Category: Abuse

NORTH CAROLINA: JUDGE RULES IN FAVOR OF CHURCHES SEEKING TO HOLD INDOOR SERVICES~”THERE IS NO PANDEMIC EXCEPTION TO CONSTITUTION”

NORTH CAROLINA: 
JUDGE RULES IN FAVOR OF CHURCHES SEEKING TO HOLD INDOOR SERVICES~
“THERE IS NO PANDEMIC EXCEPTION TO CONSTITUTION” 
BY HEATHER CLARK
RALEIGH, N.C. — A U.S. district judge in North Carolina has ruled in favor of two churches and a ministry that want to hold indoor services but feel prevented from doing so as executive orders from Gov. Roy Cooper have limited “mass gatherings” to 10 people and a later directive said that larger meetings should “take place outdoors unless impossible.” The judge stated that there is no good reason why churches can’t have indoor services — with social distancing and other protective measures in place — when funeral homes and other locations are allowed to accommodate dozens of people.
“There is no pandemic exception to the Constitution of the United States or the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment,” wrote Judge James Dever III, nominated to the bench by then-President George W. Bush.
“Plaintiffs have demonstrated that they are likely to succeed on the merits of their Free Exercise claim concerning the assembly for religious worship provisions in Executive Order 138, that they will suffer irreparable harm absent a temporary restraining order, that the equities tip in their favor, and that a temporary restraining order is in the public interest.”
In March, Gov. Cooper issued Executive Order 116, declaring a state emergency, followed by a series of executive orders, such as order 121, which defined “mass gatherings” as “any event or convening that brings together more than ten (10) persons in a single room or single space at the same time.” Religious services were specifically held to this 10-person limit, while funeral services were limited to 50 people.
Earlier this month, Cooper issued a new order, Executive Order 138, which allowed religious gatherings of more than 10 people, but with the notation that such gatherings should “take place outdoors unless impossible.”
Guidance issued by the director of Legislative Affairs outlined in further detail on the “impossible” factor, “For example, there may be situations in which particular religious beliefs dictate that some or all of a religious service must be held indoors and that more than ten persons must be in attendance.”
Two churches, Berean Baptist Church and People’s Baptist Church, along with the organization Return America, sued Cooper on Thursday, asserting that the “outdoors unless impossible” requirement violates their First Amendment rights under the Free Exercise Clause.
A rally with approximately 500 people was also held next to the state legislative building that same day, according to the Greensboro News & Record. 
While Judge Dever noted on Saturday that “[n]o constitutional right — including the right of free exercise of religion — is absolute,” he expressed concern that law enforcement would be the final arbiter of whether it is deemed “impossible” for any particular church to meet outside.
He also pointed out that legal representation for Cooper “could not explain why the governor trusts those who run funerals to have 50 people inside to attend the funeral, but only trusts religious entities and individuals to have 10 people inside to worship.”
“Eleven men and women can stand side by side working indoors Monday through Friday at a hospital, at a plant, or at a package distribution center and be trusted to follow social distancing and hygiene guidance, but those same eleven men and women cannot be trusted to do the same when they worship inside together on Saturday or Sunday. ‘The distinction defies explanation, or at least the governor has not provided one,’” Dever wrote.
He outlined that the churches plan to exercise safety guidelines to protect its members and that those who worship are the same people who go to the stores to shop, and they would not behave any differently based on location.
“[C]ommon sense suggests that religious leaders and worshipers (whether inside or outside North Carolina) have every incentive to behave safely and responsibly whether working indoors, shopping indoors, or worshiping indoors,” Dever said. “The governor cannot treat religious worship as a world apart from non-religious activities with no good, or more importantly, constitutional, explanation.”
“Plaintiffs have pledged to adhere to ‘all recommended COVID-19 social distancing and personal hygiene safety guidelines’ in exercising their free exercise rights,” he noted. “They simply want the governor to afford them the same treatment as they and their fellow non-religious citizens receive when they work at a plant, clean an office, ride a bus, shop at a store, or mourn someone they love at a funeral.”
Ultimately, Dever found that the order does not meet the “narrowly tailored” and “least restrictive means” prongs of the strict scrutiny standard in legal precedent.
“The court trusts worshipers and their leaders to look after one another and society while exercising their free exercise rights just as they and their fellow citizens (whether religious or not) do when engaged in non-religious activities,” he wrote. “Plaintiffs have pledged to practice social distancing and other public health guidelines, just like others under EO 138. Accordingly, the equities tip in favor of granting a temporary restraining order.”
Cooper’s office says it disagrees with the ruling but does not plan to appeal.
“We don’t want indoor meetings to become hotspots for the virus, and our health experts continue to warn that large groups sitting together inside for long periods of time are much more likely to cause the spread of COVID-19,” a statement, as reported by local television station WRAL, reads.
“We urge houses of worship and leaders to voluntarily follow public health guidance to keep their members safe.”

DRUNK WITH POWER! MICHIGAN’S GOVERNOR WHITMER AT IT AGAIN

DRUNK WITH POWER! 
MICHIGAN’S GOVERNOR WHITMER 
AT IT AGAIN 
MI Governor Says 1st Amendment “Not Appropriate in a Global Pandemic” “Racist,” “Misogynistic”
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research
purposes:
Obey me or pay me! That pretty much sums up the rhetoric coming from Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer who continues to defy the Constitution and chide anyone who might dare to imply that her authoritarian power is limited by that archaic document.
Of course, if you didn’t catch the sarcasm in that, let me help. She’s a tyrant who has no regard for the law and limits on government overreach. None.
Recently, Whitmer apprised her peasants that she alone had the power to determine when, what, and where the economy can reopen amid the coronavirus pandemic asserting that her executive shutdown orders are “not suggestions,” “not optional,” and “not helpful hints.” Nevermind that pesky outdated First Amendment thing:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
That, according to Whitmer, is “not appropriate in a global pandemic.” She continued, “This is calls to violence. This is racist and misogynistic,” comparing protests in the Michigan Capitol to Naziism.
“I do think that the fact of the matter is these protests, in a perverse way, make it likelier that we’re going to have to stay in a stay-at-home posture.”
So let’s get this straight — Whitmer believes she has the sole authority to lockdown an entire state, prevent people from practicing their Constitutionally-protected right to protest the lockdown, slander people by calling them names for doing so, and punish them with an extended lockdown if they refuse to grovel at her divine feet.
By the way, this peaceful protest you see below is what Whitmer says is so
racist, misogynistic, and Nazi-like.

Right. In the words of the great pastor and teacher John MacArthur,
Miss Whitmer needs to “go home”.
Michigan Gov. @gretchenwhitmer calls some protests in her state “racist and misogynistic” and urges others “to stop encouraging this behavior because it only makes it that much more precarious for us to try to reengage our economy.” http://abcn.ws/2RiH3wd 

Embedded video

276

11:49 AM – May 13, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy
266 people are talking about this

GESTAPO POLICE STATE NEW JERSEY: ELIZABETH, N.J. LANDLORD, ACQUITTED LAST YEAR OF ANTI-MUSLIM BIAS, MUST STAND TRIAL AGAIN

The double jeopardy clause in the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits the government from prosecuting individuals more than once for a single offense and from imposing more than one punishment for a single offense. It provides that “No person shall … be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb.”
VIDEO:
 
GESTAPO POLICE STATE NEW JERSEY: ELIZABETH, N.J. LANDLORD, ACQUITTED LAST YEAR OF ANTI-MUSLIM BIAS, MUST STAND TRIAL AGAIN
BY ROBERT SPENCER
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research
purposes:
“A jury sided with Greda, saying the plaintiffs failed to prove he discriminated against Farghaly based on her religion.”
But that doesn’t matter. He has offended the new protected class. Our moral superiors will keep putting William Greda, and others like him, on trial until they get the verdict they want.
“NJ landlord must stand trial again over accusations of anti-Muslim bias, judges rule,” by Terrence T. McDonald, NorthJersey.com, May 15, 2020 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):
An Elizabeth landlord cleared by a jury last year of charges that he refused to rent an apartment to a Muslim woman must stand trial again, an appellate panel ruled on Wednesday.
The three-court panel ordered a new trial because, the judges say in their 36-page ruling, the landlord’s defense attorney improperly questioned the Muslim woman about her religious beliefs during the initial trial.
By asking her about references to “infidels” in the Quran and Islamic politics, the landlord’s lawyer elicited “highly prejudicial” testimony that had no value and impaired the woman’s credibility in front of the jury, the ruling says.
The judges also said the trial judge improperly declared a televised news interview with the landlord, William Greda, inadmissible as evidence.
“The only victim here is Mr. Greda, who was forced to undergo this malicious prosecution by New Jersey,” said Greda’s attorney, Vincent Sanzone. “The people will speak again in a retrial.”
The dispute at the center of the case dates to February 2016 and it is detailed in the appellate judges’ decision.
Fatma Farghaly alleges she visited Greda’s 17-unit apartment building in Elizabeth wearing a khimar, or head covering. Farghaly alleges Greda asked her if she is Muslim and then told her, “I don’t rent to Muslims” before asking her to leave. Farghaly captured a subsequent conversation with Greda on her phone.
Farghaly reported the incident to Elizabeth police, then to the New Jersey Division on Civil Rights. The division followed up with two undercover visits. During the first, a division employee wearing a headscarf asked to see an apartment in Greda’s building and says he told her the apartment was “not good” for her. A second division employee not wearing a headscarf visited later and says Greda did not tell her the apartment was unsuitable.
The Civil Rights Division and the state Attorney General’s Office filed a complaint in October 2016 charging Greda with violating Farghaly’s civil rights. Then-Attorney General Christopher Porrino called Greda’s conduct “blatantly bias-driven.”
During the five-day trial, Greda denied Farghaly’s description of events and testified he believed she may have planned the encounter so they could “extort from him to support ISIS.”
A jury sided with Greda, saying the plaintiffs failed to prove he discriminated against Farghaly based on her religion.
The appellate judges took issue with several moments during the trial involving Sanzone. Sanzone repeatedly violated rules of evidence by asking Farghaly about Islam and at one point “gratuitously” suggested her accountant and doctor are Muslim, the judges say.
“Defense counsel’s questioning about Farghaly’s religious beliefs and the principles in the Quran constituted a clear and direct attack on her credibility,” the ruling says. “Indeed, the questioning sought information that had no substantive, probative value to any factual issue presented in the matter.”…
__________________________________________________________________
 Attorney General, Division on Civil Rights Announce Superior Court Complaint Against Landlord for Rejecting Muslim Apartment Seeker
 Landlord Accused of Telling Woman Wearing Khimar: ‘I Don’t Rent to Muslims’
SEE: https://www.nj.gov/oag/newsreleases16/pr20161019a.html
ALSO: 
https://www.nj.gov/oag/newsreleases16/Maple Garden_Complaint.pdf
AND:
https://www.njcourts.gov/attorneys/assets/opinions/appellate/
published/a0604-18.pdf?c=J3C

NEARLY 200 PASTORS, MINISTRY LEADERS CALL ON NEVADA GOVERNOR STEVE SISOLAK TO LIFT 10 PERSON LIMIT ON CHURCH SERVICES

BY HEATHER CLARK

SEE: https://christiannews.net/2020/05/15/nearly-200-pastors-ministry-leaders-call-on-nev-gov-steve-sisolak-to-lift-10-person-limit-on-church-services/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore/Wikipedia

CARSON CITY, Nev. (Christian News Network) — Nearly 200 pastors and other ministry leaders have signed on to a letter to Nevada Gov. Steve Sisolak to ask that he lift his current 10-person limit on in-person church services — “so long as each church develops, implements, and maintains a safety plan that adheres to applicable social distancing and hygiene guidelines.”

“Just like you, we deeply care for the people of the state of Nevada. During this time of crisis, our houses of worship and the people we serve have adapted to the pandemic and [have] taken safety precautions related thereto,” reads the letter sent to the governor on Thursday. “We have restricted our in-person services and [have] done our best to utilize virtual platforms to serve our congregations and our communities.”

“That being said, we have been gravely concerned that the actions you have taken appear to have targeted religious gatherings,” it outlines, noting that religious gatherings have been excluded from the first phase of the state’s gradual reopening plan.

The pastors point to Sisolak’s April 8 stay-at-home order, Emergency Directive 013, which states in one section, “Places of worship shall not hold in-person worship services where 10 or more persons may gather, including without limitation, drive-in and popup services, for the remainder of the Declaration of Emergency.”

“Places of worship may, however, hold worship services via alternative means, including but not limited to, video, streaming or broadcast, provided that any personnel needed to perform tasks related to such do so in a manner that is consistent with social distancing guidelines … ”

The order also advised that the government may use civil or criminal statutes to enforce the regulations.

The pastors state that while Sisolak likely had good intentions in issuing the order, it goes too far as there are less restrictive ways to protect people of faith from contagious diseases.

“We respectfully submit that the restrictions on in-person church services are more burdensome than they need to be in order to accomplish our shared goal of preventing the spread of COVID-19,” the letter reads. “Emergency Directive 013 restricts religious gatherings in a way that is overbroad and not narrowly tailored to accomplish our shared goal of preventing the spread of disease and death.”

The correspondence further argues that it is not fair for restaurants to be allowed to reopen in phase one at 50 percent capacity — with other safety measures in place — while churches are not permitted to do the same.

The pastors contend that as churches in Nevada have created detailed safety plans to keep their members safe, prohibiting in-person services nearly altogether is excessive.

“We believe we are not called to be isolated individuals expressing Christ in the privacy of our homes but a collective city on the hill where Christ is expressed together to one another,” they outline. “[I]t is our sincerely-held religious belief that online and drive-in services do not meet the Lord’s requirement that the Church meet together in person for corporate worship.”

“For this reason, your order violates our First Amendment rights to free exercise of religion and freedom of assembly.”

Pointing to Church history and current events, the pastors note that the Body of Christ has been active to help others in need, from caring for the elderly, to assisting the poor, to raising money for personal protective equipment (PPE) and other needed supplies in the medical community, to ministering to the mental, emotional and spiritual needs of health care workers.

“We don’t assume you have approved such restrictive orders regarding church gatherings with a specific animus toward our churches and our vital role in society, but your orders have sent an unfortunate message to us and the people of the state of Nevada that churches and church leaders can’t be trusted to take the steps necessary to protect our congregations and the communities we serve when we are engaged in the work of ministry in our communities,” the letter states.

“Although we acknowledge that there have been bad actors in the community of faith who have not taken their duty to prevent the spread of disease and death, the response of these bad actors should not be to shut down all communities of faith and the essential work we do,” it contends.

The pastors note that the Church has “faithfully shepherded communities through countless plagues” for the past 2,000 years, and therefore, “[t]here is no reason to believe our collective wisdom and experience does not have relevance during this pandemic.”

Signees include Sam Crouch of Calvary Baptist Church in Elko, John Gee of Faith Life Family Church in Las Vegas, Nickolas Emery of Hope Crossing Community Church in Carson City, Ric Fehr of Living Waters Christian Felllowship in Reno, Byron Gomez of Sheep of Christ in Sparks, Larry Webb of Shadow Mountain Church in Gardnerville, James Arthur Moore of Stagecoach Church of God, Jeffrey Ogden of The Village Church in Incline Village, D. Wayne Evans of New Hope Christian Center Assembly of God in Overton, and Duke Taber of Mesquite Worship Center.

View the letter in full here.


			

		

		
		

			
							

		


	

		
	

		
		
OPPOSE H.R. 6666, THE COVID–19 TESTING, REACHING & CONTACTING EVERYONE (TRACE) ACT
		
		
 

	
		
		
					

			
		

						
OPPOSE H.R. 6666, THE COVID–19 TESTING, REACHING & CONTACTING EVERYONE 


(TRACE) ACT 


Contact your U.S. Congressional Representative and ask them to vote NO on H.R. 6666


THE NVIC ADVOCACY PORTAL


THE NATIONAL VACCINE INFORMATION CENTER


Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:






Dear NVIC Advocacy Team Members,


H.R. 6666, otherwise known as the COVID–19 Testing, Reaching, And Contacting Everyone (TRACE) Act, was introduced and referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on 5/1/2020.  This bill is sponsored by Representative Bobby Rush (D) of Illinois District 1.  The bill has 59 cosponsors, 58 Democrats and 1 Republican.  We need your help to stop this terrible bill.


Summary


H.R. 6666 provides 100 billion dollars this year and unlimited federal funding in future years to create and operate a massive and likely unconstitutional surveillance, testing, and tracing enforcement system under the guise of “protecting” Americans against coronavirus.


H.R. 6666 is a federal funding bill. It proposes to create a surveillance infrastructure that can be used by the federal government, as well as local and state governments and private businesses, to require medical testing and tracking of all citizens in violation of fundamental civil liberties as set forth in the Bill of Rights, which include the first 10 amendments to the  U.S. Constitution designed to protect individual rights and limit the power of the government.


H.R. 6666 lacks safeguards and conditions related to funding of the proposed surveillance operation to prevent it from being applied to intrusive programs mandating testing and surveillance without an individual’s voluntary consent. If this legislation is passed by Congress and enacted into law, it could lead to denial of an individual’s right to appear in public spaces and travel; the right to employment and education or participation in government-funded services, and the right to receive care in a government funded hospital or other any other medical facility.


H.R. 6666 specifically allows for funded entities to home quarantine a person against their will, even while they are healthy. Once a vaccine is available, the testing and tracing results potentially could be used to force individuals to be injected with a COVID-19 vaccine against their will.


According to a Press Release from the sponsor Congressman Bobby L. Rush, “Reopening our economy and getting back to normal will be all but impossible if we do not step up our testing efforts and implement robust and widespread contact tracing,” said Rep. Rush.  “Until we have a vaccine to defeat this dreaded disease, contact tracing in order to understand the full breadth and depth of the spread of this virus is the only way we will be able to get out from under this.”


The Devil is in the Details


H.R. 6666 would allow The Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), acting through the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), to award federal grants to eligible entities to conduct diagnostic testing for COVID–19, to trace and monitor the contacts of infected individuals, and to support the quarantine of such contacts. Through the use of mobile health units, as necessary, individuals would be tested and provided with services related to testing and quarantine at their residences.


The amount of money appropriated for fiscal year 2020 would be $100,000,000,000 (one hundred billion dollars) and more money may be appropriated by Congress as necessary for any subsequent fiscal year during which the emergency period continues.


A grant recipient may use the federal grant funds, in support of the above referenced activities to hire, train, compensate, and pay the expenses of individuals; and to purchase personal protective equipment and other supplies.


Priority will be given to applicants in “hot spots” and medically underserved communities and to entities that hire residents of the community where the activity will occur.  Hot spots are defined as a geographic area where the rate of infection with the virus that causes COVID–19 exceeds the national average. Medically underserved communities are communities given that term in section 799B of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 295p).


Entities eligible for the grant money are defined as a federally qualified health center, school-based clinic, disproportionate share hospital, academic medical center, nonprofit organization, institute of higher education, high school, and any other type of entity as determined by the Secretary of HHS.


H.R. 6666 Does Not Guarantee Privacy


Section 2 (e) of H.R. 6666 is entitled “Federal Privacy Requirements”, but it does little to protect privacy. It states that “Nothing in this section shall be construed to supersede any Federal privacy or confidentiality requirement, including the regulations promulgated under section 264(c) of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–191; 110 Stat. 2033) and section 543 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 290dd–2).


In actuality, H.R. 6666 offers few privacy protections for Americans who will be surveilled and tested without their consent under programs funded with this grant. In fact, Americans can expect their privacy to be violated under TRACE funded programs. That is because the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) 45 CFR 164.512(b)(1)(i) has always allowed disclosure of private health information to government officials and other government approved entities including foreign governments without the knowledge or consent of the individual for the purpose of conducting public health surveillance, investigations or interventions.


Bill of Rights Cannot Be Suspended During A “Public Health Crisis”


The Bill of Rights in the U.S. Constitution cannot be set aside by the federal government or state governments during pandemics or other public health emergencies. In The United States Statement of Interest in Support of Plaintiffs, filed by the Department of Justice (DOJ) in a case last month in which church goers attending a drive-in sermon were issued citations for violating an executive order in Mississippi, the DOJ stated;


“There is no pandemic exception, however, to the fundamental liberties the Constitution safeguards. Indeed, “individual rights secured by the Constitution do not disappear during a public health crisis.” In re Abbott, — F.3d —, 2020 WL 1685929, at *6 (5th Cir. Apr. 7, 2020). These individual rights, including the protections in the Bill of Rights made applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, are always in force and restrain government action.”


H.R. 6666 sets the stage for multiple violations of our constitutional rights.


The 4th Amendment right of American citizens is to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures. The proposed law would provide government funding of entities that create and implement programs to trace and monitor healthy people potentially exposed to the coronavirus. However, the bill does not allow individuals to exercise their Constitutional right to be safe in their homes free from warrantless government intrusion, and does not provide for voluntary refusal of testing and monitoring by a government funded entity. The bill also does not set forth how the contacts of persons with COVID-19 will be traced and whether the Constitutional rights of those infected with COVID-19, as well as their contacts, will be upheld.


The 5th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. This legislation provides government funding of entities that will enforce testing and potentially enforce vaccination of healthy individuals, who are suspected of having come into contact with COVID-19 positive persons whether or not they are exhibiting symptoms, without requiring the voluntary consent of the individual.


The  8th Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment of citizens.  The proposed law provides government funding to entities that will create and implement programs that trace, monitor and support the enforced quarantine of healthy individuals, who are suspected of coming into contact with COVID-19 persons, whether or not they are exhibiting symptoms and whether or not they may already be immune.


The 9th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution bestows upon the people rights not specifically set forth in the Constitution. H.R. 6666 provides funding for entities to create and implement undefined “related activities” to COVID-19 testing and unnamed “other purposes.”


H.R. 6666 should be opposed because it provides federal funding to entities to create and enforce unrestricted surveillance, testing, tracing and quarantine mechanisms and has no set end date. There is simply no way to know how many inalienable rights protected under the U.S. Constitution could be infringed upon or taken away from citizens if this bill becomes law. 


Text, Status and History for H.R. 6666 https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/6666?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22HR+6666%22%5D%7D&r=1&s=1


Action Needed


1) Call and Email your own U.S. Congressional Representative and ask them to vote against H.R. 6666, the “COVID–19 Testing, Reaching, And Contacting Everyone (TRACE) Act.” Pick a few points in the discussion about that resonate with you to personalize your message.  You may need to leave a phone message as many staff members are working remotely.


If you do not know who your U.S. House Representative is or their contact information, you can login to the NVIC Advocacy Portal, http://NVICAdvocacy.org, click on the “NATIONAL” tab, and your elected Congressional Legislators are automatically posted on the right hand side of the page.  Click on their name to display links to all of their contact information.  If a district office is close to your home, you may also consider trying to set up a longer phone call, video chat or meeting with your Representative or staff to discuss your concerns.


2) Login to the NVIC Advocacy Portal, http://NVICAdvocacy.org, OFTEN to check for state and U.S. updates and action items.  We review bills and make updates daily. Bills can change many times over the legislative process and your timely visits, calls, and emails directed at the correct legislators are critical to this process.


3) Please forward this email to family and friends and ask them to register for the NVIC Advocacy Portal at http://NVICAdvocacy.org and share their concerns with their Representative as well. 


Sincerely,


NVIC Advocacy Team National Vaccine Information Centerhttp://NVIC.org and http://NVICAdvocacy.org https://nvicadvocacy.org/members/Members/ContactUs.aspx


The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) works diligently to prepare and disseminate our legislative advocacy action alerts and supporting materials.  We request that organizations and members of the public forward our alerts in their original form to assure consistent and accurate messaging and effective action. Please acknowledge NVIC as originators of this work when forwarding to members of the public and like-minded organizations. To receive alerts immediately, register  at http://NVICAdvocacy.org, a website dedicated to this sole purpose and provided as a free public service by NVIC. 






			

		

		
		

			
							

		


	

		
	

		
		
HOW THE DEEP STATE MADE AMERICA ILLITERATE
		
		
 

	
		
		
					

			
		

						
HOW THE DEEP STATE MADE AMERICA ILLITERATE 




In this episode of Behind the Deep State, host Alex Newman explains how subversives and collectivists deliberately turned tens of millions of Americans into illiterates using quackery such as the whole word / look say / sight word method of teaching reading. This often produces symptoms of dyslexia, and was first exposed as ineffective quackery in the 1840s when it was tried in Boston under Horace Mann. Alex also gives some phonics programs–the proper way to teach reading–that you can use to protect your children from becoming illiterates. And he gives a brief overview of the reading wars. 🎓 Special Issue – Rescuing Our Children: http://bit.ly/rescuing-our-children  ▶️ More Videos: Educating for the New World Order https://youtu.be/W2UeJKdl1IY Dumbing Down Your Children https://youtu.be/_5pbt8DCy9g Deep State Sexualizing Children at School https://youtu.be/4yGquJMp7js Public Schools Created to Collectivize Society https://youtu.be/yNoDC_KXEz8 🇺🇸 The New American: http://www.thenewamerican.com/ 📲 Let’s Connect! http://www.facebook.com/TheNewAmerican https://twitter.com/NewAmericanMag https://www.instagram.com/newamerican… #Education #AlexNewman

			

		

		
		

			
							

		


	

		
	

		
		
SEVERAL CHURCHES FILE JOINT LAWSUIT AGAINST MICHIGAN GOVERNOR WHITMER OVER UNCONSTITUTIONAL STAY AT HOME ORDER
		
		
 

	
		
		
					

			
		

						
SEVERAL CHURCHES FILE JOINT LAWSUIT AGAINST MICHIGAN GOVERNOR WHITMER OVER UNCONSTITUTIONAL 


STAY AT HOME ORDER 



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research


purposes:


In the midst of the coronavirus pandemic, governors in almost every state in the country


issued executive orders bypassing state legislature to enact Unconstitutional lockdowns


that kept businesses closed, churches from gathering, and people locked away in their


homes under the threat of force by law enforcement who chose to uphold these governor’s


orders rather than the Constitution they swore to uphold. Thankfully, in many local and


county governments, many did not — including some in Michigan.


Following widespread protests in the state of Michigan — which included tens of thousands of citizens driving into the state capital city of Lansing — several sheriffs in the state vowed not to enforce the draconian orders. Instead of listening to the citizens’ protest of her infringement of their constitutional rights, instead, Governor Janet Whitmer proceeded to blame and ridicule them.


Now, several churches, pastors, laypeople, and a former Republican delegate have filed a joint lawsuit against the Michigan tyrant claiming that her orders continue to hinder religious gatherings against afforded them in the First Amendment of the Constitution despite the “exceptions” that are made.


Whitmer’s executive order, which is in effect until May 15, says “neither a place of religious worship nor its owner” could be penalized or charged with a misdemeanor for “allowing religious worship at such place,” and that “no individual would be subject” to penalties for not wearing a face mask, which is currently a legal requirement in confined public places, including grocery stores.”


However, the lawsuit argues that “Nothing in this provision applies to individuals attending a place or worship as clergy or congregants,” and “A promise to not subject a geographic location or its ‘owner’ to the criminal penalty … merely adorns the Constitution with a fig leaf and does not protect individuals or change the clear language of the order prohibiting any religious services or other ministry functions at a church or religious organization.”




The lawsuit asks a federal judge to deem the 1945 Emergency Powers Act and the 1976 Emergency Management Act, which afforded Whitmer the power to issue her executive orders, unconstitutional.


“Nothing in the U.S. Constitution authorizes a state governor to suspend constitutional representative governance by declaring new emergencies every 28 days into perpetuity,” the complaint says. “Allowing one person to wield absolute power is not a republican form of government, it is tyranny.”




The entire lawsuit can be seen at this link.

			

		

		
		

			
							

		


	

		
	

		
		
THE PSEUDOSCIENCE OF VACCINES~BIG PHARMA’S FINAL SOLUTION
		
		
 

	
		
		
					

			
		

						
THE PSEUDOSCIENCE OF VACCINES~


BIG PHARMA’S FINAL SOLUTION


The de-evolution of healthcare in the western world


BY GREG REESE 



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research


purposes:


In this exclusive report, Infowars’ Greg Reese dives into the history of vaccinations and highlights dangers the establishment has tried to hide for decades.







			

		

		
		

			
							

		


	

		
	

		
		
U.S. UNIVERSITIES CREATING CHINESE STYLE SOCIAL CREDIT CORONAVIRUS SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM
		
		
 

	
		
		
					

			
		

						
US Universities Creating Social Credit Coronavirus Surveillance System


U.S. UNIVERSITIES CREATING CHINESE STYLE SOCIAL CREDIT CORONAVIRUS 


SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM


App will generate “personal risk scores” and determine the need “for quarantine and decontamination.”


BY STEVE WATSON



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research


purposes:


Three US universities are responding to the coronavirus crisis by creating (irony of all ironies) a Chinese style social credit surveillance system that will ‘score’ people based on their exposure to the virus.


According to a report from Tech site dot.LA, researchers at the University of Southern California, Emory University, and the University of Texas Health Science Center are jointly working on the system after receiving federal grant funding.


Like the Chinese social credit system, the scheme will consist of a mobile app for contact tracing the virus, and promises to track the real-time location and symptoms of individuals to calculate “personal risk scores”.


The score would be used to determine the need “for quarantine and decontamination,” according to the report, with “aggregate risk scores” also assigned to “locations like your neighborhood grocery store.”


The universities hope to have a working mobile app by August, in time for the start of the fall semester.


Welcome to the new normal. Surely the fallout of this system will all be positive.


When the coronavirus vaccine eventually comes along the system will presumably be updated to show who has had it and who hasn’t.


High social credit points for those who have taken it, no travel privileges for those who refuse!








We’re in this together!


The report notes that “Countries such as South Korea or China have used location-based digitized contact tracing. However, it has only been successful because citizens are forced to download it, opt into location monitoring, and regularly check in or otherwise be visited by enforcement authorities.”


“In that setting where there’s 100% mandated compliance, it’s been shown it can work, in our setting in the United States, I don’t see that really happening,” said Dr. Jeffrey Klausner, a professor of medicine at UCLA.


“We have enough problems with governors issuing orders and denying free personal movement, that the idea that people are going to be ordered to download apps to monitor their movement is highly unlikely and probably not constitutional.” Klausner added, conceding that  “It’s going to be difficult to get Americans to agree to involuntary surveillance.”


The report further notes that the social credit scoring could “become problematic if a school or employer requires students or workers reveal them as a condition of receiving a benefit, entering a building or returning to their office.”


“When you introduce ‘scoring’ that takes other factors into account, it complicates everything, and increases the risk that users will be misinformed or discriminated against due to factors beyond their control,” noted USC’s Cyrus Shahabi, a professor of computer science.


Indeed, the Chinese social credit system has reportedly blacklisted more than 13 million citizens as “untrustworthy,” state media recently bragged.


And what heinous behaviour led to the distinction? Well, jaywalking for one. According to Chinese media, other violations stretch to the following:


– Bad driving. – Smoking on trains. – Buying too many video games. – Buying too much junk food. – Buying too much alcohol. – Calling a friend who has a low credit score . – Having a friend online who has a low credit score. – Posting “fake news” online. – Criticizing the government. – Visiting unauthorized websites. – Walking your dog without a leash. – Letting your dog bark too much.








The punishment for such a designation as “discredited entity” is to be barred from traveling by train or plane.
















Global Times



✔@globaltimesnews

















China restricted 2.56 million discredited entities from purchasing plane tickets, and 90,000 entities from buying high-speed rail tickets in July: NDRC 










View image on Twitter



















134




12:00 AM – Aug 16, 2019


Twitter Ads info and privacy















159 people are talking about this
































Is this our collective future?
















James O’Malley



✔@Psythor

















Here’s a dystopian vision of the future: A real announcement I recorded on the Beijing-Shanghai bullet train. (I’ve subtitled it so you can watch in silence.)

















Embedded video





















30.8K




3:34 AM – Oct 29, 2018


Twitter Ads info and privacy















19.5K people are talking about this































Apple and Google announced this year that they are working on a Bluetooth applications that will provide contact tracing of the coronavirus using smartphone location data.





			

		

		
		

			
							

		


	

		
	
		
	

		
		
THE MUSLIM GENOCIDE OF 2.5 MILLION CHRISTIANS
		
		
 

	
		
		
					

			
		

						
THE MUSLIM GENOCIDE OF 2.5 MILLION CHRISTIANS 


The religious as opposed to nationalistic aspects of the Armenian Genocide


BY RAYMOND IBRAHIM



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research


purposes:


Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.


Last Friday, April 24, marked the “Great Crime,” that is, the genocide of Christians—primarily Armenians Assyrians and Greeks—that took place under the Islamic Ottoman Empire, throughout World War I.  Then, in an attempt to wipe out as many Christians as possible, the Turks massacred approximately 1.5 million Armenians, 300,000 Assyrians, and 750,000 Greeks.


Most objective American historians who have studied the question unequivocally agree that it was a deliberate, calculated genocide:


More than one million Armenians perished as the result of execution, starvation, disease, the harsh environment, and physical abuse.  A people who lived in eastern Turkey for nearly 3,000 years [more than double the amount of time the invading Islamic Turks had occupied Anatolia, now known as “Turkey”] lost its homeland and was profoundly decimated in the first large-scale genocide of the twentieth century.  At the beginning of 1915 there were some two million Armenians within Turkey; today there are fewer than 60,000….  Despite the vast amount of evidence that points to the historical reality of the Armenian Genocide, eyewitness accounts, official archives, photographic evidence, the reports of diplomats, and the testimony of survivors, denial of the Armenian Genocide by successive regimes in Turkey has gone on from 1915 to the present.


Similarly, in 1920, U.S. Senate Resolution 359 heard testimony that included evidence of “[m]utilation, violation, torture, and death [which] have left their haunting memories in a hundred beautiful Armenian valleys, and the traveler in that region is seldom free from the evidence of this most colossal crime of all the ages.”


In her memoir, Ravished Armenia, Aurora Mardiganian described being raped and thrown into a harem (consistent with Islam’s rules of war).  Unlike thousands of other Armenian girls who were discarded after being defiled, she managed to escape. In the city of Malatia, she saw 16 Christian girls crucified: “Each girl had been nailed alive upon her cross,” she wrote, “spikes through her feet and hands, only their hair blown by the wind, covered their bodies.” Such scenes were portrayed in the 1919 documentary film Auction of Souls, some of which is based on Mardiganian’s memoirs.


Whereas the genocide is largely acknowledged in the West, one of its primary if not fundamental causes is habitually overlooked: religion.  The genocide is usually articulated through a singularly secular paradigm, one that factors only things that are intelligible from a secular, Western point of view—such as identity and gender politics, nationalism, and territorial disputes. Such an approach does little more than project modern Western perspectives onto vastly different civilizations and eras.


War, of course, is another factor that clouds the true face of the genocide.  Because these atrocities mostly occurred during World War I, so the argument goes, they are ultimately a reflection of just that—war, in all its chaos and destruction, and nothing more.  But as Winston Churchill, who described the massacres as an “administrative holocaust,” correctly observed, “The opportunity [WWI] presented itself for clearing Turkish soil of a Christian race.”  Even Adolf Hitler, ominously presaging his own plans, had pointed out that “Turkey is taking advantage of the war in order to thoroughly liquidate its internal foes, i.e., the indigenous Christians, without being thereby disturbed by foreign intervention.”


It’s worth noting that little has changed; in the context of war in Iraq, Syria, and Libya, the first to be targeted for genocide have been Christians and other minorities.


But even the most cited factor of the Armenian Genocide, “ethnic identity conflict,” while legitimate, must be understood in light of the fact that, historically, religion accounted more for a person’s identity than language or heritage.   This is daily demonstrated throughout the Islamic world today, where Muslim governments and Muslim mobs persecute Christian minorities who share the same race, ethnicity, language, and culture; minorities who are indistinguishable from the majority—except, of course, for being non-Muslims, or “infidels.”


As one Armenian studies professor asks, “If it [the Armenian Genocide] was a feud between Turks and Armenians, what explains the genocide carried out by Turkey against the Christian Assyrians at the same time?” The same can be said about the Greeks. From a Turkish perspective, the primary thing Armenians, Assyrians, and Greeks had in common was that they were all Christian “infidels.”


According to a 2017 book, Year of the Sword: The Assyrian Christian Genocide, the “policy of ethnic cleansing was stirred up by pan-Islamism and religious fanaticism.  Christians were considered infidels (kafir).  The call to Jihad, decreed on 29 November 1914 and instigated and orchestrated for political ends, was part of the plan” to “combine and sweep over the lands of Christians and to exterminate them.”   As with Armenians and Greeks, eyewitness accounts tell of the sadistic eye-gouging of Assyrians and the gang rape of their children on church altars. According to key documents, all this was part of “an Ottoman plan to exterminate Turkey’s Christians.”


Today, from Indonesia in the east to Morocco in the west, from Central Asia in the north, to sub-Sahara Africa—that is, throughout the entire Islamic world—Muslims are, to varying degrees, persecuting, killing, raping, enslaving, torturing and dislocating Christians; where formal Islamic groups such as the Islamic State (ISIS), Al Shabaab, Boko Haram, etc., hold sway, Christians and other “infidels” are literally experiencing a genocide.  (See Crucified Again: Exposing Islam’s New War on Christians — or my monthly “Muslim Persecution of Christians” report — for a comprehensive and ongoing account of the “great crime” of our times.)


To understand how the historic genocide of Armenians, Assyrians, and Greeks is representative of the modern day plight of Christians under Islam, one need only read the following words written in 1918 by President Theodore Roosevelt; however, read “Armenian” as “Christian” and “Turkish” as  “Islamic,” as supplied in brackets:


the Armenian [Christian] massacre was the greatest crime of the war, and the failure to act against Turkey [the Islamic world] is to condone it… the failure to deal radically with the Turkish [Islamic] horror means that all talk of guaranteeing the future peace of the world is mischievous nonsense.


Similarly, if we “fail to deal radically” with the “horror” currently being visited upon millions of Christians around the Islamic world, we “condone it” and had better cease talking “mischievous nonsense” of a utopian world of peace and tolerance.


Put differently, silence is always the ally of those who would liquidate the “other.”  In 1915, Adolf Hitler rationalized his genocidal plans, which he implemented some three decades later, when he rhetorically asked: “Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?”


And who among today’s Western politicians speaks—let alone does anything—about the ongoing annihilation of Christians by Muslims?

			

		

		
		

			
							

		


	

		
	

		
		
ARMY OF MEDICAL “BROWN SHIRTS” BEING CREATED ON A NATIONAL LEVEL
		
		
 

	
		
		
					

			
		

						
ARMY OF MEDICAL “BROWN SHIRTS” BEING CREATED ON A NATIONAL LEVEL










US Universities Creating Social Credit Coronavirus Surveillance System

ARMY OF MEDICAL “BROWN SHIRTS” BEING CREATED ON A NATIONAL LEVEL 


Dems try to sneak nationalized healthcare into coronavirus response


BY GREG REESE



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research


purposes:


The Clinton Foundation is working with leftist governors to create a “National Contact Tracing Corps.”








Beware the Contact Tracers


The Public Health mafia (including the Clintons) are speaking in military language about an “army” of “front line” “agents” to question the associations & whereabouts of anyone who tested positive for the stupid v-i-r-u-s. I have lots to say.






SEE ALSO:


https://www.infowars.com/us-universities-creating-social-credit-


coronavirus-surveillance-system/



			

		

		
		

			
							

		


	

		
	

		
		
CHURCHES REFUSE TO COWER BEFORE CAESAR; COURT VICTORY IN KENTUCKY
		
		
 

	
		
		
					

			
		

						




In-person church services resume across the Commonwealth


CHURCHES REFUSE TO COWER BEFORE CAESAR; COURT VICTORY IN KENTUCKY


BY BOB ADELMANN



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research


purposes:


Some churches are suing. Some are asking permission to reopen in-person church services. Some are announcing they are opening in-person church services — with or without the government’s permission.


U.S. District Judge Gregory Van Tatenhove issued a temporary restraining order on Friday against Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear’s edict banning in-person church services.


The complaint was brought by Tabernacle Baptist Church of Nicholasville on Wednesday, May 6. The judge issued the order on Friday and the governor officially backed off that same day. The judge’s ruling applies to all churches in the commonwealth.


On March 25 Governor Beshear issued an executive order that required all organizations that are not “life-sustaining” to close. According to his edict churches were not considered to be “life-sustaining,” but laundromats, accounting services, law firms, hardware stores, and other secular entities were. This formed the first basis of the complaint: blatant discrimination.


But the meat of the complaint rested on constitutional violations:


Requiring Plaintiff [Tabernacle] to abstain from its religious gatherings, despite substantial modifications to satisfy the public health interests at stake, violates Plaintiff’s Constitutional right to free exercise of its religion;


By denying Plaintiff the ability to assemble via an in-person church service, Defendants [Governor Beshear and another official in his administration] are in violation of the Freedom of Assembly Clause [contained in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution];


Requiring Plaintiff to abstain from its religious gatherings, despite substantial modifications to satisfy the public health interests at stake, violates Plaintiff’s Constitutional right peaceably to assemble [also in the First Amendment].


On Friday the judge granted what the church demanded: a temporary restraining order against the governor’s edict.


Later that day the governor backed off: “I believe that the healthiest economy coming out of COVID-19 is going to be the one that can keep the virus contained while they successfully reopen. Remember, listen to your faith leader. If they tell you that they’re not ready and that they don’t think that it’s safe, then you should wait.”


In retrospect this is what all governors should have announced from the beginning: leave it up to individuals and organizations on how properly to respond to the threat, rather than allowing governors to interfere where they had no right to.


In California, on the other hand, churches there are taking a more direct approach: They informed Governor Gavin Newsom that they were going to start holding in-person church services starting May 31. They didn’t ask permission. They didn’t go to court. The ministers and leaders of more than 3,000 churches in the state, with 2.5 million followers, simply announced on Thursday that they will open in-person services to celebrate the Day of Pentecost (the day the Holy Spirit descended upon Christ’s apostles and launched the Christian religion).


A few of the pastors couldn’t let the moment pass without comment. Water of Life Community Church senior pastor Danny Carroll said: “Our churches are part of the answer, not part of the problem. We’re an essential part of this whole journey and we’ve been bypassed … kicked to the curb and deemed nonessential.”


Pastor Matt Brown of Sandals Church called out Governor Newsom:


My church made 10,000 masks and gowns for doctors while practicing social distancing. We feed people and procure electronic devices for seniors who are isolated. [Newsom] has no problem with all of that. But when we want to gather to worship, he has a problem….


[Newsom] didn’t ask us. He overstepped and he’s overreached. And he needs to step back and he needs to declare that the church is an essential part of what we do as Americans, as what we do as Californians.


That same day the governor met with some of the pastors and offered the possibility that he might relent and allow them to reopen earlier than expected:


Our fear is simply this. Congregations of people from far and wide coming together in a closed space at a large scale remains a point of concern and anxiety for us. We are working on guidelines for physical distancing and working with faith leaders talking about unique conditions in their own facilities. Nothing is etched in stone.


Bob Tyler, a religious freedom attorney who is advising the pastors, responded: “The churches are not asking for permission. The governor is sitting here as a dictator, trumping the Constitution and is kind of hanging on to this state of emergency for as long as he can hold it. We’ll give the governor an opportunity to amend his order. If he doesn’t, these pastors have told me that they’re committed to opening regardless of what the governor decides.”


Some churches aren’t waiting for Pentecost or for the governor to relent. The 412 Church in Murreitta and a sister congregation in San Jacinto have already begun holding in-person church services.


____________________________________________________________


Federal judge rules all Kentucky churches can have in-person services starting this Sunday






			

		

		
		

			
							

		


	

		
	

		
		
CHICAGO: ROMANIAN PASTORS PUT ILLINOIS GOVERNOR ON NOTICE WITH FIERY DECLARATION: “WE’RE OPENING MAY 10 NO MATTER WHAT”
		
		
 

	
		
		
					

			
		

						














Elim Church


2.8K subscribers










Official Statement – Pastor Cristian Ionescu




















ABOVE VIDEO IS IN ENGLISH


CHICAGO: ROMANIAN PASTORS PUT 


ILLINOIS GOVERNOR ON NOTICE 


WITH FIERY DECLARATION: 


“WE’RE OPENING MAY 10 NO MATTER WHAT”


BY DUSTIN GERMAIN



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:


A group of pastors have announced their intent to openly defy Illinois Governor J.B Pritzker’s stay-at-home orders by issuing a declaration that they are opening their churches for in-person services on May 10, no matter the consequences.


The move comes several days after The Beloved Church, a small congregation in Lena, Illinois, held their own in-person services shortly after they filed a federal lawsuit protesting what they view as their state’s severe and oppressive COVID-19 containment policies.  The state had been restricting churches from gathering at all, deeming them to not be “essential actively.”


On the day The Beloved Church filed the suite, the Governor office released a modified executive order that unambiguously allowed Illinois residents to leave their homes “to engage in the free exercise of religion.”


The updated order deems attending church and engaging in religious practices to now be considered a permitted essential activity “provided that such exercise must comply with Social Distancing Requirements and the limit on gatherings of more than ten people in keeping with CDC guidelines for the protection of public health.”


The small acquiescence from the state was too little, too late, and too bad.


Despite the overture from the government to partially relax their fingers wrapped around the churches throat, the Romanian pastors are insistent that they will not relent or change course based on their deeply-held convictions, and are ready to die on this hill. They say they have lived under Romanian communism and are painfully familiar with living under the heavy hand of a totalitarian regime, and will tolerate it no more.


Here is the letter issued to the Governor. It’s a bit of a barn-burner. Bold emphasis added by the signers. Highlighter added by us for clarity and emphasis as well.
































We also have an official statement from Pastor Cristian Ionescu, one of the pastors who signed the letter, in which he delves more into his motivation and thinking and theological implications of the letter and his actions: (SEE ABOVE)

			

		

		
		

			
							

		


	

		
	

		
		
PA REP. STEPHANIE BOROWICZ: COVID-19 UPDATE-GOVERNOR WOLF’S UNCONSTITUTIONAL DICTATES WARRANT FEDERAL INVESTIGATION
		
		
 

	
		
		
					

			
		

						


PA REP. STEPHANIE BOROWICZ:

COVID-19 UPDATE-GOVERNOR WOLF’S UNCONSTITUTIONAL DICTATES WARRANT FEDERAL INVESTIGATION

Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research

purposes:


I am so proud to stand alongside so many in the House and the Senate in protecting our liberties.


On behalf of the Independence State of Pennsylvania, we are calling on United States Attorney General William Barr and the Department of Justice to investigate the heavy-handed dictates of the Wolf Administration during the COVID-19 emergency.


“The Constitution is not suspended in times of crisis,” or in the words of Ronald Reagan: “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it on to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.”

______________________________________________________________

We Hear You: House Actions Help Guide State Toward Safe Reopening




With Pennsylvania employers, workers and families continuing to struggle in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, the House was back in session this week continuing our work to reopen businesses safely so people can return to work and support their families.


From the moment the governor abruptly announced his unconstitutional statewide business closure order in mid-March, the House has been fighting to bring openness, transparency and logic to the process.


We have taken action on bills to reopen construction (which is slated to open today), golf courses (also slated to reopen today, along with privately owned campgrounds, marinas and guided fishing trips), as well as automobile dealers, smaller retail stores, real estate, garden centers, pet groomers and more.


In fact, while we were debating legislation in the House to safely reopen the real estate industry, the Wolf administration issued new guidance to allow certain transactions to proceed.


Thank you for sharing your questions and concerns with us; we hear you, and it is making a difference.


Other bills advanced by the House this week:

• To help our communities and first responders, House Bill 2413 would invest up to $40 million in grants for fire and emergency medical services companies.

• To help save taxpayer dollars, House Bill 2418 would require a comprehensive review of all Commonwealth debt to identify opportunities to take advantage of refinancing at lower interest rates.

• House Bill 2392 would require the Independent Fiscal Office to include critical risk factors in its assessment of the Commonwealth’s fiscal condition to help lawmakers better plan and budget within our means.

• To address regulations, House Bill 2415 would require the Office of the Governor to notify legislative leaders in writing by electronic means when a specific statute or regulation is suspended, modified or waived under the authority of the emergency order.

• To ensure intergovernmental cooperation throughout the disaster and recovery period, House Bill 2419 would establish the COVID-19 inter-branch Cost and Recovery Task Force.


None of this could have been achieved without the people making their voices heard.


While this is great news, there are more sectors of PA’s economy that are ready to open safely and follow CDC guidelines. It is a matter of survival for more businesses to reopen now!


Elective Surgeries Restored


 Read more

			

		

		
		

			
							

		


	


			  

					
1
…
235
236
237