This is the message: "The Constitution gives the Congress the power of the purse; we expect the Republicans in Congress to use it and defund anything connected with the executive order President Obama issued regarding immigration. Please tell me where he stands on this issue."
GA Sen. Chambliss: 202-224-3521; Atlanta 770-763-9090
GA Sen. Isakson: 202-224-3643; Atlanta 770-661-0999
GA 8th Dist. Rep. Austin Scott: 202-225-6531, Tifton 229-396-5175
GA 1st Dist. Rep. Jack Kingston: 202-225-5831
Speaker of the House, John Boehner: 202-225-6205
Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell: 202-224-2541
Gov. Nathan Deal: 404-656-1776
Additional information can be found here >> Take action against executive amnesty now.
Find Out Who's Defending Washington Cronyism
Following the money trail of the Export-Import Bank shows taxpayers are on the hook for loans to some interesting places. China, Russia, and Venezuela just to name a few.
>> See the money trail.
The Ex-Im Bank subsidizes these foreign countries to buy the goods of large American corporations and special-interests. It can even reward an aggressive foreign nation, such as Russia, which is the target of potential U.S. sanctions.
by Katie Nielsen
This September, Congress will have the opportunity to terminate a federal “bank” that doles out loans to foreign countries and well-connected major corporations while leaving taxpayers like you are on the hook for any losses.
Heritage Foundation expert Diane Katz explains that the costs of the Depression-era Ex-Im Bank outweigh the benefits:
Ex–Im advocates offer myriad excuses for maintaining government interference in export financing, including job creation, gaps in private investment, and government subsidies lavished on foreign firms. Such justifications do not stand up to the facts, and the purported benefits, if any, are not commensurate with the risk to taxpayers.
Unfortunately, Katz continues, special interests benefit from its largesse. “The bank is a conduit for corporate welfare beset by unreliable risk management, inefficiency, and cronyism.” Even then-candidate Barack Obama described it in 2008 as “little more than a fund for corporate welfare.”
This type of government interference inevitably “distorts the competitive landscape, with winners and losers determined by political considerations rather than the merit of their products and services,” Katz argues.
Do you think the Ex-Im Bank’s charter should be terminated?
The U.S. government is preparing to transfer the oversight it has had over the Internet -- oversight that has helped keep the Internet open and free -- to the United Nations.
Some countries, like Russia and China, are eager for the United Nations to take over the oversight role. That’s because they favor censorship and other limitations on online speech and commerce.
Heritage legal expert Paul Rosenzweig said in testimony before a House committee last week that lawmakers should be cautious “lest the transition destroy the openness and freedom of the network.”
Watch this video from the Foundry for a primer on the topic, then tell us in the comments: do you think the “international community” should play a role in overseeing the Internet?
Ex-Im Bank: Deferring Risk to American Taxpayers
"We help small businesses." It's a common phrase used by Washington bureaucrats and politicians. But if they knew how the economy actually worked, the bureaucrats and politicians would understand free markets, not New Deal-era manipulation, are what helps small businesses grow.
>> See how the Ex-Im Bank disrupts the free-market.
While the Export-Import Bank tries to present itself as a champion for small business it really enables big business to defer risk to American taxpayers.
The most prominent beneficiaries of Ex-Im’s subsidies are not small business.
>> Find out which "monster corporations" receive subsidies from Ex-Im.
It’s time the Export-Import Bank stopped acting as an engine for corporate welfare.