by Political Editors:  Working is a good thing and good for your health too. President Donald Trump is now making this argument as his administration announced that it would allow states to enact work requirements for Medicaid. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) stated that it would “support state efforts to test incentives that make participation in work or other community engagement a requirement for continued Medicaid eligibility or coverage for certain adult Medicaid beneficiaries. … CMS supports state efforts to enable individuals to gain and maintain employment.”

          Citing research on the overall health benefits of working, the CMS said, “A growing body of evidence suggests that targeting certain health determinants, including productive work and community engagement, may improve health outcomes.” The Foundation for Government Accountability noted that since 2000 the number of individuals receiving Medicaid benefits has more than doubled to 75 million enrolled — including 28 million able-bodied adults. Over 50% of Medicaid beneficiaries who are able-bodied adults do not work.
          Since the passage of liar-nObamaCare the number of individuals enrolled in Medicaid has increased significantly, greatly adding cost to the program. Unfortunately, there are those who reject the notion that able-bodied adults benefiting from the Medicaid program should be required to perform at least 80 hours of work a month via a job, community engagement activity, education, job skills training or volunteering. Fundamentally, working is a good and rewarding aspect of life. It produces less dependency, greater personal accountability, and purpose in life. It is the primary means by which an individual positively contributes to their community and society at large. Work is empowering, and should never be vilified for political gain. 
~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/53477

by Thomas Gallatin:  Last week, U.S. District Judge William Alsup, a liar-Bill Clinton appointee in “sanctuary” San Francisco, ruled in favor of a lawsuit brought by Barack liar-nObama’s former secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, forbidding President Donald Trump from following through on his decision to end liar-nObama’s executive order-created DACA program. On Tuesday, the Department of Justice announced that it would seek to bypass the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and take the case directly to the Supreme Court. That’s yuge.

          Attorney General Jeff Sessions defended the unusual move, stating, “It defies both law and common sense for DACA — an entirely discretionary non-enforcement policy that was implemented unilaterally by the last administration after Congress rejected similar legislative proposals and courts invalidating the similar DAPA policy — to somehow be mandated nationwide by a single district court in San Francisco.” Tom Goldstein, publisher of SCOTUS Blog, noted, “It’s an extremely unusual request, one that is granted once in a blue moon. It’s a signal by the Trump administration that they take this issue incredibly seriously and think the justices should, too.”
          While this is indeed an unusual action, it is fully warranted given the fact that DACA is not law but an executive order, which a president is free to rescind. Meanwhile, Democrats aren’t actually interested in coming up with a legislative solution to DACA, though they do want to force Trump into keeping liar-nObama’s lawless executive order. Reflecting on the real leftist agenda with the “s—thole” episode, Mollie Hemingway correctly observes, “The out-of-context leak was designed to dampen the prospects of an immigration compromise. You may want to sit down for this, but sometimes people care more about profiting from a problem than solving a problem. What if Democrats are using DACA recipients as human shields for their own electoral plans in November, and to get increased voter intensity, higher political donations, and greater turnout in upcoming elections?”
          Why ask, though, when you can just state the fact: Democrats want to drag out DACA as long as possible, especially during an election year, all in a cynical ploy for votes. Trump is looking to end the stalemate.  
~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/53496

by Jordan Candler:  In just a few days, Donald Trump will officially mark one full year in the Oval Office, during which time his impressive list of accomplishments has blossomed, with conservative policy reforms and judicial nominations. If there’s one area the president is coming up short, however, it’s in neglecting to fill important administrative posts.

          The Daily Signal reports, “Trump has no nominee for 252 of the 633 key positions requiring Senate confirmation, according to the Partnership for Public Service, which tracks presidential appointments. That’s well behind every predecessor going back to at least President George H.W. Bush, each of whom had the bulk of nominees confirmed by this point in their administration, according to the organization.” To name just a few, key appointments are lacking in the Justice Department, Internal Revenue Service and State Department.
          In fairness, spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders last month pointed out, “The president has said before he doesn’t think that every single position in the government needs to be filled. He’s going to cut back on some of those positions. We’ve been focused on some of the top priority places and we’re going to continue filling out individuals. But, we’ve also seen a massive slowdown and obstruction by the Democrats.”
          Here’s the problem with that argument: Every second that ticks by only exacerbates the issue of the deep state, and it actually detrimentally handcuffs Trump’s broader agenda. Why? Because career politicians will jump at the opportunity to continue fulfilling Barack liar-nObama’s statist agenda, or at least blocking Trump’s. As The Heritage Foundation’s Robert Moffit observes, “If you are going to drain the swamp, you need the people to do it. You either control the federal bureaucracy or the federal bureaucracy controls you.”
          In related news, turnover is disproportionately high in the Trump White House. According to a Washington Post analysis, Trump’s first-year turnover rate sits at 36%, which dwarfs that of previous administrations. For example, of the previous five presidents, the second-highest on the list, Ronald Reagan, had a first-year turnover rate of 17%, while George W. Bush had the lowest at 6%.
          Trump is certainly largely to blame for the chaotic atmosphere in the White House, but Steven Bannon, Reince Priebus, Michael Flynn and others hurt themselves and created a lot of their own problems. The bottom line is that Trump needs to get busy filling critical positions. But he also needs to be methodical about it. The wise vetting he deployed to pick Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch should be applied to his entire administration to mitigate turnover and avoid needless distractions.  
~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/53465

by Todd Johnson:  With its announcement earlier this month that it is freezing security assistance aid worth up $1.3 billion to the government of Pakistan, the Trump administration has once again exhibited an audacity meant to shake up the status quo in the greater Middle East.

          And while the long term, geopolitical ramifications of such a bold move will not be known for years, the short term consequences are already starting to reverberate. A couple of days ago, Pakistan responded to the suspension of aid by halting the sharing of intelligence with the United States, a move meant to hurt the American-led coalition’s ability to execute counter-terrorism operations in neighboring Afghanistan.
          The partnership between Pakistan and the United States has always been a conundrum for occupants of the White House, especially since that part of the world has been in a constant state of upheaval following World War II. As Kevin Williamson put it, “Pakistan’s border with India has been a flashpoint since the 1940s and its border with Afghanistan has been very much on American strategic minds since 2001. But Pakistan also borders Iran and the Arabian Sea, and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir borders China. Everything Pakistan touches is of strategic interest to the United States.”
          Which leads to two important questions. Are President Donald Trump and his team trying to change the behavior of the government of Pakistan in order to get our “allies” to understand that their lax efforts to combat militants within their borders is not acceptable anymore? Or are they sending a stronger signal to Prime Minister Shadid Khawan Abbasi that Pakistan is no longer going to be a partner of the United States in the fight against terrorism?
          If the first question is the objective, then the Abbasi government must prove to the United States that it is taking a hardline, operational stance against terrorists. It seems as if the Pakistani government is already trying to quell U.S. anger as evidenced by yesterday’s meeting between State Department officials and a senior Pakistani envoy. The purpose of the meeting was to show U.S. diplomats that Pakistani law enforcement agencies are actively engaged in counter terrorism operations. Still, it will take more than one meeting to show the Trump administration that Pakistan has changed its stripes.
          However, if the purpose of suspending aid is to radically alter the diplomatic and military landscape of the region and pursue new partners, then President Trump, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, Secretary of Defense James Mattis and the rest of the national security team really need to think hard about the objectives they want to achieve. More importantly, they need to consider the second and third order effects of implementing such a radical policy change.
          That’s why it is important for Trump to understand that Pakistan will always do what is in the best interests of Pakistan. Pakistan developed nuclear weapons in direct contravention of U.S. law and then the father of the program worked with the governments of North Korea, Libya and Iran on their programs.
          While Pakistan is a nuclear power, it is also a weak state. It’s in America’s best interests to maintain a working relationship with the Abbasi government, and to provide humanitarian aid to the Pakistan people. At the same time, the trick is holding off on giving security assistance resources to the Pakistani government until Abbasi proves he’s actively taking the fight to the terrorists in his sovereign territory.
          Trump’s foreign policy gamble is a brash political move, and if played correctly, it has the potential to fundamentally change the internal policy of Pakistan. Only time will tell if his instincts prove to be correct and give him a significant foreign policy victory.  ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/53457

by Jordan Candler:  No city in America can function without fossil fuels. Nevertheless, last year a slew of money-grabbing opportunists along the California coastline began targeting BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil and Royal Dutch Shell in court, where they are trying to compel said oil companies to fund climate change mitigation. Oakland, San Francisco, Santa Cruz and Imperial Beach along with Santa Cruz, Marin and San Mateo Counties argue that they shouldn’t be financially liable for erecting infrastructure to combat sea level rise. Instead, the municipalities contend, the funding should be seized from oil companies, wherein the fault allegedly lies.

          Successfully litigating a blockbuster attack on oil companies won’t be easy, particularly with what Exxon has dug up. While the plaintiffs point to an admonition from November in which, according to The Wall Street Journal, “Moody’s Investors Service flagged environmental disruptions as a ‘growing negative credit factor’ for coastal municipalities and said it would adjust its ratings methodology to take climate change into account,” Exxon has just retaliated with its own court filing by exposing some damning hypocrisy. When it came to persuading their own investors, these municipalities kept their mouths shut and looked the other way. For example, the Journal notes:
          San Francisco’s lawsuit said it faced “imminent risk of catastrophic storm surge flooding,” while a general obligation bond offering last year said the city “is unable to predict whether sea-level or rise or other impacts of climate change … will occur.” Santa Cruz County said in its complaint it was experiencing more frequent and extreme droughts, precipitation events, heat waves and wildfires, and faced a 98% chance of a “devastating” three-foot flood by 2050. Yet a bond offering last year mentioned only “unpredictable climatic conditions, such as flood, droughts and destructive storms” as a risk factor.
          How can these municipalities claim to be under imminent threat and expect oil companies to foot the bill when, in truth, they are lying to their own investors for the sake of business interests? Just another example of “Do as I say, not as I do.”
          Meanwhile, the anti-oil-company bandwagon continues to grow. This week, New York City took legal action against the same oil companies. According to the lawsuit, “In this litigation, the City seeks to shift the costs of protecting the City from climate change impacts back onto the companies that have done nearly all they could to create this existential threat.” Moreover, The Washington Post reports that “officials said they expect to divest up to $5 billion in investments from as many as 190 companies with fossil fuel ties, even as they promised to maintain their fiduciary duty to New York’s pensioners.”
          It’s worth noting that analogous climate lawsuits against corporate entities have failed. And these should too. A New York Post editorial appropriately asks, “Why should the oil companies pay? They’re not actually burning the fuel — that’s the world’s utilities, motorists, etc.” Besides, it would be remarkably hypocritical to punish oil companies when their antagonists demonstrably engage in daily machinations.  ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/53420