In January, Rep. Jeff Denham (R-CA) introduced a bill that would provide legal status to illegal immigrants if they join the military. The Encourage New Legalized Immigrants to Start Training (ENLIST) Act (H.R. 60) would allow “Dreamers” to receive lawful permanent resident (LPR) status in exchange for military service.
While promoted by some of its supporters as a solution to our military preparedness problem, the ENLIST Act is amnesty —
Background: First created in the late 1930s as the Food Stamp Program, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is a federal aid program that provides food-purchasing assistance for low-income families and individuals. SNAP is the second largest mean-tested welfare program in the U.S., providing more than 45 million individuals with food-assistance at a cost of $83.1 billion in fiscal year (FY) 2014 alone.
Problem: Welfare programs, including food stamps, should be temporary,
This week, Rep. Garret Graves (R-LA) introduced the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Reform Bill (H.R. 2996). This legislation would help reduce poverty and government dependency, increase self-sufficiency, and restore families by strengthening the effective and popular work requirements for all “able-bodied adults without dependents” (ABAWDs) who receive food stamps from SNAP.
In 1996, President Clinton signed the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act, which became popularly known as “welfare reform,” into law.
The ENLIST Act (H.R. 60) would permit certain illegal immigrants to serve in the military and grant them near-instant citizenship. Some members of Congress are pushing the radical idea of granting illegal immigrants who were brought to the U.S. as minors — known as DREAMers — a path to instant citizenship by suggesting it is good for our military.
Make no mistake, this doesn’t help our military preparedness. It is a scheme to normalize amnesty for illegal immigration and essentially codify Obama’s unlawful executive amnesty.
Last month, the House passed their version of a bill to repeal and replace Obamacare called the American Health Care Act, or AHCA. That bill moved the ball forward on repealing parts of the Title I regulations of Obamacare by giving power to the states to opt-out of some of those harmful regulations.
Now the Senate has taken up their version of the bill, called the Better Care Reconciliation Act (BCRA).
Background: Labor unions and their bosses often have goals that do not line up with the desires of workers. When the interests of unions come in conflict with the interests of workers, unions typically make decisions that benefit them rather than employees. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has further exasperated this problem. When it was first established, Congress intended the NLRB to function as an impartial arbitrator mediating disputes between unions and businesses, but under the Obama administration,
This Wednesday Rep. Pete Olson (R-TX) was joined by Reps. Ralph Abraham (R-LA), Brian Babin (R-TX) and Vicky Hartzler (R-MO) in introducing the Civil Rights Uniformity Act (H.R. 2796). This legislation would prevent all references to the words “sex” or “gender” from being misinterpreted to mean “gender identity” in federal civil rights law, including Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Fair Housing Act,
This month, Rep. Phil Roe (R-Tenn.) introduced the Employee Rights Act (H.R. 2723). This legislation would protect workers from union pressure by putting power in the hands of employees and making union leaders more accountable to their members. As the Heritage Foundation notes, if union bosses “were angels, such changes would be unnecessary” but “since they are not” new protections are necessary.
Heritage explains the legislation would guarantee employees the rights to:
Last month, Rep. Mike Kelly (R-PA) and Sen. Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.) introduced the Child Welfare Provider Inclusion Act of 2017 (H.R. 1881 & S. 811). This legislation would prohibit the federal government, and state governments who receive certain federal funding, from discriminating against a child welfare service provider that serves families and children according to their “sincerely held religious beliefs or moral convictions.” Child welfare providers, including private and faith-based adoption and foster care agencies,
Earlier this year, Rep. Mark Walker (R-NC) and Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT) introduced the Academic Partnerships Lead Us to Success (A-PLUS) Act (H.R. 719 & S. 221). This legislation would allow states to opt out of programs that fall under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) — formerly known as No Child Left Behind (NCLB) — and repurpose those federal funds on a consolidated basis “to advance the educational policy of the State.”
During the presidential campaign,
Earlier this year, Rep. Mark Walker (R-NC) and Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT) introduced the Academic Partnerships Lead Us to Success (A-PLUS) Act (H.R. 719 & S. 221). This legislation would allow states to opt out of programs that fall under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) — formerly known as No Child Left Behind (NCLB) — and repurpose those federal funds on a consolidated basis “to advance the educational policy of the State.”
During the presidential campaign,
Earlier this year, Rep. Gary Palmer (R-AL) and Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) introduced the Agency Accountability Act of 2017 (H.R. 850 & S. 299). This legislation would restore Congress’ power of the purse found in Article I of the Constitution over unelected federal bureaucrats by requiring “any agency that receives a fee, fine, penalty, or proceeds from a settlement” to “deposit such amount in the general fund of the Treasury.”
Under current law,
Earlier this year, Rep. Gary Palmer (R-AL) and Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) introduced the Agency Accountability Act of 2017 (H.R. 850 & S. 299). This legislation would restore Congress’ power of the purse found in Article I of the Constitution over unelected federal bureaucrats by requiring “any agency that receives a fee, fine, penalty, or proceeds from a settlement” to “deposit such amount in the general fund of the Treasury.”
Under current law,
In response to the housing collapse and financial crisis of 2007-08, Congress rushed to pass the 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act under the guise of “consumer protection.” But instead of addressing the root causes of the financial crisis, such as the government’s reckless efforts to expand housing affordability and implied guarantees to bail out large financial institutions, Dodd-Frank empowers the very regulatory establishment which created the environment that led to the financial crisis in the first place.
Heritage Action’s CEO Mike Needham said the proposed MacArthur-Meadows Amendment to the AHCA “advances the debate and raises key issues for the Senate to consider as the effort to repeal Obamacare moves forward.”
This amendment, which is the product of weeks-long negotiations by Rep. Tom MacArthur (R-NJ) and Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC), is an important step forward in rolling back the Title I regulations of Obamacare because it would allow states to say “NO” to some of the most harmful parts of Obamacare.