Wednesday, June 28, 2017


by -

Judging by all the smiling, smug faces gathered at the White House last week after House Republicans passed the much ballyhooed American Health Care Act (“AHCA”), one might be lead to believe they actually did what they promised to do – repeal ObamaCare. And, in the typical logic-twisting of Beltway politicians, perhaps some of the GOP members probably believe they did. After all, the Republicans did pass a bill; it was sold as a replacement of the Affordable Care Act; and, Democrats acted like the sick and infirmed were to be suddenly cast into the street. Nevertheless, after the last cork pops and the confetti stops falling at the GOP’s self-congratulations party, they will be forced to answer constituents demanding to know, “Where’s the beef?”

Not every Republican was rushing to the bowl of victory punch. Rep. Justin Amash, who is an all-too-rare voice of objectivity among his more delusional colleagues, took to Facebook to criticize the new health care legislation, explaining his vote for it only as support for a “marginal improvement” to ObamaCare, nothing more. “[ObamaCare] will continue to drive up the cost of health insurance…and the modifications contained in the AHCA cannot save it,” says Amash. “At best, it will make ObamaCare less bad.”

Regardless of the made-for-fundraising outrage of the Left, the ACHA does little to change the law it purports to replace. In fact, Cato Institute’s Michael Cannon suggests if enacted, in some very real respects, it could be even worse than its predecessor.

As Cannon and others have noted, for example, the ACHA fails to eliminate ObamaCare’s onerous “community rating” price controls – which have sent insurance premiums skyrocketing for some, while reducing coverage for others. Cannon suggests the GOP’s half-hearted tinkering “will accelerate ObamaCare’s race to the bottom.” Apparently, this is what passes as “reform” to Republicans.

While House Republicans may consider their attempt at reforming ObamaCare a job well done, there is no excuse for how far short their “second draft” came to reaching anything that could remotely be considered genuine reform, much less a full “repeal.” As Amash noted, the new plan contains some good provisions, but, hailing the legislation as the “start of a new beginning,” as House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy called it, or pretending it to be some huge victory for the free market, is pure Establishment spin to cover the GOP’s lack of desire to fight the battles necessary to truly fix America’s healthcare system once and for all.

As I have written previously, Republicans had seven years to draft a replacement for ObamaCare, and then set the groundwork for passing it when the opportunity came. Yet, when the opportunity did come, we saw just how little Establishment Republicans had accomplished over those years. Instead of crafting a real free market approach to reform, convincing moderate Republicans and Democrats of its merits, and then patiently selling it to the American public as ObamaCare continued to spiral downward, Republican leaders did what they frequently do – propose a last-minute, watered-down version of reform, and promising to “get it right” later.

We saw this in March, when House Republicans first proposed a version of reform that was summarily rejected by conservatives both in Congress, and on the outside. And, we saw them do it again this month, barely getting the “revised” AHCA through the House, and only after buying-off Republicans on the fence with hollow promises that states down the road might be able to opt out of certain provisions. It is a tactic all too familiar to anyone who understands how Washington operates — trading one’s vote today for promises of future relief via some complicated formula, which rarely occurs.

Unfortunately for the GOP and its control of Congress in the future, they may not get out from under this failure. By leaving in place or slightly modifying many of ObamaCare’s worst provisions, and hoping to avoid others on the false hope that states will not succumb to pressure from pro-ObamaCare lobbyists, all they have managed to do is make modest tweaks to a law, while assuming full responsibility for it down the road. The average voter will not remember, or care, it was Obama who passed the ball; only that Republicans were the last to get a fingertip on it before going out of bounds.

Perhaps the Senate will get it right. However, history suggests this will not be the case, and it is likely that the version of the AHCA emerging from the Senate will be essentially the same as the House version, or even worse after moderates in the Senate load it up with more ObamaCare–like provisions that voters have come to consider part of their “right to health care.” For Americans hoping for a true, market-based reform of the health care system to which we are all now subject, however, RepubliCare will make little difference.

by -
health care
But is it really?

Radio host Mark Levin offered a rather half-hearted praise for the newly passed health care reform bill. Levin said that he sees it as a step in the right direction, but the many provisions in the law are no less different than Obamacare.

“Where’s the great repeal of Obamacare?” he questioned. “There are some aspects that are repealed, but there are also some expansions. I already told you about the subsidies, a hundred and thirty-eight billion dollars. I also said that this is a step in the right direction.”

“It’s an itsy bitsy little step in the right direction, and it hasn’t even gotten to the Senate yet,” he added.

“Is that what they campaigned on? An itsy bitsy little step?” Levin continued. “The president says make no mistake, its repeal and replace. It’s not. Since 90% of the Obamacare infrastructure remains in place and all the mandates and regulations.”

“It pays more ransom money to the insurance companies,” he said. “I’m looking at, somebody writes here, ‘$8 billion for high risk pools,’ no, it’s more than that, and it’s a total, when you add it all up of a hundred thirty eight billion dollars. It’s a massive slush fund.”

Levin went on to criticize President Trump for his attempt in introducing the tax cut plan. “It doesn’t even exist, there is no tax cut yet. When this pathetic Republican leadership gets through your tax cuts, Mister President, then we’ll compare your tax cuts to Reagan’s tax cuts. Right now yours is a general proposal. His were law. So you cannot compare the Reagan tax cuts, a fact, a reality, with the Trump tax cuts, which are a proposal, which this Congress hasn’t even acted on yet. And Reagan had to fight the Congress. He had to go over the head of Tip O’Neill and the Democrats in the House, which is exactly what he did.”

by -
Karma will eventually catch up with health insurance pigs.

According to a recent Kaiser Family Foundation report, average premium for the silver plan of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) will rise by 19 percent if the government fails to fund the program’s cost-sharing subsidies.

The Affordable Care Act used cost-sharing subsidies as a means to curtail the cost of out-of-pocket expenses for low-income households by reimbursing insurance providers.

Ways and Means, and Energy and Commerce, the two House committees investigating the source of the funding for the subsidies, said they were unconstitutional. They found that the Obama administration had been funding the program without permanent adoption from the Congress. They also filed a lawsuit challenging the payments.

“With a legal appeal pending, the federal government and Congress are in a position to choose whether to continue reimbursing insurers for their cost,” Kaiser said.

The report states that if the government fails to fund the program through cost-sharing subsidies, premiums will rise significantly; from 9 percent in North Dakota to 27 percent in Mississippi.

“The analysis—based on cost-sharing subsidy payments and benchmark premiums in federal marketplace states in 2016, the most recent data available—finds that the estimated premium increase for silver plans would be higher (21%) in states that did not expand Medicaid under the ACA than in states that expanded Medicaid (15%),” the report notes.

“Cost-sharing subsidies are generally higher in states that have not expanded Medicaid because they have a larger share of enrollees with incomes from 100% to 150% of the poverty level, who get the biggest cost-sharing reductions.”

There are currently around 7.1 million Americans who receive these types of payments, accounting for almost 58 percent of the people who chose an Obamacare plan in 2017.

Additionally, it has been noted that these potential premium hikes would come after the Obama administration’s announcement in 2016 that premiums would increase by approximately 22 percent in 2017, after several insurers faced heavy losses.

President Donald Trump and several other Congressional Republicans have also repeatedly warned that Obamacare will ultimately collapse due to its own shortcomings, if it isn’t repealed soon enough.
With that said, health insurance providers continue to experience soaring profits. In February, one of the largest insurance providers, Aetna, doubled it’s quarterly cash dividends and announced a $3.3 billion share buyback. The company generated $2.3 billion in net income in 2016.

by -
At least some of them don't forget who they are.

Of all the muscles in the human body, none are perhaps more toned and strengthened than those in the index finger of moderate Republicans in Congress; particularly following the defeat of their high profile, “too-important-too-fail” health care legislation. There certainly was no shortage of finger wagging and pointing this week, following Speaker Paul Ryan’s decision to pull the GOP’s controversial “replacement” of ObamaCare due to lack of support within the ranks.

Supporters of the American Health Care Act, including the White House which demanded its passage “or else,” blamed everybody — from the House Freedom Caucus to the Cato Institute to Democrats — for its failure; except, of course, the moderates who cobbled together the faux repeal in the first place.

However, another – and far more accurate – way to look at defeating the AHCA by Republicans would be to say, “It’s about time!”

In national politics, on key issues especially, you rarely if ever, get more than one chance to pass something meaningful. If you allow the moderates/Establishment to convince you that you cannot let “the perfect to be enemy to the good” (a phrase I grew to loathe during my time in Congress after hearing it so many times from leadership), seldom does another opportunity come around; much less one to actually “get it right.”

Ever since George H. W. Bush pressed House Republicans to join in breaking his infamous “read my lips” no-tax-increase pledge, these have been the same empty promises force-fed to conservatives by moderates in Congress to goad them into supporting dreadful bills. And, almost always, conservatives are left holding the bag.

So, when it came time to line-up support on the AHCA, despite its manifest shortcomings as genuine reform, finally enough was enough for conservatives. Was this not the precise opportunity to “get it right” that was promised to them for years when it came to replacing ObamaCare with the conservative, free market reforms Republicans have claimed for decades are the key to fixing healthcare in America? Members of the House Freedom Caucus, Cato Institute, Freedom Works, Club for Growth and others were asking nothing more than for the GOP to uphold its end of the bargain, and not squander the opportunity with another permanent “temporary fix.”

Yes, passing genuine repeal of ObamaCare and replacing it with a free market based alternative would have been more difficult and time-consuming than what was proposed by Ryan and his team. It would have taken additional weeks, if not months, to draft, debate, and convince both their colleagues in the Congress and the public that government does not have a magic wand, and should instead give the private sector broader latitude to come up with solutions for efficiency and effectiveness. Yet, this is a fundamental duty of Republicans in Congress – to get it right – rather than taking short cuts, that while perhaps making things a little better is far from the true path needed to make things much better.

In this respect, conservatives were saying “No” because they wanted to stand up for what is right, rather than saying “Yes” just because House moderates wanted reelection material, or because an optics-obsessed White House could check off another campaign promise, regardless of what the end-product looked like. They were finally demonstrating what conservative voters have long wanted from Republicans in Congress – a willingness to stay true to the principles of the Party and the Constitution, even if it means going against Party leaders.

Standing up for these principles is not being anti-Republican, or not “living in the real world” as White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon suggests; it is simply refusing to be yet another rubber-stamp Congress similar to that which gave us No Child Left Behind, the USA PATRIOT Act, and the massively expensive prescription drug bill – just because a Republican president wanted such legislation passed.

In doing what they did last week, the conservatives sent a message to the Establishment that principles do actually mean something; and that at least a significant number of Republican members will stand firm in that regard.

The lack of “loyalty” by the Freedom Caucus that the President decried immediately following Ryan’s pulling the vote last Friday was in fact a welcome exhibition of “loyalty” to true Republican principles, and to the Constitution-based responsibility of the House of Representatives that is independent of the presidency even if the occupant of that office happens to be of the same political Party as the majority.

Hopefully, congressional leaders and the White House will come to understand this, and see it as an opportunity to begin actually reining in government rather than expanding it. One can at least hope.

by -

As result of disagreements regarding the House Freedom Caucus’ role in the failure of President Donald Trump’s healthcare plan, Republican Representative Ted Poe, on Sunday, March 26, resigned from the conservative group.

Texas GOP Rep. Ted Poe’s resignation comes after the right-wing caucus vehemently opposed the Republican healthcare proposal, for which he wanted to vote.

“I have resigned from the House Freedom Caucus,” Poe said in a statement. He suggested that his decision to leave the caucus would allow him to serve his constituents better.

“In order to deliver on the conservative agenda we have promised the American people for eight years, we must come together to find solutions to move this country forward. Saying no is easy, leading is hard, but that is what we were elected to do. Leaving this caucus will allow me to be a more effective Member of Congress and advocate for the people of Texas. It is time to lead,” he added.

A tweet by reporter Chad Pergram later confirmed that Poe had told Caucus chairman Rep. Mark Meadows about his departure from the group. While the Freedom Caucus is not known to keep an official list of its members, Poe was reportedly a recent addition.

The Freedom Caucus believes that the Republican proposal did not actually repeal the 2010 Affordable Care Act, popularly known as Obamacare, in its true essence. Poe had different views and was in favor of the legislation.

The caucus argued that the Affordable Health Care Act (AHCA) did not go far enough to fulfill the Republicans’ promise of fully repealing and replacing ObamaCare. Despite late attempts from both, President Donald Trump and House Speaker Paul Ryan, the bill failed to gain any support from the caucus; Meadows believes the bill simply does not do enough.

The Freedom Caucus consists of the House of Representatives’ most conservative members, which played a critical role in dealing the Trump administration a major political setback on Friday; when Republican House leaders had to pull off the healthcare legislation, one of Trump’s major campaign promises.

Trump showed his displeasure towards the Freedom Caucus and other conservatives in a tweet on Sunday morning, saying their actions resulted in “Democrats smiling in D.C.”

by -
The jig is up.

Under the Obama Administration, Republicans attempted to repeal the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) a total of 52 times.

The repeal bills easily passed both the House and the Senate and then were predictably vetoed by President Obama.

Now with a Republican in the White House who would sign any repeal bill put in front of him, Republicans in Congress all of the sudden have no ability to repeal ObamaCare despite controlling both the House and the Senate.

What type of wizadry is going on here?

How did Republicans members of Congress all of the sudden lose the ability to pass a repeal bill after pulling it off 52 different times?

They didn’t.

Establishment Republicans never wanted to repeal ObamaCare.

For the last seven years, they knew that Obama would never sign a repeal bill. They also knew that “Repeal and Replace” was a beautiful wedge issue that could be used for years against Democrats.

Most importantly, the Finance, Health Care and Insurance industries are the GOP’s biggest backers (and the Democrats).

In the 2016 campaign season, the Insurance, Finance and Real Estate sectors contributed a massive $1.1 billion to candidates, parties and outside groups. Of that billion, 55% went to Republicans.

The Health Care Industry piled on another $268 million.

In the House of Representatives alone, candidates raised $554 million in 2016 for their campaigns . . . with the bulk of the funds being raised by incumbents.

In 2016, the Health Care, Insurance and Finance sectors contributed $118 million to House Republicans. That’s 21% of the campaign contributions.

It’s needless to say that if someone donates 21% of your revenue, you’re going to make them happy.

Why else would they be donating?

One question may remain about this industry influence over Congress. That is, do those industries benefit from ObamaCare?

An astounding, YES!

Take a look at the stock price of just about any company in those industries since March of 2010 (when ObamaCare passed).

Amgen (AMGN), which donated $1.5 million in 2016, had a stock price of $60. Today the price stands at $164.

United Health’s (UNH) stock went from $32.91 to $170.

The list goes on and on, and doesn’t even include the corporations who donated through industry associations such as the American Medical Association that donated $1.8 million or the American Hospital Association that also donated $1.8 million.

Paul Ryan and other Establishment Republicans showed their hand in the past weeks by proposing a bill that was nothing more than a reworded version of ObamaCare, while trying to confuse the public about their real intent.

It didn’t work.

Instead, they showed their hand and flat out proved that they never intent to repeal this $1.72 trillion entitlement program.

Angry yet? Comment below.

by -
"Repeal and Replace! That's the ticket!"

Last week was an eye opener for many Americans as they were able to see the partisan faces of their elected officials.

Over 200 Republican members of Congress were willing to not just support a continuation of ObamaCare, they were willing to lie to you and say with a straight face that it was “repeal.”

Last year, nearly every Republican candidate hit the campaign trail to make a promise to voters that they would “repeal and replace” ObamaCare.

Instead, many of these same men and women aggressively lobbied to slap a fresh coat of paint on the $1.72 trillion entitlement program with their support of Paul Ryan’s American Health Care Act.

Louisiana Congressman Clay Higgins, a tough talking former cop took to the House Floor on Friday to shout, “A vote against the American Health Care Act is a vote against FREEDOM!”

When I watched Rep. Higgins shout into the microphone as if he were a Drill Instructor dressing down recruits, I laughed out loud.

Higgins truly believes that RyanCare is better than ObamaCare based on the fact that ObamaCare is 8,000 pages and RyanCare is “124 pages of freedom.”

Higgins and many others within Congress are so distanced from reality that they don’t even get that RyanCare is an amendment to ObamaCare, thereby extending the monstrous legislation.

They were sold a bill of goods by the Establishment and told to go out and loyally toe the line . . . and like good little sheep, they fell in line.

Unfortunately, the vast majority of Republican members of Congress, along with our populist President, do not grasp that the expectation of voters for the last seven years was to REPEAL ObamaCare.

What’s worse, politicians like Paul Ryan believe that the American voter is so dumb, that they can call an apple an orange and we’d fall for it.

But are you really surprised?

Since at least 4,000 years ago, politicians have been making promises to voters and then betraying them.

Within American history, with the exception of the Civil War, Americans have continued to fall for it and every year, the federal government grows in expense, size and power.

While I had a sliver of hope that Donald Trump would shake up the Establishment and at least pause the growth of the Federal behemoth, his support of RyanCare shows how easily he can be manipulated.

If we are ever going to get back on a path toward liberty, politicians will have to be held accountable for their promises to the public.

In the past, thousands of “pledges” have been signed and in 1994 the GOP even created a “Contract with America.”

All fine and dandy, but what was the penalty when a politician violated their pledge or promise?

Not much . . . a few lost endorsements and a few lost votes.

Wash, rinse, repeat and a politician is back in office for another term and another round of disloyalty to voters.

To break this cycle, we need something more . . . something that includes both the carrot of support and the threat of a large and heavy stick.

Let me introduce you to the concept of the “Liberty Contract.”

The Liberty Contract is a theoretical binding civil contract between a non-profit organization that represents a voting base, and a candidate.

Here’s how it works.


During an election, a candidate enters into a negotiated, LEGAL and voluntary contract with his or her own constituents through a non-profit organization.

The terms are clear and simple. For instance, if a candidate says they won’t vote to raise or create taxes, or that they will vote to repeal ObamaCare, that’s the deliverable product.

Of course the contract will have to include provisions that would allow a work around in the event of an extraordinary event. For instance, if a candidate vowed not to raise taxes, but we entered another World War, that’s a legitimate exception that would deserve arbitration.

A team of legal experts would do their best to ensure that the contract is legally binding and does not violate any current laws.


Upon taking office and serving a term, if the contract is adhered to a SuperPAC will legally spend enough money for that candidate to win re-election. Basically, the politician doesn’t have to worry about the major issue of raising campaign dollars – a very gracious carrot.

For purposes of this theory, the SuperPAC would agree to spend at least what was spent in the last election of that specific winning race . . . and more if facing a greater challenge.

The SuperPAC (which would be separate from the non-profit) would use adherence to the Liberty Contract as its guide.

Another significant benefit of the contract is the cover it provides to a politician. This would have been useful last week within the back rooms of Congress.

When Establishment powers use every threat possible to rally support for their cause, politicians who are contracted to maintain a position, are provided with strong cover to stand their ground.

And that gets us to the stick.


For far too long, politicians have easily been able to walk away unscathed when they break their promises. They have one excuse after another and, as with any good politician, they are very convincing.

If government were a business, 90% of politicians would be out of a job after their first term.

The Liberty Contract makes “firing” enforceable.

If a “signed” politician violates the contract, they agree to not seek reelection.

Pretty simple? No, not really because what would stop them from violating an agreement to not run again?

Constitutionally, they can’t be stopped.

However, by signing the contract, they agree to a financial fine of half their net worth if they breach the contract and seek subsequent terms.

That may sound harsh, but without a penalty, there is no point to a contract.

While a politician may violate the contract every which way till Sunday, it would become a personally painful experience.

Theoretically, the Liberty Contract sounds great, but honestly who would sign it?

A true statesman who is grounded in his or her beliefs wouldn’t have an issue with the agreement.

A politician who ebbs and flows in whatever direction would likely never agree to a contract like this . . . and they would have to compete against another politician who has signed put their future on the line and signed the contract.

While the concept of the Liberty Contract may sound exciting, that excitement should be met with resignation over our current circumstance.

Even with the awakening of the “Silent Majority” that supported Donald Trump, in 2016 97% of the members of Congress — who have failed us for years — were reelected.

Will they finally deliver on their promises?

No, they won’t. You can bet on that.

But by organizing a new standard that will hold politicians accountable, we can make headway in 2018 and be in a position to finally shrink government by 2020.

Please share your thoughts below.

by -
Support isn't blind.

Typically when a strong “personality candidate” like Donald Trump or Barack Obama rises to the top, a sheep-like mentality quickly emerges to support every move of the politician.

During President Obama’s eight years in office, some called his supporters “ObamaZombies.”

George Bush’s blind backers were called “BushBots.”

With Bill Clinton, they were just called “dipshits.”

Whether under Obama, Bush or Clinton, their supporters who blindly went along with every move were a powerful, vocal force.

But within the first months of Donald Trump’s administration, something radically different is happening among the President’s most loyal supporters.

They are holding him accountable for his campaign promises.

Rather than jumping on board with RyanCare as President Trump has requested, pro-liberty voters are saying, “absolutely not, get it right and repeal!”

In addition to nearly every conservative group opposing the bill, from Heritage Action to the libertarian groups Cato Institute and Liberty Guard, diehard Trump supporters are telling the President to get it right.

When President Trump tweeted this morning, “Big day for healthcare. Working hard!” the response was overwhelming . . . against the President . . . by his own people.

Here’s just a sampling:

Even typically quiet members of Congress like Dave Brat (who led a revolt against the establishment by beating Eric Cantor) said, “We want Trump to be hugely successful, so we don’t want to handle a bill that’s going to fail in a few years.”

The Republican Congressman called RyanCare a “perverse economic system.”

To the credit of the grassroots movement that elected Donald Trump, they’re not going to toe the line just because they were told to do so.

Just as Trump was an unconventional candidate that won the election based on faith in his ability to deliver . . . his support base is also unconventional in that they are showing something rarely seen in politics . . . collective intelligence.

While Ryan, Trump and even Fox News are calling the American Health Care Act the “Repeal and Replace Bill,” nearly all of Trump’s supports can easily see through that lie and know it’s nothing more than a fresh coat of paint on ObamaCare.

Make no mistake, Trump’s supporters are not turning on the President, quite the opposite, they are serving as guiding force to get him on track when he swerves off course.

Comment below.

by -
Right on.

50 Days, or 1,200 hours have passed since the swearing in of Donald Trump as the 45th President of the United States.

While in any other circumstance with any other human being it would be completely unfair to review a President’s performance at the 50-day mark, but President Trump is no mere mortal.

The man makes the Tasmanian Devil look “low energy.”

And since the billionaire turned president is a man who puts accomplishment first, it’s fair to throw in a quick and honest evaluation.

To back up a bit, when I initially endorsed Donald Trump during the primary, it was not because I thought he was a conservative, or even a man who understands the value of a small government. He is a man who has little understanding of Liberty. That’s undeniable and displayed in his actions since becoming President.

Being a libertarian, why in the heck would I back a man like Trump?

It was an easy decision for me.

First, there was no libertarian candidate on the ballot (don’t get me started on Gary “Let Them Eat Nazi Cake” Johnson), and even if there were, I still would have likely backed Donald Trump.

And I have a very, very good reason for that.

Trump is a modern day Conan the Barbarian. Instead of muscles and a sword, he wields disdain for the Establishment and can strike hard blows through the power of the White House.

When you diminish the power of the Establishment, you put massive cracks in the foundation of the government largess they have built.

In the simplest terms, whether or not it’s his intent, Trump is going to rattle the walls protecting government so much, that others can rush in and do lasting damage.

Time Magazine wrote in their latest edition, “Trump is a Threat to Democracy.”

They meant to say, “Trump is a Threat to Government.”

Yes . . . he . . . is.

Now, on to that 50-day critique.

The Trump Administration moved quickly to disrupt Washington since Day 1. The hiring freeze, travel ban, restarts on pipelines and a focus on industry were no surprise and all what was promised.

However, what happened behind the scenes was not expected by most people in or out of Washington. The government bureaucrats (not just the politicians) fought back.

We refer to them as the Deep State.

They are the government workers that you and I pay for who are protecting their way of life that comes from the massive size, power and expense of the federal government.

They ignored his hiring freeze, leaked any details at all to the press, and even overtly disobeyed him (specifically the acting Attorney General who was fired).

Worse, they decided to put their disdain for Trump above the law and national security, leaking classified material to the press . . . and we now find out that the material may have been collected illegally.

The Deep State has been engaging in Guerrilla Warfare with the President of United States.

We couldn’t ask for more.

You see, Trump is a man with little patience, a quick temper and a long, vindictive memory.

The secrecy and power embedded within the Deep State will have to be dismantled for Trump to end this conflict . . . and if he wins, we’ll all be a bit more safe from our own government.

So how did Trump do in his first 50 Days? Better than we could have ever expected . . . with one exception.

His vocal support for ObamaCare 2.0 shows that he has likely been co-opted by the Republican Establishment.

There is nothing honest about the Republican plan to “Repeal and Replace” ObamaCare as it doesn’t even carry out the first goal to “repeal” the legislation.

Paul Ryan and other big government Republicans have his ear for now.

That’s where we come in.

Trump needs to hear the truth from his own supporters. They cannot fall into the trap of genuflecting to the promise of the President rather holding to his promises to America.

On the issue of ObamaCare 2.0, the calls to “give him time,” or worse the bleat of the sheeple, “let’s trust him” are long gone on this one.

Obligation goes both ways.

Trump has obligations to the American People that are unbreakable, and we have an obligation to hold politicians accountable for their actions.

Donald Trump needs to be reminded that he’s our President, or he runs the risk of becoming a puppet to the GOP Establishment.

So let’s get to it.

Let us know what you think by voting in our poll.

by -
This is your government.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell went to the media this week to lower expectations about tax reform in 2017, a top goal of the Trump Administration.


It seems that Congressional Republicans can’t take on more than one thing at a time.

McConnell told Playbook Live that they would have to “wrap up work” on the ObamaCare “repeal” bill before taking a crack at tax reform.

McConnell also said, “All of those discussions are already under way, [but] how do you craft it?”

Given that Senator McConnell has served in the Senate since 1985, the question is bizarre. He and many of his colleagues have literally had decades to ponder tax reform.

And for decades, they have done nothing.

Another reason for the delay on the issue, is that Senators are choosing to take the month of August off. Their recess begins on July 31st and resumes in September.

American businesses however are churning along at a pace that has not been seen in decades. They are operating and investing based upon the promise of a 15% corporate tax rate that has been committed by Donald Trump.

If there is even a hint that tax reform will be a broken promise, the recent stock market gains will turn into a bursting bubble.

[Correction: On January 23, 2017, President Trump stated that the corporate tax rate will now be “anywhere from 15 to 20 percent.” The change in the corporate tax rate followed a raise in his proposed income tax brackets that quietly changed at the end of the election. The top tax rate increased from 25% to 33%. ]


Heightened Tensions

CBS News anchor Scott Pelley, who is being replaced as anchor chair by the news channel, took, what is being called “parting shot” at...