Morning Source

The rotten reconciliation bill

The politics may be entertaining, but the substance is no laughing matter.

October 7, 2021

The rotten reconciliation bill...

The politics surrounding national Democrats’ proposed reconciliation bill is getting lots of media attention these days, and to be sure, there’s something quite a bit amusing about watching the left’s internal squabbles over the measure.

Still, amid all the drama and theatrics, we ought not lose sight of just how terrible this bill is substantively.

In a piece for RealClearPolitics, Betsy McCaughey takes a close look at the bill and breaks down its sheer awfulness, bit by bit.

From union giveaways, to racial preferences, to enormous additions to the federal debt, the bill is an affront to the principles of responsible government at every turn.

Just as bad, as McCaughey explains, is that “Democrats can't seem to tell the truth about their legislation. To break the stalemate in Congress, they're toying with leaving the programs intact but funding them for a shorter time — only the first five years instead of all 10, in some cases. That's a hoax.”

Do read the full piece, but we’ll leave you with McCaughey’s succinct summation: “This bill is as un-American as it gets.”

Anyone surprised that none of Nevada’s federally elected Democrats are opposing it? Didn’t think so.

California schemin’...

We all know that so many of Nevada Democrats’ worst ideas originate in California. So Silver State conservatives ought to keep a close eye on the Golden State’s latest attack on the rights of law-abiding gun owners.

The Washington Examiner’s editorial board has the details on a bill recently signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newson:

"The measure, AB 173, will soon give researchers at the California Firearm Violence Research Center at the University of California-Davis access to all the information that the state collects about gun and ammunition purchasers, including personally identifying information, although this is supposedly not to be 'transferred, revealed, and used for purposes other than research.'”

The editorial does a terrific job of spelling out why this is so alarming:

"If government workers leak private IRS data despite felony penalties, California gun owners’ private data will be leaked too. It is not a question of if, but of when. This will not only violate gun owners’ privacy, but it will also give criminals a nice list from which to work when looking for guns to steal.

"Even before that inevitably happens, there is simply no reason to send the personal information of gun owners to anti-gun academics. The federal courts must step in to preserve Second Amendment rights in the states."


You can bank on abuse...

Speaking of left-wing assaults on privacy, the Wall Street Journal’s editors pass along some additional chilling news:

"On your next trip to the ATM, imagine that Uncle Sam is looking over your shoulder. As if your annual tax filing wasn’t invasive enough, the Biden Administration would like a look at your checking account.

"Charles Rettig, commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, wants banks to report annual cash flows for ordinary account holders. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen is promoting the plan, and the House Ways and Means Committee is debating whether to include this mandate in the Democrats’ $3.5 trillion spending bill.

"Ms. Yellen says the reporting will help to catch wealthy tax dodgers. In a recent letter to the committee she said the plan would reveal 'opaque income streams that disproportionately accrue to the top.' Treasury and congressional Democrats hope taxpayers will report income more accurately if they know the feds have their account information.

"Yet the IRS plans to review every account above a $600 balance, or with more than $600 of transactions in a year. So every American with a job could get looked over. A group of 41 industry groups recently warned congressional leaders that the plan ‘is not remotely targeted’ to detect major tax avoidance."

Potent parental pushback...

As Critical Race Theory continues to worm its way into more and more of America’s school curricula, we thought we’d share some good news out of Guilford, Connecticut, where Jay Bergman reports on a group of parents who finally had enough — and found an effective way to push back.

From Bergman’s piece at Minding the Campus:

"This past summer, there emerged a peaceful but forceful rising up in Guilford, Connecticut, of parents who had had enough of the corruption of their children’s education. The Superintendent of Schools, Paul Freeman, had gone so far as to charge town taxpayers the cost of sending copies of How to be an Antiracist to all teachers in the school system, with instructions to inculcate its contents in their students. ...

"To reclaim their children’s education, Guilford residents established Truth in Education (TIE), an organization that supports candidates in elections to the Guilford Board of Education who are committed to stopping the superintendent from imposing his ideology on students and their unsuspecting parents. ...

"The results of their efforts, in the GOP Primary Election on September 14, 2021, are astonishing. The five TIE candidates vying for four contested seats on the Board of Education — Nick Cusano, Danielle Scarpellino, William Maisano, Timothy Chamberlain, and Aly Passarelli — defeated five competitors, all of whom had pledged to continue the Kendian Orthodoxy in the school system, by margins of nearly 3-1. Three of the latter were incumbents."

The larger fight on this front is far from over, of course, but this is a welcome reminder that sometimes, all it takes is citizens standing up for what’s right in order for sanity to prevail.

McLeod and clear...

Democrats have finally found someone they loathe more than Confederates.

From National Review’s Jack Butler:

“In an article in the Atlanta-Journal Constitution about a proposed statue of Supreme Court justice (and Georgia native) Clarence Thomas on state capitol grounds, Georgia state representative Donna McLeod, a Democrat, is quoted in opposition. Her rationale is worth reproducing here:

“‘I’d rather them keep a Confederate monument than a statue of Clarence Thomas,’ said Democratic state Rep. Donna McLeod. ‘That’s how much I don’t like the idea.’”

Butler hits the nail on the head in explaining progressives’ unhinged hatred for Justice Thomas:

“Despite his incredible life story, and his tremendous stature and influence on the Court, the Left has had it in for Thomas from the start of his time in public life. The logic of contemporary identity politics dictates that he is supposed to have a different set of views from the originalism he has so skillfully expounded on the Supreme Court. Because he does not, he is not merely an ideological opponent. Indeed, he is, to McLeod, not even morally indistinguishable from Confederates. He is worse.”

The party of tolerance, folks.


“It really bugs me that someone will tell me, after I spent 20 years being educated, how I'm supposed to think.” ― Clarence Thomas