – whether to AT&T or not.
The one advantage AT&T has in this deal is that they operate a GSM network, just like T-Mobile. Verizon uses CDMA and Sprint uses CDMA and the old Nextel’s iDEN.
All that jibberish means that the AT&T and T-Mobile networks are the most compatible, and would avoid the lengthy and costly conversion that was required when Sprint merged with Nextel – even having to offer a special phone that would access both networks for two years after the deal.
Now, from the consumer’s point of view, this deal would allow some 120 million Americans to realize a larger coverage area, more retail outlets, and an improved buying power which will result in an increased selection of devices and a wider array of available services – including T-Mobile customers finally having access to the iPhone.
Don’t believe me? Simply look back to when AT&T and Cingular merged. Never before had so many wireless consumers enjoyed such a large network, expanded choice in devices, and an unbelievable amount of phones priced at $50 and below – often free with contract extension.
And, because both AT&T and Cingular used GSM technology, customers enjoyed improved coverage overnight.
Not to mention that AT&T’s service has suffered tremendously because of the high-bandwidth content being accessed by iPhone users – and expanding their network overnight will ease this congestion. As an AT&T customer, I eagerly await this.
The biggest complaint from the Justice Department is that this merger will stifle competition across the U.S. However, I direct you to companies like TracFone, MetroPCS, U.S. Cellular, and Cricket (the 5th – 8th largest wireless companies in the U.S.) as perfect examples of low-cost – and often no-contract – alternatives to the large companies.
In addition to these choices, there are often concessions made by companies in merger deals such as this. When Cingular acquired AT&T, the new company had to divest its control of several smaller markets to regional carriers – something I am sure would occur here as well. Although I feel compelled to mention that those customers living in the divested areas end up with worse coverage and less choices, because the government chooses to intervene in this manner.
Next up: Employees.
When AT&T Wireless was purchased by Cingular (SBC), several things changed. For one, the new company saw increased purchasing power when it came to negotiating benefit costs for employees. In addition, while there were some initial layoffs because of duplicate positions and redundancies (myself included), the company continued to grow (and I returned as well).
Employees also were able to be part of the largest wireless company in America, which resulted in increased sales – which means increased commissions for sales folks and more job security for everyone else.
Who would argue that T-Mobile employees are better off because they work for the 4th largest company with the worst coverage of the four major carriers? In addition, because T-Mobile is forced to accept low-credit customers to keep up with the larger companies, many of their sales result in cancellations, and therefore commission chargebacks.
Also, T-Mobile does not offer the iPhone – the most sought after wireless device in America.
This merger would change all of that, and keep the standard of living constant for AT&T employees, but be a tremendous boon for T-Mobile workers.
The one downfall I see for T-Mobile employees is that they would have to deal with the Communication Workers of America (CWA), which is a foul organization posing as a pro-worker union. Although most people against this merger seem to love unions, so I guess this would also be a positive for them.
The labor agreement CWA and AT&T negotiated while I was there was good for Cingular employees, but terrible for AT&T workers – who had a far better deal before the union showed up.
One thing I’d like everyone reading this to remember, is that America is far behind Europe and Asia when it comes to wireless coverage and services. The reason for this is that we demand free phones and low-priced plans, leaving carriers with far less money to re-invest in their networks – which is very expensive. In Europe, there is no such thing as included minutes, free nights & weekends, unlimited text messaging, etc. Because of this difference in culture, created by the carriers themselves when they offered free phones in exchange for contracts, we will never be on par with the rest of the wireless world.
One way American companies can close that technology gap is by continuing to increase their subscriber base, and by creating and selling new services which generate additional revenue.
This merger will help achieve that. It will help offer AT&T’s 97 million consumers and T-Mobile’s 33 million consumers the best in what wireless can offer.
AT&T/Cingular has the most grueling and stringent testing phase for all products and services, and has world-class training programs for its employees to better service its customers.
At no time has T-Mobile ever been a top-tier carrier – and I say that as both a consumer, and as someone who lived the mobile phone culture for seven years.
This merger would be a plus for all involved – except Verizon and Sprint who would realize lower market share.
Verizon and Sprint should realize that they will receive 3-4 million new subscribers from customers who leave the newly combined AT&T/T-Mobile for a variety of reasons – including owing AT&T a previous debt, or disliking AT&T. But I guess they aren’t thinking that far ahead.
In the end, however, the Justice Department is overstepping its bounds by interfering with the free market. They do not understand the wireless industry, they are simply attempting to “protect consumers” by not allowing the 120 million AT&T and T-Mobile customers to enjoy a better experience – while assisting Sprint and Verizon in preventing AT&T from once again becoming the largest wireless carrier in America (until Verizon once again retakes the lead – which it did after the AT&T/Cingular merger, and will again).
The government does not increase competition, private industry does. See TracFone, MetroPCS, U.S. Cellular, and Cricket as examples.
The Justice Department needs to focus on the real challenges in our country – instead of suing states for enforcing the law, banning online poker, and refusing to investigate voter intimidation cases.
Until then, it’s hard to take them seriously.
