And once again President Trump is doing exactly what he said he would do during the 2016 campaign.
The very next day after rolling out a major infrastructure plan the White House promptly announced that the President’s fourth-quarter earnings salary of $100k will be going to rebuilding what Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders called ‘our crumbling infrastructure.”
Elaine Chao, who is the Transportation Secretary, and also Mitch McConnell’s wife, was on hand to accept President Trump’s generous donation in the press briefing room on behalf of her department.
Although the president’s donation is nothing compared to what he wants to spend on infrastructure in the coming years it’s still a lot more than any other past president has ever given, especially Democrat presidents in recent past. This donation will go towards the proposed $21 billion infrastructure spending proposal for the fiscal year 2019 which was announced on Monday. But this is only a small part of a proposed larger spending plan that would dedicate $200 billion to infrastructure over the next decade.
Here is more on the proposed Infrastructure spending bill via USA Today:
“President Trump will unveil his long-awaited infrastructure proposal Monday to shift $200 billion over the next decade from other federal programs to pave the way for $1.5 trillion for roads, bridges, waterways and railways.
Trump’s approach is to let Congress negotiate the details. His four objectives are to stimulate new investment, streamline federal permitting, invest in rural projects and improve the workforce, according to four senior administration officials who briefed reporters Saturday.
Spurring construction is broadly popular. But critics are already calling Trump’s approach “fake” and a “scam” for its lack of new revenue and because of its reliance on funding from local governments and private investors.
“This fake proposal will not address the serious infrastructure needs facing this country, so our potholed roads will get worse, our bridges and transit systems will become more dangerous, and our tolls will become higher,” Rep. Peter DeFazio of Oregon, the top Democrat on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, said in a Saturday radio address.
Trump’s proposal is built on top of existing construction programs with an eye toward encouraging greater local investment, according to senior administration officials. Polls show people would prefer to have projects determined locally, rather than sending their money to Washington, according to the officials.
More about President Trump and infrastructure:
Trump State of the Union: “There has never been a better time to start living the American dream”
States with the riskiest roads, bridges and dams
Dynamic tolls: How highways can charge $40 for driving just 10 miles
Trump and members of his Cabinet will tour the country to point out where construction is needed — and where admirable projects have been accomplished, according to senior administration officials.
A poll administration officials cited from September found 84% of Americans think the country needs infrastructure investment. The Harvard CAPS-Harris poll surveyed 2,177 registered voters.
Groups such as the National Association of Counties, the National Conference of State Legislatures and the U.S. Conference of Mayors issued a joint statement Thursday welcoming Trump’s focus on infrastructure.
Trump’s program will be debated by six committees in the House and five in the Senate. The administration has been conferring with lawmakers since March 2017 on the program, holding 40 meetings with caucuses or other groups to gauge priorities and get feedback, according to a senior administration official.
Congress could still develop its own funding. Trump is open to new sources of revenue, according to senior administration officials.
In 2015, lawmakers patched $70 billion from sources such as a Federal Reserve surplus, Customs and Border Protection fees and the sale of part of the strategic petroleum reserve in order to provide $305 billion for the last five-year highway bill.
The gas tax traditionally funded the highway trust fund. But the tax has remained 18.4 cents per gallon since 1993, and it hasn’t kept pace with inflation as cars became more fuel-efficient.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, an influential advocacy group for businesses, proposed in January raising the gas tax 5 cents each year for five years to generate $394 billion over a decade.
“It’s the simplest, fairest and most effective way to raise the money we need for roads, bridges and transit,” Chamber CEO Tom Donohue said.
Under Trump’s budget, the $200 billion in federal funding will be taken from other programs that are cut or eliminated, according to senior administration officials. The precise trade-offs aren’t designated.
Trump’s priorities include $100 billion for incentive funding to match local investments; $50 billion for rural projects distributed as block grants to governors; $20 billion for expanding loan programs and private bonds for roads, waterways and railways; $20 billion for transformative projects with a vision for the future; and $10 billion for federal building projects.
The federal government traditionally provided 80% of funding for qualified highway construction. But Trump’s incentive funding is projected to provide 10% or 20% of a project’s cost to generate $500 billion to $1 trillion in total investment, according to senior administration officials. The loan programs could generate 40 times the federal investment, officials said.
While the federal share would fall, senior administration officials said the change will reduce the reliance on the federal government for a broader variety of worthy projects. Only 28% of all highway construction and only 4% of water projects nationwide get federal funding, the officials said.
Local matching funds could come from sales or property taxes, or user fees. The city of Los Angeles adopted a sales-tax referendum in November 2016 to generate $120 billion over 40 years for infrastructure, which administration officials said could serve as an example for others.
Tolls would be one way to spur private investment in roads or bridges. But they wouldn’t be financially justifiable everywhere.
“This is one of the tools in the toolbox,” Pat Jones, CEO of the International Bridge, Tunnel and Turnpike Association, said before Trump unveiled his plan. “We believe we need an approach to infrastructure that says, ‘all of the above.’ ”
But shifting the financial burden onto states and local governments, and to private groups, is what drew criticism.
“This is not a real infrastructure plan — it’s simply another scam, an attempt by this administration to privatize critical government functions, and create windfalls for their buddies on Wall Street,” DeFazio said.
Other aspects of Trump’s proposal include:
•Putting a single federal agency in charge of permitting for each construction project, such as the Transportation Department for a highway or the Army Corps of Engineers for a water project. The single review could stop second-guessing and delays from other agencies.
•Giving governors rural grants for greater local control over how money is spent on projects such as broadband.
•Removing training obstacles for workers who don’t attend four-year colleges. The proposal would expand eligibility for Pell grants and allow the transfer of professional licenses from part of the country to another.”
In addition, the White House is saying this spending program would lead to an investment of over $1.5 trillion on roads, bridges, waterways, and railways. Which is something our nation is so lacking at this moment.
Since he took office Donald Trump has donated all his salary back to the US. The National Park Service, The Department of Education and the Department of Health and Human Services. Not bad considering the current Democrat favorite for 2020, former Vice President Joe Biden, who is no pauper himself increased his charitable donations from 1.5 percent of his income back in 2012 to a whopping 1.87 percent in 2016. But I’m sure since President Trump did this it will never be enough and the left will still find something to criticize him about.
Join the conversation
Dem Candidate Pushing ‘Irresponsible Breeder’ Tax On Certain Parents Because Of ‘Privilege’
Scott Wallace is a multimillionaire running in Pennsylvania’s 1st Congressional District against current incumbent Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (PA-R). Considered an elite, even amongst the wealthy, he boasts a net worth of between $127 million and $309 million, according to his financial disclosure statement. This would make him the third-richest member of Congress if he were elected to the House today.
From a hardline leftist pedigree, his grandfather was Henry Wallace, the “New Deal visionary” and one-time vice president under former President Franklin D. Roosevelt. His wealth is inherited, stemming from a seed company his grandfather founded that was purchased by DuPont for $10 billion in the 1990s, along with a large number of stocks with the largest being DowDuPont.
His campaign is largely self funded with Wallace claiming he is “putting a significant amount of my own assets into this because this is the most important thing I can imagine doing for America at this point in my life — this is a very expensive district to run in, but it is crucial in the Democrats’ efforts to retake the House.”
But just why this is so incredibly important to Wallace goes beyond the typical party lines of Republican and Democrat. Receiving endorsements from both Planned Parenthood and the National Organization for Women (NOW), Wallace is a population control zealot who believes families who choose to have more than two children are “irresponsible breeders” and should be taxed. Wallace has donated nearly $7 million dollars to various population control groups over the past 20 years, with the majority going through his own Wallace Global Fund. In addition to its efforts towards population control, the foundation has also reportedly donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to anti-Israel groups that support a boycott of the Jewish State.
Fox News reports:
“Zero Population Growth (ZPG) was among the organizations that received the money from the fund. According to public records, it received $420,000 between 1997 and 2003.
The group, shortly after being founded in 1968, released a brochure advocating abortion to stabilize population growth and claimed that “no responsible family should have more than two children.” To deal with larger families, it also called for families to be “taxed to the hilt” for “irresponsible breeding.”
It also blamed the overpopulation on the ‘white middle-class’ that ‘use up more than their share of resources and do more than their share of polluting‘ and urged them to ‘voluntarily limit their families to two children.’
Paul Ehrlich, who co-founded the ZPG, once called abortion “a highly effective weapon in the armory of population control.” The goal of the organization, which changed its name to Population Connection in 2002, has remained the same since its inception, arguing that the world needs to contain population growth with particular emphasis on American families.
The organization’s political arm, Population Connection Action Fund, publicly endorsed Wallace for Congress, saying his support for their cause is “exactly the kind of dedication we need in Congress.”
Wallace’s fund also gave $20,000 in 2010 to the Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy (CASSE), a group that sees the economic growth as undesirable and instead supports an economy with ‘stable or mildly fluctuating levels’ and a society where birth rates equal death rates.
The organization openly supports zero population growth and its executive board member, Herman Daly, advocated issuing reproduction licenses, allowing women to have only two children unless they buy the license for more children from other women. Daly called it the ‘best plan yet offered’ to limit population growth.”
The group advocates strongly for abortion and along with taxing families “to the hilt” for having more than two children, as noted in a Yale Law School publication about the “voices that shaped the abortion debate before the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court’s ruling.”
The group advocates that –
- That no responsible family should have more than two children. Any family wanting to care for more than two children should adopt further children. Adopting children does not increase the population.
- All methods of birth control, including legalized abortion, should be freely available—and at no cost in poverty cases.
- Irresponsible people who have more than two children should be taxed to the hilt for the privilege of irresponsible breeding.
Fox News continued:
Zoe Wilson-Meyer, communications director for Wallace’s campaign, didn’t answer Fox News’ questions on whether Wallace still supports the ideas expressed by the groups.
“The Wallace Global Fund has for decades been a leader in helping women gain access to family planning. Former Co-Chair Scott Wallace is proud of the work of grantees like Planned Parenthood in empowering women and protecting reproductive rights and will stand up for Pennsylvania women,” she said in an email.
“In Washington, Brian Fitzpatrick voted to defund Planned Parenthood and supports Donald Trump’s effort to take away a woman’s right to choose,” she added.
Largely reminiscent of Nazi Germany who exercised eugenics to its full and most horrific potential, this policy of so-called “irresponsible breeders” also resembles the one-child policy from China that saw forced abortions or other forced invasive birth control procedures. Yet eugenics practices had their roots in America as well. American newspapers frequently offered praise for eugenics just prior to WWII and The Holocaust …. that is until Adolf Hitler revealed the true horrors of what eugenics really looked like. They avoided the subject for decades thereafter.
Nine out of ten eugenicists in the 20th Century were also Progressives or Socialists, and the most central component to the eugenic creed is the desire to engineer and centrally plan human reproduction, weeding out the unwanted or undesirable, according to a report on eugenics by PBS.
Yet where does that end? Who determines who is undesirable? Is it the unborn child conceived at an inconvenient time? The elderly mother? The child with cerebral palsy? Those with PTSD? Autism? Blue eyes? White skin? You cannot get to genocide without first visiting identity politics and they say the propagandist’s job is to effectively make the people forget his “enemy” is, in fact, a human being just as he is. It seems we never really do learn from history, do we?
Elected Democrat Official Who Viciously Attacked Veteran Just Learned Her Fate
This heated exchange just got personal!
Earlier this week it was reported that Patricia Edmonson, who is the vice chair of the Palm Beach Soil and Water Conservation District, has now had to resign after she came under fire for her vulgar comments on Facebook against a combat veteran over his support for President Donald Trump. The resignation came after the chairman of the Republican Party of Palm Beach County demanded Edmonson’s resignation over the comments.
Palm Beach Post reported:
“The vice chair of a little-known environmental panel resigned Wednesday after she came under fire for cursing at a U.S. Army veteran, calling him a traitor and speaking ill of fallen veterans in a Facebook chat earlier this month.
Patricia “Pat” Edmonson, who until Wednesday afternoon served on the Palm Beach Soil and Water Conservation District, and U.S. Army veteran James Plowman, who lives in North Carolina, didn’t know each other before they met in cyberspace through a discussion on Facebook on July 16.
But their conversation turned extremely ugly — and has gone viral.
The two sparred over a Facebook post by another user regarding President Donald Trump’s meeting with Vladimir Putin. After Plowman mentioned the years he spent in combat, Edmonson, wrote using an expletive, “—— you, traitor.”
Edmonson then launched into a vitriolic tirade of posts. “Do your dead brothers ever visit your dreams and ask you why you’ve turned your back on them?” she wrote. She also asked:“Do you smell the rotting flesh of those you’ve betrayed?”
Reached on Wednesday, Plowman said he isn’t concerned about being called a traitor. That’s comical to him, he said. But the comments she made about soldiers killed in battle “just can’t be forgiven,” Plowman said.
“That’s just something I’m not going to even look at forgiving. It’s just not a place she should have ever went,” he said.
The posts have not gone unnoticed and have circulated through Palm Beach County and beyond.
Michael Barnett, the chair of the Palm Beach County GOP, publicly called for Edmonson, a Democrat, to resign from the conservation district’s governing board. Rob Long, who sat on the board with Edmonson, also called for her resignation. Long said her seat will either be filled through an appointment or a special election.
On Plowman’s Facebook page, Edmonson wrote that she appreciated Plowman’s service to the country and apologized for “the inappropriate choice of language” by calling him a “traitor.”
“My words were spoken as a private citizen, not in any professional or public capacity and should be treated accordingly,” she wrote. She also added her role in the exchange wasn’t “her finest hour” and she “let my Trump hate get the best of me and said some truly hurtful things.”
In an email to The Post, Edmonson said: “Given the enormity of the reaction to my indefensible Facebook comments to CSM Plowman, I am submitting my resignation as Vice Chair of the PB Soil & Water Conservation District. It has been an honor to serve with my colleagues on the District and to serve the people of Palm Beach County. However, I cannot allow collateral damage from my actions to harm the District, its employees, or the outstanding work done by the District.”
I have personally apologized to CSM Plowman for my highly offensive remarks. I have no defense for the comments made to one person on a social media platform at a specific point in time. My comments have been globalized to assert that they represent my feelings towards veterans and the military; which they do not. My comments have been politicized by others to further their own agendas. Do my foolish and highly regrettable comments rise to the level of receiving death threats, does the punishment fit the crime? I will leave that question to wiser minds than mine. I made a terrible mistake; I apologized to the person I wronged.”
Edmonson was elected to the Palm Beach Soil and Water Conservation District in 2016 and won a new term in June when she ran again but unopposed.
The Palm Beach Soil & Water Conservation District, based in Royal Palm Beach, is a state government division. It does not have taxing authority, nor does it levy bonds or enforce land use laws. Its mission is to work with “local businesses and agencies to provide conservation services throughout Palm Beach County.” It’s governed by an elected, five-member board of supervisors that serve without pay.
The district addressed Edmonson’s comments on its Facebook page Tuesday saying views expressed by members of the governing board in “ABSOLUTELY NO WAY” reflect that of the rest of the board or the employees.
But the fallout continued.
A consulting company that lists Edmonson as an officer has received $39,000 from Jim Bonfiglio’s Democratic campaign for state House District 89, according to Florida Division of Elections reports. Bonfiglio took to Facebook on Tuesday to announce that his campaign has severed ties with Edmondson.
“Ms. Edmonson’s words do not reflect my views or the views of my campaign. She exhibited a severe lapse in judgment, to say the least. Although I count her as a friend, Pat is no longer associated with my campaign in any way,” he wrote.”
Edmonson had also been working on the campaign of Jim Bonfiglio, who is, of course, a Democratic candidate for the Florida House of Representatives, but he swiftly kicked her off his campaign.
Her vacant seat will now be filled through appointment or a special election.
Let’s be honest here. This woman may regret that she lost her temper and was caught. She let her true feelings out and because of this has possibly lost whatever career in politics she had aspired to have. But no need to worry, I am sure she can still salvage her political career by moving to Southern California and getting a job with Maxine Waters. I’m sure she would be considered a superstar there and would go far.
Like Us on Facebook
First Video of Latest Trump Star Vandal Swinging Pickaxe Shows What Happened – Spread Like Wildfire
TMZ is now reporting that the LAPD has released the first video and has made an arrest in connection with...
Dem Candidate Pushing ‘Irresponsible Breeder’ Tax On Certain Parents Because Of ‘Privilege’
Scott Wallace is a multimillionaire running in Pennsylvania’s 1st Congressional District against current incumbent Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (PA-R). Considered an...
McDonald’s Worker Bodyslams Female Customer Over A Milkshake And Free Drink
It seemed more like Burger King with all those 'Whoppers' delivered!
Trump Issued Major Warning: ‘We Will Look Into Discriminatory and Illegal Practice’ – It’s On!
Huge problems and everyone needs to know!
Elected Democrat Official Who Viciously Attacked Veteran Just Learned Her Fate
This heated exchange just got personal!