Back to Top

Feed aggregator

Alec Baldwin eyes Broadway for solo Trump show

Liberty Unyielding - Tue, 12/12/2017 - 4:06pm
Deadline Hollywood

Trendy New York eatery alleged to have ‘rape room’ on premises

Liberty Unyielding - Tue, 12/12/2017 - 3:59pm
Margaret Whitfield, AppleEats

Sanctuary Cities…Harboring Injustice

Tea Party Tribune - Tue, 12/12/2017 - 3:42pm
He was knowingly here illegally, in fact he had already been deported five times before and yet he always did manage to return. And it was during his sixth and last return that this illegal alien murdered an innocent 32-year old woman in the prime of her life…and so Kate Steinle became the rallying cry for all that is so very wrong with our immigration system.
“A disgraceful verdict in the Kate Steinle case! No wonder the people of our Country are so angry with Illegal Immigration.”
– President Donald Trump

Jose Ines Garcia Zarate…aka Juan Francisco Lopes-Sanchez…an illegal Mexican with a lengthy felony record…was found ‘not guilty’ of murdering Kate Steinle by a San Francisco jury of six men and six women. Not guilty of murder in the first degree nor in the second degree, Zarate was also acquitted of involuntary manslaughter with the sole guilty charge leveled against him being the much lesser charge of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon.In other words, Kate Steinle’s killer basically walks free…free after he is once again deported back to Mexico…while there is no justice for the the innocent girl killed nor for her parents who now live a life of hell no parent should ever be forced to live…a life knowing their daughter’s death took a backseat to the life of a piece of human garbage whose mere existence in our country was against our laws.


By now we all know the story of how Kate Steinle was killed on July 1, 2015, while lazily walking along a San Francisco pier with her dad enjoying the hot summer day…and how a shot rang out seeing Kate dropping to the ground, being cradled in her dad’s arms with her last words spoken, “help me dad.” Shot in the back by what this jury deemed was an accidental shooting that was anything but, the jury was charged with deciding whether Zarate intentionally and willfully fired the single shot that killed Kate Steinle or whether it was as the defense claimed ‘unintentional’…a freak accident…after Zarate found the gun wrapped in a cloth under his seat at the pier, that it accidentally discharged with the bullet ricocheting off of the concrete surface and into Steinle’s back.

So while this scenario was deemed plausible to the jury… plausible enough to find Zarate ‘not guilty’…it might have resulted in a vastly different verdict if the jury in Judge Samuel Feng’s courtroom had been allowed to hear that the gun had been stolen just four days before the killing from the parked car of a visiting Bureau of Land Management ranger. And while even the prosecution agreed that there was no evidence linking Zarate to that particular robbery, sometimes no evidence is evidence in and of itself especially when also kept from the jury was the fact that Zarate had been deported five times before, and that in 2015 he was scheduled for a sixth deportation having then been in federal custody for felony ‘re-entry.’

But instead of their deporting him when they had the chance, federal authorities sent Zarate to San Francisco on a 20-year-old drug warrant for possession of a small amount of marijuana, where San Francisco prosecutors dropped the charge and the sheriff’s department let him go…let him go despite a federal detainer request.

Two months after the charges were dropped Kate Steinle lay dead.

And it was only after the ‘not guilty’ verdict had been reached that an amended federal arrest warrant was reissued for Zarate…a warrant stating that he did indeed violate his court mandated supervised release on a previous federal sentence for illegally re-entering our country now being coupled with his being a convicted felon possessing the gun that killed Kate Steinle.

But no matter, because with just a three or so year sentence as per current sentence guidelines, and with factoring in ‘time served,’ Zarate could see himself being deported back to Mexico within less than year’s time…deported back as he plots and plans how to re-enter our country for the seventh time, while Kate Stenle remains dead.

A true miscarriage of justice unseen since the OJ Simpson verdict back in the ’90’s, this nightmare stems directly from San Francisco being a sanctuary city in the now sanctuary state of California, and with local sanctuary city laws stating that local law enforcement do not have to hold an individual beyond the term of their incarceration. And so San Francisco decided back in 2015 not to honor any federal ICE detainer requests, that is unless a detainee is proven to have had committed a violent or serious felony within the past seven years…and this continues today.

And with her death Kate Steinle truly did become ground zero for the nightmare scenario that is sanctuary cities…which by the way is not a legal term…replete with said city’s policies hindering local authorities from cooperating with federal immigration agents. Remember, if those policies had not been in place Zarate would have been turned over to ICE back in the spring of 2015, and Kate Steinle would be alive today.

A day of vindication for the rest of immigrants,” so said Zarate’s defense attorney Francisco Ugarte yet this verdict is anything but as the backlash against illegals and sanctuary cities grows stronger by the day…and might we add rightfully so for two simple truths are that Zarate was not supposed to be here and yet he was, and that our existing immigration laws were passed to protect American citizens not to protect illegal criminal aliens.

So what exactly are sanctuary cities…which is not a new concept but has been around since Biblical times…besides being breeding grounds for those wishing to do Americans harm while at the same time being a place where criminals relish in raking in the benefits this country has to offer. A federally funded safe haven, sanctuary cities limit their cooperation with the federal government in order to help illegals avoid deportation by ICE agents…and if truth be told also to help increase the Democrats voting roster.

And while President Trump wants to pull said federal funding for cities that refuse to comply with ICE deportation requests, many sanctuary cities are fighting back against a cut in funding while they await a federal court ruling against the legality of withholding such funding. And to give you an idea of just how much funding these cities would loose, know that in Fiscal Year 2016 alone Obama sent $26.74 billion in federal funding to America’s 106 sanctuary cities… funding they desperately needed to feed, house, cloth, and educate those who came to our country illegally…those who are criminals by their very act of doing so. And know that during the entirety of the Obama years illegal immigration cost we state taxpayers $89 billion with the feds adding in another $46 billion, bringing the total to fund sanctuary cities up to a whopping $135 billion…monies that should have been spent on American citizens instead.

Now here’s something most don’t know…sometimes sanctuary cities aren’t just cities per se. In fact, across America, there are over 300 governmental jurisdictions claiming sanctuary status including 106 actual cities, four states (California, Connecticut, New Mexico, and Colorado), and with the rest being counties or other units of government. But their joint commonality is that all have officially enacted sanctuary policies, with most refusing to honor ICE detainers warrants.

Thankfully, on January 25, 2017 President Trump signed Executive Order 13768 directing the Secretary of Homeland Security and Attorney General Jeff Sessions to defund sanctuary jurisdictions that refuse to comply with federal immigration law. So while at least 33 states have considered enacting such laws to crack down on sanctuary cities, Georgia, Indiana, Mississippi, and Texas have already passed laws that punish local governments that enact policies that protect and shelter illegals

In fact, Indiana Rep. Todd Rokita recently introduced a bill that could hold what he calls “lawless” state and local politicians and officials accountable with criminal penalties if they choose to obstruct federal immigration authority efforts. Specifically targeting sanctuary cities, H.R. 4526…the Stopping Lawless Actions of Politicians (SLAP) Act…could see any and all violators facing up to five years of prison time and a fine of up to $1 million for willfully ignoring the federal government’s requests for custody of undocumented individuals. It’s a start…a very good start indeed.

And with other states and elected officials now planning to jump on the anti-sanctuary city bandwagon, a war of words has started as those in favor of sanctuary cities and the policies surrounding them claim said cities are being made safer because they foster positive relationships between illegals and law enforcement; that they are legal and protected by the tenth amendment* (re: separation of federal and state powers); and that said cities protect what they call ‘undocumented immigrants’ from federal immigration laws. Countering them are those who say sanctuary city policies allow dangerous and violent illegal aliens the ability to roam free to threaten the safety of both their communities and law-abiding American citizens; that said cities defy federal laws by which state and local governments are bound as per 8 U.S. Code § 1373**; and that these cities prevent both local and state police officers from doing their jobs.

And the opposition to sanctuary cities is rightfully growing in numbers by the day not only because of the miscarriage of justice regarding the Kate Steinle verdict; not only because thousands of Americans die each year at the hands of illegals; but also because the hypocrisy of the left is now on full display for all to see as their ad-nauseum call for more gun control has been drowned out by their silence because one of their protected sorts basically got off scot-free.

In the wake of the Kate Steinle murder verdict, while the liberals continue to do everything possible to both harbor and protect those who simply by setting foot in our country illegally are criminals. And in sanctuary cities and in sanctuary states one thing is quite conspicuous in its abject silence…liberal calls for gun control. And how exactly does the liberal gun control agenda fit into all of this…simply it doesn’t.

In this case, and in others that we’ve both seen, and will see as time marches on and the illegal alien flood into sanctuary cities and states continues, a criminal, as cited above, who was also a felon, deported five times and being protected by the liberal agenda, stole a gun, was a felon in possession of a gun, and used that gun in the commission of yet another felony…the murder of Kate Steinle…was acquitted of the charges by a liberal jury, and yet, not a word concerning their gun control agenda.

To be perfectly frank, and brutally politically direct about this, had the killer of Kate Steinle been anything but a protected class non-citizen, the outcry from the left for more gun control would be deafening.

As it is, the silence is now what’s deafening, and that places the spotlight squarely upon liberal hypocrisy.

To be fair, no amount of gun control would have kept Kate Steinle alive, so it is not at all that we’re preaching gun control here. The facts regarding liberal gun control are more than evident in Chicago, a bastion of liberalism with the strictest anti-gun laws in the nation…a city seeing 3,382 shootings with 587 people killed in those shootings in 2017, and the year isn’t over yet.

Such figures also put the spotlight on yet another of liberalism’s many hypocritical failures in that the vast majority of the shootings and resulting murders in the gun-free, target-rich zone of Chicago, are crimes committed by blacks, against blacks.

Just as illegal aliens are considered the sole purview of liberals, so too is the black community, and yet black on black crime, which is culpable in some 93 percent of all black murders in this country, as per FBI statistics, never raises so much as a liberal eyebrow, much less a liberal outcry.

If you need more proof of the hypocritical double standard regarding Kate Steinle and liberal demands for gun control, or in this case their lack of such demands, look no further than Barack Hussein Obama who, since the murder of Kate Steinle in 2015 by an illegal alien with a string of felonies and deportations glued to him, has remained silent regarding the crime, the victim, and for that matter the killer.


When Michael Brown, for instance, a thug and a thief, was shot by a police officer in the process of attacking that officer, Obama spoke out within three days, demanded more gun control, ordered an investigation by the DOJ into the justified shooting and sent his representatives to the dead thug’s funeral.


Has Obama spoken out in regards to Kate Steinle? No. Has he spoken out calling for gun control using the killing of Steinle as his platform? No. Has Obama uttered even a single word against the illegal alien and felon, five times deported who murdered Kate Steinle? No, no he has not.

And what of Nancy Pelosi, in whose backyard if not her front yard, this murder took place?

Well, Nancy Pelosi did, in fact, issue one singular call for more gun control exactly one week after the murder of Kate Steinle, stating, “Last week, in San Francisco, our city suffered our own senseless act of gun violence with the killing of Kathryn Steinle, and our thoughts and prayers are very much with her family. Today, we must do more as a nation to prevent dangerous people from getting easy access to guns. And Congress has a moral responsibility to act. What is so unclear? What do they not understand about that? The memory of these victims, the cries of their families deserve action – results, not words.”

Since that rather obtuse statement, Pelosi has been conspicuously quite, as though the liberal elite shut her down because the illegal alien was somehow a more protected class than an American citizen, but notice a very important aspect of Pelosi’s statement…“we must do more as a nation to prevent dangerous people from getting easy access to guns. And Congress has a moral responsibility to act. What is so unclear? What do they not understand about that?”

Let’s be clear here in that it wasn’t the gun that killed Kate Steinle, it was in fact, the illegal alien who had already been deported five times, had a string of felonies attached to him, and was, not least of all, living in a sanctuary city…her sanctuary city to be exact.

Gun control was what Pelosi was preaching a week after Steinle was murdered…not illegal alien control, and why do you suppose that was? Because guns can’t vote, and because California issues driver’s licenses, and registers illegal aliens to do just that…vote.

On January 1, 2015, California’s AB 60 law went into effect, and illegal aliens flooded DMV locations to take full advantage, getting driver’s licenses. Couple that with yet another California law, AB 1461, which is a motor-voter law that registers holders of a California driver’s license to vote, and you have the perfect liberal storm…illegal aliens with voter registration forms.

In the state of California today, there are some 800,000 illegal aliens who because of the combination of the two laws, have been registered to vote, and while it’s illegal for them to cast a vote, the laws have no teeth. In fact, it’s up to the illegal…those who have broken the law by being in this country to begin with…to police themselves, and not vote.

Illegal aliens in California are on the honor system when it comes to voting, and to be once again perfectly frank, the honor system becomes an abject failure when it is left to those who do not honor our nation’s laws, to suddenly show honor for our nation’s laws.


According to Claude Arnold, a former Special Agent in Charge for the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Homeland Security Investigations in Southern California, as well as in the states of Nevada, Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota, “Throughout my 27-year career with [Immigration and Naturalization Service] and ICE, I arrested hundreds of illegal criminal aliens who had voter registration cards. They would often admit they voted, but they were rarely prosecuted for illegally voting.”

Putting a finer point on it, Arnold stated that of the hundreds of illegal aliens he has personally arrested over the years, who were registered to vote, only once was an illegal alien registered as a Republican. All the rest, he said, were registered as Democrats.

Let’s now put this into context with the Kate Steinle murder, and Nancy Pelosi’s statement…Pelosi called for gun control after Steinle’s murder, and not for illegal alien control… because guns don’t vote, and illegal aliens do.In the liberal world, guns are not a voting bloc, so liberals can, and do call for all the laws they want for the purpose of banning guns, and this is exactly why you don’t hear them begging for, or demanding laws to ban illegal aliens from flooding into our country, of holing up in liberal controlled sanctuary cities or states.

It’s not that liberals just don’t know where the true responsibility lies for the murder of Kate Steinle…it’s that they absolutely do know…and simply don’t give a damn.

Sanctuary cities, and sanctuary states, set up by liberals as safe havens for criminals for no other purpose than to protect an illegal voting bloc have no place in a nation of laws…no place in our Constitutional Republic. Such cities and states should be defunded from federal assistance dollars, paid by legal citizens, so that liberals can flaunt the laws of the land.Further, to diminish the future possibilities of more parents having to bury their children, or children having to bury their parents because of the actions of those who shouldn’t even be here in the first place, stricter border enforcement, a wall, and harsher penalties for those who commit crimes while in this country illegally must be adopted, and used.


It’s not an abundance of guns that caused the murder of Kate Steinle, it is the absence of a wall that was a direct contributor in the equation, and a liberal agenda that aided and abetted in Miss Steinle’s murder.

To quote Nancy Pelosi…“What is so unclear? What do they not understand about that?”

____________________________ * Tenth Amendment: the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. ** 8 U.S. Code § 1373: Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal, State, or local law, a Federal, State, or local government entity or official may not prohibit, or in any way restrict, any government entity or official from sending to, or receiving from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service information regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual. Copyright © 2017 Diane Sori and Craig Andresen / Right Side Patriots ************************************************************************* RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS…LIVE!  Today, Friday, December 8th from 7 to 9pm EST on American Political Radio, RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS Craig Andresen and Diane Sori discuss sanctuary cities as the harbor of injustice, and important news of the day. Hope you can tune in at:

The post Sanctuary Cities…Harboring Injustice appeared first on Tea Party Tribune.

Impeach Mueller!

Tea Party Tribune - Tue, 12/12/2017 - 3:36pm


That is the screech we’re about to hear emanating from the denizens of the swamp.  Sure Maxine Waters and a few others have been singing this song since election night when their plans for the last nail in our coffin went down in flames.  Now it’s beginning to percolate through the monotone media megaphone.  And though this was predicted in this column by this author before the inauguration it still has a jarring impact on the senses.

Back in the Dream Times when the Deep State was able to turn Watergate into a Silent Coup the precedent was set.  If someone tries to overturn the moneychanger’s tables they must be destroyed.  If it’s a president, even one elected for the sole purpose of adding some reality to the mirage of our functioning oligarchy which portrays itself as a dysfunctional democratic republic, they must be hounded out of office, disgraced, and discredited.

That’s the play book.  Since before the inauguration the perpetually re-elected hacks aided and abetted by the ABCCBSNBCCNNMSNBCPBS Cartel and their paleo partners in print latched on to their intended weapon, “The Russians are coming!  The Russians are coming!”

No matter that the initial facts of the story are ludicrous: the fictional Golden Shower Dossier and the Russian hack of the DNC, which was in fact an inside job.  It doesn’t matter that the very foundation of the Russian collusion theory is built on sand.  Al that matters is that they now have a Special Counselor.  They can’t call him a Special Prosecutor because there’s no legal foundation to appoint a Special Prosecutor, so if they call him a Special Counselor that should fool all of us out here in fly-over country.

Prosecutors always believe whoever they’re investigating is guilty and that their job is to find enough evidence to prove what they believe.  Innocent until you are proven guilty, right.  Anyone who has ever been unlucky enough to have be involved in a criminal trial and lived to talk about it knows how that feels in reality.  It has inspired some to look at the courthouse and say, “It may say justice on the outside but there isn’t any on the inside.”

Remember the Valerie Plame investigation?  Someone blew her cover as an undercover CIA operative.  Before the investigation even started they knew who did it.  Eventually after a few years and millions of dollars they never prosecuted anyone for the leak; instead they prosecuted Lewis “Scooter” Libby the Chief of Staff of Vice President Dick Chaney for inconsistencies in his testimony, a process crime.

These are search and destroy missions.  They are looking to get as many convictions as they can to justify all of their expenses and to puff up the reputations of the scalp hunters who run them.  This Special “Counselor” is one of the closest associates of James “The Leaker” Comey.  He is staffing his office with Obama and Hillary supporters and we’re supposed to believe his investigation of a non-crime that never happened will produce objective results that anyone anywhere would imagine are justice?

Witch hunts find witches.  That’s what they do.

If anyone was interested in finding real collusion to disrupt an American election they could look into the subject of the DNC emails leaked to WikiLeaks; the proven collusion between the Hillary Clinton campaign and Debbie Wasserman Schultz as revealed by unindicted co-conspirator Donna Brazile.  Did you ever notice that none of the principles ever denied what was in the leaked emails, they merely complained about who leaked what to who.  Why isn’t there a Special Counsel looking in to how these people stacked the cards against poor old Bernie Sanders?  He said all along the election was rigged and he was right after all.  Why no interest in this?  It doesn’t serve to keep the swamp damp that’s why.

Our elite masters, the perpetually re-elected, the Deeps State, and the Media Cartel are setting the stage.  They must drive Trump from office before he can actually drain the swamp.  They must drive him out disgraced and repudiated or else the poor blind masses might figure out that we don’t need technocrats to rule us.  If a professional business man is necessary to clean up the mess professional politicians have made, what do we need professional politicians for?

Now it turns out that Special Counsel Robert Mueller kept secret that Peter Strzok a top FBI investigator exchanged anti-Trump text messages with an FBI attorney.  This transparent bias fuels questions about Mueller’s credibility and his ability to oversee an impartial investigation.  It was revealed that Strzok helped push the largely unverified dossier on Trump, oversaw both the Clinton email and Russia collusion investigations, and  conducted the July 2, 2016 interview with Hillary Clinton as well as the interview with Flynn. Several weeks later, he was handpicked to oversee the investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian government.  Add all this to the fact that Mueller has packed his investigating team with Clinton Supporters and there you have it, a fair and unbiased effort by the Deep State to remove President Trump from office.

They won’t let little things like votes, or facts, or what’s good for America get in their way.  No, they’ll soldier on and soon we’ll hear their longed for victory chant “IMPEACH TRUMP!!!! IMPEACH TRUMP!!!!” echoing through the halls of Rome on the Potomac.

To which I say, “Impeach Mueller!”

Dr. Owens teaches History, Political Science, and Religion.  He is the Historian of the Future @ © 2017 Contact Dr. Owens [email protected]  Follow Dr. Robert Owens on Facebook or Twitter @ Drrobertowens / Edited by Dr. Rosalie Owens

The post Impeach Mueller! appeared first on Tea Party Tribune.

Illegal Immigration

Tea Party Tribune - Tue, 12/12/2017 - 3:16pm

Illegal Immigration

Assume someone broke into your home and your urgent call to the authorities was met with derision and disinterest. Imagine them telling you, that unless they were physically harming you, authorities had more pressing things to worry about since breaking into your home is only a misdemeanor. And besides, they are just poor people looking for a safe place to live. Furthermore, it’s the civilized, humanitarian thing for you to care for these people and tend to all their needs, and if you do not, you are a racist.

Then envision the scenario of being told that you are also responsible for any and all of their family members wishing to live in your home.

Sound ludicrous? It happens every day in our country.

Our federal government has no greater constitutional responsibility, nor more important function than protecting our home borders. There is also no greater failure than the lack of performance of this duty. Hundreds of thousands of our troops guard borders around the world, while an epidemic of illegal immigration to our country goes unchecked.

Republicans historically have stood against closing our borders to keep the cash pipeline open from businesses to coffers in exchange for cheap labor. Democrats, likewise, refuse all efforts to build a wall or support anything that stems the tide of illegal aliens in the party’s decades-long, successful effort to change the culture, political makeup, and ethnicity of America.

Both parties cry about separating families. American citizens did not separate these families; those coming here illegally separated their families, and reunification awaits their return home.

A country without secure borders cannot protect its citizens, and ceases to exist as a sovereign nation. Where lawlessness is accepted or excused, the lawless reign.

Mexico demands we accept their low-skilled, uneducated workers, and we subserviently oblige. Money is sent to their families in Mexico, and since they pay little or no taxes, taxpayers subsidize them, and the unscrupulous businesses for which they work.

Additionally, the visa program is systemically broken. Those entering legally from around the world with a visa can simply disappear into a bureaucratic fog.

Aside from the obvious issues of security; education, health care and social security systems are in deep financial difficulty due, in large part, to the vast invasion of our nation by foreign armies.

It’s not enough they allow unlawful incursions; politicians warmly embrace hoards of people from terrorist nations who have proven in Europe and nationally to cause upheaval and unnecessary and preventable deaths of thousands of innocent people.

Despite these unmitigated crises, Leftist politicians move to legalize tens of millions of illegals plus millions more that will claim familiar ties. Cries for “Comprehensive immigration legislation,” are codes for amnesty, legalization, and citizenship.  Amnesty always brings more illegal immigration.

President Trump is the first Presidential candidate to address the massive sieges of our borders; and was elected in large part to his stance on building a fence to end the onslaughts; including importation from terrorist countries.

The federal government has given up on, and scores at the state and local levels are uncooperative in, enforcement of immigration laws.  Areas in the West and Southwest, and in metropolitan areas controlled by Democrats, are havens for lawless, drug-infested areas populated with illegal aliens.

Despite repeated cries to government about people breaking into our home, the silence says, ‘live with it.’ Furthermore, politicians demand that we assume responsibility for total support of the intruders by paying for their education, healthcare, and indulging them as if they belong in our homes. Our resistance is met with epithets of racist, xenophobe, or Islamophobe.

A steady stream of demagoguery spews from congress and the establishment bureaucrats. It’s time Americans demand that congress back President Trump’s call for the wall, and except under rare circumstances; immigration must be limited, and tailored toward the needs of our nation.

Anti-American ‘Globalists’ and ‘No-borders’ lunatics are powerful, well organized, and well funded; as is the New Socialist Democrat Party. These George Soros-like leftists are united in their quest to weaken America to the point of collapse. America must stand for strength, independence, and constitutional law. Allowing decades of lawlessness by our government is traitorous, and cannot be tolerated.

Jim Mullen

The post Illegal Immigration appeared first on Tea Party Tribune.

Disney pleaded with Obama not to use its cartoon characters in climate change propaganda

Liberty Unyielding - Tue, 12/12/2017 - 3:12pm
Disney officials said that its characters should not be used to harangue people about global warming.

The Under-Appreciated Success of Canadian Welfare Reform

Center for Freedom and Prosperity (CF&P) - Tue, 12/12/2017 - 12:40pm

Back in 2014, I shared a report that looked at the growth of redistribution spending in developed nations.

That bad news in the story was that the welfare state was expanding at a rapid pace in the United States. The good news is that the overall fiscal burden of those programs was still comparatively low. At least compared to other industrialized countries (though depressingly high by historical standards).

I specifically noted that Switzerland deserved a lot of praise because redistribution spending was not only relatively modest, but that it also was growing at a slow rate. Yet another sign it truly is the “sensible country.”

But I also expressed admiration for Canada.

Canada deserves honorable mention. It has the second-lowest overall burden of welfare spending, and it had the sixth-best performance in controlling spending since 2000. Welfare outlays in our northern neighbor grew by 10 percent since 2000, barely one-fourth as fast as the American increase during the reckless Bush-Obama years.

But I didn’t try to explain why Canada had good numbers.

Now it’s time to rectify that oversight. I went to the University of Texas-Arlington last week to give a speech and had the pleasure of meeting Professor Todd Gabel. Originally from Canada, Professor Gabel has written extensively on Canadian welfare policy and he gave me a basic explanation of what happened in his home country.

I asked him to share some of his academic research and he sent me several publications, including two academic studies he co-authored with Nathan Berg from the University of Otago.

Here are some excerpts from their 2015 study published in the Canadian Journal of Economics. Gabel and Berg explain welfare reform in Canada and look at which policies were most successful.

During the 1990s and 2000s, Canada’s social assistance (SA) system transitioned from a relatively centralized program with federal administrative controls to a decentralized mix of programs in which provinces had considerable discretion to undertake new policies. This transition led to substantially different SA programs across provinces and years… Some provincial governments experimented aggressively with new policy tools aimed at reducing SA participation. Others did not. In different years and by different amounts, nearly all provinces reduced SA benefit levels and tightened eligibility requirements.

By the way, the SA program in Canada is basically a more generous version of the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) program in America, in part because there are not separate programs for food and housing.

The study includes this remarkable chart showing a significant drop in Canadian welfare dependency, along with specific data for three provinces.

The authors wanted to know why welfare dependency declined in Canada. Was is simply a result of a better macroeconomic environment? Or did specific reforms in welfare policy play a role?

…what role, if any, did new reform strategies undertaken by provinces play in observed declines in SA participation. This paper attempts to address this question by measuring disaggregated effects of new reform strategies on provinces’ SA participation rates, while controlling for changes in benefit levels, eligibility requirements, labour market conditions, GDP growth and demographic composition.

Their conclusion is that welfare reform helped reduce dependency.

…our econometric models let the data decide on a ranking of which mechanisms—reductions in benefit levels, tightened eligibility requirements, improved macro-economic conditions or adoption of new reform strategies—had the largest statistical associations with declines in participation. The data suggest that new reforms were the second most important policy reform after reductions in employment insurance benefits. … In the empirical models that disaggregate the effects of different new reform strategies, it appears that work requirements with strong sanctions for non-compliance had the largest effects. The presence of strong work requirements is associated with a 27% reduction in SA participation.

Here’s their table showing the drop in various provinces between 1994 and 2009.

The same authors unveiled a new scholarly study published in 2017 in Applied Economics, which is based on individual-level data rather than province-level data.

Here are the key portions.

A heterogeneous mix of aggressive welfare reforms took effect in different provinces and years starting in the 1990s. Welfare participation rates subsequently declined. Previous investigations of these declines focused on cuts in benefits and stricter eligibility requirements. This article focuses instead on work requirements, diversion, earning exemptions and time limits – referred to jointly as new welfare reform strategies.

Here’s their breakdown of the types of reforms in the various provinces.

And here are the results of their statistical investigation.

The empirical models suggest that new reform strategies significantly reduced the probability of welfare participation by a minimum of 13% overall…the mean person in the sample faces a reduced risk of welfare participation of 1.1–1.3 percentage points when new reform strategies are present… the participation rates of the disabled, immigrants, aboriginals and single parents, appear to have responded to the presence of new reform strategies significantly more than the average Canadian in our sample. The expected rate of welfare participation for these groups fell by two to four times the mean rate of decline associated with new reform policies.

The bottom line is that welfare reform was very beneficial for Canada. Taxpayers benefited because the fiscal burden decreased. And poor people benefited because of a transition from dependency to work.

Let’s close by looking at data measuring redistribution spending in Canada compared to other developed nations. These OECD numbers include social insurance outlays as well as social welfare outlays, so this is a broad measure of redistribution spending, not just the money being spent on welfare. But it’s nonetheless worth noting the huge improvement in Canada’s numbers starting about 1994.

Canada now has the world’s 5th-freest economy. Welfare reform is just one piece of a very good policy puzzle. There also have been relatively sensible policies involving spending restraintcorporate tax reformbank bailoutsregulatory budgeting, the tax treatment of saving, and privatization of air traffic control.

P.S. If it wasn’t so cold in Canada, that might be my escape option instead of Australia.

P.P.S. Given the mentality of the current Prime Minister, it’s unclear whether Canada will remain an economic success story.

Is CNN protecting Rep. Adam Schiff (D. – Calif.)?

Liberty Unyielding - Tue, 12/12/2017 - 10:53am
James Freeman, WSJ

Cartoon of the Day: The Wizard of D.C.

Liberty Unyielding - Tue, 12/12/2017 - 10:39am
Robert Mueller

Another bakery, another liberal accusation, another lawsuit

Liberty Unyielding - Tue, 12/12/2017 - 10:03am
Across the country, a second lawsuit has been filed by a second bakery. This time the flash point is another liberal bugbear: racial profiling.

Per the Constitution, Christian baker should win his religious liberty fight: Here’s why he won’t

Liberty Unyielding - Tue, 12/12/2017 - 8:53am
The First Amendment was written to protect us from exactly this kind of governmental overreach.


Subscribe to Tea Party Manatee aggregator

Donate to Tea Party Manatee

Follow us on social media


If you have Constitutional values, believe in fiscal restraint, limited government, and a free market economy - then join us or just come and listen to one of our excellent speakers. We meet every Tuesday from 6-8 pm at Mixon Fruit Farms in the Honeybell Hall, 2525 27th St. East, Bradenton, Florida. Map it

Tea Party Manatee welcomes all like-minded Americans.

Our core values are:

  • Defend the Constitution
  • Fiscal Responsibility
  • Limited Government
  • Free Markets
  • God and Country

Read more