The U.S. military is facing a dangerous recruitment crisis. It seems to me, the main contributing factor to this crisis has been the Left’s insistence on infusing politics into our military. Under President Biden’s leadership, the Pentagon has been more interested in fighting the culture war at home than equipping our service men and women in their mission of deterring war and protecting our nation.
Earlier this year, President Biden’s Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin issued a memo to use taxpayer funds for paid time off, lodging, and travel expenses for military service members and their families to receive elective abortions. A clear example of the Left’s push to prioritize a political agenda over longstanding federal policy, this memo was issued without necessary congressional approvals and in spite of the Hyde amendment, a decades-old federal law prohibiting federal funding for abortion that even President Biden himself supported during his tenure in the U.S. Senate. The simple fact is that the Defense Department has no authority to use our taxpayer dollars to facilitate abortion services—in fact, existing federal law makes doing so illegal.
In response, Senator Tommy Tuberville of Alabama has placed holds on the confirmation of certain military promotions to both demand Secretary Austin rescind the policy and also bring attention to the wider issue of the politicization of our military. Rather than addressing these clear problems and violations of federal law, Arizona’s own Senators have continued to play politics, repeat Democrat talking points, or avoid the issue altogether.
It is the policies of the Biden administration that are the real threat to military readiness and undercutting our national defense capabilities, and that is what Senator Tuberville’s holds are rightly pointing out.
As a former officer in the Army, I can tell you Arizona’s veterans and active-duty service members understand firsthand that politicizing the military is a problem—not a solution. Yet, our U.S. Senators in Arizona have both apparently missed that message.
In July, Senator Mark Kelly claimed blocking of certain military promotions “is doing real damage to our national security right now” and that it will “have cascading effects for years.” But Senator Kelly is fear mongering, plain and simple.
Similarly, Senator Kyrsten Sinema has indicated that she wants to find a “middle ground” between Senator Tuberville and President Biden.
When the military prioritizes social justice instead of operational readiness, uses drag queens as recruiting ambassadors, and spends 6 million man-hours pushing DEI and CRT, it’s no wonder confidence in our military has already dropped by double-digits since Joe Biden took office. Common sense would tell you that is no way to foster recruitment.
We can continue down President Biden’s destructive path of turning our military into a social experiment or we can choose a path that helps our military get back to fulfilling its mission of keeping our country safe.
I stand with Senator Tommy Tuberville.
Curtiss Leroy is a resident of Tucson, AZ, and a Heritage Action Sentinel. He is a former officer in the U.S. Army, serving in Alaska and Vietnam.
As host of the Sept. 9 G20 summit, India is ready to defend its use of fossil fuels despite the hostility of some of its guests toward the energy source.
Speaking at a pre-summit conclave organized by local media, Union Power Minister R.K. Singh answered criticism that his country is a large emitter of carbon dioxide from its use of fossil fuels, particularly coal. Calling the criticism ridiculous, he said that “you don’t decide on the emissions depending on the size of the country. A small island will be consuming huge quantities of energy per capita, yet its total emissions will be less. You have to talk about it in per capita terms … The narrative has to change.”
India’s per capita emissions are lowest among the top users of fossil fuels and much lower than the global average. This means many Indians continue to consume energy at a rate well below levels reached decades ago in the developed West.
G20 attendees will include the U.S., U.K., Canada, Germany and others, whose leaders seek to eliminate the use of fossil fuels in developing nations even though coal and oil helped to produce western wealth in the Industrial Revolution.
“If you have an economy that is growing at 7%, electricity from coal will also grow,” the minister said. “We will meet the energy requirement for our growth because we have a right to grow. The hypocrisy of developed countries is amazing.”
Mr. Singh pointed out the inconvenient fact that renewables are not a realistic alternative to fossil fuels for generating large amounts of electricity. The requirement to back up wind and solar with batteries increases their cost by nearly fivefold, he said.
The cost of renewables is not just an issue in developing economies. Even in the wealthiest countries, wind and solar are notorious for increasing the overall cost of power.
Writer Michael Shellenberger argues that consumers have been bearing much of these costs. For example, he says that “renewables had contributed to electricity prices rising 50% in Germany and five times more in California than in the rest of the U.S. despite generating just 17% of the state’s electricity.”
Availability and affordability of raw materials for batteries are also a growing concern. Contrary to popular claims that the prices of storage systems have declined, data show that their raw materials are becoming more expensive.
According to Energy Storage News, “Lithium-ion battery pack prices have gone up 7% in 2022, marking the first time that prices have risen since BloombergNEF began its surveys in 2010. The finding that average pack prices for electric vehicles and battery energy storage systems have increased globally in real terms … confirms the consequences of what the industry has been confronted with in recent months.”
Given these uncertainties, countries like India will not commit to any ambitious renewable transition goals. This is evident, given how India has been increasing its dependency on fossil fuels while simultaneously increasing its renewable capacity.
While India may give outward signs of interest in renewable energy installations, it will not risk the cost of risking blackouts or stunted economic growth by overreliance on high-cost wind and solar energy.
Vijay Jayaraj is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation and Research Associate at the CO2 Coalition, Arlington, Virginia. He holds a master’s degree in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia, UK.
For local governments—and councils of governments—in Arizona, it appears that creating a climate action plan has become all the rage. Maybe that’s because it pays well.
The latest group to bow down at the altar of the Biden administration’s climate change agenda is the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG). Back in August, MAG received a $1 million grant from the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Climate Pollution Reduction Grant Program to serve as the lead planning organization for the Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler metro area. The grant requires MAG to develop a priority climate action plan by next March, a comprehensive climate action plan by 2025, and a status report in 2027 after the four-year grant period expires.
But this $1 million grant isn’t the only way MAG stands to benefit…
In boasting about Bidenomics two weeks ago in Milwaukee, President Joe Biden declared that his policies are “restoring the American dream.” Then he went into his creepy whispering mode and assured us “it’s working.”
Huh?
Isn’t a big aspiration of the American dream owning a home? Biden keeps making first-time homeownership harder for young families for two reasons. One is that the overall jump in inflation and the slower increase in wages and salaries means that homes are more expensive. High home prices benefit those who already own their homes, but much of the increased value is due to general inflation, which reached a high of 9% last year and hurts everyone.
A bigger killer for first-time homebuyers has been the steady rise in mortgage rates under Biden. When he came into office, the mortgage rate was 2.9% nationally. Now it is 7.1%, thanks in no small part to the Federal Reserve’s 11 interest rate increases prompted by the $6 trillion Biden spending and borrowing spree in 2021 and 2022.
So now, according to the mortgage company Redfin, just the increase in interest rates on a 30-year mortgage from 5% to 7% means that a middle-income family that could once afford a median-value home of $500,000 can only afford a home worth $429,000. Great, spend more and you get less house. Or instead of a single-family home, you can only afford a three-room condo or a townhouse. If we compare the rates today versus when Donald Trump was president, the typical homebuyer can only afford a house with a price tag more than $100,000 less than three years ago.
What a deal? Maybe this is one reason the size of a new home is smaller than in the past.
Here’s another way to think about the damage done by Biden policies: If you want to buy a $500,000 home today, which is close to the median price in many desirable locations, your total interest payments will be at least $800 more per month. That means over three decades of payments totaling at least $250,000.
Of course, rents are up nearly 20% as well, so for many 20-somethings, this means sleeping in the parents’ basement.
Biden talks a lot about bridging gaps between rich and poor and blacks and whites. But the group that is most handicapped by these interest rate shocks is minorities. Black homeownership is still less than 50% for black households. The Washington Post calls this “heartbreaking,” but they blame racism, not bad government policies.
There’s one other impediment to homeownership for Generation X and millennials. Many 30- and 40-somethings are hamstrung by their existing and expanding debt. Credit card debt is now $1.03 trillion. Half of all families are expected to have problems paying off this debt each month. Delinquencies are rising, which can mean penalty rates of 20% to 25%.
So, if families can’t afford their existing debt, how will they get a bank to approve a $400,000 or more mortgage loan?
An even bigger question is how in the world can Biden call his economic policies a success?
Perhaps Biden has a secret plan to “forgive” trillions of dollars of mortgage debt, as he has already attempted to do with student loans. But that just shifts the debt burden to taxpayers — hardly a solution.
The Biden administration’s assault on homeownership isn’t just harmful to the families that are being priced out of the market. It’s bad for communities and cities around the country. When families become homeowners and set roots in a town, they are much more prone to care about not just improving their own house and maintaining the upkeep and mowing the lawn and trimming the hedges, but it gives them a stake in the schools and children in the neighborhood and the quality of the public services. In other words, homeownership gives Americans a sense of Tocquevillian civic pride.
Crime is lower, neighbors are friendlier and everyone’s property values rise when they live in a community of owners, not renters.
There is one reason to feel today’s downward spiral can be reversed. Back in 1980 when Jimmy Carter was president, mortgage rates weren’t 7%; they reached above 17%. Voters rebelled against the economic mayhem and chased Carter out of office. Ronald Reagan came into the White House, and with wiser economic fiscal policies, mortgage rates quickly fell in half and then lower still. It can happen again.
Stephen Moore is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation, senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation, and chief economist at FreedomWorks. He is the co-author of the “Trumponomics: Inside the America First Plan to Revive Our Economy.”
At the August 8th governing board meeting for Mesa Public Schools (MPS), conservative board member Rachel Walden was attacked and silenced. Apparently, her line of questioning and discussion of agenda items did not fit the approved district narrative and ruffled the feathers of fellow board member Kiana Sears.
Two of the items pulled from the consent agenda by Mrs. Walden were for the renewal and expansion of non-competitive contracts for mental health services to be provided by A New Leaf and Empact on campus at two district schools. In discussion on the first item, the contract with A New Leaf, Mrs. Walden was questioning the wisdom of giving A New Leaf space in schools to provide mental health services rather than simply referring students in need to mental health services available in the community.
“As difficult as the mental health crisis is, we need to stay in our lane and do everything that we can to improve student outcomes. So where are the afterschool tutoring programs? That’s something I’ve been asking for a long time,” said Mrs. Walden. She continued, “We should focus on what we’re tasked with doing and then we can refer out the other services.”
The reasoning behind this discussion was to point out that by bringing mental health services into the schools, the district would be diluting its resources with activities other than the one that is statutorily mandated, which is education. Mesa Public Schools Superintendent Dr. Andi Fourlis remarked, “When we talk about bringing partners into our school system, we use partners only when we have exhausted all of the resources available at the school. That is counselors, social workers, psychologists…that are working to solve the many challenges of children. So, when we have run out of all of our skills and assets, that’s when we would rely upon a community partner.”
Mrs. Walden questioned how the district could be exhausting all resources when it has more than the state average of school counselors. The district has 2.5 times the number of school counselors as the state average on a per student basis.
Superintendent Fourlis commented that having the resources on campuses alleviated logistical issues with parents getting their children to the outside service. She said, “Providing services closest to the student to reduce the amount of instructional time is very important…. Often times, there’s just not enough services available, and so bringing them to school where they can take students out of class for a 30-minute time perhaps versus having to take a half a day out of school, drive, get to an appointment, and so on. It becomes access and convenience for the families.” Mrs. Walden nullified that justification by correctly noting that mental health care providers will come to a student’s home.
In the middle of this exchange between Mrs. Walden and Superintendent Fourlis, otherwise disinterested board member Kiana Sears interrupted the conversation and called for the question essentially silencing Mrs. Walden’s inquiry into the details of the agenda item. The call for the question was seconded by Dr. O’Reilly, thereby ending the discussion and forcing a vote on the agenda item. To his credit, Dr. O’Reilly recognized that seconding the call to the question was a mistake and later apologized to Mrs. Walden for silencing her voice. Mrs. Sears has yet to acknowledge such contrition.
After silencing Mrs. Walden and moving to the vote on renewal and expansion of the contract with A New Leaf, President Hutchinson proceeded to carry water for A New Leaf, lauding its 52 years of service “to our families and our kids” and that it is “very well respected for the decades of work that they have done to keep this community whole.” She went on to say, “A New Leaf has been there, and this is an amazing organization that is local, and they are embedded in our community and in our schools and have been for years, decades as a matter of fact. So, let’s move on to the next agenda item…”
The next agenda item pulled by Mrs. Walden was similar to the first one—the approval of the contract for Empact to provide on-site mental health services on campus. During the discussion, Mrs. Walden questioned how these providers (A New Leaf and Empact) were chosen. Superintendent Fourlis responded, “I will tell you that this is an interesting question. As needs have arised (sic), throughout our community, we have responded, and community partners have responded differently. There is a scarcity of resources available, and so when our schools and our parents are asking for the help, we are grabbing the help that we can. And so there is not a plethora of services…and so to answer your very specific question, we did not do an RFP process.”
Did you catch that? “Community partners responded differently”? Responded to what? Community partners have never received a notice to respond to.
And what does Superintendent Fourlis mean by, “we are grabbing the help where we can”? While she’s making it sound like a desperate grasp for services of a couple of randomly selected organizations, it is actually closer to a pre-arranged preferred selection.
Consider this. Mesa Public Schools and A New Leaf have shared a cozy relationship for years. A New Leaf’s CEO, Michael Hughes, previously served on the governing board of MPS for 20 years from 1994-2014. No doubt, he made lots of close friends in the district during his tenure. In 2021, the MPS Governing Board, including President Hutchinson, approved what appears to be a very favorable lease agreement to A New Leaf for district owned office space. (See image below)
Then, in 2022, no less than 3 members of A New Leaf’s management, including Michael Hughes, donated to President Hutchinson’s re-election campaign. Now in 2023, the governing board, including President Hutchinson, has voted to renew and expand a non-competitive contract for A New Leaf to provide services on MPS campuses. And the narrative the superintendent is pushing is that A New Leaf was chosen because they responded to some non-existent public call for services and that there is a scarcity of services in the community.
As Mrs. Walden was challenging Superintendent Foulis’ claim of scarcity of services, again, disinterested Mrs. Sears interrupted the conversation to express her “outrage” at Mrs. Walden for her line of questioning and discussion. But questions and discussions based on Mrs. Walden’s interactions with her constituents are how a representative government is supposed to operate. She is seemingly the only board member acting as the representative of the community by engaging in such questioning and discussions rather than just rubber stamping every agenda item that is presented.
But that didn’t stop Mrs. Sears from fabricating a false narrative toward the end of the meeting that Mrs. Walden believes the district should just “turn our backs on our parents and our kids.” Mrs. Sears expressed anger at Mrs. Walden based on that false narrative, and this dangerous and dishonest behavior incited community anger toward Mrs. Walden. You would think President Hutchinson, who was presiding over the meeting, would have stopped this unfounded attack on Mrs. Walden. But instead, she allowed it to continue without calling the meeting back to order and telling Mrs. Sears that she was violating the district code of ethics.
Not only is President Hutchinson complicit in Mrs. Sears’ dangerous and dishonest behavior, but it has become clear. Conservative voices in Mesa Public Schools are not welcome. And any conservative who dares to challenge the preferred narrative will be bullied and silenced. It once again goes to show you: elections have consequences, especially at the local level.
You can watch the portion of the meeting discussing A New Leaf below.
Ed Steele is a husband, father, grandfather, and Mesa resident with a passion for helping the younger generation succeed in education.
The federal government and state governments across the country should be doing everything they can to ensure election integrity going forward. Over the past few years, the Arizona legislature has taken this to heart. But the Left has been fighting against every legitimate election reform that comes from conservatives. Not only are they filing lawsuits in court, but they’ve been deploying a new tactic that threatens the First Amendment.
Lawsuits Against Election Integrity Bills
In 2021, the Arizona legislature passed, and then-Governor Ducey signed into law SB 1485—a law designed to clean up Arizona’s early voter list. Then in 2022, state lawmakers followed that up with HB 2243 (to ensure regular voter list maintenance) and HB 2492 (to ensure that only U.S. citizens are voting in our elections).
These are commonsense laws that everyone should be able to get behind, but the Left gave up commonsense years ago…
