U.S. Politics

[Rick Plant]

Can’t wait to hear what Desantis has to say about why he likely just lost most or all of the $300 million from the Florida state employees pension fund that he has tied up in Russia. His spokesperson assures us we just have to wait for the market in Moscow to come back around. Is there any Republican not involved with Russians?



Florida Dems call for state, Gov. DeSantis to end $300M in Russian investments

TAMPA, Fla. (WFLA) — More than a month after Russia invaded Ukraine, Florida Democrats have continued calls for Gov. Ron DeSantis to formally end the state’s investments in Russian companies.

According to DeSantis’ Democratic critics and political opponents in the coming gubernatorial election, Florida’s governor has not taken enough action to move away from its economic ties to Russia. U.S. Rep. Charlie Crist (D-St. Petersburg), who is running for governor against DeSantis, said he has “failed” to be tough on Putin. Crist has repeatedly urged the governor to divest state investments in Russian companies.

Current Florida Commissioner of Agriculture Nikkie Fried, another contender for governor against DeSantis, has taken a similar stance, calling for the state to divest from the companies and submitted a plan to do so, as well as move toward what she calls clean energy independence. Fried said the state must “act on it as soon as possible” to buffer its dependence on foreign energy.

To that end, an amendment in the state legislature came during appropriations votes to pull the money away from Russian investment, but failed to gather enough support to pass. Florida has about $300 million the wrapped up in what are called Russian domiciled entities, or a company based in Russia.

The amendment to divest was introduced by Hillsborough state representative Andrew Learned, a Democrat. In new comments that Rep. Learned posted to Twitter, he criticized Florida Republicans for their silence on the matter.

“Reminder: still crickets from Florida GOP about divesting our Russian investments,” Learned tweeted.

The state’s investments in Russian companies are managed by the State Board of Administration. The Florida SBA operates as an investment fiduciary, and before any decision to invest or divest is made, the board has to review the funds.

The SBA is, by law, under the control of the Governor, alongside the state’s Chief Financial Officer and Attorney General, Jimmy Patronis and Ashley Moody, respectively.

That said, a representative for DeSantis said investment and divestment decisions must be made in accordance with state law, and any federal regulations, which include Treasury Department sanctions. The representative also said the $300 million mentioned for investment was the amount held before the latest federal sanctions on Russia due to its invasion of Ukraine, and the value of the assets in question “may have changed due to volatility in the stock market.”

“The SBA has been reviewing investments in Russian domiciled entities,” according to the Governor’s Office. “Any decisions will be announced after the SBA has concluded its review.”

https://www.wfla.com/news/politics/florida-dems-call-for-state-gov-desantis-to-end-300m-in-russian-investments/

[Richard Smith]

The media is really laying the groundwork before Hunter's indictment.  Trying to soften the blow by slowly acknowledging the obvious after years of denial and suppression of the topic as a conspiracy theory.  Will Hunter go to prison?  Probably not.  But he will cut a deal pleading guilty to numerous crimes that will expose his corruption (along with the entire Biden family) and the media coverup.  Trump will be vindicated once again. 

[Rick Plant]

We are days away from the vote to confirm Ketanji Brown Jackson, and the polling speaks volumes—Judge Jackson is more than qualified for SCOTUS and Americans overwhelmingly support her confirmation.   

Senate Republicans' attacks on Ketanji Brown Jackson have fallen flat

Americans broadly support confirming Judge Jackson to the Supreme Court, recent polling shows.



Senate Republicans have spent the past several weeks levying false attacks against Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, President Joe Biden's nominee for the Supreme Court. But a new poll indicates the smears have not convinced the vast majority of American voters — two-thirds of whom back her confirmation.

A Marquette Law School poll released Wednesday found 66% of the nation's adults said they would vote to confirm Jackson — who would become the first Black woman in U.S. history to serve on the high court — if they were members of the Senate. Interestingly, 64% of poll respondents who were surveyed before the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings began said they supported Jackson's confirmation, compared to 72% of poll respondents who were interviewed after the hearings began.

"It is an interesting and meaningful result given that some of the initial criticism before she was picked was, 'Why is Biden narrowing the field to just this demographic group?'" polling director Charles Franklin told USA Today. "Our evidence, at least, is that it certainly looks like a little bit of a net positive."

This poll matches the results of other recent polls, which indicated that Jackson is one of the most popular Supreme Court nominees in decades.

GOP senators started attacking Jackson's record as a judge and lawyer soon after Biden nominated her to the high court in February.

South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham first criticized Biden for picking someone who attended Harvard Law School, objecting to the fact that eight of the nine current justices earned law degrees from Harvard and Yale Universities — though he had himself voted to confirm six of them.

Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley began pushing widely debunked claims that "Judge Jackson has a pattern of letting child p*rn offenders off the hook for their appalling crimes, both as a judge and as a policymaker" and that she showed an "alarming trend of lenient sentencing." As Missouri's attorney general, Hawley had agreed to a plea deal in at least one s*x crime case that allowed a sheriff to avoid any jail time.

Republicans then used the very same "embarrassing antics" at Jackson's confirmation hearings to try to undermine her nomination that they had previously decried and vowed not to use.

Specifically complaining that Jackson — like GOP nominees before her — refused to weigh in on policy questions that are up to Congress, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, said last Thursday that he "cannot and will not support Judge Jackson for a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court."

Minority Whip John Thune, Republican Conference Chair John Barrasso, Kansas Sen. Roger Marshall, Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse, and Mississippi Sen. Roger Wicker have also announced their intention to vote no.

So far, only one Republican — Maine Sen. Susan Collins — has indicated her support for Jackson.

Thune (R-SD) told the Hill on Wednesday that he does not expect Jackson to get more than one or two more GOP votes. "I think the universe of votes that she could get in the Senate among Republicans is probably similar to what happened in the appeals court," he said, referencing the three Republican votes she received in June 2021.

The Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to vote next Monday to advance Jackson's nomination to the full Senate.

https://americanindependent.com/ketanji-brown-jackson-poll-supreme-court-senate-republicans/

[Rick Plant]

Why are Republicans so afraid to let people vote? Because when more people vote Republicans lose. 

Judge blocks all new Florida voter suppression laws — then knocks the Supreme Court for putting voting rights 'under siege'

In a 288-page document, District Court Judge Mark Walker blocked the Florida voter suppression bill and specifically called out judges and the Supreme Court for undercutting the Voting Rights Act. Mark Joseph Stern, Slate's court and law writer, cited several excerpts in the judge's decision that make the decision groundbreaking. Until the case goes to the Supreme Court, Florida's suppression laws will be stopped.

Republicans around the country have been pushing voter suppression laws after former President Donald Trump lost the 2020 election after a record-setting voter turnout. In Texas, for example, Republicans confessed that the law they passed putting additional barriers on vote by mail wasn't due to an outbreak of voter fraud. Instead, it was to make people feel better.

"This is a preventative measure for us," Republican state Rep. Travis Clardy said. "I think it is our job to make sure that doesn't blossom into a problem that disturbs the underlying and one of the underpinnings of our democracy, and that is confidence in our elections."

Florida SB 90 created their own restrictive legislation that Gov. Ron DeSantis signed in 2021. The Florida voter suppression law makes voter registration more difficult, puts additional barriers on vote by mail and changes the rules for election observers.

"Having reviewed all the evidence, this Court finds that, for the most part, Plaintiffs are right" wrote Judge Walker. "Thus, as explained in detail below, this Court enjoins Defendants from enforcing most of SB 90’s challenged provisions. In so ruling, this Court recognizes that the right to vote, and the VRA particularly, are under siege."

He went on to cite Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., who wrote in a letter to the New York Amsterdam News in June 1965 about the VRA that “to deny a person the right to exercise his political freedom at the polls is no less a dastardly act as to deny a Christian the right to petition God in prayer."

Then he dropped the hammer on the Florida law, explaining that Florida "has repeatedly, recently, and persistently acted to deny Black Floridians access to the franchise," meaning the right to vote. He thus placed the state back under preclearance, which mandates that any election laws in the state must be approved by the federal government.

He went on to detail an extensive "horrendous history of racial discrimination in voting," and explained that when the Florida Legislature passes so many laws that disproportionately burden Black voters, "this Court can no longer accept that the effect is incidental."

Judge Walker then attacked the Supreme Court, recalling Chief Justice John Roberts 2013 majority opinion, "Voting discrimination still exists; no one doubts that. The question is whether the act's extraordinary measures, including its disparate treatment of the states, continue to satisfy constitutional requirements."

"Nearly 50 years later, things have changed dramatically. Largely because of the Voting Rights Act, voter turnout and registration rates in covered jurisdictions now approach parity," the majority opinion continued. "Blatantly discriminatory evasions of federal decrees are rare and minority candidates hold office at unprecedented levels."

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg responded with a dissent, writing, "Throwing out preclearance when it has worked and is continuing to work to stop discriminatory changes is like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet."

According to Judge Walker, "In short, without explaining itself, the Court has allowed its wholly judge-made prudential rule to trump some of our most precious constitutional rights."

He said that the parts of the Florida law were inspired by racist desires to suppress Black votes. He then put the state back under the VRA's preclearance restrictions and said that the state must get federal approval before passing any new laws limiting voter registration, drop boxes, or "line warming."

So-called "line warming" is when people bring food, water, blankets, jackets, or even chairs while people spend hours standing in line to vote. Georgia passed a law this year banning any efforts to help anyone in line trying to vote. So, if someone has to use the bathroom after several hours, they have to do it on the sidewalk outside the poll place or soil themselves, otherwise, they'll lose their place in line.

https://www.rawstory.com/voting-rights-florida-decision/

[Rick Plant]

President Biden's plan will set us on a path to true energy independence.

[Rick Plant]

President Biden is Building Back Better. Labor income up $1.2 trillion since Biden took office.

Wages Up by $1.2 Trillion Since Biden Takes Office, $9,400 per Household

Okay, this is not 100 percent kosher, but since we seem to have entered the political silly season, and the media have jumped in with both feet, these are real numbers from the Commerce Department. The $1.2 trillion increase refers to all labor income, which counts employer provided health care insurance, pensions, and other benefits. More importantly, these data are not adjusted for inflation, but even when price increases are factored in, labor income is still up by 1.6 percent from when President Biden took office.

This is worth noting, because the news media have filled their pages and broadcasts with stories of workers who are suffering because of the rise in gas prices and inflation more generally. There are undoubtedly many workers who are seriously suffering, but this is always true. Since labor income is higher today than it was before the pandemic, we can reasonably infer that many more workers were having trouble making ends meet in 2019 than today. If we hear more stories of hardship now, it is because of the decision by the media to give us more stories of hardship, not because more stories exist in the world.

For those who want a picture of how labor income growth since Biden took office compares with prior years, here’s the picture since 2010.


Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis, Bureau of Labor Statistics, and author’s calculations.

As can be seen, labor income generally rises. The one exception was 2011, when austerity measures slowed job growth and high unemployment dampened wage growth.

The other item that jumps out in this picture is that in 2014 and 2015, which were the second and third strongest year for labor income growth, oil prices fell sharply. Since wage growth and job growth don’t usually change much year by year, changes in the rate of inflation are a major determinant of the pace of real labor income growth. Oil and energy prices in turn, are major factors in the rate of inflation.

The jump in oil prices since the pandemic ended, which has been aggravated by disruptions, and the threat of disruptions, associated with the Russian invasion of Ukraine, has been a major factor depressing real labor income growth since President Biden took office. The impact of higher oil prices, and other supply chain issues associated with the pandemic, have led to a big jump in inflation rates everywhere. For example, in the United Kingdom inflation has risen by 6.2 percent over the last year. In Germany, inflation has been 7.6 percent.

It is understandable that Republicans don’t like to call attention to the extent that the pandemic is responsible for higher inflation and its negative impact on living standards. It is a bit harder to understand why ostensibly neutral reporters don’t like to call attention to this fact. It’s a bit like reporting on a rise in homelessness in an area, without mentioning that much of the housing stock had been wiped out by a hurricane. But such is the state of reporting in the United States today. 

[Rick Plant]

Big news today: President Biden is taking on the greedy oil industry who is artificially keeping gas prices high for profit by releasing 1 million barrels of oil per day from the strategic reserve. "The action, which Biden will formally announce later Thursday, will represent the largest release from the reserve in its nearly 50-year history." He is also going to make sure these companies are producing oil in the U.S. like they are supposed to instead of just sitting on 9,000 permits while doing nothing with his "Use It or Lose It" policy. There is absolutely no need for these greedy oil companies to take  advantage of us. They already made enough profits at our expense. 

Biden to release 1 million barrels of oil per day from strategic reserve to drive down gas prices



WASHINGTON – President Joe Biden will order the release of 1 million barrels of oil per day over the next six months from the nation's Strategic Petroleum Reserve in response to a spike in gas prices triggered by Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

The action, which Biden will formally announce later Thursday, will represent the largest release from the reserve in its nearly 50-year history.

Gas prices at the pump have soared by nearly $1 per gallon in the month since Russia's invasion of Ukraine. The war means less Russian oil is getting to the market, and the reduction in supply is raising prices at the pump.

Senior administration officials who briefed reporters ahead of Biden's announcement could not say how much the release of oil from the strategic reserves is expected to lower prices at the pump or how soon prices will start to fall.

The administration predicts that release of the oil will serve as a bridge until the end of the year, when domestic production ramps up. The Energy Department will use revenue from the release to restock the emergency stockpile in future years, the officials said.

What is the Strategic Petroleum Reserve?

The Strategic Petroleum Reserve is a stockpile to preserve access to oil in case of natural disasters, national security issues and other events. Maintained by the Energy Department, the reserves are stored in caverns created in salt domes along the Texas and Louisiana Gulf Coasts. There are roughly 605 million barrels of petroleum in the reserve.

The reserve was established by Congress in 1975 after the oil crisis in 1973, when oil-exporting nations throttled their production and caused energy prices to soar.

Biden promotes domestic oil production

Meanwhile, to encourage U.S. companies to ramp up domestic production, Biden also is proposing a "use it or lose it" policy for companies to produce more oil with the resources they already have. Right now, the oil and gas industry is sitting on more than 9,000 approved but unused permits for production on federal lands.

Biden will call for Congress to force companies to pay fees on wells from leases that they haven't used in years. Companies that are producing from leased acres and existing wells won't be subject to the fees. But companies that continue to sit on non-producing acres will have to choose whether to start producing or pay a fee.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/biden-to-release-1-million-barrels-of-oil-per-day-from-strategic-reserve-to-drive-down-gas-prices/ar-AAVIJ0A?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=792b2aa487e64100bd966aef51f5ce01

[Rick Plant]

House Democrats have just passed a bill to cap insulin prices at $35. Republicans call saving Americans money for their necessary medication "socialist".

Anytime Democrats want to help people save money, radical Republicans bring out the old right wing "socialist" buzzword in order to turn off their own voting base from a bill that helps them. Republicans would rather have people go into debt or miss crucial insulin doses (in which they can die) than save them money on outrageous insulin prices. And yet Republican voters keep voting against their own interests as the party they vote for forces them to go into debt over their life saving insulin they need to survive.   

When a car dealership has a huge sale on cars and trucks to save folks some money, would Republicans call that "socialist" too?   

193 Republicans voted against capping insulin for their own supporters who need it. House Republicans would rather have them pay well over $100 as drug companies gouge them for profits. How can anybody be against saving people money for the necessary medication they need each day? This vote was not partisan or political. It was about saving Americans money from being gouged by drug companies so they can afford their necessary insulin. This vote was a no brainer, but almost every single Republican voted "no" to save lives and save people money, which includes their own voters.     

Once again, Republicans fail Americans, but mostly their own voters by proving they do not care about them. If Republicans cared about them, they would have voted "yes" to save them money on their insulin. Their "no" vote has proven they do not care.   

How can the GOP claim to be "Pro Life" when they voted against another pro life issue? If someone misses their insulin shot because they can't afford it that person is likely to die. Yet, the GOP made sure that was possible by voting no to cap insulin at $35 so people can afford to live. Thankfully we have Democrats in charge of the House to save lives and to make people's lives more affordable, otherwise this crucial bill never would have passed the House.           

Republicans already voted against "The American Rescue Plan" and the 'Infrastructure Bil" which has created the best economy on record, giving 7.4 million people new jobs, lowering unemployment to the lowest number since 1969, and putting more money in people's pockets. Republicans are more interested in banning books, banning transgenders from playing sports, taking away women's reproductive rights, and passing anti voter laws, none of which helps struggling families and individuals pay for the necessary medications they need to survive.

The GOP is not "Pro Life" and are not for the working man. Their voting record proves it each time they vote.

So my question is, "what has the GOP done to help the average American better their lives"? And the answer is absolutely nothing, because the GOP has already have voted "no" on every single bill in 2021/2022 that does exactly that. The GOP is the party of "NO". Remember that this November.                   


House passes bill to cap insulin prices

The House of Representatives voted Thursday to approve legislation that would limit cost-sharing for insulin under private health insurance and Medicare. The vote was 232-193, with 12 Republican members joining their Democratic colleagues to pass the measure.

The Affordable Insulin Now Act would cap insulin prices at either $35 a month or 25% of an insurance plan's negotiated price — whichever is lower. The legislation aims to take effect in 2023 but its fate in the Senate remains unclear.

"This is a kitchen table issue, "House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said to reporters ahead of the bill's passage on Thursday.

"One in four Americans is forced to skip or ration doses of insulin and that's life-threatening," she said, noting the legislation "paves the way" for further action on negotiating lower drug prices beyond insulin.

independent nonprofit that studies health care prices, which shows prices for insulin doubled between 2012 and 2016.

"No one should have to choose between taking their medication as prescribed and putting food on the table or a roof over their head," said Rep. Dan Kildee, one of three Democratic lawmakers who sponsored the legislation.

"As a father of a type 1 diabetic, I have seen firsthand how the high price of prescription drugs like insulin can harm patients and harm families," the Michigan Democrat said during debate on the House floor. "When my daughter turned 26 and got her own health insurance, there were months where she spent a third of her take home pay because she's diabetic on staying alive."

Critics of the bill argue the cap alone doesn't do enough to solve the underlying problem of rising prescription drug prices.

"We want lower prices for drugs, particularly for insulin," said Rep. Buddy Carter, R-Ga, during debate. "But instead of fixing a broken system, this bill aims to control it," he adding, calling the bill a "socialist plan."

House Democrats passed legislation in November as part of a broader spending package that would have enabled Medicare to negotiate lower prices for various prescription drugs.

Because that package remains stalled in the Senate, Democrats are working to more narrowly tackle making common drugs like insulin more affordable.

There is a similar bipartisan effort under way in the Senate but its path is unclear as Republicans have traditionally been opposed to price caps.

https://www.npr.org/2022/03/31/1090085513/house-passes-bill-to-cap-insulin-prices