Daily Archives: April 25, 2017

According to a report that's out, President Donald Trump's executive order that eliminates two regulations for every new rule imposed could result in zero net regulatory costs this fiscal year.

On Tuesday, the American Action Forum released a report titled "Getting to $0" demonstrating how Executive Order 13771, using 2006 as a model, could result in zero net regulatory costs for the current fiscal year.

The report, written by Sam Batkins,director of regulatory policy at the American Action Forum, claims that EO's on regulation and the Congressional Review Act could bring regulatory costs to $0 by October 1, 2017. Contrast that with Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Sobarkah's $164 billion in costs from his final regulations alone.

With the landmark signature of Executive Order (EO) 13,771, the Trump administration has made a bold move to limit regulatory costs, Batkins writes. But is the EOs goal of achieving $0 in regulatory costs for the remainder of the fiscal year (through October 1) possible?

According to American Action Forum (AAF) research, the administration need only be as restrained as the Bush Administration was in 2006 to accomplish the goal of no net costs, he continues. With the regulatory freeze still mostly in effect, the days of $164 billion in regulatory costs could come quickly to an end.

Batkins report also states that there have been "virtually no new regulatory burdens" since Trump's January 30th executive order.

The report points to way in which achieving the $0 regulatory costs can be achieved.

...there are already $305 million in regulatory recessions it could use, along with more than 40 million hours of reduced paperwork. These gains occurred before the EO, but since they are so recent, the administration does have some control over their future. Its not clear if these savings, largely stemming from a 'Food Stamps' revision, would count toward the one-in, two-out process or the $0 goal, but if they did, at least the Department of Agriculture would start with a negative regulatory balance.

In addition, the administration can use CRA resolutions of disapproval toward the goal of EO 13,771. The administrations guidance makes clear, We will consider Acts of Congress that overturn final regulatory actions, such as disapprovals of rules under the Congressional Review Act, to operate in a similar manner as agency deregulatory actions.

Currently, Congress has introduced roughly 30 resolutions of disapproval. If they were to pass everything on their agenda, they could generate more than $2.4 billion in annual regulatory savings for EO 13,771, with 7.6 million fewer paperwork hours as a byproduct. Although no resolution has been introduced, nullifying new greenhouse gas standards for trucks would save another $2.6 billion in burdens. These savings could be achieved without first performing the laborious task of identifying two prior regulations for repeal, arguably the most challenging aspect of the order.

The Congressional Review Act has already been used to roll back a coal mining rule imposed by Obama and there have been approximately 30 resolutions to repeal some of Obama's major regulations.

Among the complications and challenges that are faced is the fact that the central government has become a monstrosity by creating new unconstitutional agencies, which have more delegated authority. The report also says there is a question of how the executive order treats "repeal" versus an "amend" approach.

Batkins believes that the executive order will result in "a robust retrospective review of the current stock of federal rules to identify cost savings within existing programs."

"EO 13,771 has ushered in a new era for regulatory policy. Now, regulators must balance the imposition of new rules against removing some of the past burden of old regulations," the report concludes. "Regulators across the globe already engage in some form of this regulatory budgeting, but achieving $0 in net costs by October will be a challenge. However, a regulatory freeze, a robust retrospective effort, and a measured pace of regulation for next few months could make getting to $0 by the end of the fiscal year a reality."

Read the original:

Trump's Executive Order Could Result in ... - Freedom Outpost

President Donald Trump signaled he may be willing to wait a little longer to secure federal funding for his controversial border wall, a shift that could make it possible for Congress to finish work on spending legislation in time to avoid a government shutdown.

Trump told a group of conservative journalists gathered at the White House Monday that he could put off until September asking Congress to include the money in the federal budget. That could remove, at least for now, one of the biggest deal-breakers hes inserted into talks to pass a bill this week that would finance the government through September, the end of the fiscal year.

QuickTake U.S. Budget Battles

"On funding the border wall, Trump said he could get it this week or the administration could come back to it in September,"Trey Yingst, a White House correspondent for One America News, reported in a tweet. A White House official who asked for anonymity confirmed what Trump said during the private meeting.

Democrats, whose votes will be needed to help pass the spending plan, hope hell blink to avoid an embarrassing milestone for a new president trying to prove he can govern. A partial shutdown would start on Saturday, Trumps 100th day in office.

"The Presidents comments this evening are welcome news given the bipartisan opposition to the wall, and the obstacle it has been to the continuing bipartisan negotiations in the appropriations committees," House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi said in a statement. "Its time for Congress to act to make it clear that government will remain open for the American people."

Heres What You Missed From President Trump Today

Earlier in the day Monday, Trump was still touting the long-promised wall that hes said Mexico will pay for in the end, according to a White House official.

"The Wall is a very important tool in stopping drugs from pouring into our country and poisoning our youth (and many others)! Trump wrote Monday on Twitter.

There is another way for both sides to avert a shutdown -- a short-term spending plan that would provide another week or so for negotiations after the deadline early Saturday.

"We feel very confident the governments not going to shut down," White House press secretary Sean Spicer said Monday, although he said he wouldnt guarantee it. The spokesman wouldnt say whether the president was willing to shut the government down over funding for the border wall.

Right now, each side is dug in. And, as budget talks intensify, Trump also is pushing House Republicans to restart work on an Obamacare repeal-and-replace bill after the last one collapsed in March when conservatives walked away.

Trump is also planning to announce at least the broad parameters of a tax overhaul on Wednesday that has elements already drawing the opposition of Democrats, including likely tax cuts for corporations and high-earners.

On top of that, Trump insists he wont go quietly even if Republicans and Democrats cut a deal. His budget director tried to sweeten the pot on Friday by offeringDemocrats help on their pet cause, Obamacare subsidies.

The question is, how much of our stuff do we have to get? How much of their stuff are they willing to take? budget director Mick Mulvaney said on Bloomberg Television. Wed offer them one dollar of Obamacare payments, he added, for one dollar of wall payments right now.

Democrats called Mulvaneys Obamacare offer a non-starter, saying they refuse to include any funds for a wall in the spending bill.

Its a rare moment when the Democrats have leverage in the Republican-controlled House, because its likely that Republican leaders would need at least some Democratic votes to offset Republican defections on the budget -- as has been the case for a series of budget fights in recent years.

Republicans may not be willing to allow the government to shut down over the wall.

Paul Ryan Needs Pelosi's Help to Avert a Gov't Shutdown

I wouldnt risk a trillion-dollar funding bill for a $3 billion wall, Representative Tom Cole, the Oklahoma Republican who sits on the House appropriations and budget committees, told MSNBC Monday. Theres another way, another time to get this.

Through it all, Trump has sounded upbeat, saying he thinks negotiations are in good shape to avert a shutdown.

We dont know yet whether Trump would sign a spending bill that doesnt include money for the border wall, Mulvaney, a former House member from South Carolina and a founding member of the conservative Freedom Caucus, said on Fox News Sunday.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumers spokesman, Matt House, complained that the White House in recent days brought a heavy hand into what he said were smooth-going talks between congressional Republicans and Democrats.

If the administration would drop their 11th-hour demand for a wall that Democrats, and a good number of Republicans, oppose, congressional leaders could quickly reach a deal, House said in a statement Friday.

Schumer told MSNBC on Monday that Republican and Democratic leaders were on their way to a resolution when Trump intervened and he throws a monkey wrench in it.

One thing is certain: Any spending deal must be a bipartisan one. Even though Republicans control both houses of Congress and the White House, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker Paul Ryan know theyll both need Democratic votes to pass a government funding measure.

The Senate needs 60 votes to advance legislation, meaning the 52 Republicans will need help from at least eight Democrats. In the House, conservatives led by the Freedom Caucus and other fiscal hawks have regularly bolted on spending bills, and Democrats have provided enough votes for passage.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions said Monday that Democrats should be blamed if the funding legislation doesnt pass in time to avoid a shutdown.

Well have a bill moving forward with some money in there for the wall, he said on Fox News. If the Democrats filibuster that and block it, theyre the ones shutting the whole government down.

Mulvaney has acknowledged that Democrats have a certain amount of leverage.

But giving in to Democrats demands to get a bipartisan deal would not only threaten Trumps wall funding, it also would require dropping Republican priorities such as language to block funding for such womens health clinics as Planned Parenthood, and to defund so-called sanctuary cities that decline to enforce some immigration laws.

Congressional negotiators have been quietly working for weeks on possible compromises, including an increase in defense spending that would be less than the $30 billion Trump has sought but larger than the $5 billion requested earlier by former President Barack Obama.

Democrats insisted during the Obama administration that any defense increases be matched by higher domestic spending, though they may show some flexibility now.

One trade-off could pair $9 billion in subsidies for insurance companies under Obamacare -- a domestic spending increase -- with an equal increase for regular defense operations. Another $5 billion to $10 billion in war funding could be added to that, and Democrats could justify going along with the idea given heightened tensions with Syria and North Korea.

On the border wall, appropriations lobbyist Jim Dyer of the Podesta Group suggested the issue could be solved by having wall money depend on the Homeland Security Department issuing a detailed plan later in the year, subject to bipartisan approval.

Republican appropriators, meanwhile, havent emphasized the issue of stopping funding for sanctuary cities. The Justice Department already can restrict some local law enforcement grants to cities and states that dont provide immigration status updates to the federal government.

Theres also been little talk lately of the White Houses call for $18 billion in immediate domestic agency cuts as part of the package. This shows bipartisan promise in Congress, but also leaves Trumps views largely unknown.

Democratic leaders in both chambers have complained of a lack of communication with the president until recent days.

I dont think there is a relationship between Trump and congressional Democrats yet, said Stan Collender, a budget analyst and executive vice president of Qorvis MSLGroup in Washington. I dont see them doing anything to help him at all.

Still, if McConnell and Ryan decide they need to pass a short-term funding plan to provide time for more talks, Democrats will have a strategic decision to make -- oppose it to keep pressure on Trump, or go along amid concern about being the party blamed for a shutdown.

Collender said Trump may decide to declare a win by making compromises to avoid a shutdown similar to the 16-day partial closing in 2013 under Obama. Yet, he said, the president also might surprise people by pushing hard for his proposals. His supporters might like to see him fight for the border wall and other priorities, Collender said.

Ross Baker, a political scientist at Rutgers University in New Jersey, said, Government shutdowns seem to have fallen out of fashion even with conservative Republicans who forced the 2013 shutdown in an unsuccessful attempt to repeal Obamacare.

The only hitch I see is if Trump gets dogmatic over the wall and passes the word to Ryan that they shouldnt let the Democrats off the hook with their alternative to a brick-and-mortar wall, he said.

The rest is here:

Trump Signals Shift on Wall Funding to Avert Government Shutdown - Bloomberg

New Delhi, Apr 25:With the aim of preparing budgets as soon as the agricultural income is received, Prime Minister Narendra Modi in the governing council meeting of the NITI Aayog asked the states to consider the advancing of the fiscal year from April-March to January-December. PM Modi stated that in a country where agricultural income is exceedingly important, the budget must be prepared immediately after the receipts of the year are received.

A committee to examine the shifting of the financial year was set up earlier by PM Modi. The government also advanced the presentation of union budget from February end to 1st February. Pitching for January-December fiscal year,PM Modi said that because of poor time management, many good initiatives and schemes had failed to deliver the anticipated results.

He also reiterated the idea of holding simultaneous parliamentary and state assembly elections, saying that the country had suffered from economic and political mismanagement for long now, and that a constructive discussion had already begun on the subject.

The Prime Minister said if the elections are held simultaneously, then political parties could just focus on them once in five years and then use the rest of the period to do serious work, NITI Vice Chairman Arvind Panagariya told reporters after the meet.

Modi also called upon the state governments to work with the Centre as to build the India of the dreams of our freedom fighters by 2022, the 75th anniversary of Independence.

He urged states, local governments and all government and non-government organisations to decide goals for 2022, and work in mission mode towards achieving them.

He called upon the states to use the GeM (Government e-Marketplace) platform to reduce corruption and increase transparency in government procurement, adding that the use of technologies such as BHIM and Aadhaar would result in significant savings for the states.

(With inputs from IANS)

7th Pay Commission: Committee on Allowances to submit report on April 27 upon arrival of Arun Jaitley from Russia?

Sachin Tendulkar birthday: Sushant Singh Rajput, Virender Sehwag and fans wish theMaster Blaster a happy birthday!

Sukma encounter LIVE Updates: 25 CRPF Jawans killed, CRPF revises death toll

Sonakshi Sinhas secret plan for Justin Biebers concert might further upset Armaan Malik, Kailash Kher EXCLUSIVE

Sachin Tendulkars 44th birthday: Watch videos of top five moments from his career

Read more here:

Prime Minister Narendra Modi urges states to consider January-December fiscal year - India.com

When an individual is blacklisted for jobs, harassed by taxes, subjected to illegal surveillance and threatened by thugs his countrys freedom is arrested by politicism

Repression can be defined as an act of using force in order to control someone or something. Enchanted by the simplicity of this description, many political alchemists hoped for a gold- bearing mixture: coercion + thralldom= control. But did they find the elixir of eternal power, or just a false equation placing them a pseudo- philosophical stones throw away from wrath of the pawns? It is impossible to describe the vast variety of strategies of political repression in a few paragraphs; a short article can only give a hint of Arcanum.

Isolation can simply mean imprisonment, so judicial harassment and legal abuse become typical implements in a regimes tool-box. In the case of individuals, solitary confinement can be also imposed by intimidation of the targets friends and employers. Stripped from emotional support and blacklisted for jobs, the maltreated dissident feels the impact of harassment and surveillance even harder.

Groups considered potentially reactive are impoverished and marginalized in order to prevent them from taking part in political life and to suppress their freedom of expression. The rule of political repression is simple: Show me the vulnerable population, I will tell you who the pet-hates are. And by the way, in 2011, a survey https://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2011-02-10-1Ahomelessvets10_ST_N.htm determined that: Military veterans are much more likely to be homeless than other Americans. . .

While facing a kangaroo court, a member of the http://www.l10freedomride.com/ rel=nofollow>Leavenworth 10 , Master Sergeant John E. Hatley observed: What I do take issue with is being used as a pawn on a political chessboard or sacrificing my men or myself to provide assurances to a foreign country that we are at war with. Mr. Hatley is still in prison.

While subjecting dissidents to discriminatory measures such as denial of opportunity or unfair treatment career-wise, the coercive manipulator prepares a favorable environment for fiscal harassment. The victims are now guilty of being impoverished, gas-lighted and confused by false interpretation of arbitrary laws on tax exempt.

Fiscal harassment doesnt happen only when tax-collectors are so hyperactive in your workplace that it costs you your job. The main difference between collecting back payments and harassment is the final objective: a solution allowing you to pay your debts versus permanent fiscal prison. The real goal is to condemn the opponent for perpetuity of debts through the interest rates and to permanently reside on his bank account denying him financial freedom.

A whistleblower could have his e-mails passed through the sieve of Sec Divert , or his computer mouse would be dragged by an invisible rat. Political repression is a weapon of cowards so threats made by passers-by have traditionally been reserved for women.

When an individual is blacklisted for jobs, harassed by taxes, subjected to illegal surveillance and threatened by thugs his countrys freedom is arrested by politicism.

If Ronald Reagan and John Paul the 2nd are permanently viewed as emblematic figures in the struggle for democracy , its because they understood that an individual is sacred, and if God himself respects human liberty so too must the state.

Some alchemists still expect that President Trump does not get this message. Their targets hope that he does, and that he will responsibly rid the country of attack dogs which as he himself says: have nothing but hate and anger in their hearts and spew it whenever possible.

Read more here:

Alchemy of Political Repression - Canada Free Press