Sunday, January 26, 2025

Raising Next-gen Conservatives


The first step in solving a problem is to acknowledge that the problem exists. Only then can steps be taken to solve, or at least manage the problem. During the COVID lockdowns many schools instituted remote learning and parents got to see first-hand some of the things their children were being exposed to. We know there's a problem, but what can we do about it?

Young children learn at an astonishing rate, so it makes sense for parents, as their children’s primary educators to take advantage of their receptivity. If teachers are immersing our children in objectionable ideologies we might be able to remove them from that environment. Transferring to a different school may help, but we're still relying on someone else to teach our children what we think they should know. A better tactic is to equip them with the values and intellectual skills they need to form and defend their own opinions. Children may not be able to discuss current events at an adult level, but they do possess a sense of fairness and are (hopefully!) able to distinguish right from wrong.

We can engage in conversations with our children at appropriate levels, and in order to do that we have to be well-informed ourselves. The public is turning away from newspapers and televised news programs and are increasingly getting their information from podcasts, internet news and opinion sites, and social media. It's a simple matter to access a few of those each day and bring them up in conversation afterwards, perhaps around the dinner table.

One tactic might be to ask those at the table to contribute something to the conversation. It could be something that happened to them that day or a news item they heard about. There are enough major news stories breaking each day that one of those could easily become a conversational topic. Mom or dad could explain the event and then the children could take turns responding to it. Children could mention what they think about it, or how it makes them feel and why. Children like being asked about their opinion and doing so encourages them to think seriously about the issue being discussed.

This is a good opportunity to introduce proper debating techniques, especially in how to disagree with another person in a constructive way. Some news programs feature group discussions where participants discuss an issue from different perspectives. While these are probably not very entertaining for very young children, those who are a little older might benefit from seeing how adults conduct debates. Some of these shows are better than others, and still others show how not to conduct a debate. Choose wisely.

Another approach might be to use television commercials and programs to teach about bias. Rather than simply consuming the information at face value, ask your children what factors might be underlying the advertisement or a particular scene or bit of dialogue. Doing this encourages them to look deeper into the situation and look for underlying motivations. If they can identify someone else's viewpoint, ask them what they think about it. Do they agree or disagree with it, and why? Have them justify their opinion.

At this point it's also helpful to teach them to avoid unjustly vilifying those with whom they disagree. Conflicts can become teachable moments in which parents model respectful problem-solving skills. The Socratic Method is very useful in this regard. Watching Peter Doocy questioning Karine Jean Pierre was very instructive. They were usually both polite in their exchanges but one almost always emerged unscathed afterwards. The person who has the facts on his side and asks basic questions forces the other person to defend or explain his position and in some cases, that position is untenable. This is a valuable skill for anyone to learn, especially children. Hopefully mom and dad model respectful problem-solving themselves.

Children notice how their parents interact with others and how they engage with society. It's a good idea for parents to praise the positive values of others they see being demonstrated. Thanking a service member or a law enforcement officer for his service makes a big impression on children, as does discussing the contributions those serving in our military, police and fire departments and EMTs provide. Children should know about those organizations and what motivates people to participate in them. Parents could compare and contrast how children earn rewards and consequences around the house with the manner in which promotions are earned and crimes are punished in society at large. The family is, after all a microcosm of society.

Children of middle-school age and older might be interested in attending meetings at the local town hall, school board or city council. If they knew a little about the issues to be discussed beforehand and had an opportunity to talk about them at home they'd have a greater appreciation of seeing those issues debated in a public forum. If they feel strongly about an issue, encourage them to write a letter to their mayor or councilman, congressman or senator. Many politicians will reply to such letters and getting official mail can be a rewarding experience for a child.

Visiting historical sites and museums can help open children's minds up to the world around them and give them a sense of perspective and the depth of history. Rather than focusing on the alleged misdeeds of historical figures, have them look into the positive contributions they made to their communities, the struggles they faced and how they overcame them.

When voting season rolls around, discuss the issues with your children at a level they can understand and ask them their opinions. Talk about the various candidates and what they've had to say on the issues. Ask your children with whom they agree or disagree and why. Do they agree with a particular candidate on some matters and disagree on others? Have them rank some of the issues in the order they feel is most important and decide on a candidate they would vote for, and why. Some children might be excited to see mom and dad volunteer for a political campaign or even run for a position. Maybe they'd like to help out in a campaign if it were allowed, or they might consider running for a position on their own student council, debate team or related club. When it comes time to vote, do it in person and consider taking your children with you so they can see the process first-hand. That will make it real for them.



The 8 Executive Actions That Will Drive the Trump Energy Agenda

 

The 8 Executive Actions That Will Drive the Trump Energy Agenda

Four sweeping slates of energy directives revoke prior orders, deregulate, and direct to ‘drill baby drill.’

Image

Illustration by The Epoch Times, Getty Images

 
By John Haughey | January 23, 2025
Updated:January 24, 2025
 
President Trump signed 46 executive actions in the hours after his inauguration on Jan. 20 with many of them multi-pronged mixes of more than 200 executive orders, directives, and policy guidance designed to prompt a “whole-of-government” sea change in administration.
 

At least eight relate directly to energy policy with four eliminating more than 200 rules, regulations, and executive orders issued under the Biden administration. This includes any regulations or rules adopted within the last 60 days and any allocations authorized under two “New Green Deal” bills adopted in 2021 and 2022.

 

Two of the seven are dedicated to specific issues in Alaska and California, and one implements a temporary pause in offshore wind development leasing. Tucked inside another one are directives calling for dramatic expansions of offshore oil and gas leasing.

 

One of Trump’s signature campaign slogans was “Drill, baby, drill.”

 

As expected, perhaps the least complicated of the eight energy and environment-related actions is Trump’s order withdrawing the United States from 2015’s Paris Climate Accords, which Trump did in 2017 and vowed to do again during his 2024 campaign.

 

Not only does Trump’s executive order withdraw the United States from the pact, it also includes “withdrawal from any agreement, pact, accord, or similar commitment made under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change” and immediately rescinds the U.S. International Climate Finance Plan which, over the years, earmarks billions in U.S. taxpayer commitments.
 
In the “Unleashing Alaska’s Extraordinary Resource Potential” executive order, Trump calls on federal agency officials to “expedite the permitting and leasing of energy and natural resource projects,” prioritize “development of Alaska’s liquefied natural gas (LNG) potential,” and expand fossil fuel development in the 23-million-acre National Petroleum Reserve and 19.6-million-acre Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
 

The sweeping action rescinds “all regulations, orders, guidance documents, policies, and any other similar agency actions … promulgated, issued, or adopted between Jan. 20, 2021, and Jan. 20, 2025,” essentially erasing dozens of Biden-era actions related to Alaska.

 

During Trump’s first term, Congress directed the Department of Interior (DOI) to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas drilling for the first time. Under the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the DOI was required to conduct two annual lease auctions within Section 1002, a 1.5-million acre coastal plain expanse that the U.S. Geological Survey estimates could hold up to 11.8 billion barrels of oil.

 

Instead, the administration auctioned only 400,000 acres in January, drawing no bidders because “new severe restrictions” imposed in November 2024 made “any development economically and practically impossible,” Alaska argued in a Jan. 5 lawsuit filed against the DOI.
 
By broader interpretation, the policy directives could allow Trump’s White House also to challenge the Biden administration’s withdrawal of 13 million National Petroleum Reserve acres from oil and gas leasing as part of its March 2024 decision to allow ConocoPhillips to proceed with its $8 billion Alaska Willow Project.
Image

The Kaktovik Lagoon and the Brooks Range mountains of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Kaktovik, Alaska, on Oct. 15, 2024. (Lindsey Wasson, File/AP Photo)

Another executive order is focused solely on California. Trump’s “Stopping Radical Environmentalism to Provide Water to Southern California” executive order revives his first-term proposal to redirect water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta to Central Valley farms and into Southern California urban areas.
 
The state of California and dozens of varied advocacy groups stymied the order in a federal court ruling that determined the action was a federal and executive overreach, and would endanger protected wildlife, including the delta smelt, a species of tiny fish.
 

“Today, this enormous water supply flows wastefully into the Pacific Ocean,” the executive order reads. “The recent deadly and historically destructive wildfires in Southern California underscore why the State of California needs a reliable water supply and sound vegetation management practices in order to provide water desperately needed there, and why this plan must immediately be reimplemented.”

 

The Paris Climate Accord withdrawal, Alaska oil and gas, and Southern California water executive action packets are relatively straightforward with narrow apertures.

By contrast, many of the 46 pen-stroke calls-to-action issued on Jan. 20 are multi-faceted, including five that dissolve dozens of Biden era actions and dispense dozens of Trump actions across a wide swath of energy-related policy and regulation.
 

‘Unleashing American Energy’

 

The 3,456-word “Unleashing American Energy” executive order states the administration’s intent “to establish our position as the leading producer and processor of non-fuel minerals, including rare earth minerals … to protect the United States’ economic and national security” and includes executive orders, actions, directives, and policy guidance.
 

Many provisions in this order enact or begin the process of encoding initiatives that Trump frequently cited in campaign rallies and also in his Policy47 agenda platform.

 

One provision pledges to “eliminate the “electric vehicle (EV) mandate” imposed by the Department of Transportation’s fuel-efficiency rules that would lift average fuel economy to 50 miles per gallon by 2031.

 

Trump’s order states that the action will ensure “a level regulatory playing field for consumer choice in vehicles” and calls for eliminating “unfair subsidies and other ill-conceived government-imposed market distortions that favor EVs over other technologies and effectively mandate their purchase.”

Image

Vehicles on the 101 freeway during a morning commute in Los Angeles on Sept. 23, 2024. Trump's energy order calls for the Environmental Protection Agency to “take measures” to roll back tailpipe pollution limits for cars, SUVs, and trucks that were finalized in March 2024. (Mario Tama/Getty Images)

The order calls for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to take measures to roll back tailpipe pollution limits for cars, SUVs, and trucks that were finalized in March 2024.

 

The order also directs the roll back of energy efficiency standards for appliances. It terminates “efforts to curtail consumer choice” by the Biden administration in pushing the energy efficient home improvement credit for domestic appliances that meet new EPA standards.
 

Trump’s order maintains the White House must act “to safeguard the American people’s freedom to choose from a variety of goods and appliances, including but not limited to lightbulbs, dishwashers, washing machines, gas stoves, water heaters, toilets, and shower heads, and to promote market competition and innovation within the manufacturing and appliance industries.”

 

The executive order includes provisions that launch an “immediate review of actions that potentially burden the development of domestic energy resources” and a revocation/revisions section that abolishes 12 executive orders issued by Biden, including the creation of a Climate Change Support Office and an executive order essential to the implementation of the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).

 

Another order within the package focuses on expediting permitting and simplifying compliance related to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

 

The order requires agency officials to have a plan within 30 days that includes the rescission of any regulations and rules added through the IRA to NEPA purview by the Biden administration.

 

The order authorizes the directors of the National Economic Council and the Office of Legislative Affairs to jointly prepare recommendations to Congress that “facilitate the permitting and construction of interstate energy transportation and other critical energy infrastructure, including, but not limited to, pipelines … and provide greater certainty in the Federal permitting process, including, but not limited to, streamlining the judicial review of the application of NEPA.”

 

A further provision takes aim at recently crafted federal greenhouse gas and methane emission rules by tossing aside all studies and analyses that justified them, including any by The Interagency Working Group on the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases, which the order also sunsets.

 

The order—“Prioritizing Accuracy in Environmental Analyses"—specifically calls for doing away with “social cost of carbon” calculations that it maintains “is marked by logical deficiencies, a poor basis in empirical science, politicization, and the absence of a foundation in legislation” and that is putting the U.S. economy at a disadvantage.

 

The order also requires agencies to provide “estimates to assess the value of changes in greenhouse gas emissions resulting from agency actions.”

A customer looks at washers and dryers on display at a Lowe's Home Improvement store in Miami on June 27, 2022. Trump’s energy order maintains the White House must act “to safeguard the American people’s freedom to choose from a variety of goods and appliances.” (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

The EPA under the Biden administration in April 2024 finalized stringent new greenhouse gas emission standards that significantly raise costs for coal-fired power plants and those invested in newly built gas generation that utilities and electric transmission operators say could render some power plants financially inoperable.
 

The EPA rule has been challenged and an opinion by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is expected soon. Trump could issue an executive order directing agencies not to implement the order until the court ruling. It will require legislative action, however, to bury the greenhouse gas rule.

 

The EPA finalized on Nov. 12, 2024, a new methane emissions rule that levies a first-ever “waste emissions charge” on oil and gas producers via IRA provisions authorized under the Clean Air Act.
 

Under the IRA, companies that emit methane beyond 25,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide annually must pay $900 per metric ton in 2024, $1,200 in 2025, and $1,500 in 2026 and beyond.

 

Although repealing the methane emission fee will require congressional action, the emissions charge could be eliminated in budget reconciliation under the Congressional Review Act. A Trump executive action might direct agencies not to collect the data that emitters are required to provide to verify compliance while legislation and court actions play out.

 

A further provision calls for “Terminating the Green New Deal.” This directive mandates that “all agencies shall immediately pause the disbursement of funds appropriated through” the massive IRA and the 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, which along with the 2022 CHIPS & Science Act, are the three signature laws of Biden’s “New Green Deal.”

 

The provision specifically cites “defunding” authorized IRA and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law allocations using “funds for electric vehicle charging stations made available through the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Program and the Charging and Fueling Infrastructure Discretionary Grant Program.”

 

Among other dissolutions, the provision rescinds Biden’s executive order 14082, which could now allow the White House and Congress to tighten tax credits, claw back loans and grants, and revise unfinalized rules under the Congressional Review Act to chip away at the IRA.

AES Indiana Petersburg Generating Station, a coal-fired power plant, operates in Petersburg, Ind., on Oct. 25, 2023. The EPA under the Biden administration in April 2024 finalized stringent new greenhouse gas emission standards that significantly raise costs for coal-fired power plants. (Joshua A. Bickel/AP Photo)

Trump and Republican congressional leaders vow to dismantle the IRA, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and the CHIPS act. The IRA alone authorizes 10 years of sustained tax credits, low-interest loans, and grant programs that by some estimates could top $1 trillion.
 

Also within the “Unleashing American Energy” executive order is a directive to lift the pause that had been placed on LNG exports.

This provision directs the secretary of energy to “restart reviews of applications for approvals of liquefied natural gas export projects as expeditiously as possible.” This essentially pulls the plug on the Biden administration’s January 2024 halt in new permit reviews.

 

The order states that it is in the public interest when the criteria for review includes “the economic and employment impacts to the United States and the impact to the security of allies and partners that would result from granting the [export] application.”

 

“Restoring America’s Mineral Dominance” is another provision within the executive order package. It is similar to a 2020 Trump order that installs a “whole-of-government” synthesis to “identify all agency actions that impose undue burdens on the domestic mining and processing of non-fuel minerals and undertake steps to revise or rescind such actions.”
 

Offshore Wind Moratorium

 

Another energy-related executive order signed by Trump on Jan. 20 suspends all “energy leasing in all areas within the Offshore Continental Shelf (OCS)” related to wind energy nationwide.
 

The moratorium will remain in effect until “various alleged legal deficiencies underlying” the federal government’s wind leasing regulations for onshore and offshore wind projects are addressed.

 

“This withdrawal does not apply to leasing related to any other purposes such as, but not limited to, oil, gas, minerals, and environmental conservation,” the order states. A separate package of executive action calls to expand the number of leases and where leases can be sold.

 

Trump frequently expresses a dislike for windmills and, despite his first administration backing offshore wind ventures, he appears intent on halting proposals to develop wind power in federal waters beyond the 11 already approved. Those 11 are projected to generate more than 19 gigawatts of energy—enough to power more than 6 million homes...

Heritage Foundation Experts Analyze Trump’s Executive Orders




By Heritage Foundation Staff
22 January 2025

Note: This OP consists of a few excerpts from the article cited. Interested readers are advised to refer to it.

President Donald Trump signed a flurry of executive orders his first day in office. His executive orders covered policies related to the economy, the border, gender ideology and more.

Below, we round up analysis from The Heritage Foundation’s policy experts on these executive orders. This article will be regularly updated to include new analysis.

>>> If you are a journalist interested in booking or interviewing Heritage Foundation experts quoted in this article, please email: Heritagepress@heritage.org

The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now

Political Prosecution of Pro-Life Activists Comes to an End With Pardon of 23 Pro-Lifers

On Thursday, a day before the annual March for Life, Trump issued pardons for 23 protesters who were prosecuted under the Biden administration for violations of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act.

The FACE Act, passed in 1994 under President Bill Clinton, makes it a federal crime to use “threats of force, obstruction or inflict property damage intended to interfere with reproductive health care services.” And while the Act also protects houses of worship and crisis pregnancy centers that offer assistance to women with unexpected pregnancies, the Biden administration disproportionately focused on cases involving abortion clinics. Pro-life pregnancy resource centers are 22 times more likely to be attacked than abortion facilities, and in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, 436 church and pro-life pregnancy resource centers were firebombed or vandalized.

The disparity has resulted in some Republicans in Congress calling for the FACE Act’s repeal on the basis of the fact that there are both state and federal legal remedies available for conduct covered by the FACE Act, and the fact that the Constitution reserves the general police power to the states, something they can use to protect houses of worship, pregnancy centers, and abortion clinics.  [...]

—Sarah Parshall Perry, senior legal fellow, Edwin Meese III Center for Legal & Judicial Studies, The Heritage Foundation.

Wind Energy

Trump issued a presidential memorandum directing the temporary halt of all federal offshore and onshore wind energy leasing and permitting activities, while ordering a comprehensive review of existing practices. This memorandum, which took effect Jan. 21, specifically places a temporary moratorium on the Lava Ridge Wind Project approved in the Dec. 5, 2024 Record of Decision.

One of wind energy’s fundamental flaws is its intermittency. Wind power projects consistently overpromise and underdeliver while imposing massive costs on taxpayers. Recent Heritage Foundation analysis shows these projects cost communities billions. In New Jersey’s case, nearly $75 billion ($8,000 per resident) for a global temperature reduction of just 0.0007 degrees Celsius by 2100.

In 2023, wind power operated at full capacity only 33% of the time, dropping to 26% during summer. American families and businesses need power 100% of the time. Utility scale battery backup can help curtail this deficiency some, but it remains very expensive and not widely deployed. This is why despite decades of subsidies, wind is not economically sustainable without ongoing taxpayer support and policy mandates. It is estimated that the tax credits enjoyed by wind producers would have cost U.S. taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars between 2025 and 2034.

That is why it has long been the Heritage position that subsidies for wind (or any source of energy) distort energy markets and results in less reliable, more expensive energy. Heritage analysis shows that energy access determines whether societies thrive or suffer. Looking across every nation on Earth, we see that high-energy societies are high-prosperity societies, while low-energy countries remain trapped in poverty.

Jack Spencer, senior research fellow for Energy and Environmental Policy, Center for Energy, Climate, and Environment at The Heritage Foundation

Paris Agreement Withdrawal

Trump issued executive order, “Putting America First in International Environmental Agreements,” which withdraws the United States from all commitments, including the Paris Agreement, under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

The order directs the U.S. United Nations ambassador to immediately submit notification that the U.S. is withdrawing from the Paris Agreement on climate change.  It goes on to withdraw the U.S. from any agreement associated with the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, ends the U.S. International Climate Finance Plan, and directs federal agency heads to review, identify and stop any activities associated with the global warming agenda. 

The Heritage Foundation has consistently argued for withdrawing from these commitments for the benefit of every American family and business—and the rest of the world.  As academic research shows, alarmist rhetoric around global warming is overblown while the economic consequences of global warming policies are real and growing.  This is critical step to modernizing America’s energy and environmental policy.  

Though the agreement never made good economic or environmental sense, China’s decision to virtually abandon the pact exacerbated these underlying issues.  The Biden administration’s obsession with the global warming agenda has been an unmitigated disaster by any measure.  It has caused inflationreduced consumer choiceempowered America’s strategic competitors, increased the threat of electricity blackouts,, chilled investment in new energy infrastructure, and left Americans less prepared to deal with natural disasters. 

The foundation for much of this bad policy is America’s participation in international environmental agreements that put premium on environmental virtue signaling at the expense of America’s economy and world standing.  This executive order changes that.

Jack Spencer, senior research fellow for Energy and Environmental Policy, Center for Energy, Climate, and Environment at The Heritage Foundation

Stopping the Abuse of the Government’s Power

In his executive order, “Ending the Weaponization of the Federal Government,” Trump at long last sets out the policy of the United States “to correct misconduct by the Federal Government related to the weaponization of law enforcement and the weaponization of the Intelligence Community.”

The executive sets out an unfortunately accurate summary of that misuse over the past four years:

The American people have witnessed the previous administration engage in a systematic campaign against its perceived political opponents, weaponizing the legal force of numerous Federal law enforcement agencies and the Intelligence Community against those perceived political opponents in the form of investigations, prosecutions, civil enforcement actions, and other related actions [that were] oriented more toward inflicting political pain than toward pursuing actual justice or legitimate governmental objectives.

Those activities were “inconsistent with the Constitution and/or the laws of the United States, including those activities directed at parents protesting at school board meetings, Americans who spoke out against the previous administration’s actions, and other Americans who were simply exercising constitutionally protected rights.”

In fact, it was a “third-world weaponization of prosecutorial power to upend the democratic process.” As just one example, the executive order points out that while the Justice Department “ruthlessly” prosecuted the 1,500 Jan. 6 defendants, it “simultaneously dropped nearly all cases against BLM rioters.” It was unequal justice under the law.

The attorney general is directed to review the activities of executive branch “departments and agencies exercising civil or criminal enforcement authority,” and the director of intelligence is to undertake a similar review of all intelligence agencies, for any conduct over the past four years “contrary to the purposes and policies of this order.” They must submit a report to the president and federal agencies are ordered to preserve all documents of their activities.

More information on the weaponization of the federal government can be seen here: https://www.heritage.org/weaponization-government

Hans von Spakovsky, manager of the Election Law Reform Initiative and a senior legal fellow with the Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation

Rescinding Biden EOs on gender identity, DEI, and more

In his executive order, “Initial Rescissions of Harmful Executive Orders and Actions,” President Donald Trump revoked 67 executive orders issued by his predecessor and 11 “Presidential” memoranda. 

They cover everything from “gender identity,” the “climate crisis,” and “diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility” to withdrawing areas of the country from “oil or gas leasing,” rescinding Cuba’s designation as a “state sponsor of terrorism,” and weakening enforcement of our immigration laws.

In revoking these orders and memoranda, Trump says that the Biden administration “embedded deeply unpopular, inflationary, illegal, and radical practices within every agency and office of the Federal Government.” 

The “injection” of DEI “into our institutions has corrupted them by replacing hard work, merit, and equality with a divisive and dangerous preferential hierarchy.” On immigration, Trump says Biden’s orders opened “the borders” and “endangered the American people.” The orders on the climate amounted to “extremism” that “exploded inflation and overburdened businesses with regulations.”

Executive orders are not the legal equivalent of laws passed by Congress. They are orders from the president as the chief executive directing the behavior and actions of federal agencies and employees in carrying out their responsibilities under those laws and the duties of the president as the commander in chief.

—Hans von Spakovsky, manager of the Election Law Reform Initiative and a senior legal fellow with the Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation

‘Total and Efficient Enforcement’ of Immigration Laws

President Donald Trump on Monday issued an executive order, “Protecting the American People Against Invasion,” to achieve “total and efficient enforcement” of immigration laws against all inadmissible and removable aliens.

The order directs the attorney general and secretary of Homeland Security to establish Homeland Security task forces in all 50 states to provide logistics, intelligence, and operational support to end the presence of criminal cartels, foreign gangs, transnational criminal organizations, and human smuggling and trafficking networks throughout the U.S.

The order directs a long list of tools to be used to enforce immigration laws, including alien registration, visa sanctions, and incentives to self-deport. It also requires a pause and analysis of contracts and grants given to nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) that hav\e facilitated mass migration, including termination and claw back authority, if appropriate.

Heritage has consistently called for a return to fully enforcing immigration laws and defunding the NGOs that have been enriched for implementing mass illegal immigration to, and throughout, the U.S.

Lora Ries, director of Border Security and Immigration Center at The Heritage Foundation

Undoing Biden’s Illicit ‘Promoting Access to Voting’

Among the many prior “illegal and radical” executive orders of Biden that his successor, President Donald Trump, revoked on the latter’s first day in office in his “Initial Rescissions of Harmful Executive Orders and Actions” was Executive Order 14019 (March 7, 2021). That EO, which Biden misleadingly titled “Promoting Access to Voting,” should have been titled “Illegally Using the Federal Government to Manipulate Election Outcomes for the Democratic Party.”

Biden’s EO ordered federal agencies and federal employees to implement a get-out-the-vote operation using government resources and taxpayer funding that was clearly intended to benefit his political party. He had no constitutional or statutory authority to engage in such reprehensible actions and, in fact, spending federal funds on such activity violated federal law. 

Biden’s Justice Department used its resources in court to fight all attempts to get the administration to disclose what it was actually doing and to stop its misbehavior.

More information about this attempted election interference can be found at The Heritage Foundation, “Biden Executive Order 14019: Unlawful interference in State Election Administration,” and at The Daily Signal, “Latest Federal Takeover of Elections Violates Federal Law.”  

The new administration should ensure that all information hidden by the Biden administration is now publicly disclosed.

—Hans von Spakovsky, manager of the Election Law Reform Initiative and a senior legal fellow with the Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation

[more]

The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now



Don't Forget to Recommend
and Follow us at our

W3P Homepage