Archive for the ‘FedGov’ Category

Via HotAir, from Government Executive:

Environmental Protection Agency workers have done some odd things recently.

Contractors built secret man caves in an EPA warehouse, an employee pretended to work for the CIA to get unlimited vacations and one worker even spent most of his time on the clock looking at pornography.

It appears, however, that a regional office has reached a new low: Management for Region 8 in Denver, Colo., wrote an email earlier this year to all staff in the area pleading with them to stop inappropriate bathroom behavior, including defecating in the hallway.

In the email, obtained by Government Executive, Deputy Regional Administrator Howard Cantor mentioned “several incidents” in the building, including clogging the toilets with paper towels and “an individual placing feces in the hallway” outside the restroom.

Confounded by what to make of this occurrence, EPA management “consulted” with workplace violence “national expert” John Nicoletti, who said that hallway feces is in fact a health and safety risk. He added the behavior was “very dangerous” and the individuals responsible would “probably escalate” their actions.

There are two possible explanations for this.

First explanation is that the EPA is hiring people from the third world.  It’s just possible.  It’s a common occurence at colleges where third world students are taken in who’ve never used flush toilets, aren’t familiar with indoor plumbing, and aren’t familiar with sanitation at all.  Signs like this exist for a reason:

sitting vs squatting on toilet sign

Some places people aren’t used to how toilets work.  Even people from places with public sanitation sometimes leave unexpected messes.  Some folks south of the US have flush toilets but low pressure, so they’ll throw used paper into a trash can next to the toilet, or just on the floor.  People from different parts of Asia and Africa frequently are used to squatting and often don’t know how flushing works.  A lot of folks in the Middle East… well, you just don’t use your left hand to shake there.   They’re really bad.

So this could be a matter of the EPA having really crappy hiring practices and pulling in people from remote third world areas that have failed to assimilate in even the most basic manner.  If you move to some remote jungle place, you learn to dig a cathole and squat.  If you move to the civilized world,  you learn to use a toilet.

Failure to learn how to poop in your host country is not only disgusting, but in this case these are people with regulatory authority who don’t even know how to shit.  If you’ve failed to learn the culture well enough to operate your own bowel movements, you should not be in charge of anything.

Second explanation, and the more likely one: These are filthy, disgusting EPA employees who know how to shit and are willfully crapping everywhere because they’re filthy, malicious animals.

That’s much worse.  A cultural misunderstanding that comes from hiring some ignorant dirt farmer out of blind stupidity – and an ignorant dirt farmer who will be responsible for the interpretation of millions of rules and regulations that destroy American businesses with compliance costs – at least that’s just profound stupidity on the part of the EPA hiring department and profound ignorance on the part of the third worlder.

If culturally acclimated EPA employees from modern nations are doing this, they’re just filthy malicious swine who will shit where they work out of hate and contempt for everything.

A citizen petitioning the EPA to stop using their millions of regulations to crush them would be greeted with the stink of EPA peons’ anal creations and probably walls smeared with brown bureaucrat fingerpaint.  The EPA-crappers’ own coworkers must live and work in their filth whether diligent employees or lazy cretins.  The taxpayers and government funded by those taxpayers that paid for their building and pays their salaries is having steaming clumps of contempt flung at them – and at you if you’re a taxpayer.  It’s all because some disgusting primate has made his workplace – the workplace you paid for – into a sewer.

They’re tasked with Environmental Protection, have been granted the absurd authority to control CO2 – every breath you exhale… and they shit in their own workplace.

From Katie Pavlich over at Townhall:

Last week the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, through the power of Dodd-Frank, passed a rule giving the agency unprecedented power to shut down businesses, no matter what the reason, at any time it wishes through a cease-and-desist order. Further, the rule puts businesses at the mercy of the CFPB and they cannot go back into operation until government approval or a court ruling is made over an issue. Subsequently because bureaucratic decisions and court rulings take a substantial amount of time to happen, businesses cannot survive during those waiting periods.  Here are the details:

In a notice published in today’s Federal Register, the CFPB has announced that it has adopted its interim final rule on temporary cease-and-desist orders (C&Ds) without change. The final rule takes effect on July 18, 2014.

The CFPB is authorized to issue temporary C&Ds under Section 1053(c) of Dodd-Frank. That provision authorizes a temporary C&D as an adjunct to a cease-and-desist proceeding brought under Section 1053 against a covered person or service provider. A temporary C&D is effective immediately upon service and remains in effect unless modified or terminated administratively by the CFPB or set aside on judicial review.

So they can shut any business down at any time.

regulations grow freedom dies

1053(c) of Dodd-Frank is almost incomprehensible.

(c) SPECIAL RULES FOR TEMPORARY CEASE-AND-DESIST PROCEEDINGS.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Whenever the Bureau determines that the violation specified in the notice of charges served upon a person, including a service provider, pursuant to subsection (b), or the continuation thereof, is likely to cause the person to be insolvent or otherwise prejudice the interests of consumers before the completion of the proceedings conducted pursuant to subsection (b), the Bureau may issue a temporary order requiring the person to cease and desist from any such violation or practice and to take affirmative action to prevent or remedy such insolvency or other condition pending completion of such proceedings.

Such order may include any requirement authorized under this subtitle. Such order shall become effective upon service upon the person and, unless set aside, limited, or suspended by a court in proceedings authorized by paragraph (2), shall remain effective and enforceable pending the completion of the administrative proceedings pursuant to such notice and until such time as the Bureau shall dismiss the charges specified in such notice, or if a cease-and-desist order is issued against the person, until the effective date of such order.

There’s more, but it’s the same kind of legalese gibberish that basically means if there’s something questioned in a terms of service agreement or contract, a business can be shut down.

Ms. Pavlich points out some more things going on with this:

The new rule comes on the heals of revelations the Department of Justice has been smothering firearms dealerships and other “high risk” entities out of business by “choking” banks and stripping funding through Operation Choke Point.

Consumer groups are pushing back against the rule and issuing a warnings to businesses everywhere about what the rule means for them. The United States Consumer Coalition in particular is sounding the alarm:

“This unprecedented rule created by the CFPB grants the agency unilateral authority to literally shut down any business overnight. It is a doubling down of Operation Choke Point (OCP), the Administration’s program to target lawful industries by intimidating banks from doing business with them. This rule allows the CFPB to immediately issue a cease-and-desist order, which terminates all business practices — and a hearing doesn’t have to be granted for 10 days, effectively shutting down businesses for at least 10 days. This is a ‘guilty until proven innocent’ tactic of the Administration that goes against every historical notion of justice under the law in America.”

A quick primer on Operation Choke Point:

The Obama administration, after failing to get gun control passed on Capitol Hill, has resorted to using its executive power to try to put some in the firearms industry out of business, House Republican investigators say.

The assertion is included in a report recently released by California GOP Rep. Darrell Issa, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

Citing internal Justice Department documents, the committee concluded that the administration used a program known as Operation Choke Point to target legal companies that it finds “objectionable.”

The program was started in 2013 to protect consumers by “choking” alleged fraudsters’ access to the banking system. The Justice Department essentially forces banks and third-party payment processors to stop accepting payments from companies that are considered “high risk” and are supposedly violating federal law.

However, the documents released by Issa’s committee show the federal government lumped the firearms industry in with other “high-risk” businesses including those dealing with pornography, drug paraphernalia, escort services, racist materials, Ponzi schemes and online gambling.

So basically the Orwellian-named Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is going to have the ability to shut down any business, any time, and we’ve already seen this administration using financial schemes to target businesses they find politically undesirable.

But what’s the best part about the Consumer Financial Protection People’s Defense Bureau?  They can’t be stopped – they’re funded by the Federal Reserve, and thus can’t even be reigned in by congress defunding them.

Republicans and Democrats on Captiol Hill continue to fight over whether the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau should be subject to the congressional appropriations process — that is, whether Congress should directly control how much money the fledgling agency can spend each year.

In the meantime, the CFPB funds itself through a bank account at the New York Fed.

Under the Dodd-Frank law, the CFPB gets its money from transfers from the Federal Reserve System, up to specific caps set by the law. The Fed can’t turn down requests under that cap.

The caps are fixed percentages of the Fed’s operating expenses, which works out to the following:
–10% of Fed operating expenses in fiscal 2011 or $498 million
–11% of Fed operating expenses in fiscal 2012 or $547.8 million
–12% in fiscal 2013 or $597.6 million
–12% each fiscal year thereafter, subject to annual adjustments for inflation

So they’re a completely unaccountable, self-funded government group who’ve just made up the rule that they can shut down any business at any time, giving themselves virtually unlimited power to unilaterally destroy any company or enterprise.

Update 2: Looks like USDA this time is using them more exclusively for their OIG, which means they probably sit in a locker somewhere until those guys need to serve a warrant.  Either way, the rest of the post stands.

-

A Breitbart story via HotAir, but it’s also around the internet:

A May 7th solicitation by the U.S. Department of Agriculture seeks “the commercial acquisition of submachine guns [in] .40 Cal. S&W.”

According to the solicitation, the Dept. of Agriculture wants the guns to have an “ambidextrous safety, semiautomatic or 2 round [bursts] trigger group, Tritium night sights front and rear, rails for attachment of flashlight (front under fore group) and scope (top rear), stock collapsible or folding,” and a “30 rd. capacity” magazine.

They also want the submachine guns to have a “sling,” be “lightweight,” and have an “oversized trigger guard for gloved operation.”

The solicitation is from the USDA’s Office of Inspector General, and another of their solicitations submitted on the same day (May 7th) is looking for the “commerical acquisition of ballist vests, compliant with NIJ 0101.06 for Level IIIA Ballistic Resistance of body armor… Body armor is gender specific, lightweight, trauma plate/pad (hard or soft), concealable carrier, tactical vest, undergarment (white), identification patches, accessories (6 pouches), body armor carry bag, and professional measurements.”

The SMGs they’re basically asking for are things like the HK UMP 40 that several DHS components carry (USBP, for example).

oleg volk UMP40

Photo by Oleg Volk.

The Forest Service falls under USDA, and the Forest Service has to deal with things like this:

A marijuana farm with more than 3,000 plants — valued at about $9 million — was found in the Pike National Forest in Douglas County.

“These grow operations are believed to be connected to the Drug Trafficking Organizations (DTO) that have proliferated on public lands throughout California, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, and Utah, and are now being found in the northeastern, southeastern and southwestern states,” said U.S. Forest Service Special Agent in Charge Laura Mark.

usfs grow op raid 1

The criminals with grow operations tend to guard their crops:

One of the wardens who went to the site found makeshift huts and crude rooms hidden under tarps and disguised in trees. There were rifles and pistols. In other similar illegal drug grow operations, the warden said booby traps and other devices have been used.

This tends to fly under the radar, since it’s out where no one sees it.  While DEA or FBI or some other agency could make a special “arboreal operations unit”, the Forest Service already works those areas, knows the areas, and will be the first to respond, and has the jurisdiction and specific enforcement authority protection of national forests.

Again:

Marcos Solano Farias, 32, and Joe Miseal Avaia Talavera, 20, pleaded guilty Thursday in federal court to charges of unlawful manufacture with intent to distribute more than 1,000 marijuana plants. They also pleaded guilty to illegal possession of a firearm and damage to government property.

Police raided two outdoor marijuana growing operations in the forest a few miles from Highway 21 in Boise County on Sept. 11. The two men, Mexico nationals, were taken into custody at a camp located next to the grow site on Rabbit Creek.

A total of 1,411 live plants, along with several hundred plants that had been harvested, were confiscated. Officers also seized two semi-automatic handguns and a rifle.

And an official “awareness” warning from the USFS:

Illegal drug operations, such as marijuana gardens and methamphetamine production sites, threaten public safety and also damage the environment.

For many years, the Forest Service and other law enforcement agencies have worked together to identify and clean-up illegal drug operations on National Forest lands in Michigan. In recent years, these illegal activities have increased.  For example, 2010 marked the first time that authorities found marijuana grow sites on Michigan’s National Forest lands operated by large drug trafficking organizations.

Thing is, it’s their beat, and USFS law enforcement is who works those areas and who has to be the first one on the scene.  If they get a call that a hiker stumbled over a meth lab on an old logging road and got shot at by the meth cook, they’re the ones who have to go deal with it and have to act because they’re the ones on-scene, and the ones with the knowledge of the area.  If they personally stumble over it, they’re the ones who may have to deal with it immediately.

So there’s little reason they shouldn’t have the option to carry an SMG that’s lighter weight than a rifle, more handy, and convenient.  It’s not as if submachineguns are a new thing for law enforcement.

them trooper with smg

While a fictional example there, no one batted an eye decades ago to the idea that law enforcement working in remote locations with no backup (like, say, rural highways, remote borders, and national forests) should have the option to carry something to at least get themselves out of a bad situation.

Or maybe I’m just the only person who’s seen Without A Paddle and remembers anything from it?

without a paddle 1

-

While it’s pretty much always good to be skeptical and critical of government, this one, much like DHS’s ammo purchases, may not be so crazy if you assess it a bit more and if it’s USDA procuring weapons for a specific group of law enforcement with a dangerous task.

Unless this is for the anti-raw milk task force.  Then all bets are off.

-

Update: Minor point that I’ve seen some folks asking is why SMGs in particular, why not rifles (or shotguns)?

Because SMGs are lightweight, they have ease of use, share ammunition with pistols which makes for ease of logistical use, and are compact.  There are all kinds of organizational advantages to have just from those positives alone.  Plus the agencies may already have rifles, and just want to add one more option for their personnel to carry.  Anyone who’s carried a rifle all day can tell you they get heavy.  Anyone who’s not used to carrying a rifle all day is going to really appreciate the saved weight by going from a rifle or carbine to an SMG.  Same goes for shotguns, but they have more limited ammunition capacity, slower reloads, recoil, and other negatives.  So why not have the option to use any of the three?

BLM, Oklahoma, Texas, and the Red River

Posted: April 23, 2014 by ShortTimer in FedGov, Government, Texas
Tags:

As I’ve previously noted, I break with some on the right out of my own concern for rule of law, and I don’t have much sympathy for the Nevada rancher who’s simply disregarded the law because it’s inconvenient for him.  Every word written about that situation is one wasted that should be used to talk about the Red River between Texas and Oklahoma.

I certainly am very concerned for folks living on the northern border of Texas and souther border of Oklahoma, who are facing the BLM taking 90,000 acres that is and was always private land.

This story is much more black and white:

BYERS, Texas (RFD-TV) Most people think the border between Texas and Oklahoma is the Red River. Unfortunately, it’s a little more complicated than that, especially along the part of the river where Tommy Henderson and his family ranch.

Henderson lost a lawsuit 30 years ago that moved part of the northern Texas border over a mile to the south.

The Bureau of Land Management [BLM] took 140 acres of his property and didn’t pay him one cent.

Now, they want to use his case as precedent to seize land along a 116-mile stretch of the river.

“They’re wanting to take the boundaries that the courts placed here and extend those east and west to the forks of the river north of Vernon and east to the 98th Meridian which is about 20 miles east of us,” Henderson explained.

BLM, which oversees public land in the United States, claims this land never belonged to Texas.

This is an issue for the states to deal with.  As nice as it would be if the federal government actually did its job and made commerce regular by acting as a neutral party between disputes, the BLM has considered simply taking 90,000 acres of private land and making it off-limits.

“How can BLM come in and say, “Hey, this isn’t yours.” Even though it’s patented from the state, you’ve always paid taxes on it. Our family has paid taxes for over 100 years on this place. We’ve got a deed to it. But yet they walked in and said it wasn’t ours,” said Henderson.

It’s private property.  It’s not a lease, it’s not public land, it’s private, and has been since Texas was an independent nation.

The border pretty much is the river.  It isn’t that complicated… but it is a land grab.

Ever since the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, there has been controversy over where Oklahoma ends and Texas begins.

In layman’s terms the boundary is the vegetation line on the south side of the Red River.

Over time the river moves. This movement north toward Oklahoma is the sticking point.

The sandy soils erode in a process called accretion, which wipes out the bank. So the property line follows the river.

BLM claims that the river moved by another process called avulsion. With avulsion, the land may be changed by flood or currents, but the property line isn’t. So BLM claims that when the river moved back north the property line stayed put.

It doesn’t help that Oklahoma defines avulsion differently than Texas and the U.S.

“Originally, here the river was out there where it is now and it eroded and accreted up to here, and then it eroded and accreted back. Well, their interpretation is that it eroded up to here but avulsed back. So when you listen to them it is always erosion to the south because the property line follows it then, but it’s always avulsion when it goes north. So the boundary can move south but it can never move back north,” said Henderson.

That the BLM could come in and just take 90,000 acres and rule it off-limits because the river moved is absurd and is not their function.  They’re not managing federal lands, they’re not dealing with delinquent grazing lessees, they’re taking land.

Sympathy and The Bundy Ranch

Posted: April 23, 2014 by ShortTimer in FedGov, Government, Nevada, Texas

I find myself again breaking from a lot of folks on the right on this issue, and mostly out of concern for the rule of law.

Powerline had this piece last week on the Nevada ranch standoff that’s worth reading for another viewpoint.  John Hinderaker argues that folks should feel sympathy towards the Bundys.  But he has to preface it with this:

First, it must be admitted that legally, Bundy doesn’t have a leg to stand on. The Bureau of Land Management has been charging him grazing fees since the early 1990s, which he has refused to pay. Further, BLM has issued orders limiting the area on which Bundy’s cows can graze and the number that can graze, and Bundy has ignored those directives. As a result, BLM has sued Bundy twice in federal court, and won both cases. In the second, more recent action, Bundy’s defense is that the federal government doesn’t own the land in question and therefore has no authority to regulate grazing. That simply isn’t right; the land, like most of Nevada, is federally owned. Bundy is representing himself, of necessity: no lawyer could make that argument.

That’s why I can’t be on the side of the Bundys.  And no matter the cries for sympathy, I have find myself having no more for them than I would for yesterday’s example of a hypothetical where Reverend Jeremiah “God Damn America” Wright used a church owned as a historic site by the National Park Service and then decided to ignore the law.

That being the case, why does Bundy deserve our sympathy? To begin with, his family has been ranching on the acres at issue since the late 19th century. They and other settlers were induced to come to Nevada in part by the federal government’s promise that they would be able to graze their cattle on adjacent government-owned land. For many years they did so, with no limitations or fees. The Bundy family was ranching in southern Nevada long before the BLM came into existence.

I don’t think he does deserve much sympathy.  He’s broken the law for decades.  Rather than create a conflict back in 1993 when he “fired” the BLM (which would be analagous to you or I “firing” the IRS… or a traffic cop) by choosing not to pay them, and with the BLM derelict in enforcement, he just kept on breaking the law.  He didn’t make it an issue then to get the law changed, he just operated in violation of it because the BLM didn’t enforce it.  I don’t have sympathy for Tim Geithner when he forgets to pay taxes and the IRS doesn’t bother to enforce it for a long time, and I don’t have sympathy for an illegal alien who ICE doesn’t deport until they finally do, so why should I have sympathy here?

The argument that he was there first by virtue of his family being there is meaningless.  Working land that wasn’t yours in 1870 but before there was an enforcement structure for the owner to control it doesn’t mean it’s yours – especially when the owner of the land owned it since 1848.

Over the last two or three decades, the Bureau has squeezed the ranchers in southern Nevada by limiting the acres on which their cattle can graze, reducing the number of cattle that can be on federal land, and charging grazing fees for the ever-diminishing privilege.  The effect of these restrictions has been to drive the ranchers out of business. Formerly, there were dozens of ranches in the area where Bundy operates. Now, his ranch is the only one.

Like the Blaze article yesterday noted… maybe other ranchers were “chased off”.  Or maybe it’s part of Bundy’s yarn to make him the heroic last rancher standing.  Alternately, that could mean he’s just a monopoly in the region.

Reducing the number of cattle on federal land, whether due to tortoises, or due to the kind of drought that has been hitting the west for the last decade doesn’t really matter.  It’s not his land.  The key word is privilege.

The land belongs to the federal government, not to Bundy.  It’s up to them how they want to manage their land – it’s up to us as the people who direct that federal government how we want to manage our land.

If the law passed by our elected representatives says no and we don’t like that, then it’s time to pressure our reps and change the law.  It’s not time to let one lawbreaker continue to violate it just because he’s managed to draw down on some BLM agents and wrap himself in some dramatic western martyrdom.

When Bundy refused to pay grazing fees beginning in around 1993, he said something to the effect of, they are supposed to be charging me a fee for managing the land and all they are doing is trying to manage me out of business. Why should I pay them for that?

Business models sometimes have to change.  If the landowner says “no more grazing”, then maybe it’s time to find some greener pastures, rather than just declare “these are my pastures now”.

Frankly, the Bundy situation smacks of the self-righteous entitlement of a general strike where communist workers claim the factory is really theirs because they work there.  It’s not the workers’ factory, and it’s not the Bundys’ land.

Hinderaker ends with this:

So let’s have some sympathy for Cliven Bundy and his family. They don’t have a chance on the law, because under the Endangered Species Act and many other federal statutes, the agencies are always in the right. And their way of life is one that, frankly, is on the outs. They don’t develop apps. They don’t ask for food stamps. It probably has never occurred to them to bribe a politician. They don’t subsist by virtue of government subsidies or regulations that hamstring competitors. They aren’t illegal immigrants. They have never even gone to law school. So what possible place is there for the Bundys in the Age of Obama?

I’d like to have sympathy, but just because the Obama administration is lawless doesn’t justify actions of individuals who’ve been ignoring the law since the beginning of the Clinton administration.

The Bundy’s family’s way of life is on the outs because they refused to change.  Their business model didn’t advance because their cattle were grazing for free since 1993.

They didn’t need food stamps because they were feeding their livestock on taxpayer lands.  They’re no different than if Weyerhauser decided to start cutting down national forests without permission, and then cried that their lumberjack way of life was dying because the Forest Service finally told them to stop two decades later.

They subsisted entirely because of government subsidies.  They subsisted entirely because of regulations that hamstrung their competitors – the other ranchers who were “squeezed out” were legal – the Bundys just chose to break the law.

-

Update: From a local Nevada news outlet, contrasting the Bundy claims:

…the 1998 opinion from U.S. District Judge Johnnie Rawlinson in a case where it was determined Bundy wouldn’t be allowed to use federal land for his cattle because of failure to pay grazing fees to the Bureau of Land Management. Rawlinson wrote that it wasn’t until roughly 1954 that “Bundy or his father or both have grazed livestock on public lands owned by the United States and administered by the BLM.”

Clark County Recorder documents show the 160-acre Bunkerville ranch Bundy calls home was purchased by his parents, David and Bodel Bundy, from Raoul and Ruth Leavitt on Jan. 5, 1948. The purchase included the transfer to the Bundys of certain water rights, including water from the nearby Virgin River. Cliven Bundy was born in 1946.

And federal grazing districts were established nationally in 1934 and in Nevada in 1936.

-

Furthermore, every word written about the Bundys is a word not written about the Red River along the Texas-Oklahoma border, where the BLM is looking at seizing 90,000 privately held acres of land.

Really, it’s a much bigger story, and it is black and white:

BYERS, Texas (RFD-TV) Most people think the border between Texas and Oklahoma is the Red River. Unfortunately, it’s a little more complicated than that, especially along the part of the river where Tommy Henderson and his family ranch.

Henderson lost a lawsuit 30 years ago that moved part of the northern Texas border over a mile to the south.

The Bureau of Land Management [BLM] took 140 acres of his property and didn’t pay him one cent.

Now, they want to use his case as precedent to seize land along a 116-mile stretch of the river.

“They’re wanting to take the boundaries that the courts placed here and extend those east and west to the forks of the river north of Vernon and east to the 98th Meridian which is about 20 miles east of us,” Henderson explained.

BLM, which oversees public land in the United States, claims this land never belonged to Texas.

That’s not leases that they haven’t paid in over 20 years, that’s their own land.

Welfare for Weed

Posted: February 4, 2014 by ShortTimer in FedGov, Government, Welfare state
Tags:

FOX already got the best title for this:

Amid the growing debate about the legalization of marijuana, Colorado GOP lawmakers are trying to make it a little tougher for people receiving welfare or other federal government benefits to spend that money on marijuana.

Colorado pot shops currently have ATMs where welfare recipients can withdraw cash using their EBT cards. A State Senate committee rejected Republicans’ proposal to close this loophole.

Of course the Colorado Democrat-controlled senate would reject it.  If you’re giving people handouts to vote for you, you need them to dope themselves up, too.

Sen. Vicki Marble, R-Fort Collins, said Colorado’s new legal pot industry needs to make sure not to invite federal scrutiny through improper cash withdrawals at recreational or medical marijuana stores.

“Already we are operating an industry which is not allowed under federal law,” said Marble, one of the chief lawmakers involved with Colorado’s marijuana regulation bills.

If federal authorities notice public benefit card use at marijuana shops, “I have a feeling we’re going to see trouble we’re not ready to deal with,” she said.

It’s only one of the chief lawmakers who worked with Colorado’s pot bills saying “we should probably not invite the fedgov in to crush us”.

The choom gang will eventually be out of office and other federal administrations may be less pot-friendly overall.

But even before the specter of a new administration, Obama’s “revenue”-happy fedgov will demand its share of taxes off these unlicensed pharmacists and it’ll get interesting.  The FDA will get involved, the IRS will get involved, and all these happy hippy doper businesses will suddenly find out that government regulation and taxation is a real pain in the ass.

There are still pro-pot people who say “legalize and tax it and it’ll solve the ______(fill in financial problem of choice)____”.  It’s as though they don’t understand what they’re inviting in.

Right now it’s a largely unregulated business.  Wait until they find out about all the laws they have to comply with for their pot shops.  Inviting in the fedgov in any way while pushing for deregulation especially in violation of federal law – is going to be a problem for them.

OSHA will have to be regulating secondhand exposure to pot smoke, the EPA will have to assess their carbon and particulate output, the NLRB will be out there representing the Marijuana Cultivators and Harvesters Local 420 against the Big Pot companies that are out to crush the working man and deny the grower a living wage.

-

As Colorado’s government leaders have decided that their people are unfit to defend themselves and thus should be disarmed, but should be doped up and given feelgood drugs – even going so far as to enable welfare benefits to provide direct handouts for drugs – it’ll make for some schadenfreude entertainment as they begin to run afoul of fedgov – whether it be through law enforcement, taxation, or regulation.

They might have even had some support from people who dislike pot, but who’d agree with them on an individual rights basis… except they traded a valuable right of self-defense in for a dubious right of self-intoxication.

They traded in the tools of liberty for soma.

May as well date the post, since this stuff will be ongoing.

Carrot-faced crybaby earthworm John Boehner is “setting up an immigration debate” which is not a debate, but just a question of “how do we tell people to let home invaders stay on the couch and claim it as theirs”:

GOP leaders are finalizing plans for an open debate on immigration to be held by legislators at their late January closed-door strategy session in Cambridge, Md.

The debate will include a panel of legislators, an outside expert, and an open mic, allowing members to comment on a one-page set of “principles” that likely will be released at the event, according to a person with knowledge of the situation.

There should be no “debate” or question of “principles” on how to create amnesty for criminals.  There is one answer – deport illegal aliens.  Deport them all, deport them wherever you find them.  Make the climate for illegals hostile, and they will go away.  Legal immigrants and naturalized citizens will applaud it, and American citizens will applaud it.  The only people who won’t applaud it will be the slimy businessmen who want cheap, unaccountable labor and the Democrats who want free voters.

The new Quinnipiac University poll shows that both independent and GOP voters have swung sharply against an immigration amnesty since last May.

The reason is simple.  There’s a push for amnesty, and Americans are loathe to want to admit people whose first steps into the country were as criminals.

Furthermore, there is no economic argument.  We have a crippling labor participation rate and still have high unemployment across the country, yet somehow, illegals are needed to come in and do jobs that unemployed Americans won’t do?  And jobs that Americans are leaving the labor force about because those jobs have vanished?  What a load of nonsense, even taking into account leftist desires to make Americans into dependent pawns of the state who don’t work.

Senator Jeff Sessions said that the House is the last line of defense against the economic and socially destructive push for amnesty for illegal aliens.

On Friday, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) said the House was the last line of defense for the millions of Americans whose wages and livelihood will be put at risk by amnesty and comprehensive immigration reform.

He urged House Republicans to put the interests of American workers ahead of those of the consultant class, lobbyists, and Democrats who want cheaper labor and more potential votes.

House Republican leaders are preparing to unveil their “immigration principles” which will include amnesty provisions that the Congressional Budget Office determined would lower the wages of American workers. Sessions, the ranking Member of the Budget Committee, said that Obama and Senate Democrats have “uniformly embraced an immigration plan that would devastate wages and working conditions for millions of struggling Americans to benefit a small cadre of lobbyists and CEOs.”

He added that their plan “doubles the flow of immigrant workers, adds another 30 million new permanent residents to compete for every job, and guarantees illegal immigration will continue permanently in the future.” Sessions warned the House to not pass comprehensive immigration reform in everything but name only, which is what Obama has desired and Rep. Luis Gutierrez’s (D-IL) has said his “Republican friends” do as well.

Luis Gutierrez would have been forcibly removed from the country a few generations ago.  He has stated outright that his only loyalty is to the illegal alien community.  And his “Republican friends” are filthy turncoats willing to destroy the country for their personal interests.  At least Gutierrez has the courage of his ideological convictions to pretty much say he supports the destruction of the country and the Reconquista for his Balkanizing racialist group of illegals.

But that’s okay, because soon all his little illegal alien kinsmen (who he embraces while defecating on the legal aliens and naturalized citizens who bust their butts to get their hard-earned and well-deserved portion of the American dream) will be freed again, as Congress is cutting funding for jailing illegal alien criminals.

WASHINGTON — A massive 2014 federal spending bill passed this week by Congress would cut nearly $60 million — or about 25% — from a federal program that reimburses states and local governments for the cost of incarcerating undocumented immigrants convicted of crimes.

Local and state taxpayers will have to pick up a bigger share of the tab as Congress moves to reduce the annual funding of the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP) from $238 million to $180 million in 2014.

Among the states that would be hit hardest are Arizona, California, Florida, New Jersey, New York and Texas, which have high numbers of undocumented immigrant criminals serving time in state prisons and county jails.

The feds should be picking up those bills, as its the fedgov’s job to enforce uniform immigration laws.  Every time the fedgov lets illegals go in the interior of the country because they refuse to let ICE do their jobs and refuse to deport illegals, and actively court illegal aliens as voters and “dreamers”, the states and counties are paying the price for it.  Every illegal alien who steps into the country is one more sucking up resources at hospitals, schools, and as clearly illustrated here – law enforcement resources.

“This is already a burden for state and local law enforcement and county budgets, and this latest cut just makes things worse,” said Matt Chase, executive director of the National Association of Counties. “Our view is that it’s the federal government’s role to take care of illegal immigration. They’re supposed to protect the borders but they’ve failed and local law enforcement is paying for the consequences of undocumented aliens being in the country.”

It’s not just his view, it’s the law.  And the fedgov is willingly failing in it, because dirtbag RINOs like Paul “I’m All For Amnesty” Ryan and company are willing to support illegal aliens for their corporate buddies, and the Democrats of course are willing to help those fools commit suicide at the polls by offering amnesty to undocumented Democrats… and thus we have the entirety of the federal government’s political side pushing for something that the citizenry utterly loathe and oppose.

>Lame Duck "Immigration Reform" - Amnesty

And while I’m at it, a reminder that Chris Christie and Marco Rubio are both all about having home invaders get the right to sleep in your bed and claim it as theirs.