Showing posts with label lobbyists. Show all posts
Showing posts with label lobbyists. Show all posts

Thursday, August 20, 2026

Teacher unions funnel funds to Democratic lawmakers


The influence of teacher unions

By Esther Wickham | The Center Square




Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., at a town hall in Las Vegas, Feb. 9, 2020. Photo: Gage Skidmore / Flickr / CC BY-SA 2.0 / Cropped from Original


(The Center Square) – The nation’s two largest teachers' unions directed thousands of dollars in campaign contributions to Democratic members of key congressional education committees, according to federal campaign finance records reviewed by The Center Square.

The congressional members whose campaigns received the money supported legislation favoring schools and teachers.

The National Education Association and American Federation of Teachers represent millions of educators nationwide and are among the most politically active labor organizations in the country. The NEA has about 3 million members, while the AFT represents roughly 1.8 million.

Lance Izumi of the Pasadena, Calif.-based Pacific Research Institute said teacher unions' political spending can influence education policy at the federal, state and local levels.
Editor's Note

This is the third in a series on teacher unions, their influence on elected officials and the cost to taxpayers.
Izumi described the national teachers' unions as an “800-pound gorilla” in education politics and pointed to issues including charter schools and school choice as examples of areas where unions have sought to shape policy.

“They don't want the competition,” Izumi, senior director of PRI's Center for Education, told The Center Square during an exclusive interview.

Unions are funded with dues taken out of teacher paychecks, so critics say the taxpayers are basically funding the lobbying and campaign contributions.

The Center Square reached out to both the NEA and AFT multiple times for comments, but union officials did not respond.

Thursday, December 17, 2015

Revealed: how Google enlisted members of US Congress it bankrolled to fight $6bn EU antitrust case





US tech firm has stepped up lobbying efforts with $3.5m charm offensive to persuade EU to drop punitive action over alleged abuse of monopoly position

 


The European commission building in Brussels, where Google’s lobbying is said to be unrivalled. Photograph: Olivier Hoslet/EPA


Simon Marks in Brussels and Harry Davies

Thursday 17 December 2015 07.30 EST


Last modified on Thursday 17 December 201517.37 EST



Google enlisted members of the US congress, whose election campaigns it had funded, to pressure the European Union to drop a €6bn antitrust case which threatens to decimate the US tech firm’s business in Europe.

The coordinated effort by senators and members of the House of Representatives, as well as by a congressional committee, formed part of a sophisticated, multimillion-pound lobbying drive in Brussels, which Google has significantly ramped up as it fends off challenges to its dominance in Europe.




How Google's antitrust siege began not far from Windsor Castle ramparts


An investigation by the Guardian into Google’s multifaceted lobbying campaign in Europe has uncovered fresh details of its activities and methods. Based on documents obtained under a freedom of information request and a series of interviews with EU officials, MEPs and Brussels lobbyists, the investigation has also found:

• Google’s co-founder and CEO Larry Page met the then European commission chief privately in California in spring 2014 and raised the antitrust case despite being warned by EU officials that it would be inappropriate to do so.

• Officials and lawmakers in Brussels say they have witnessed a significant expansion of Google lobbying efforts over the past 18 months as the company faces increased scrutiny of its business activities in Europe.


• Google has employed several former EU officials as in-house lobbyists, and has funded European thinktanks and university research favourable to its position as part of its broader campaign.



Google co-founder Larry Page. Photograph: Bloomberg via Getty Images

Capitol Hill’s aggressive intervention in Brussels came as the European parliament prepared to vote through a resolution in November 2014 that called on EU policymakers to consider breaking up Google’s online business into separate companies.

Republican and Democratic senators and congressmen, many of whom have received significant campaign donations from Google totalling hundreds of thousands of dollars, leaned on parliament in a series of similar – and in some cases identical – letters sent to key MEPs.



.

Saturday, August 10, 2013

Obama Opposes Olympic Boycott, Criticizes Russian Anti-Gay Law




Posted: 08/09/2013 4:01 pm EDT | Updated: 08/09/2013 4:21 pm EDT



WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama said Friday that he did not favor boycotting the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia, rejecting calls from LGBT activists to do so over a new law banning so-called homosexual propaganda.

"I want to say very clearly. I do not think it's appropriate to boycott the Olympics," he said at a news conference. But he added that he hoped gay and lesbian American athletes would bring home medals and reiterated his opposition to the law.

"If Russia doesn't have gay or lesbian athletes, then it will probably make their team weaker," he said.

A law signed by Russian President Vladimir Putin in June bans "propaganda of nontraditional sexual relations," and the law is written so vaguely that many fear that it will be used to crack down against gays and lesbians broadly. Since foreigners who violate the law can potentially be deported, many fear LGBT athletes from other countries who are competing in the Olympics may be targeted.

"Nobody is more offended than me by some of the anti-gay and lesbian legislation than you’ve been seeing in Russia," Obama said. "As I said just this week, I’ve spoken out against that, not just with respect to Russia, but a number of other countries where we continue to do work with them but we have a strong disagreement on this issue."

Obama also spoke on the U.S.-Russian relationship more broadly, and defended his relationship with Putin.

"I don't have a bad personal relationship with Putin," he said, describing their conversations as "blunt" and "candid."

He added, however, that he had seen more anti-American rhetoric coming from Russia since Putin became president again in 2012. "I've encouraged Mr. Putin to think forward as opposed to backwards with mixed success," Obama said.

The comments come after Obama cancelled a bilateral meeting in Moscow with Putin amid tensions over Edward Snowden, the NSA leaker who applied for asylum in Russia, as well as differences on Syria, arms control and missile defense. The presidents will still meet in St. Petersburg during the G-20 summit next month.

Also on Friday, Secretary of State John Kerry and Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu in Washington.

Relations with Russia have gone downhill since Putin returned to office and moved the country in a more conservative, nationalistic direction. Obama and Putin's predecessor, Dimitry Medvedev, had signed a new arms control agreement and maintained a somewhat warmer relationship.


Source
,

Wednesday, July 10, 2013

Religious Groups Urge House to Act on Immigration Reform




Tuesday, 09 Jul 2013 04:28 PM

By Dan Weil


A foursome of religious groups that include many conservatives is pressing the House to approve immigration reform.

"For those of us who are Christians, we must heed the direct commandment of Jesus to welcome the stranger," Jim Wallis, the president of Sojourners, said in a letter. "That is why evangelicals are praying for every member of the House and will continue to speak out publicly in support of Congress taking action."

The Senate passed a reform bill last month, but House Speaker John Boehner said he won't bring that proposal up for a vote, given strong opposition among the Republican conference. Boehner said on Monday that the House will come up with an immigration overhaul of its own.

The four religious organizations include the Sojourners, National Association of Evangelicals, the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, and the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, Politico reports. All of those groups include conservative elements, except the Sojourners.

The groups are keeping the focus of the immigration issue on compassion and are peppering House members with letters on the issue.

The four groups support the possibility of citizenship for illegal immigrants, a policy that many conservatives reject. Russell Moore, president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, wrote in his group's letter "a solution that respects the rule of law, treats undocumented immigrants in the nation compassionately, and provides them a tough, yet achievable, earned pathway to citizenship is necessary."

Meanwhile, three major secular conservative groups urged House Speaker John Boehner Tuesday to push ahead with immigration reform, The Hill reports.

American Action Forum President Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist, and American Conservative Union Chairman Al Cardenas said in a letter to the speaker that their groups back many provisions of the Senate bill, including a citizenship pathway.

But the conservative leaders want any House bill to embrace more conservative principles.

"The U.S. Senate passed a bill last week that we consider progress," the letter reads.

"But members of the House will correctly pursue their own legislation. This will ensure that any final product has considerable conservative input, and that certain aspects of the Senate bill are markedly improved. Whether a comprehensive bill or a piecemeal approach, we support an immigration reform package that reflects the economic contributions that immigrants make to our country."

Holtz-Eakin, Norquist and Cardenas cited three GOP amendments rejected by the Senate that the House should approve.

One proposed by Sens. Mike Lee of Utah and Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania would limit visas for low-skilled workers. One offered by Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas would offer more high-skilled visas. And one from Sens. Orrin Hatch of Utah and Marco Rubio of Florida would mandate a five-year waiting period for green card holders to apply for federal healthcare benefits.



Source: http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/religious-groups-immigration-reform/2013/07/09/id/514157#ixzz2YdlamDQq


.

Saturday, January 22, 2011

Bishops Manipulate Congress




Bishops Manipulate Congress · July 01, 2010 [click to listen] W

Dear friends,

A warm welcome to you and your family. We are truly nearing the end. Recently the Wall Street Journal commented that the Roman Catholic Church in America has “emerged as a major political force… Behind-the-scenes lobbying, coupled with a grassroots mobilization of Catholic churches across the country,” has led a decidedly liberal, democratically dominated U.S. House of Representatives to enact a law in harmony with conservative Roman Catholic policy.

Though generating howls of protest, the Catholic Church played a central role in one of the most sweeping changes in legislative history in the United States. The Bishops forced their will on the House of Representatives and the President to act against their own will. When you see what they did, you will be amazed at the power of Rome in the United States. From a prophetic point of view, this is astonishing, regardless of where you might stand on the issues embedded in the legislation.

Article on the Legislation

Before we go any further, I want you to be aware that Keep the Faith is dedicated to documenting fulfilling prophecy. We are not interested in promoting politics or weighing in on partisan issues. We respect our government leaders because God has appointed them a certain amount of time to do their work. In discussing prophecy and its fulfillment, we do not in any way intend to show disrespect to them or to the offices which they hold.

However, we also recognize that they are free moral agents and that God does not dictate how they think or act, though everything they do must have His permission, and ultimately fulfills His purposes. He may hold back the consequences of their decisions for a time. He may defeat their efforts by using opposing forces. But no one can do anything “against the truth but for the truth.” That’s what II Corinthians 13:8 says. He may even send angels in the form of men to argue His case before legislative assemblies.

The same goes for religious leaders. We do not disrespect them, and we believe that they have free choice just like anyone else. But today there is an undercurrent that is moving us toward a Sunday law. Bible prophecy tells us that both groups have a large part to play in the final movements.

Remember the scripture admonition in Revelation 16:15, which says, “Behold, I come as a thief. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame.” This verse reminds us of the nearness of Jesus’ second coming and that He will come as a thief, or at a time when we do not expect him. Because of that, it also reminds us that we are to watch. The only way to watch is to open your eyes and see the fulfilling prophecy. Then the verse reminds us to “keep our garments,” in other words, don’t let go of the righteousness of Christ, lest you be shamed by sin which brings nakedness of character. Friends, this is vital counsel for the last generation. Notice the combination of watching and righteous living. More than ever we need righteous living through the righteousness of Jesus, for the time is at hand when the prophecies are being fulfilled in rapid succession. Your eternal destiny is at stake at this very moment. Don’t delay the necessary preparation.

I am going to read a powerful prophetic statement from scripture. It is one that you may well recognize, especially if you are one of our regular subscribers, because I have quoted it before. It is from Revelation 17. Beginning with verse one, the scripture says, “And there came one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come hither; I will shew unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters: With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.”

Then the apostle John describes a woman in scarlet sitting on a scarlet colored beast full of blasphemy, etc. This beast and woman represent Roman Catholicism, both a civil power, represented by a beast, and a church represented by a woman. There is no other entity on earth that can meet the description given here than the Roman Catholic Church. But I want you to notice that the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication, or her doctrines. Fornication is when someone is unfaithful. This church has doctrines that are unfaithful to the Lord and to scripture.

That drunkenness which inebriates the inhabitants of the earth spiritually is already happening. Rome has so successfully developed her popularity in Western countries that most people living in those countries don’t have much objection to her doctrines or to her power, except a very few secular people, or those who have rather liberal lifestyles and beliefs. Of course those that understand Bible prophecy and who accept Jesus and all the truth into their hearts and lives would not be drunk with her wine either. But they too are really a small minority.

Note also that the kings of the earth have committed fornication with Rome. The rulers of this world seek Rome’s counsel. They are also influenced by Rome in making their decisions. Rome in many ways has developed very powerful influence. This power is reflected in many different ways.

For instance in 1989, Germany was reunited and the Berlin wall separating east and west was no more. This was engineered by John Paul II working together with Ronald Reagan and other world leaders, and was reported in Time magazine as a clandestine campaign which was one of the “greatest secret alliances of all time.” In other words, they were in a conspiracy against communism, and amazingly without knowing it, they were fulfilling prophecy. Rome could never recover old Europe and thereby resurrect the Holy Roman Empire without the dissolution of Eastern European communism, particularly that which controlled Central and Eastern Europe. It was one of Rome’s key political achievements under John Paul II which then paved the way for the European Union to be melded together, which is now a federated block of nations with an overriding supranational constitution and government. This is essentially the way Europe was in the middle ages when Rome controlled it. There are new people. There are new documents, and new agencies, but the principles are the same. And Rome is working very hard to rebuild the ancient relationships that will put her on the throne of Europe. Even the European Union President is a Jesuit trained Roman Catholic.

Time Magazine Article

Independent News Article

What happened between John Paul and Ronald Reagan was an alliance, a cooperative effort. Rome had a lot of power in Poland because more than 90% of its people are Roman Catholic. John Paul II was also a Pole. This made it very difficult for the polish communist government to overrule him. In fact, they were utterly unsuccessful.

But that was 1989. Since then the popularity of Rome in America has dramatically increased. Americans are awed by Rome. This gives Rome tremendous influence and power. Now Rome has expanded her political efforts and is determined to influence the nation’s laws whenever possible. Once Rome has power to dictate the laws she wants, she will influence lawmakers to enact her ultimate geopolitical objective, Sunday laws.

The Holy See, which is the official name of the Vatican among the nation states, has bragged that she has considerable greatness. “According to Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Vatican Secretary of State, the Holy See is “small but great; the greatest in the world from any point of view,” quoted Zenit on February 13, 2009.

Bertone was speaking at a conference marking the 80th anniversary of the Lateran Treaty of 1929 which established the current Vatican as an independent city state and recognized its sovereignty. This was also the beginning of the healing of the deadly wound mentioned in Revelation 13:3.

“Cardinal Bertone noted in a special way the funeral of John Paul II and the election of Benedict XVI, ‘which brought to Rome the top political authorities of the world and massive crowds.’”

The pontificate of John Paul II, the second longest in history, and perhaps the most influential in recent times from a global perspective, elevated the popularity of the papacy to unprecedented levels which greatly enhanced its political influence and power.

The Bible also identifies the papacy as great, particularly in regard to her arrogance and sins and her blasphemy against God, all in the name of God, and of Christ.

For example, Daniel 7:25 says that the Holy See “speaks great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws.” If ever any organization was great in changing God’s law, it is the Catholic Church. If ever any organization wore out the saints of the Most High by persecuting them, it is the Papacy, even while creating a great many so-called “saints” of her own.

The Bible even speaks of the Vatican City State: “What city is like unto this great city!… wherein were made rich all that had ships in the sea by reason of her costliness!” (Rev. 18:18, 19) And speaking of the great whore it says: “And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.”

The Vatican is indeed great. Cardinal Bertone was not speaking idly when he said that the Holy See is the “greatest in the world from any point of view.” Perhaps he wasn’t referring to the Bible’s definition of the greatness of the Vatican and the Holy See, but from the prophetic point of view, he inadvertently confirmed the words of sacred scripture nevertheless.

Zenit News Article

That greatness is reflected in so many aspects of Rome’s relationships with nation states too. Leaders of most nations, when in Europe on official business stop in Rome for an audience with the Pope. And Rome knows that this gives her political power on a global scale. But perhaps for Rome, there is no greater prize than to manipulate the United States, which was originally founded on Protestant principles. Rome has been patiently working to strengthen her power in the United States so that she would be able to influence its laws and policies. That day has now come.

Listen to this powerful statement from the book Great Controversy, page 581. “God’s word has given warning of the impending danger; let this be unheeded, and the Protestant world will learn what the purposes of Rome really are, only when it is too late to escape the snare. She is silently growing into power. Her doctrines are exerting their influence in legislative halls, in the churches, and in the hearts of men.”

Perhaps we could say that Rome has silently grown into power! This prophecy has been largely fulfilled. But it has more to go. Rome has not yet influenced the United States to pass a Sunday law. But note also that her doctrines are gaining acceptance and influence in legislative halls too.

Today, I’m going to show you a direct fulfillment of this prophecy, and the prophecy about the kings or rulers of the earth committing fornication with Rome, and specifically her doctrines.

But before I do, let us read the rest of the paragraph in Great Controversy, page 581. It goes like this: “She [meaning Rome] is piling up her lofty and massive structures in the secret recesses of which her former persecutions will be repeated. Stealthily and unsuspectingly she is strengthening her forces to further her own ends when the time shall come for her to strike. All that she desires is vantage ground, and this is already being given her. We shall soon see and shall feel what the purpose of the Roman element is. Whoever shall believe and obey the word of God will thereby incur reproach and persecution.”

I wonder why the author linked Rome’s popularity and legislative influence with persecution of those who follow God’s law. Isn’t that interesting? Perhaps the reason is self-evident. Laws are made by nations. When Rome gains popularity and influence she gains political strength. Then she pressures lawmakers to make laws that suit her. Note that there will come a time for her to strike. I wonder why the author used this term “strike.” It reminds us of a snake coiled up and ready to strike the innocent little mouse that is minding his own business doing what God made him to do.

The passage I read says that “Rome is strengthening her forces.” This is talking about her influence, and particularly in democratic Western countries, it is talking about votes. She is doing this in many ways. For instance, she does this through Catholic immigration into Western Europe, the USA and other Western nations. She also has her bishops conferences close to the centers of power in Western nations. In the United States, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops is in Washington DC, not far from the White House and Congress. Needless to say, the bishops designed it that way so that they can influence these individuals and legislative bodies and the votes they cast for legislative actions. She also promotes causes that advocate for the poor, which, while a good thing in itself, Rome uses to strengthen her own power and influence with the people. This translates into votes for and against those individuals or laws that Rome endorses or does not endorse. Her Jesuit institutions influence generation after generation of congressmen and congresswomen and other political leaders who are trained in them. This list of her “forces” could go on and on.

But Rome’s influence was powerfully manifested in a recent vote in the United States House of Representatives, and subsequently forced the President to take action to support Rome’s demands. Remember that the Speaker of the House is a Roman Catholic named Nancy Pelosi. Though she is liberal, she has very good relations with the Roman Catholic hierarchy in the United States and abroad, particularly in Rome as you will soon see. Also, remember that the majority leader of the House of Representatives, Steny Hoyer, is also a Roman Catholic. And again, the minority leader of the House of Representatives is John Boehner, another Roman Catholic. Moreover, Roman Catholics make up essentially 30% of the U.S. Congress, many of whom were trained at Jesuit institutions, the most notable of which is Georgetown University in Washington, DC.

The decision that I am referring to is the health care bill that was recently enacted by Congress so that there can be universal health care in the United States. It is really a bill which is a dramatic step toward the socialization of American health care. It has been a key platform of President Obama’s administration. Interestingly, the Catholic Church, since 1963 has supported the concept of universal health care at public expense. The church and the liberal administration have found common cause.

Herald Sun Article

Cleveland Article

Faith Magazine News Article

While I don’t want to get into all the ramifications of this particular law, I do need to tell you just one piece of information that will help you understand the rest of what I am going to say. Originally this bill had provisions in it that would allow the government to pay for abortions as part of the health care plan.

The bill delegated to the Secretary of Health and Human Services the power to make abortion an essential benefit in all health plans, and in any ‘public plan’ created by the legislation. But the final House of Representatives version of the bill does not have that provision. In fact, abortion was specifically excluded from the House version in spite of the fact that President Obama is a strong supporter of liberal abortion laws, as is Nancy Pelosi, speaker of the House. How the bill was changed is the story you need to hear.

CNA News Article

Her position on abortion is one of Rome’s doctrines on which God’s people can agree. Nevertheless, Rome uses this doctrine for her own ends. In this case, Rome saw her opportunity to pressure liberal abortion-supporting lawmakers into removing the abortion funding in order to pass the law.

The original bill created a firestorm of opposition which stemmed from various aspects of the legislation. The health care bill ran into problems in subcommittee. Conservatives, especially Catholic members of Congress, had introduced an amendment to prevent federal money from paying for abortions. But the committees dropped the amendment, much to the dismay of the Catholic Church. It appeared as though the health care bill was in trouble. Conservatives in Congress were strong enough to defeat the whole bill if it did not prevent support for abortion.

Then the bishops weighted in. Cardinal Rigali of Philadelphia who is the chairman of the bishops Pro-life Committee, wrote Congress a letter on July 29 which vowed that the bishops would “vigorously” oppose a health care bill that provided funding for abortion. “No one should be required to pay for or participate in abortion,” the letter said. “We sincerely hope that the legislation will not fall short of our criteria,” the letter also says. “However, we remain apprehensive when amendments protecting freedom of conscience and ensuring no taxpayer money for abortion are defeated in committee votes,” they said. Clearly the Bishops were planning to use their influence to lobby congress to comply with Rome’s doctrine. Remember that the issue is not about whether you agree with Rome’s position. It is about Rome’s increasing power to enforce her doctrine.

CNN Article

New York Times Article

EWTN Article

Medical News Article

CNA News Article

But as the debate wended its way through Congress, I wondered if the Catholic Church would get more involved in some way. Little did I know that they were actually going to mobilize a major campaign to engineer a coup d‘état and force liberal democrats to vote in favor of conservative amendments against abortion funding in the bill.

On November 11, 2009, the Associated Press published an article entitled “Catholic Bishops Shape Health Care Bill.” The opening statement is very revealing. “Catholic bishops have emerged as a formidable force in the health care overhaul fight, using their clout with millions of Catholics and working behind the scenes in Congress to get strong abortion restrictions into the House bill.”

Notice that the bishops used their clout with millions of Catholics in America, 68 million of them in fact, to pressure Congress to do their will. They worked behind the scenes – stealthily I might add, just as prophecy predicted. The second sentence in the article is just as revealing… “[The bishops] don’t spend a dime on what is legally defined as lobbying, but lawmakers and insiders recognize that the bishops’ voices matter — and they move votes.”

The Wall Street Journal revealed much of the powerful campaign conducted by the bishops. Listen. “At least four representatives of the [Bishop’s Conference] worked the House…, holding private meetings with lawmakers and Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The group distributed talking points to priests across the country and gave fliers to churches featuring the headline, ‘Health Care Reform Is About Saving Lives, Not Destroying Them.’ A prayer circulated to churches supporting an overhaul of the health-care system included the phrase: ‘We will raise our voices to protect the unborn.’” But that’s not all they did, as you will see in a few minutes.

Here is a little history. In the United States, there has been a long-standing open relationship between the leaders of government and the Roman Catholic bishops. Ever since at least the Carter Administration, presidents and popes began to cavort together and work in secret alliances to accomplish mutual geopolitical goals. These successful alliances have also opened the door for the bishops to become increasingly involved in direct intervention in domestic government affairs in the intervening years. As the Roman Catholic population in the United States has increased dramatically through immigration, and as the Catholic Church has become dramatically more popular in the last 30 years, the bishops have gained tremendous political clout. Almost all Americans have no objections to a foreign geopolitical power strongly influencing U.S. politics, if it is the Roman Catholic Church.

The Journal revealed what really happened secretly behind closed doors. “Representatives for the bishops were in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s Capitol suite negotiating with top officials… as they reached final terms of the agreement.”

CBS News Article

Earlier in the day, Pelosi, a Catholic and an abortion rights supporter, had been contacted by Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick, Washington’s former archbishop, now in Rome. He called her from Rome to discuss the abortion restrictions that he and Rome wanted in the bill. “It was just one element of an intensive lobbying effort orchestrated by the nation’s Catholic bishops,” wrote Breitbart.com, “who have emerged as a formidable force in the health care negotiations.”

Breibart News Article

But this was only the beginning of the bishop’s intervention. They had a well planned strategy. I’ll quote again from the article. “It wasn’t the first time a high-ranking Catholic had weighed in with a key player on writing strict abortion curbs into the health measure. Boston’s Cardinal Sean P. O’Malley personally appealed to President Barack Obama about it near the church altar (of all places) at the early September funeral for Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass. [In addition] Bishops quietly called their congressmen and senators to weigh in.”

Rome worked every angle she could. The Stupak amendment, by which the abortion restrictions are known, was the tool used to pressure Congress. It was designed and introduced by Representative Bart Stupak, D-Mich., a Roman Catholic, and a strong abortion opponent even though he is a Democrat. The Stupak amendment wasn’t even considered to be viable until the Catholic bishops got involved the week before the vote with a massive campaign to pressure the House of Representatives to take out the abortion funding. Listen to Bart Stupak’s own words; “The Catholic Church used their power — their clout, if you will — to influence this issue. They had to. It’s a basic teaching of the religion…”

“It was [actually] Stupak” said the AP report “who told Pelosi… that if she wanted a deal on the health bill, she’d be well advised to invite the bishops’ staff, who were already in his office, to her table. ‘I said, ‘Well, they’re here, and they’re one of the key groups you want to have on your side, so why don’t we just bring them in and work this out,’’ Stupak said.” Pelosi did, and the result revealed what really went on behind the scenes. The bishop’s conference convinced Nancy and other leading Democrats that the only way to get the House version of the health care bill passed was to include the anti-abortion Stupak amendment. The Stupak Amendment passed the House 240-196, leading to the narrow passage of the entire bill.

MSNBC News Article

The amendment was co-sponsored by Joseph Pitts, an evangelical from Pennsylvania, and a strong abortion foe as well. This is an example of Catholics and Evangelicals working together to achieve Rome’s political goals.

MSNBC Article on Health Reform

CBS News Article

Bart Stupak Biography

The battle had became intense, both over the involvement of the Catholic Church and the amendment. There were actually up to 40 Democrats that were dissatisfied with the bill. They would have been enough to stop Pelosi’s health care bill if they were all unwilling to vote yes. Pelosi and her fellow Democratic leaders were working behind closed doors, scrambling to forge a compromise right down to the 11th hour to save the legislation. Rome obviously took advantage of this situation.

Several Democrats, including Rep. Jason Altmire, D-Pennsylvania, said they are in touch with their Catholic bishops back home. Altmire said he must have the approval of his bishop in Pittsburgh before he can vote yes. Imagine having to ask your pastor’s approval to vote for something like this. How is it that the Catholic Bishops have such powerful influence?

Rep. Steve Driehaus, D-Ohio, said he’s “trying to get to yes,” but said he won’t vote for the health care bill unless it says “no federal funds used to pay for abortions and so that means no federal funds used to pay for abortion in the public option.” Dreihaus is a Roman Catholic who worked closely with Jesuit Xavier University for a time as a teacher of political science, and as one time director and now consultant to the Community Building Institute, a collaborative effort of Xavier and United Way. Dreihaus is very friendly with the Jesuits and no doubt understands how to work with them.

CNN Article

Jason Altmire Biography

Steven Driehaus Biography

Fox News 4 published an editorial by radio commentator Bill Press entitled Congress of Catholic Bishops. “Consider this scenario, wrote Press. “After months of debate, the national legislature is set to cast an historic vote. But, before legislators can vote yea or nay, the bill must first be sent to the country’s Supreme Religious Council for its approval. Only after unelected clerics give their blessing are elected politicians permitted to vote.

“Did that happen in Iran? No, it happened right here, in the House of Representatives, during [the] vote on health care reform.

“A carefully crafted piece of legislation — the result of months of debate by three different House committees — was before the House for a final vote. But, at the 11th hour, lobbyists for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops descended on the Capitol, declared they could not accept provisions in the bill restricting federal funding of abortion, demanded that the language be made tougher — and dutiful Democrats did just what the bishops ordered.”

In other words, the conservative Catholic vote in the House of Representatives was so vital to Nancy Pelosi that she knew, ultimately, that she had to have the bishop’s support. She needed 218 votes. Considering that the bill lacked 19 votes up until that time, it is astonishing that the bill narrowly passed, suggesting that the arm-twisting was very intense. The final count was 220 in favor of the bill, just two votes to spare. It also suggests that those 21 votes were holding up the voting in favor of the demands of the Catholic Church.

Health Care Bill Clears House

Obviously my friends, the Catholic bishops convinced Nancy Pelosi and certain other Democratic leaders that they would lose the whole health care reform bill if they didn’t make the abortion changes.

Bill Press continued; “In so doing, they might just as well have tossed the First Amendment, and its separation of church and state, right out the window. Civil liberty advocates should be equally angry over such a blatant violation of the Constitution,” he said. “In effect, members of Congress gave Catholic bishops a veto over federal legislation: power that no group of religious leaders should hold over a secular, popularly elected Congress. Who elected the bishops, anyway? And whom do they represent?”

My friends, the “stones” are crying out. Though Mr. Press, a Catholic, is on the other side of the abortion question from the bishops, and even though many of God’s people would agree with the bishops concerns, students of prophecy should not miss the importance of what happened.

Listen to the prophet Daniel in speaking of the power of Rome. It’s from Chapter 7:7 “After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it…” While we have not seen this power in its fullest strength, we are beginning to see how Rome does this. She devoured the Democrats and broke them down. This is only the beginning folks, but we must see that this is a partial fulfillment of this prophecy. Rome is getting ready to devour God’s people if she can, and “destroy the mighty and the holy people,” Daniel 8:25 says. Those are the ones who keep all of God’s commandments and have the Holy Spirit in latter rain power. Rome is demonstrating her power as she rises to the height to which prophecy destines her.

Bill Press made another very interesting point. “Why is there special treatment for Catholic bishops?” he asked. “Can you imagine the complaints from Democrats if religious conservatives James Dobson and Pat Robertson had been given the same access? Or the howls of outrage from conservatives if Congress first took time out to ask Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson for their blessing? Not to mention the universal uproar [there would be] were a group of Muslim clerics consulted before the vote. No other group of religious leaders would have been given that special access to the corridors of power…”

While any American Catholic, even a bishop has the right to speak out on political matters in America as an individual, it is another thing however, for the bishops to lobby Congress as a religious entity or church, and then go on a full throttle campaign to pressure Congress through Catholic Church members. This is a violation of the intent of the first amendment, separation of church and state in the U.S. Constitution, if not of the constitution itself. The reason the bishops have such powerful influence is because of the dual nature of the Catholic Church. No other church has the kind of power that Rome has because they are not a mixture of Church and nation state. The Bible tells us this in Revelation 17 by describing this entity as both a beast and a woman. There are other nations that mix religion and politics, but none of them have the global clout that Rome has.

Bill Press concluded; “If Catholic bishops are going to demand a voice in legislation, then they must do what all other special interests in Washington do: register as lobbyists and pay their taxes. If they insist on playing politics, then we should insist on taking away the Catholic Church’s tax-exempt status.”

Fox Article

In other words, the nation’s laws are being influenced and manipulated by a powerfully influential church that is doing so without paying taxes. This is illegal in the United States.

In essence the Vatican actually passed judgment on civil legislation in the United States Congress before the vote was taken, and in effect, delivered Catholic votes for it once their demands were met. The outcome of the legislation in the House demonstrates that while the Republicans don’t have the votes to stop proposed legislation, the Vatican has the power to get it passed in harmony with its own agenda.

Notice that the Roman Catholic Church, a foreign nation, is now in a position to judge at least some of America’s laws. This should not go unnoticed by students of prophecy. When the Catholic Church has the power to successfully pressure the U.S. House of Representatives against their own majority, we have come to an unprecedented moment in history. It makes you wonder how long it will be until Rome will reach critical mass, so that any law that impinges in her principles, will ultimately be “engineered” or “fixed” by the Catholic bishops. More dangerously, how long will it be until Rome is capable of getting laws initiated and passed that restrict God’s last generation of Sabbath keepers, such as Sunday laws.

While you and I may agree with Rome’s position concerning abortion, this process in Congress to politically pressure legislative representatives to do her will, even though the vast majority disagree with Rome concerning abortion, is extremely significant.

There were enough conservative Democrats, mostly Catholic, who oppose abortion and would not vote in favor of the legislation unmodified, that the liberal and most powerful Democrats had to forego one of their key principles to bring the conservatives over to support the health care bill. The fact that the bill passed by only two votes, tells us that Rome has enough power to influence the outcome if it is one of Rome’s key principles, even when there is a wide margin of votes against her. It also tells us that Rome doesn’t yet have full throttle power if the House is more united against her positions. But she is well on the way to having it.

Not that long ago Republicans held the power of Congress. Democrats were very weak for most of the years between the Reagan administration and the present. The Democratic Party had to get more conservative Democrats elected into congressional office. Listen to the Wall Street Journal.

“The bishops’ success” wrote the Journal “served as a reminder that Democrats’ strategy over the past two election cycles of recruiting more conservative candidates to run in competitive House and Senate seats can have unwelcome policy consequences for liberals among the party’s base. About 40 House Democrats are opposed to abortion rights.”

Do you see what happened? Once there were enough conservative Democrats in Congress that were opposed to abortion, the Catholic Church could then use them to manipulate Congress into legislating in harmony with her religious principles. That is dangerous, my friends. What would happen if more conservative Democrats were elected to the U.S. Congress.

“The bishops have a history of political activism,” continued the Journal. “In the 2004 presidential race, some bishops said they would refuse to grant communion to Democratic nominee John Kerry, a Catholic who favored abortion rights. In 2005, the bishops’ conference backed efforts by then-President George W. Bush and Republican lawmakers to intervene in the Terri Schiavo right-to-die case. But rarely has the church entered the fray with such decisive force [as it did with the health care reform bill].”

More on the Health Care Reform Bill

Remember that of the members of Congress, 30 percent are Roman Catholic. Most of them are liberals. But should that change and more conservatives get voted into office over time, the landscape could change, giving Rome additional power. However, even now full power could arise on a specific issue if almost the whole nation were united concerning it. For instance, if massive disasters occurred and the bishops, mainstream pastors and evangelical preachers began promoting Sunday observance as a way to get the nation back to God, Sunday laws could easily pass through the House and the Senate rather quickly.

“The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops…” continued the Associated Press, “derives its power in large part from the sheer number of Catholics in this country… but also from the special moral and religious standing of its members. Many of them are in regular contact with lawmakers, weighing in on issues from immigration policy to benefits for low-income people.”

Note the point about special moral and religious standing of the Catholic Church members. The suggestion here is that they have more power and influence than other people when Roman Catholic members speak.

Kathy Saile, a spokesperson for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops made a very telling comment that was quoted in the AP article mentioned earlier. After pointing out that the Democrats are keenly aware of the power of Catholic voters, more than 50% of whom voted for President Obama, the AP reported that Kathy Saile said, “This was a lot of members of Congress listening to their constituents.” Of course she means that mainly Roman Catholic constituents were being listened to by Democrats that are keenly aware of their power. This comment coming from the Catholic Bishops spokesperson suggests that the bishops had been working behind the scenes urging their people to contact their elected officials, even telling them what to say.

This is, in fact, exactly what the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops did. They engaged in an outright, all-out campaign, largely out of sight of the public press by distributing “fliers to every parish in the nation asking people to pray for abortion restrictions and to call their congressmen and senators asking them to ‘fix these bills with pro-life amendments,’” said the AP report.

Moreover, continued the AP article, “the conference staff got elbow-deep in the legislative machinations on the health measure, even having bishops intervene with Republicans — who were loath to help Democrats pass their bill — to make sure they supported the abortion provisions.”

In other words, the bishops worked both sides of the political isle to get the legislation passed with provisions satisfactory to themselves. Incidentally, they weren’t as successful with Republicans as they were with Democrats. Only one Republican voted for the bill.

His name was Jospeh Cao, a Roman Catholic from New Orleans, LA. Once the anti-abortion provisions were included, he was prepared to support the health care reform bill. Cao studied for six years at a Jesuit seminary to become a Jesuit priest, but eventually abandoned that to pursue Philosophy and Law. Cao attended both Jesuit Fordham University in New York, and Loyola University in New Orleans to acquire his masters degree and his law degree respectively. Loyola had him teaching undergraduate philosophy classes while in law school there. No doubt Cao is very familiar with Catholic teaching and the Church’s positions concerning universal health care and abortion. Moreover, one would expect that he could be depended on to assist Rome in her efforts to get the legislation passed in the House of Representatives.

Joseph Cao Background

Joseph Cao Biography

Fordham University Website

Fordham University Background

Loyola University of New Orleans

Loyola University Background

The AP article went on to say that “The outcome [of the health care vote in the House of Representatives] left abortion-rights supporters, who couldn’t muster enough votes in the House to head off Catholic… intervention, fuming. The bishops ‘essentially got signoff. They dictated this, and it’s totally inappropriate — it’s blatant interference between church and state,’ said Eleanor Smeal of the Feminist Majority. ‘The women’s movement and the pro-choice forces feel like they were had.’”

MSNBC Article

Los Angeles Times News Article

I want you to think about those comments for a minute. Can you see what is happening? Those who are defending the separation of church and state in this case, are the feminists and pro-abortionists. Will those who defend the separation of church and state on the grounds of Bible principle get lumped in with these? When the best solution to a national or international emergency is a religious solution that sounds very pious and righteous, but is actually overturning the separation of church and state, and compelling people to break the law of God, how effective do you think God’s faithful people will be in arguing in favor of separation of church and state, and against Sunday laws, when linked with people that press progressive liberal agendas? Friends, in more than one way, God’s Sabbath keeping people have also been “had” by the Roman Catholic bishop’s intervention. It is only a matter of time.

“Tony Perkins, head of the Family Research Council, an evangelical group that tends to side with Republicans, said Saturday’s vote ranked among the most important victories for abortion foes since the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision legalizing the procedure, because it came under Democratic leadership,” reported the Wall Street Journal.

Speaking of the Democratic Party, Nancy Pelosi said at a press conference, “We’re glad to take responsibility for this bill, and the credit.” But the real credit goes to the Catholic Bishops whose aggressive campaign handed the vote to the Democrats. When the Vatican has the ability to turn liberal Democrats on their heads, my friends, we can see that Rome has largely fulfilled its prophetic destiny to become perhaps the most powerful religious and political influence in American politics.

Listen to this statement from the book Great Controversy, page 588. “The Protestants of the United States will be foremost in stretching their hands across the gulf to grasp the hand of Spiritualism; they will reach over the abyss to clasp hands with the Roman power; and under the influence of this threefold union, this country will follow in the steps of Rome in trampling on the rights of conscience.” The United States is perhaps toward the end of the process of reaching across the abyss to clasp hands with the Roman power.

Friends, we are in the state of orange alert, and not far from red alert. “The evidence indicates that the Bishops-and the Vatican itself-are calling the shots behind the scene,” wrote Accuracy in Media.com. “In fact, as many media organizations are now reporting, they engineered the “compromise” that deleted abortion funding so the bill could pass the House.”

AIM News Article

Huffington Post News Article

The Bishops also went after the Senate, but were not able to get an amendment to the Senate version of the bill to eliminate abortion funding. Apparently, the Senate doesn’t have enough abortion foes yet for the Catholic Church to do what it did in the House. That is why Rome has clearly not reached the zenith of her power. However, during the reconciliation process between the two versions of the bill, the Bishops again pressed hard for the removal of the funding. Again, the conservative members of the House held out for abortion restrictions. This in turn forced President Obama to issue an executive order to restricting funding for abortion in the reconciled bill. Only then did enough conservatives vote in favor of the bill.
The Bishops were not satisfied with an executive order because it can be sassily changed. No doubt, they will keep putting pressure on the legislative bodies until they get what they want. Because of other constitutional issues in the bill, there are already a number of states that have filed lawsuits against the U.S. Federal Government to challenge the whole law. Certainly the Bishops will use their clout to influence the outcome if they can.

CNA News Article
Alternate CNA News Article

US Catholic News Article

Life News Article

Washington Times News Article

Friends, as we get closer to the time of the close of probation, do you think there are some things that you should do to get ready for the crisis? I hope you are taking these things seriously and doing what you have to do to have a very close relationship with Jesus. Now is the time; not sometime in the future. Today is the day of salvation. We must be spiritually prepared if we want to be protected by God’s grace when there is no human law to do so.

Want to read more? Feel free to read more about this subject by clicking the links below:

Do Catholic Bishops Run the US Government?

NPR News Article

Any one else want to sell us out?

NY Times Article

CNA Article on Faith Groups

CNA News Article on Abortion

New York Times Article

Zenit News Article

USCCB Article

Zenit News Article

CNA News Article

CNS News Article

CNA News Article

NPR Article on US Congress

Life News Article

Bishops Warn Against Health Care Abortion Expansion

Life News Article

We hope you have been greatly blessed by this month’s message. Your prayers and gifts mean much to us. Thank you for your support.




Note: All links referred to in this article are not enabled...
.

Friday, January 29, 2010

Catholic Bishops Lobby for ObamaCare, Amnesty for Illegals


Photo (Courtesy)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjym6WeC5mGqxAcJEe1_q9F_Kxe8WRbv10O-5HxaM6Gg4nYTkXDTcd7gqmg3RaAWm7NF5Qa4khj2f8xzaF0e9AnIpRJXJB7OXSYs-BjpbXQT_QIH7tRJBI0puSFGRVwon7tT8oSIQ/s1600/capt.675f816030cc462799476aa7ddde503d.catholic_bishops_mdrc102.jpg


AIM Column By Cliff Kincaid January 27, 2010

The religious left, led by the Catholic Bishops, may represent the only way that liberals in Congress can ultimately succeed in passing ObamaCare.

Calling health care a "right" to be guaranteed by the federal government, America's Catholic Bishops are trying to save ObamaCare at a time when the legislation has been pronounced in limbo, dying or dead by most of the media.

The evidence of intensive Catholic Bishop lobbying activity suggests that liberal Congressional leaders are going to give the legislation a temporary respite so that liberal Catholics can be persuaded to pressure Congress to pass both national health care legislation and "comprehensive immigration reform" in the form of H.R. 4321, the "Comprehensive Immigration Reform for America's Security and Prosperity" Act.

As AIM has documented, lobbying by the Catholic Bishops and their representatives, who worked closely with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, guaranteed passage of the health care bill in the House.

In a January 13 conference call and briefing, Kevin Appleby, a representative of the U.S. Catholic Bishops, explained in frank language why the Bishops are so desperate to pass the health care and immigration bills. He said that the Bishops want a federal health plan to absorb the costs being borne by the nation's 600 Catholic hospitals to cover illegal aliens.

Appleby said, "We have Catholic hospitals throughout the country that experience the same things that Alan was describing and we serve undocumented immigrants in our emergency rooms and community clinics, etc. So we have a stake in this in that the burden will fall not just on our providers but as Alan described, taxpayers throughout the country."

This was one of the clearest indications yet that support for national health care legislation is a means by which the Bishops can dump some of the costs of operating Catholic hospitals on the American taxpayers.

The reference to "Alan" was to Alan Aviles, president of the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation, another person on the telephone conference call.

Just four days after the annual January 22 March for Life, which featured many Catholic Bishops standing shoulder-to-shoulder with conservative members of Congress against President Obama's pro-abortion policies, the Bishops have returned to their liberal ways, firing off a letter to Congress complaining that national health care bills pending in the House and Senate aren't far-reaching enough. While the Bishops want the ultimate legislation to include "prohibitions on abortion funding," they also want it expanded to include millions of more people, including illegal aliens.

Indeed, the Bishops say in their January 26 letter that the House and Senate bills should be expanded because they "leave between 18 and 23 million people in our nation without health insurance."

In addition, the Bishops openly state in their letter that they want "undocumented persons"--illegal aliens--to be able to purchase insurance in the new health care exchange established by the federal government.

Gabino Zavala, an auxiliary bishop in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles for the San Gabriel region, has written an article noting that the religious left, which he describes as "religious leaders and faith-based organizations," have been pushing for a national health care system "for decades." He adds, "Catholic bishops have been leading advocates for universal health care as a fundamental human right, not simply a luxury for the privileged few."

The religious left, led by the Catholic Bishops, may represent the only way that liberals in Congress can ultimately succeed in passing ObamaCare. But that assumes that conservative Catholics will not resist the push to use church resources to give amnesty and federal benefits to illegal aliens as a way to take Catholic hospitals off the hook for many of their health care costs.

Left-wing Huffington Post blogger John Gehring notes with pride and pleasure that the Catholic bishops have "signaled they will play a leading role in pushing for comprehensive immigration reform this year by using the power of their pulpits and bipartisan political influence on Capitol Hill" and that the recent briefing was designed "to outline plans for persuading the public and wavering members of Congress that fixing a broken immigration system is a moral and practical priority."

Gehring is Communications Director and Senior Writer for Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, an organization funded by atheist George Soros. He is also a regular contributor to the God's Politics blog run by Jim Wallis of Sojourners, which received $100,000 from the Soros Open Society Institute to support the "Christians for Immigration Reform" campaign.

That briefing in question was the January 13 "Turning a New Leaf in Health Care Reform" conference call that included a lot of discussion about how to revive and save health care legislation in Congress and pass immigration legislation as well. The call featured Jennifer Ng'andu, Deputy Director of the Health Policy Project at the National Council of La Raza; Sonal Ambegaokar, a health policy attorney at the National Immigration Law Center; Alan Aviles; and Kevin Appleby, whose official title is Director of Migration and Policy Services at the U.S. Catholic Conference of Bishops.

An audio recording and transcript of the conference call are available at the La Raza website.

The Huffington Post's Gehring said that Bishop John C. Wester of Salt Lake City and Bishop Howard Hubbard of Albany, New York, who are respective chairmen of the U.S. bishops' committees on migration and international policy, have announced that over a million postcards "touting the need for immigration reform have been ordered by dioceses and parishes across the country" and that the cards will be sent to congressional offices.

The campaign is being run by the Justice for Immigrants campaign, an official project of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

The pre-written postcards say, "I am a concerned constituent and agree with the U.S. Catholic bishops that the U.S. immigration system is broken and is in need of repair. I ask that this year you support immigration reform legislation that keeps immigrant families together, adopts smart and humane enforcement policies, and ensures that immigrants without legal status register with the government and begin a path toward citizenship. Our families and communities cannot wait!"

The phrase "without legal status" means, of course, being illegal. It means they broke the law to enter the United States.

But the Bishops don't seem to want members of their flock to understand this critical fact.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Cliff Kincaid is the Editor of the AIM Report and can be reached at cliff.kincaid@aim.org




Source: http://www.aim.org/aim-column/catholic-bishops-lobby-for-obamacare-amnesty-for-illegals/
.

Tuesday, November 24, 2009

Tensions Flare Between Religious Leaders and Lawmakers Over Abortion

Updated November 23, 2009

by
FOXNews.com



In this Sept. 22 file photo, Rep. Patrick Kennedy gestures during a news conference on Capitol Hill. (AP Photo)


In an effort that has produced heated public feuds as well as significant changes in proposed health care legislation, religious leaders are zeroing in on followers of their faith in Congress to make sure that taxpayer money will not be used to fund abortions.

The latest confrontation comes between Rep. Patrick Kennedy, D-R.I., an abortion-rights supporter, and Roman Catholic Bishop Thomas Tobin, who asked Kennedy not to receive Holy Communion if he maintained his position.

The tension is palpable as senators prepare to take up a version of legislation that pro-life leaders say does not provide the same assurances as the version that passed the House early this month. Catholic leaders were considered key in pushing for the restrictions in the House bill.

Richard Doerflinger, associate director of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishop' Secretariat of Pro-Life Activities, said Monday that his group will "work with senators of both parties" to address their concerns. But his group blasted the Senate health bill on Friday, and Doerflinger said Monday that the conference will oppose it if their concerns are not met.

Here's a look at some of the lawmakers who are at odds with their religious leaders over the issue:

Rep. Patrick Kennedy

The dispute between Kennedy, son of the late Sen. Ted Kennedy, and Tobin began in October when Kennedy criticized Catholic bishops for threatening to oppose health care reform without restrictions on federally funded abortion. Tobin demanded an apology and requested a meeting with Kennedy, but that meeting fell through. Tobin then wrote a public letter calling Kennedy's position "scandalous" and "unacceptable."

The latest chapter in the dispute came over the weekend, when Kennedy told The Providence Journal that Tobin instructed him not to take Communion and instructed other priests not to give it to Kennedy either. Though Tobin denied banning Kennedy from receiving Communion elsewhere, he said he did ask Kennedy to stop receiving Communion in 2007.

"He attacked the church, he attacked the position of the church on health care, on abortion, on funding," Tobin told The Associated Press on Sunday.

But Kennedy, a member of the most prominent Catholic family in American political life, has earned some support in his stand against the church.

Catholics for Choice issued a statement Monday applauding Kennedy and describing Tobin as part of a "small minority of bishops" trying to "intimidate" Catholic lawmakers.

"Despite what this minority of bishops has done -- and it is worth noting that the majority of bishops do not seek to use the sacraments as political weapons -- prochoice Catholic policymakers continue to stand by their consciences," the statement said.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi

Pelosi has a long history of conflict with the Catholic Church.

But the church's intervention this time around may have helped persuade the California Democrat, who is Catholic, to allow a game-changing amendment.

Before the House passed its health care bill, representatives for Catholic bishops huddled with top officials in Pelosi's office to discuss the language. Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick, the former archbishop of Washington, also called Pelosi to discuss abortion restrictions with her personally.

In the end, an amendment from Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., to impose tough restrictions on federal funding for abortion coverage passed along with the overall health care bill. And the bishops are taking credit.

"It was a good example of how we as a conference can work together to have a positive influence on legislation," Bishop William Murphy, chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development, told the Catholic News Service, pledging that the conference would remain "vigilant" on the Senate side.

But the bishops' harmony with Pelosi may be temporary.

William Donohue, president of the Catholic League, told FoxNews.com that he expects Pelosi to try to strip out the Stupak language in conference committee when differences between the House and Senate versions must be ironed out. Donohue was one of 150 Christian leaders who signed a declaration on Friday reaffirming their opposition to abortion and gay marriage.

Pelosi hasn't shied away from confrontations with the church. She was rebuked by the archbishop of Washington last year after she said in an interview that the church had been inconsistent on its abortion position over the years. At the same time, the archbishop of Denver warned then-vice presidential candidate Joe Biden not to take Communion. Pelosi later met privately with Pope Benedict XVI at the Vatican. The Vatican released a statement at the time saying the pope spoke with Pelosi about "the Church's consistent teaching on the dignity of human life from conception to natural death."

Rep. Michael Capuano

Capuano, D-Mass., has also bucked leaders of his Catholic faith to take a firm stand in favor of abortion rights as the health care debate proceeds. He told FoxNews.com recently that he would "tend to vote against" the final bill if it restricted abortion funding -- though he voted for the House version weeks ago.

Capuano is focusing on abortion in part because it's a big issue in the race for the Senate seat formerly held by Ted Kennedy. Both he and state Attorney General Martha Coakley are playing up their abortion rights credentials in the race for the Democratic nomination.

Capuano, though, made clear that he won't be intimidated by Catholic leaders on the issue.

"I treat them with probably more respect, more deference. But they don't tell me how to vote," he said, according to The Boston Globe.

Rep. Rosa DeLauro

DeLauro, D-Conn., was among the female Democratic House members outraged by the Stupak amendment. DeLauro reportedly got in a shouting match with Rep. George Miller, a Pelosi ally, after the House speaker announced in early November that she would allow the amendment on the health care reform bill.

But as a Catholic, DeLauro has drawn fierce criticism from inside the religious community.

Deacon Keith Fournier, founder of The Catholic Way, listed DeLauro among those lawmakers "who supported the funding of the continued killing of children in the womb with tax dollars" in a recent online column.

In an interview with the Catholic News Agency, a representative for The National Right to Life Committee blasted a separate amendment offered by DeLauro on the issue of abortion funding as "ludicrous" and "an insult."

Sen. Bob Casey Jr.

Casey, D-Pa., is known for his pro-life stance but he's not been entirely clear on how forcefully he would come down on the issue in the Senate health care legislation.

Expect the Catholic senator to be a target of religious groups seeking tougher language in Majority Leader Harry Reid's health care bill.

"Bob Casey has had an on-again, off-again relationship with some of the bishops in his state," Donohue said. "I'm sure there's a tremendous amount of pressure on him to make good on this."

Casey told CNSNews.com in early November that he supports an amendment to prohibit federal funding from paying for abortion coverage in health care reform.

But then a few days later, his office put out a statement saying he's not in favor of new restrictions, suggesting he doesn't want to pursue language akin to the Stupak amendment in the Senate.

Galen Carey, director of government affairs for the National Association of Evangelicals, told FoxNews.com that his group is hoping to persuade Casey, and even Reid, to change the abortion language in the Senate bill.

"The current Senate bill is a radical departure from the current U.S. government policy," Carey said.

The Senate bill as written would allow let private insurers that receive federal subsidies to offer plans that include abortion coverage, but the money for abortions is supposed to come from premiums paid by beneficiaries and not from the subsidy money.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.
.
.

Thursday, November 12, 2009

Congress, Catholics and Canadians


By Mary Starrett
November 12, 2009
NewsWithViews.com

Passage of H.R. 3692 was a thumb of the nose to all Americans who actually understand the Constitution. No where in that hallowed document is there allowance for the federal government to establish, oversee, require or otherwise meddle in the business of health insurance and healthcare. No where.

Yet, 220 elected Congressional representatives rammed an unconstitutional bill down our collective gullets caring nothing for the well established fact that Americans do not want this monster. So, what will you do about it? Keep re-electing the incumbents who ignored your wishes though scores of Town Hall meetings confirmed the massive opposition to federal control of health care?

According to a recent poll, the healthcare plan has been opposed by 90% of Republicans and 58% of unaffiliated voters. The passage of the bill (HR 3692) which now heads to the Senate was touted as “historic”; perhaps it was... seeing as voters didn’t want it though it was passed anyway.

With mega special interest groups like AARP and the AMA pushing for passage of Obamacare, it showed exactly who was pulling the strings behind this behemoth socialized medicine bill. Add to those groups another powerful political force which pushed for the House bill, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. Go figure.

According to Accuracy in Media, Catholic lobbyists were wheeling and dealing with the devil handing the pro-abortion Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi a sign-off on the bill some credit with getting it passed. So what we have here essentially is the Catholic Mafia cutting a deal to foist one of the most dangerous socialist schemes on Americans. This coming from a group purporting to be “pro-life,” making all kinds of noise about abortion provisions in the healthcare bill while consistently putting the kibosh on anti-abortion personhood bills in states like Michigan, Georgia, Colorado, Florida and North Dakota.

Pro-life activist Judie Brown wrote:

Over the years I have tried on many occasions to understand the apparent disconnect between the bureaucrats at the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and the fundamental teaching of the Roman Catholic (Church).

Brown, like so many others has been perplexed why supposedly pro-life clerics would refuse to support amendments which seek to establish the life of the pre-born as “persons” pointing out:

The bishops go on to reaffirm their view “that it will be more prudent to pursue incremental measures that add to existing protections in law and help change hearts and minds.”

There you have it, in their own words they’d rather stand around for another 36 years and twiddle their thumbs while millions more babies have their limbs torn apart and “pursue incremental measures” than cut to the chase making it clear that a person is a person whether born or unborn.

Ironically, the Canadians who’ve suffered under the weight of government-controlled healthcare are now rethinking the mess they made up there and are looking toward replacing their national health care with one more resembling ours, or should I say one that used to resemble ours.

Congress, Catholic Bishops and Canadians have spoken. Now, how will we respond?

.

.

Wednesday, September 23, 2009

Mel Martinez Joins Lobbying Shop Immediately After Quitting Senate


First Posted: 09-23-09 03:10 PM Updated: 09-23-09 08:26 PM

Former Sen. Mel Martinez has joined the lobbying shop of major law firm DLA Piper -- just two weeks after resigning from the Senate.

Martinez has joined the firm as a partner and will advise on issues ranging from government affairs, litigation, defense, energy and real estate, according to a statement released by DLA Piper.

USA Today reports that Martinez will come to the firm with $456,220 in cash from his campaign committee. DLA Piper made $11.8 million last year lobbying for clients that include the Royal Bank of Scotland and Lockheed Martin.

Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey left DLA Piper last month amid negative media attention his Freedom Works organization received for its involvement in town hall protests.
Under the Senate's post employment rules, Martinez will be unable to lobby the Senate for two years.


More here.


-- Jenna Staul


Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/23/mel-martinez-joins-lobbyi_n_296600.html

Saturday, July 04, 2009

Pay-for-Chat Plan Falls Flat at Washington Post

By RICHARD PÉREZ-PEÑA
Published: July 2, 2009

For generations, The Washington Post has been a scrupulous watchdog over the capital’s cozy world of power networking. For a short time, it almost became the network’s host.

The Post decided Thursday to cancel plans to charge lobbyists and trade groups $25,000 or more to sponsor private, off-the-record dinner parties at the home of its publisher, Katharine Weymouth, events that would have brought together lobbyists, business leaders, Post journalists and officials from the Obama administration and Congress.

The revelation of the parties early Thursday morning by Politico.com appalled members of The Post newsroom and put the paper squarely in the cross hairs of journalism ethicists. In response, Ms. Weymouth canceled the first dinner, scheduled for July 21.

A flier describing the events promised corporate sponsors conversation (“Spirited? Yes. Confrontational? No.”) at the Washington home of Ms. Weymouth. Sponsors were asked to pay $25,000 to attend an event, or underwrite a series of 11 for $250,000.

The July 21 event, focusing on health care reform, “guaranteed” a “collegial evening” with health industry advocates, Post journalists covering the field and administration officials involved with its policies.

The Politico article prompted an immediate newsroom reaction. The Post’s ombudsman, Andrew Alexander, wrote on his blog that “this comes pretty close to a public relations disaster.”

Valerie Strauss, a reporter who, unlike some, was willing to speak on the record, said, “I don’t believe the newsroom would ever go along with that.”

With the print business in tough straits, many news organizations have turned to conferences and other events to raise revenue and their profiles. But the planned Post events seem particularly audacious, not only acting essentially as a paid conduit between lobbyists and government officials, but also providing sponsors the opportunity to make their case to Post journalists.

It was not entirely clear Thursday how the salon idea had developed, how much people inside the company knew about it or who planned to attend. Soon after the news broke, Marcus W. Brauchli, executive editor of The Post, sent a memo to his staff saying that “the language in the flier and the description of the event preclude our participation.”

In an interview, Mr. Brauchli said he had intended to go to the dinner and knew the company was seeking paying sponsors. But he said he did not see the promotional flier, or know that the event might have a single sponsor. Invitations to the event stated it was “underwritten by Kaiser Permanente.”

Sybil Wartenberg, a Kaiser spokeswoman, said that despite what was written on the invitation, “we were in discussions about the event, but there was no final agreement for us to participate.”

Mr. Brauchli said that in talking to The Post’s marketing arm, “we have always been explicit that there are certain parameters that are elemental for newsroom participation” in special events. Among those, he said, “we do not limit our questions, and we reserve the right to allow any ideas that emerge in an event to shape or inform our coverage.”

A few officials at the Department of Health and Human Services had been invited to the gathering, but no senior White House officials, administration aides said. Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, said during his daily press briefing, “I do not believe, based on what I’ve been able to check, that anybody has accepted the invitations.”

In midafternoon, Ms. Weymouth sent a memo to employees, saying: “A flier went out that was prepared by the marketing department and was never vetted by me or by the newsroom. Had it been, the flier would have been immediately killed, because it completely misrepresented what we were trying to do.” She added that other salon dinners would not involve the newsroom.

The Post recently hired a marketing executive, Charles Pelton, to begin organizing conferences, and executives said the flier came from his group. He did not return calls seeking comment.

The Post’s ombudsman, Mr. Alexander, in his blog, quoted Mr. Pelton as saying that the nature of the events had been “well developed with the newsroom,” but that “what was not developed was the marketing message to potential sponsors.”

News of the planned events dominated discussion across the nation’s capital Thursday, and inspired wisecracks.

At that White House briefing, when a Post reporter, Michael Shear, asked about the president’s health care plan, Mr. Gibbs joked: “The counsel’s office has advised me to ask Mike exactly how much each of these questions is costing. I seem to have forgotten my AmEx card.”

In the Post’s newsroom, editors and reporters reacted with dismay. Marc Fisher, the enterprise editor for local news, said people in the newsroom knew the company was considering conferences, “but I don’t think that anybody envisioned that we would attempt to sell access in a very limited way, with the implication that there would be inside information only to those who ponied up big money.”

Most often, events held by journalism organizations are on the record and the public can attend by buying a ticket. Even Politico, which broke The Post story, has done some such events.

“We have not done anything quite like this,” said John F. Harris, the editor in chief of Politico, referring to The Post’s plan. In December 2007, for instance, Politico hosted a panel at George Washington University that was sponsored by the A.C.L.U.

During last year’s presidential conventions, Politico had panels sponsored by Yahoo.

Since 2003, The Wall Street Journal has held the All Things Digital Conference, which gathers executives and others for “informal but pointed conversations” for an audience of paying customers.

The New York Times, too, has considered holding paid business-sponsored forums involving Times journalists, but only on conditions that would avoid any real or apparent conflicts of interest, company officials said.

What has made The Post’s proposed events different is the setting — in the privacy of the publisher’s home — and that they were aimed at connecting lobbyists, trade associations and other influential capital players.

Loren Ghiglione, a professor of journalism ethics at Northwestern University’s Medill School of Journalism, said the episode was “disappointing but not surprising,” at a time when news organizations are casting about for ways to replace lost revenue. “So it’s not surprising that people got, let’s say, a little too creative about how to do that,” he said.

Jeff Zeleny and Tim Arango contributed reporting.


Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/03/business/media/03post.html
.