Terrifying Immigration Numbers, and Court Decision

Hundreds of Migrants Pitch Tents on Paris Streets as Calais Camp Shuts

(REUTERS) – The number of migrants sleeping rough on the streets of Paris has risen by at least a third since the start of the week when the “Jungle” shanty town in Calais was evacuated, officials said on Friday.

Along the bustling boulevards and a canal in a northeastern corner of Paris, hundreds of tents have been pitched by migrants – mostly Africans who say they are from Sudan – with cardboard on the ground to try and insulate them from the autumn chill.

While the presence of migrants there is not new, it has grown substantially this week, Colombe Brossel, Paris deputy mayor in charge of security issues, told Reuters.

“We have seen a big increase since the start of the week. Last night, our teams counted 40 to 50 new tents there in two days,” Brossel said, adding there was now a total of 700 to 750.

This means there are some 2,000-2,500 sleeping in the area, up from around 1,500 a few days before, she said.

“It’s not a huge explosion in numbers but there is a clear increase,” she said. “Some of them come from Calais, others from other places.”

 migrants Paris JOEL SAGET/AFP/Getty

After years as serving as an illegal base camp for migrants trying to get to Britain, the “Jungle” at Calais was finally bulldozed this week and the more than 6,000 residents of the ramshackle camp near the English channel were relocated to shelters around France. More here.

Sessions: ‘Critical alert,’ 817,740 illegals crossed last year

In a bid to put the issue of illegal immigration back into the presidential debate, outspoken critic Sen. Jeff Sessions on Monday issued a “Critical Alert” warning of a potentially historic surge of over the border.

“We are simply overwhelmed,” his statement said. In it he estimated the Fiscal Year 2016 illegal crossings at 817,740.

“There is a crisis at our southwest border — one that in many ways exceeds the crisis we saw just two years ago, one that further undermines the integrity of our immigration system, but one that the most of the media has elected to ignore,” said Sessions, an advisor to Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump.

  • U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is currently detaining more than 40,000 aliens, with internal predictions indicating that the number could reach 47,000 in the coming months.
  • In fiscal 2016, the U.S. Border Patrol apprehended 408,870 illegal aliens at the southern border; a number 23 percent higher than in fiscal 2015.
  • Brandon Judd, president of the National Border Patrol Council, was quoted as saying just half of illegals are caught crossing the border.
  • Calculating illegal entries based on that formula, 408,870 illegal aliens evaded detection in fiscal 2016, for a total of approximately 817,740 illegal entries into the United States last year.

Sessions said the border crisis demands a new president and approach to reforming immigration starting with a closed border.

*****

In part from Breitbart: Border Patrol Agent and NBPC President Brandon Judd spoke exclusively with Breitbart Texas and condemned the leadership of the Border Patrol’s parent agency, Customs and Border Protection (CBP), for allegedly “keeping this information secret” ahead of the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

“We are at breaking point. We have the highest number of illegal aliens in custody in history in Border Patrol’s RGV Sector and this information has been kept from the American public,” said Agent Judd. “The talk of amnesty has once again created pull factors and encouraged people from all over the world to cross Mexico and then cross our porous southern border to illegally enter the U.S. We are simply overwhelmed.” (See CBP’s response below.)

Agent Judd told Breitbart Texas that Americans should vote their conscience, but they should do so with all of the information available. “This is an issue of the federal government restricting crucial information from the public ahead of a presidential election and it is unacceptable. Americans deserve to know the truth. Our Border Patrol agents deserve for Americans to know what they are really facing. Too many Border Patrol agents have given their lives and left loved ones to grieve for CBP leadership to play these types of political games ahead of such an impactful election.”

Agent Cabrera said CBP were in fact concealing the gravity of the current border crisis. “One side in this coming election is downplaying illegal immigration and concealing this information only serves to help that agenda,” said Agent Cabrera.

Breitbart Texas reached out to the RGV Sector PIO for the Border Patrol and did not receive a response, though not much time was given to the agency. (See update below. A strong denial of the agents’ claims was issued by CBP to Breitbart Texas after publication.)

Historically, CBP, Border Patrol’s parent agency, has had to correct false assertions and denials. Perhaps the most glaring example occurred in June 2014 when an official CBP Twitter account directly accused this reporter of publishing a false report, only to later admit the report was accurate and true.

CBP has released numbers indicating near-record apprehensions; however, the assertions from the agents in the NBPC pertain to people who illegally entered the U.S. and are currently in custody in Border Patrol facilities. Agent Judd stated, “There is a significant difference between apprehension numbers and numbers in custody in our facilities. These record numbers in custody indicate that these are people who are not voluntarily returning. This indicates that these people will, under current policy, be released into our communities and given amnesty. This record number of people currently in detention is significant because the RGV Sector is dealing with the Gulf and Los Zetas cartels. This means our agents are busy babysitting record numbers in facilities instead of patrolling the border and stopping these murderers, kidnappers, and drug smugglers.” More here.

*****

Judge rebukes administration over few admissions for Syrian Christian refugees

FNC: A federal judge has rebuked the Obama administration over the lack of Syrian Christians being admitted from the war-zone, calling it a “perplexing discrepancy” that only 56 of 11,000 Syrian refugees to the U.S. in fiscal 2016 were Christian.

The rebuke came in a Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals opinion on a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by The Heartland Alliance’s National Immigrant Justice Center – a liberal human rights group that advocates for immigrants and asylum-seekers — seeking information on certain terror groups.

As first reported by attorney and former FEC member Hans von Spakovsky for The Daily Signal, while the court found in favor of the government, Judge Daniel Manion addressed the refugee issue and took aim at the Obama administration over how few Christians had been admitted to the U.S.

“It is well‐documented that refugees to the United States are not representative of that war‐torn area of the world. Perhaps 10 percent of the population of Syria is Christian, and yet less than one‐half of one percent of Syrian refugees admitted to the United States this year are Christian,” he wrote.

According to government figures, of the almost 11,000 Syrian refugees admitted to the United States in fiscal 2016, only 56 were Christian.

RELATED: ‘GROSS INJUSTICE’: OF 10,000 SYRIAN REFUGEES TO THE US, 56 ARE CHRISTIAN

“To date, there has not been a good explanation for this perplexing discrepancy,” Manion noted.

The numbers are disproportionate to the Christian population in Syria, estimated last year by the U.S. government to make up roughly 10 percent of the population. Since the outbreak of civil war in 2011, it is estimated that between 500,000 and 1 million Christians have fled the country, while many have been targeted and slaughtered by the Islamic State.

Manion qualified his remarks by saying that his point “is not to suggest that any refugee group is more or less welcome: quite the contrary” but warned the Obama administration against failing to provide states with enough data on the people coming in.

In the case, the NIJC was requesting the identities of Tier III terrorist organizations, which are not publicly available. The administration argued that Tier III terrorist organizations “tend to be groups about which the U.S. government does not have good intelligence, making it essential that [DHS] be able to obtain information about them during screening interviews that are as focused and complete as possible.”

Manion noted that potential ties to a Tier III organization like a Christian militia may be why the government is not letting in as many Christians, but that it was impossible to tell since the information is not publicly available.

“It is at least possible that incidental affiliation with some Christian militia could lead an immigration officer to deny entry to Syrians on this basis. That would be a dubious consequence,” he wrote.

A State Department spokesperson told FoxNews.com in September that religion was only one of many factors used in determining a refugee’s eligibility to enter the United States.

WikiLeaks: Hillary/Podesta and Army Discussions Include Destroy GOP

*****

Working document:

To: Interested parties

RE: DNC Structure

 

 

STRUCTURE

I would suggest you consider two staffing structures for the DNC:

  1. CEO onlyIf this is the chosen structure, I would recommend finding a new CEO.
  2. Under this scenario, the CEO would be accountable for all functions of the DNC—money, general election, and party/convention affairs. She or he would need to hire a General Election Director to help with general election planning and programs, but would remain ultimately accountable to the Chair for everything in the building.
  3. CEO and General Election DirectorI would then suggest hiring a General Election Director, who would report directly to the Chair on all general election matters (a job scope is attached), including all budgeting, spending, and cash flow for the joint fundraising committee with the campaign. This would be “your person” at the DNC and she or he would work directly with your campaign manager on organizing a general election strategy and getting battleground state parties and the DNC up to snuff. This person would be the final decision maker at the DNC on how the joint committee money is spent and would do so in coordination with your campaign.
  4. In this scenario, I would suggest keeping Amy Dacey as CEO and make her responsible for all party affairs and meetings, the convention, and basic DNC operations (compliance, the building, etc). I suggest keeping Amy because she is already familiar with the rhythm and functions of the DNC, such as the Rules and Bylaws process, the quarterly party meetings, and the convention. These functions are important to the DNC as an institution, especially to the DNC members, but they aren’t particularly important to you if you decide to run. Keeping Amy at the DNC would also allow White House to have someone in the building to look after their needs, such as polling.

Recommendation: I would recommend the second option, since party affairs and the convention are incredibly time consuming and would probably distract from general election planning (i.e. you don’t want the person in charge of figuring out how to win Florida and Ohio taking a week to look at convention sites). You also don’t want the politics of the DNC itself to disrupt or derail your general election effort.

 

STAFFING OPTIONS

Options for Chair

  • Stephanie Shriock, President of EMILY’s List
  • Jennifer Granholm, former Governor of Michigan
  • Ted Strickland, former Governor of Ohio
  • NEED OTHER OPTIONS

CEO or General Election Director

  • Kelly Ward, current Executive Director of DCCC
  • Mitch Stewart, 270 Strategies, former Battleground States Director for OFA 12
  • Jeremy Bird, 270 Strategies, former Field Director for OFA 12
  • Marlon Marshall, former Dep. Field Director for OFA 2012
  • Buffy Wicks, current ED of Priorities, USA

Other key staff:

  • Finance Director: recommend keeping Jordan Kaplan
  • Data and Technology Director: recommend keeping Andrew Brown
  • Communications and Research: recommend assessment; potentially bring in some enhanced research capacity
  • Voter protection director: recommend a new Voter Protection Director
  • Political Director: recommend a new Political Director

TIMING

I would suggest aiming to have a General Election Director in place by the beginning of December, so he or she can attend immediately to some urgent voter protection and research matters. The role could be announced at the December Executive Committee meeting.

A new Chair is slightly less urgent in my opinion. I would certainly make the change by the February DNC meeting, but would probably defer to the White House on what timing they prefer.

  • Executive Committee    December 5-6, Hollywood, FL

 

  • Full Meeting                      Week of Feb 18 (tent), Washington, DC

General Election Director

Job Scope

  • General election analytics and planning
    1. Analytics and polling in each battleground state to identify the actual battleground map
    2. Identify off year-work (probably voter registration) that should be done to support the 2016 strategy
    3. Start creating turnout and support models for the general election
  • General election data hygiene and systems
    1. Analytics capability for matched data (user capacity, candidate confidentiality)
    2. VAN/NGP technical updates
    3. Update key tools: make a plan, commit to vote, voter registration, polling place look up, etc.
    4. Coordination with campaigns on who is completing what engineering projects; ensuring that all systems will be compatible in the general election
  • Opposition research
    1. Identify next steps on opposition research
    2. Ensure all collection and record request work has been completed
    3. Setting up a permanent tracking structure (whether that involves purchasing tracking or doing it in house)
  • Technology and digital
      1. Update key online GOTV tools
      2. Ensure updates to the voter file are completed on time
      3. Ensure all DNC data systems can synch perfectly with the campaign
  • Complete all necessary updates to internal database tools like voter protection incident tracking
    1.  
  • Coordination with allies
    1. Coordination on state ballot referenda
    2. Aligning around general election goals/plan/targeting/best practices
    3. Ensuring data systems will be compatible, where possible
  • Identifying staff for general election field and state organizations

 

    1.  
  • Ironing out state party operational issues
    1. Helping
    2. Transfer down MOUs for battleground states completed in the off year
      1. Indemnification
      2. Approval of direct mail
      3. Administrative overhead
      4. Using SPP for accountability re: the items above?
    3. Aligning state party staff with critical projects (voter protection, registration, etc)
  • Joint fundraising account money management and supervision

 

  • Voter registration projects in battleground states (where needed)
      1. Directly oversee development of any state strategy
      2. Hire project leader
      3. Oversee progress to goals
  • Oversee budget for the program
    1.  
  • Coordination with Voting Rights Trust on litigation
  • Florida
  • North Carolina
  • Wisconsin
  • Ohio
  • Nevada (Reid coordination)
  • Michigan?
    1.  
  • Coordination with voter protection ballot referenda program
    1. Ohio (State Director and team)
    2. Florida (State Director and team)
    3. Michigan?
    4. Colorado?
    5. Missouri?
    6. Arizona?
  • Political and research work for voter protection
    1. State FOIA project
    2. Plaintiff recruitment
    3. Earned media and political advocacy management (esp. Florida)
    4. Coordinating with Perkins Coie staff on state legislative threat monitoring
      1. Voting law changes
      2. Electoral vote allocations (esp PA and WI)

 

*****

To: Interested parties

Re: Threat assessment

 

PRIMARY ELECTION

  • Message
    1. Higher concerns
      1. Authenticity
        1. Emily’s List: “Panelists have about whether HRC is personally trustworthy: tells the truth, levels with people, is sincere in her motivations”.
      2. “Relatability”
        1. Emily’s List: “When voters think about HRC’s positives, they do not instinctively think about what she cares about…when pressed panelists say they do not necessarily think of HRC as “relatable” and tend to describe her personally as more ‘cold’ than ‘warm’”. But respondents are quick to say they do not have a feel HRC as a person. They are intrigued by details like ‘she shops at Target’”.
        2. Emily’s List: “The focus groups make clear, however, that winning the voters’ trust on the economy is not only a matter of having a plan. A successful candidate must also show that s/he personally understands the struggles and concerns voters experience in today’s economy and that s/he is on their side”
      3. Not a clear/credible vision, including clarity on Obama
        1. Emily’s List: “It will be essential for her to articulate a more specific economic agenda that translates these normative values and broad policy directions into a credible plan of action.
      4. Wall Street/elitism
        1. Policy and rhetoric on Wall Street (Emily’s List: 22% “Hillary Clinton won’t stand up to the big banks”)
        2. Personal income and finances
        3. Foundation fundraising and business connections
        4. Campaign finance; superpac affiliation
      5. How to respond to superpac attacks
        1. Do you need to respond?
        2. How do you respond when there is no opponent?
        3. Role of outside groups vs. campaign
    2. Lower concerns
      1. Benghazi (only because of upcoming hearings)
        1. Emily’s List: “Benhgazi raises questions about HRC that relate more to lingering questions about her candor than about the event itself. Voters do not know the details of the incident (other than the fatal outcome) and are not especially eager to learn all the complicated facts…Benghazi can serve as a proxy character issue”.
      2. Immigration
        1. Need to be firm and unequivocal
        2. Will there be a compromise that is unpopular with Hispanics?
      3. Use of military force: remains very unpopular with Democrats
        1. Need Simas numbers
      4. Grand bargain: what if Obama cuts a budget deal that’s unpopular with Democrats?

 

  • Timing
    1. Oxygen for competitors
      1. Waiting too long gives competitors time to get the media spotlight and build credibility
      2. Risk of a reactionary launch
    2. Lack of infrastructure to manage GOP attacks in Q1 and Q2
    3. Losing talent to other campaigns/jobs
      1. People will start to accept other jobs after Thanksgiving
      2. New DCCC and DSCC leadership and senior staffs; many attractive Senate and House races
    4. Losing time on technology
      1. Long term projects like mobile canvassing tools, volunteer engagement ap, etc.
    5. Fundraising opportunity cost: losing time in Q2
  • Geography
    1. Iowa
      1. Starting out on the right foot will be key to ice out the competition. This could be challenging if opponents get in early and pick up any steam.
      2. Potential for caucus goes to want to “make it a race” if there’s a perception that the campaign is not fully invested. Primary opponents will always be more accessible and exciting to the left no matter what.
    2. South Carolina and early southern primary states: if there’s an African American primary opponent
  • Demography
    1. African Americas (if there’s an African American primary opponent)
    2. The 2008 Obama primary coalition: younger, better educated, less partisan primary, male voters are less supportive, but still very winnable

 

Source:

Emily’s List Dec 2013

Support HRC Regardless Consider others, but prefer HRC Consider HRC, but prefer others Likely to support others
Men 29% 39% 15% 6%
Women 40% 46% 6% 5%
18-34 23% 45% 19% 5%
35-49 37% 45% 11% 3%
50-64 36% 44% 6% 7%
65+ 43% 39% 6% 5%
Whites 33% 46% 9% 5%
AA 42% 41% 10% 3%
Hisp 40% 36% 10% 6%
Strong D 42% 43% 8% 3%
Weaker D 22% 42% 14% 9%

 

  • Political
    1. Potential opponents: Biden, Warren, Patrick, O’Malley, Sanders
    2. Clumsy launch politics
    3. Messy labor endorsement process
  • Operational
    1. Clear leadership and decision making; clarity on who speaks for the campaign
    2. Unhelpful chatter and leaks

 

 

GENERAL ELECTION

  • Message
    1. Same issues as the primary, as well as…
    2. A better GOP candidate than Romney (better profile, more credibly moderate)
      1. Risk of losing more downscale whites in places like PA and OH
    3. National environment (largely not controllable)
      1. President Obama’s approval rating/direction of the country
      2. Perceived success/failure of foreign policy at the time
  • DemographySince we don’t have a lot of polling, it’s most helpful to look at the breakdown of Obama’s vote and figure out how to offset likely changes. Big picture, we have to assume slightly lower performance and turnout among the key “Obama coalition” groups (young people and minorities), which will need to be made up with stronger performance among whites.

 

  1. Obama won by driving up turnout and support among key minority groups and getting enough whites to break 50%. Your math to 50% could look similar, but one potential “threat” is that you match Obama’s performance with white voters but don’t achieve his level of turnout or support with other groups.
  1. White voters: Obama was the first president to win the presidency with less than 40% of the white vote (39%). This was possible because whites are shrinking as a proportion of the electorate, but also because he organized very strong African American turnout and boosted traditionally high levels of support even higher. These proportions with African Americans will likely dip for you, meaning that you will need over 40% of the white vote nationally.
  2. The GOP candidate will also be a key factor in this equation: Romeny’s profile as a defender of Wall Street and outsourcer helped to suppress support among downscale whites in Pennsylvania, for example. His positions on abortion helped to move persuadable white women to Obama. All these variables will need to be accounted for in determining the win number in each state.
  3. African Americans: African American performance is a key factor in states like Ohio and Florida , where Obama pushed turnout disproportionately high. We have to anticipate 89% African American support, whereas Obama was in the mid 90s. We also have to anticipate a drop in African American turnout. Romney would have won Ohio, for example, if African American turnout had been at “normal” levels.
  4. Hispanics: Hispanics are equally key in some states for determining the win number. They performed at or above 70% for Obama nationally. We have to anticipate closer to 65%, although the rhetoric and immigration stance of the GOP candidate will be a major factor.   Correctly predicting Hispanic turnout in Colorado, for example, will determine how much we need to worry about a potential rightward swing in the Denver suburbs.
  5. Young people: level of support and turnout are both major unknowns and need to be examined early. Your level of support is softest with young people, but that could just be because they know the least about you. Extreme GOP views on gay marriage, global warming, and/or birth control could swing and motivate young voters.
  6. That said, we have to assume a drop in performance and turnout among young voters. The Emily’s List general election poll from last year predicts that you can get 50% or more of voters 65 and older, while Obama only got 44%, which could make up the difference.
  7. Asians: exit polls showed that Asians performed 70/30 for Obama, but this could move closer to 60% next year since their level of support for Democrats appears to have dipped in 2014. This needs to be researched further.
  • Geography
    1. Lean Democratic states to watch
      1. Wisconsin: was harder for Obama in 2012 due to Paul Ryan, but Walker’s performance was higher than expected last week. This requires further research.
      2. Pennsylvania: probably stable, but should be monitored, since downscale whites could sour even more depending on the national mood.
    2. Battlegrounds to watch
      1. Colorado: Denver suburbs troubling, GOP carried Jefferson Co. this year.
      2. Virginia: African American turnout appeared to be disproportionately high last week, but Warner still performed poorly in suburban counties like Loudon, Prince William, Chesterfield.
      3. Iowa: rural and white, could get worse depending on performance with whites overall and national mood.
      4. Ohio: Obama won with black turnout in 2012; need to identify a path to winning more whites.

 

    1. The 2016 electorate will look completely different than 2014, which was even lower than 2010. That’s why states like Nevada, where Democrats were beaten badly this year, remain favorable for 2016. The breakdown of the battleground has been covered in other documents, but I’ve noted a few states below that could become harder next year based on what we saw in last week’s election returns.
  • Changing rules
    1. Harsher voting restrictions in GOP controlled battleground states
      1. Florida (Gov has announced a bill already), Ohio, Wisconsin, Nevada, Michigan
    2. Changes in electoral vote allocations (there are only rumors now)
      1. Ohio, Michigan, Florida
  • Financial
    1. Full concentration of GOP resources from Day One
    2. GOP general election spending begins earlier than

 

****

To: Cheryl Mills

Re: Legal Options for launching a potential campaign

 

 

SUMMARY

If you decide to run, a number of core functions need to be in place for a successful campaign launch, which have been outlined in previous materials.  Ideally, every aspect of the campaign will ramp up as quickly as possible, but three tasks will take a particularly long time and will drive the overall timeline:

  1. Researching and testing your message
  2. Developing a brand and logo
  3. Designing and testing your website and mobile ap

All three tasks are highly intertwined and contain a series of constituent steps, which should be carefully sequenced.   As demonstrated by the attached timeline, they will collectively take approximately 19 weeks to complete. The first five weeks can take place do not require any funding or structure, but the last 14 will require some sort of funding mechanism. I would recommend that a CTO, Digital Director, and Media Director are hired within the first four weeks to help shepherd the process.

The launch will require a full leadership team, as well as staff in the early 4 primary states and support staff at headquarters. The attached timeline has them starting a month before the launch and I suggest a formal exploratory be set up a month out to pay for them (and the equipment and overhead that will come with them!).

 

WHAT NEEDS TO BE ACCOMPLISHED

Message

As we have discussed before, a campaign is fundamentally an organization built to do one thing—communicate a message. The proposed message development process is a series of focus groups, polls, and web tests to develop a narrative, messages, responses to attacks, and even a tagline for the campaign. This process will allow you to hear directly from voters about their mood and what they want from a president. It will also allow you to explore how you can articulate your vision and policy proposals. Lastly, it will help us to put together a path to victory in the primary and general, including key target groups.

Branding and Logo

Based on how you decide to present your candidacy based on the research process, we will engage design firms to develop a logo and branding scheme for all campaign materials that reflect the kind of candidate you are and the audiences we are trying to reach. The brand will dictate what colors, fonts, and moods should be used to design the site and mobile ap.

Website and Mobile Ap Design

Four separate firms will each create three designs for your site using the branding and logo concepts. We will choose one design (or an amalgamation of many) and go through a cycle of edits and feedback to get it exactly right. We will probably want to do some sort of photo shoot and record a video for the site as well.

 

WHEN TO START

Attached are three alternative timelines. The first begins in December, the second in January and the third in February. All three have the same 19-week timeline and sequence.

I would suggest establishing a date you want to launch and then work back from there. For example, if you want to launch your campaign at the beginning of the second quarter, you should start the ramp up process in December.

Keep in mind that this process will take over four months, which is a long time to keep potential opponents iced out. For example, the winter DNC meeting (which will take place in mid February) traditionally includes a beauty pageant for declared or prospective candidates. You will undoubtedly be asked to speak and we have to assume for planning purposes that Sanders and/or O’Malley will be declared and actively running by that time. Once a launch date is set, it will be worth thinking of what can be done from a communications standpoint to keep the opposition frozen out, even if you won’t declare for a few months.

 

BUDGET AND SPENDING

As described above, candidate-specific design work will begin in the fifth week of the ramp up process, at which point you will need either personal resources, or an exploratory committee to fund work.

If personal funds are used, spending can be limited to polling, focus groups, web tests, design firms, and some modest staff overhead.   The budget below is approximately $1.3 million, but I would assume this will cost $2-3 million due to unforeseen expenses.

Polling and Focus Groups:            $800,000

Logo and branding                           $100,000

Digital design:                                    $200,000

Staff Overhead                                 $200,000

 

Even if personal funds are used, there will inevitably need to be an exploratory period of about a month for the sole purpose of hiring staff and getting them ready to execute the launch plan. On the day you declare your candidacy, the campaign will need a fully functioning finance, communications, political, and operations/compliance staff. There should also be skeletal staff in the four early states. Overhead for the last month will likely be $3-4 million.

****

More here including the timeline.

Another item to destroy the GOP and includes SEIU operatives:

From:[email protected] To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] more [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Date: 2007-12-03 19:20 Subject: Revised PowerPoint

He Warned the WH and Democrats About Obamacare

He Predicted Obamacare Wouldn’t Be ‘Affordable.’ Democrats Didn’t Listen.

DailySignal: Robert Laszewski is a policy adviser and analyst for the health insurance industry. He’s correctly predicted Obamacare’s pitfalls since Day One.

Heritage

In an interview with “Full Measure” this Sunday, Laszewski says he warned the Obama administration and other Democrats not to call it the “Affordable Care Act.” Earlier this week, the administration announced Obamacare premiums are spiking 25 percent.

Here’s a transcript from our interview:

Laszewski: The future is not good. The fundamental problem is not enough healthy people have signed up to pay for the sick, and not enough healthy people have signed up because the insurance plans that people are being offered just simply aren’t of good value.

Attkisson: What do customers see as wrong with the insurance product?

Laszewski: The insurance products consumers see are still too expensive in terms of premium. And the deductibles and copays are too high.

Attkisson: Can you explain in simple terms how the insurance companies are losing so much money if they’re charging so much for premiums and if deductibles are so high?

Laszewski: It’s real simple. If you only provide a health insurance plan that the sickest people buy, you can’t charge enough. You can never charge enough.

Attkisson: At it’s core, it was supposed the provide affordable insurance for everybody who needed it.

Laszewski: Yes. The Affordable Care Act was supposed to ensure that whether you were employed or unemployed or self-employed, you would have access to affordable health insurance. For someone who’s not getting a subsidy, who’s paying the full cost of the insurance, it’s likely they are now paying about double what they paid before under the old market, where only healthy people could get in.

>> Find out when and where you can watch “Full Measure”

 

DailySignal

**** Either way, taxpayers are in fact on the hook to offset costs regardless of how they are applied. Socialized payment system for a broken system.

****

Minnesota could spend up to $300M to offset ObamaCare hikes

TheHill: Minnesota’s Democratic governor wants to pour as much as $300 million into a relief fund for people facing massive premium hikes under ObamaCare in his state next year.

Gov. Mark Dayton proposed Thursday that he would offer “rebates” to help offset the 55 percent increase in healthcare premiums that ObamaCare customers will face in Minnesota this year.

The money would be taken out of Minnesota’s “rainy day fund,” which got a boost from the state’s budget surplus last year.

But Dayton was clear that his state would need a longer-term solution to make ObamaCare plans more affordable.

Dayton is the first governor in the country to announce his own plan to tackle rising premiums this year, which are far steeper than any of the previous year’s increases. The state’s final plan will also include input from the state’s Republicans, who are working on their own proposals to address panic over the premiums.

With the new rebates, Dayton said the rate increase would be limited to an average of 16 percent — below the national average of 22 percent. Last year, the national average for premium hikes was about 7 percent.

Minnesota has attracted national attention this year as it faces one of the highest premium hikes in the country. Dayton himself came under scrutiny on the issue of healthcare after he declared earlier this month that the “Affordable Care Act is no longer affordable.” Under pressure from fellow Democrats, he later walked back his remarks.

In his lengthy statement on Thursday, Dayton vigorously defended ObamaCare while also acknowledging the law is “now causing very difficult financial problems” for some people.

If you Don’t Remember Thomas Pickering, Check this…

Clinton’s Shadow Diplomat: Thomas Pickering and Russia’s Pipeline Sales to Iran…

  

CenterforSecurityPolicy: “Clinton’s Shadow Diplomat” is a hard-hitting investigative report from the Center for Security Policy, exposing the ties of former Ambassador Thomas Pickering to a Putin-linked Russian company that sold oil and gas pipelines to Iran and Syria when Pickering was on its Board of Directors. The report reveals Pickering’s overlapping roles: as Clinton’s Foreign Affairs Policy Advisor, as an Advisory Board member for two Iranian advocacy groups, as a paid Director for a Russian firm selling pipeline to Iran and Syria, as a paid consultant to Iranian aircraft contractor Boeing, and as a Senate committee hearing witness, all with a common goal of ending economic sanctions on Iran and reversing U.S. Iran policies.

As meticulously documented in “Clinton’s Shadow Diplomat,” Pickering was a paid Director for the Russian-owned company Trubnaya Metallurgicheskaya Kompaniya (TMK) from June 30, 2009 to June 26, 2012. TMK is majority-owned by Russian billionaire oligarch Dmitry Pumpyansky, a close Putin ally.

The investigation discovered extensive proof of TMK’s business dealings in Iran and Syria while Pickering was on the Board, including a financial offering disclosure, catalogs, marketing materials, websites, press releases, legal documents, reports from the steel industry press and Iranian customer websites. Sales of oil and gas pipelines to Iran were specifically prohibited under U.S. laws and executive orders.

According to TMK’s records, Pickering attended 143 of the 145 TMK Board meetings. Pickering is estimated to have been paid over half a million dollars for his service to TMK, based on TMK’s compensation rules.

“Clinton’s Shadow Diplomat” documents TMK’s relationships with three Iranian customers, all listed by the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) as “Specially Designated Nationals” during the years Pickering served on the Board: the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC), Petropars, and Pars Oil and Gas Company.

The investigation also shows TMK’s relationships with three Syrian customers listed by OFAC as “Specially Designated Nationals” in 2011, while Pickering was on the Board: the Syrian Gas Company, the Syrian Petroleum Company, and the Al Furat Petroleum Company. U.S. persons are generally prohibited from conducting any kind of business with “Specially Designated Nationals.”

Thomas Pickering was appointed by Clinton as Chairman for the Benghazi Accountability Review Board three months after he left TMK. Starting in December 2011, he also served in official capacity on Clinton’s Foreign Affairs Policy Board. Emails released from Clinton’s private server show that Pickering was emailing and meeting with Clinton and her staff from the beginning of her time as Secretary of State, arguing for an end to economic sanctions on Iran, during the same years he was on TMK’s Board of Directors.

“Clinton’s Shadow Diplomat” raises questions for the American public and policymakers about Thomas Pickering’s and Hillary Clinton’s priorities. Did they put America’s interests first, or those of Iran and Russia?

****

Pickering was briefly the president of the Eurasia Foundation, a Washington-based organization that makes small grants and loans in the states of the former Soviet Union.

Former Ambassador Thomas Pickering agreed in May 2013 to be a director of Luxoft Holding Inc., which was incorporated by Mossack Fonseca in the British Virgin Islands. Former Ambassador Thomas Pickering agreed in May 2013 to be a director of Luxoft Holding Inc., which was incorporated by Mossack Fonseca in the British Virgin Islands. CHRIS USHER AP

WASHINGTON

As Russian software company Luxoft prepared to offer shares on the U.S. stock market, its executives turned to a well-known U.S. diplomat.

Thomas Pickering, a former U.S. ambassador to Russia who also served as undersecretary of state for political affairs under President Bill Clinton, agreed in May 2013 to be a director of Luxoft Holding Inc. a month before the company’s debut on the New York Stock Exchange. The relationship between Luxoft and Pickering, whose diplomatic career spans six presidents and four decades, is detailed in the massive Panama Papers leak and comes amid a global debate over the role of offshore companies. Luxoft is incorporated in the British Virgin Islands. More here from McClatchy/MiamiHerald.

****

Anyone find it curious that Luxoft just happened to be protected from the U.S. sanctions list due to the Russian invasion of Crimea and Ukraine? Barack Obama signed a couple of Executive Orders against Russia in 2014 as published here by the U.S. Department of Treasury and the U.S. State Department, but Luxoft was exempt.

Luxoft Gains in U.S. as Sales Shielded From Sanctions while this company has an intriguing business model:

Industries / areas:
Aerospace & Defense, Automotive, Banking and Financial Services, Education, Entertainment, Industrial, Insurance, Media, Publishing, Retail / Distribution, Science and Research, Software and Technology, Telecom, Transportation, Travel
Global headquarters: Moscow Russia
Worldwide office locations:
New York, Seattle United States US; Kiev, Odessa, Dnepropetrovsk Ukraine UA; London United Kingdom GB; Bucharest Romania RO; Ho Chi Minh City Vietnam VN; Eschborn/Frankfurt Germany DE; Krakow Poland PL; Singapore Singapore SG
Russian office locations:
St. Petersburg Russia RU, Omsk Russia RU, Dubna Russia RU
*****
The United States last week experienced the largest intrusion of the internet affecting social media platforms and Internet Service Providers. The further investigations found that specific malware was used via the pathway of the ‘Internet of Things’. IoT is all those other appliances that are attached to the internet for communications.
So this slide is rather fascinating and may have some clues to domestic cyber threats and risks…

LUXOFT HORIZONTAL TECHNICAL EXCELLENCE – IOT PRACTICE

While it’s called the Internet of Things, it’s really about the data you gather from those connected “things” and the derived insights that help you make improvements to your business – new service offerings, transformed product lines, and improved time-to-market.

IOT can help you transform your business.

iot-luxoft

 

Obama Announced the Obamacare Doom for Next Year

Obama administration confirms double-digit premium hikes

 

WASHINGTON (AP)— Premiums will go up sharply next year under President Barack Obama’s health care law, and many consumers will be down to just one insurer, the administration confirmed Monday. That will stoke another “Obamacare” controversy days before a presidential election.

Related reading: Click this link to see increases by State.

Before taxpayer-provided subsidies, premiums for a midlevel benchmark plan will increase an average of 25 percent across the 39 states served by the federally run online market, according to a report from the Department of Health and Human Services. Some states will see much bigger jumps, others less.

Moreover, about 1 in 5 consumers will only have plans from a single insurer to pick from, after major national carriers such as UnitedHealth Group, Humana and Aetna scaled back their roles.

“Consumers will be faced this year with not only big premium increases but also with a declining number of insurers participating, and that will lead to a tumultuous open enrollment period,” said Larry Levitt, who tracks the health care law for the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation.

Republicans will pounce on the numbers as confirmation that insurance markets created by the 2010 health overhaul are on the verge of collapsing in a “death spiral.” Sign-up season starts Nov. 1, about a week before national elections in which the GOP remains committed to a full repeal. Window shopping for plans and premiums is already available through HealthCare.gov.

The sobering numbers confirmed state-by-state reports that have been coming in for months. Administration officials are stressing that subsidies provided under the law, which are designed to rise alongside premiums, will insulate most customers from sticker shock. They add that consumers who are willing to switch to cheaper plans will still be able to find bargains.

“Headline rates are generally rising faster than in previous years,” acknowledged HHS spokesman Kevin Griffis. But he added that for most consumers, “headline rates are not what they pay.”

The vast majority of the more than 10 million customers who purchase through HealthCare.gov and its state-run counterparts do receive generous financial assistance. “Enrollment is concentrated among very low-income individuals who receive significant government subsidies to reduce premiums and cost-sharing,” said Caroline Pearson of the consulting firm Avalere Health

But an estimated 5 million to 7 million people are either not eligible for the income-based assistance, or they buy individual policies outside of the health law’s markets, where the subsidies are not available. The administration is urging the latter group to check out HealthCare.gov. The spike in premiums generally does not affect the employer-provided plans that most workers and their families rely on.

In some states, the premium increases are striking. In Arizona, unsubsidized premiums for a 27-year-old buying a benchmark “second-lowest cost silver plan” will jump by 116 percent, from $196 to $422, according to the administration report. Oklahoma has the next biggest increase for a similarly situated customer, 69 percent.

Dwindling choice is another problem factor.

The total number of HealthCare.gov insurers will drop from 232 this year to 167 in 2017, a loss of 28 percent. (Insurers are counted multiple times if they offer coverage in more than one state. So Aetna, for example, would count once in each state that it participated in.)

Switching insurers may not be simple for patients with chronic conditions.

While many carriers are offering a choice of plan designs, most use a single prescription formulary and physician network across all their products, explained Pearson. “So, enrollees may need to change doctors or drugs when they switch insurers,” he said.