Morning Action: Why Did They #MarchforLife?

MARCH FOR LIFE.  The Heritage Foundation interviewed several people at the March for Life Wednesday in Washington about why they march for life:

America is becoming increasingly pro-life and increasingly willing to actively defend life, at a cultural and political level, and through social media:

SOTU 2014.  President Obama’s State of the Union address will focus on income inequality this year:

The address will include a “healthy dose” of the income inequality message the White House has focused on in recent weeks, according to one senior administration official familiar with the text. 

 A president who has yet to add to the big legislative accomplishments of his first term will call for raising the minimum wage to $10 per hour and extending federal unemployment benefits that expired last month.

The problem with his proposal is it would eliminate some 300,000 jobs from the economy and “lower our national economic output by more than $40 billion annually.”  Former Heritage Foundation President Ed Feulner explains:

Those who blithely propose large minimum-wage increases are ignoring a basic economic truth: When you raise the cost of something, you slow down the rate at which people purchase it. They buy less. So an employer who might decide to hire another worker when the cost is relatively low will forgo that expense when it gets too high.

IMMIGRATION.  A top Republican has called for the legalization of illegal immigrants, which is amnesty:

According to Eyewitness News (Bakersfield, CA), “Republican leaders, including House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy, of Bakersfield, are calling for the first time to give legal status to millions of undocumented immigrants living in the United States.”  In an interview published late yesterday, Rep. McCarthy said it was his “personal belief I think it’ll go with legal status that will allow you to work and pay taxes.”   Make no mistake, he is signaling amnesty will be part of House Republicans’ “piecemeal” immigration strategy

 OMNIBUS.  Funding for various projects in the $1.1 trillion omnibus, such as funding for a provision aimed at cutting down on helicopter noise in Los Angeles, has evoked a new question: Are we seeing the return of earmarks on Capitol Hill, or are these provisions simply a reflection of policy priorities (sub. req’d):

Some observers said policy provisions seeping into appropriations bills is to be expected following a Congress that did not move much legislation, making the omnibus a major moment for many lawmakers trying to incorporate their policy priorities.

 …

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) 52% suggested late last week that even though he thinks the spending bill contains pork barrel spending, he sees that as a symptom of an omnibus, which is dealt with in rapid floor action generally closed to significant amendments, and not necessarily because earmarking is on the rise.

 Regardless of what lawmakers call it, wasteful spending on frivolous, ineffective projects has no place in the omnibus.

Suggested Tweets
The #MarchforLife was a success Wednesday!

Tweet This

Please Share Your Thoughts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *