Foxx Praises Exit of Consumer Financial Protection Bureau in Student Loan Servicing

Source: Committee on Education and the Workforce



Washington, D.C. - September 3, 2017 (The Ponder News) -- Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC), chairwoman of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, issued the following statement praising the Department of Education’s decision to end its Memorandum of Understanding with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) regarding the oversight of student loan servicing:


“Congress bestowed the powers to oversee student loans and student loan servicing solely to the Department of Education, and it was a mistake for the Obama administration to have the Department of Education let the CFPB abuse its privilege on these matters. The Department of Education has made it clear that its partnership with the CFPB is doing more harm than good when it comes to how it can best serve students and borrowers.

“Specifically, the department has shown that a partnership with the CFPB was complicating and undermining its efforts to act in the best interest of borrowers and students. I am pleased that the department is taking its authority back from the CFPB, and remains committed to serving borrowers and students first.”

Click here to read the full letter from the Department of Education.

Police Have Collected Data on Millions of Law-Abiding Drivers Via License Readers

Source: Electronic Frontier Foundation

San Francisco, CA - September 3, 2017 (The Ponder News) -- The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the ACLU won a decision by the California Supreme Court that the license plate data of millions of law-abiding drivers, collected indiscriminately by police across the state, are not “investigative records” that law enforcement can keep secret.

California’s highest court ruled that the collection of license plate data isn’t targeted at any particular crime, so the records couldn’t be considered part of a police investigation.

“This is a big win for transparency in California,” attorney Peter Bibring, director of police practices at the ACLU of Southern California, which joined EFF in a lawsuit over the records. “The Supreme Court recognized that California’s sweeping public records exemption for police investigations doesn’t cover mass collection of data by police, like the automated scanning of license plates in this case. The Court also recognized that mere speculation by police on the harms that might result from releasing information can’t defeat the public’s strong interest in understanding how police surveillance impacts privacy."

The ruling sets a precedent that mass, indiscriminate data collection by the police can’t be withheld just because the information may contain some criminal data. This is important because police are increasingly using technology tools to surveil and collect data on citizens, whether it’s via body cameras, facial recognition cameras, or license plate readers.

The panel sent the case back to the trial court to determine whether the data can be made public in a redacted or anonymized form so drivers’ privacy is protected.

“The court recognized the huge privacy implications of this data collection,” said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Jennifer Lynch. “Location data like this, that’s collected on innocent drivers, reveals sensitive information about where they have been and when, whether that’s their home, their doctor’s office, or their house of worship.”

Automated License Plate Readers or ALPRs are high-speed cameras mounted on light poles and police cars that continuously scan the plates of every passing car. They collect not only the license plate number but also the time, date, and location of each plate scanned, along with a photograph of the vehicle and sometimes its occupants. The Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) and the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department (LASD) collect, on average, three million plate scans every week and have amassed a database of half a billion records.

EFF filed public records requests for a week’s worth of ALPR data from the agencies and, along with American Civil Liberties Union-SoCal, sued after both agencies refused to release the records.

EFF and ACLU SoCal asked the state supreme court to overturn a lower court ruling in the case that said all license plate data—collected indiscriminately and without suspicion that the vehicle or driver was involved in a crime—could be withheld from disclosure as “records of law enforcement investigations.”

EFF and the ACLU SoCal argued the ruling was tantamount to saying all drivers in Los Angeles are under criminal investigation at all times. The ruling would also have set a dangerous precedent, allowing law enforcement agencies to withhold from the public all kinds of information gathered on innocent Californians merely by claiming it was collected for investigative purposes.

EFF and ACLU SoCal will continue fighting for transparency and privacy as the trial court considers how to provide public access to the records so this highly intrusive data collection can be scrutinized and better understood.

Washington Think Tanks Live In Fear Of Google's Ire

Source: Consumer Watchdog

Santa Monica, CA - September 3, 2017 (The Ponder News) -- News that the New America Foundation shut down its Open Markets unit after the group expressed support of European antitrust enforcement action against Internet giant Google shows how Washington think tanks live in fear of incurring Google’s ire and losing their funding, Consumer Watchdog said.

The nonpartisan nonprofit public interest group warned that staunch opposition to bipartisan Congressional efforts to AMEND a key internet law that would allow rogue websites like Backpage.com to be held accountable for aiding sex trafficking may be motivated by a fear of losing Google money.

In an email to Barry Lynn, head of Open MarkeTs, New America’s President Anne-Marie Slaughter expressed concern that Google’s views wouldn’t be represented in a conference he was organizing.

“We are in the process of trying to expand our relationship with Google on some absolutely key points,” Ms. Slaughter wrote, according to the New York Times, “just THINK about how you are imperiling funding for others.”

New America has received more than $21 million from Google; its parent company’s executive chairman, Eric Schmidt; and his family’s foundation since the think tank’s founding in 1999, the Times noted.

The Times reported that Slaughter later told Mr. Lynn that “the time has come for Open Markets and New America to part ways,” according to an email from Ms. Slaughter to Mr. Lynn. The email suggested that the entire Open Markets team — nearly 10 full-time employees and unpaid fellows — would be exiled from New America.

In 2009 a Google lobbyist in Washington DC, Bob Boorstin, tried to get the Rose Foundation to stop funding Consumer Watchdog’s Privacy Project. Rose rebuffed the effort and gave Consumer Watchdog another grant.

Click here to view the email exchange between Google’s Boorstin and Rose Foundation’s Tim Little.

Consumer Watchdog noted that virtually all groups opposing amending Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act get Google money.

The current interpretation of CDA Section 230 enables rogue websites like Backpage.com, which facilitates sex trafficking, to use the law as a shield. This interpretation, pushed by the tech industry, keeps child sex trafficking alive and allows websites like Backpage to avoid accountability to victims and their families.

Consumer Watchdog said the bipartisan Senate bill, S. 1693 the Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act of 2017 introduced by Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH) with 27 co-sponsors and Rep. Ann Wagner’s (R-MO) H.R. 1865, the Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act of 2017 with 111 co-sponsors, would amend the law and let Backpage be held accountable.

In May Consumer Watchdog, DeliverFund, Faith and Freedom Coalition, The Rebecca Project for Justice, Trafficking in America Taskforce and Nacole S., a sex-trafficking victim’s mother, released a comprehensive report detailing Backpage’s wrongful activities and how Google has spent millions to fund efforts to thwart any changes in Section 230. As detailed in the report, major recipients of Google’s money are two nonprofit organizations, The Center for Digital Democracy (CDT) and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF). As documented in the report, CDT and EFF have frequently jumped to aid Backpage as it faced various legal challenges.

Google, CDT, EFF and other tech industry representatives may claim to be protecting free speech and Internet freedom, but their activities have done little more than protect a notorious sex-trafficking hub from being held accountable by its victims, Consumer Watchdog said. Backpage’s abuses and the fight by its victims to hold it accountable are the subject of a new documentary film, "I Am Jane Doe". It is now available on Netflix or can be downloaded from Google Play, iTunes or Amazon.

“Internet freedom must not come at the expense of children who are sex trafficked,” said John M. Simpson, Con sumer Watchdog Privacy Project Director. “Just as the First Amendment does not allow you to shout fire in a crowded movie house, or to assist hit men and drug dealers in their criminal activity, CDA Section 230 must not be allowed to protect an exploitative business that is built on child sex trafficking.”

CVA URGES ACTIVISTS TO ATTEND HEARING ON SECRETARY OLIVER’S UNCONSTITUTIONAL ANTI-FREE SPEECH MEASURE

Source: Concerned Veterans for America (CVA)

Santa Fe, NM - September 3, 2017 (The Ponder News) -- New Mexico Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver will hold a hearing on her revised, unconstitutional anti-free speech measure in Santa Fe. The hearing will give citizens the opportunity to share their opinions about the measure.

Secretary Oliver recently announced revisions to her formerly-proposed measure forcing citizens who support causes to list their names and personal information publicly – leaving them open to harassment and intimidation. This effort represents a massive overreach by Secretary Oliver, who does not have the authority to implement such drastic changes to New Mexico’s laws.

Concerned Veterans for America (CVA) Policy Director Dan Caldwell issued the following statement:

“Secretary Oliver is circumventing the legislative process to push forward a measure that would inhibit the First Amendment rights of citizens. It’s important that New Mexicans are given the opportunity to voice opposition to this deeply flawed and unconstitutional measure. We’ve seen an overwhelming response to Oliver’s rule from New Mexicans who have serious concerns about the impact it would have on their right to free expression. This measure will limit open debate in New Mexico and we encourage citizens of the state to stand up for their rights today.”

After Secretary Oliver released her revised measure, CVA launched a digital tool that allows New Mexicans to submit comments to her office.

In July, CVA joined a coalition of 29 individuals representing 14 different organizations that submitted a letter to the Secretary asking her to end her attack on free speech in New Mexico. Former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson was among the signers urging the Secretary to abandon her measure.

Earlier this year, Governor Susana Martinez vetoed S.B. 96, a similar anti-free speech measure that passed the legislature in April. CVA led a coalition of 11 different organizations and sent a letter to Governor Martinez asking her to reject S.B. 96. The group also launched a targeted digital campaign, including a tool which allowed New Mexico constituents to contact Governor Martinez directly via email, Facebook, Twitter, and phone to warn her about the dangers of S.B. 96.

Last year, CVA launched “Defend the First,” a project focused on protecting the free exchange of information and ideas at the state and federal level.

CCV SUPPORTS GOODMAN/BRENNER CAMPUS FREE SPEECH ACT

Source: Citizens for Community Values

Columbus, OH - September 3, 2017 (The Ponder News) -- Citizens for Community Values, an Ohio Christian advocacy group that defends free speech and religious freedom, participated in a press conference held by Ohio State Representatives Wesley Goodman & Andrew Brenner today announcing their intention to introduce the Campus Free Speech Act. The proposal will protect the free speech rights of students on public universities throughout Ohio.

According to research conducted by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), which maintains an exhaustive list of incidents of free speech violations on campus, “freedom of speech is under continuous threat at many of America’s campuses, pushed aside in favor of politics, comfort, or simply a desire to avoid controversy.”

“Colleges and universities are supposed to be the marketplace for ideas,” said Aaron Baer, President of Citizens for Community Values. “Unfortunately, throughout the country, many students and student organizations are not given the opportunity to participate in open and honest discussion. The Campus Free Speech Act ensures all university speech codes respect the first amendment rights of Ohio students.”

According to FIRE’s ratings, 11 universities in Ohio have speech codes that restrict protected expression or, by virtue of their vague wording, could too easily be used to restrict protected expression. One university has codes that clearly and substantially restrict freedom of speech.

The Campus Free Speech Act restates and codifies a student’s right to “engage in free expression.” It guarantees to members of the campus community, “clear, content neutral rules for conduct of expression.” The bill requires public universities to adopt and promulgate a policy saying, “it is not the proper role of a state institution of higher education to shield individuals from expression.”

The Campus Free Speech act also codifies current Constitutional free speech law by limiting the university’s authority to segregate expression from certain places and audiences. It specifically states that “Offense or irritation taken to the content of speech shall not be considered an actionable harm under any circumstances.”

Citizens Against Government Waste Statement on Tax Reform Kickoff

Source: Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW)

Washington, D.C. - September 3, 2017 (The Ponder News) -- Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) President Tom Schatz issued the following statement echoing President Trump’s kickoff speech on the urgent need for comprehensive tax reform that lowers rates and eliminates loopholes:

“President Trump’s tax plan will reduce taxes, create jobs, simplify the tax code, and put more money back into the taxpayers’ pockets. There is a simple choice on tax reform: Either the taxpayers’ hard-earned money will continue to be sent to Washington and enter a maze of bureaucratic inefficiency and ineptitude, or the tax code can be fixed and rates can be lowered. The American people will then make their own decisions about how to spend and invest their own money.

“The President’s plan would reduce both the individual and business tax rates, which will be particularly helpful to the middle class and small businesses. The U.S. cannot remain competitive with other nations with a tax rate that is 16.4 percentage points higher than the world average. His plan is intended to result in economic growth of at least 3 percent and create millions of new jobs. It deserves prompt consideration by Congress so that Americans can get immediate relief from burdensome taxes and a complex tax code as soon as possible, and fill out their tax returns in the future on a short form that should be no longer than one page.”

Background:

Taxpayers spend 8.9 billion hours annually complying with the tax code.

Tax code compliance costs the economy $234.4 billion per year.

The tax code is 10 million words and is more than six times as long as it was in 1955.

94 percent of taxpayers paid someone else or used software to prepare their tax forms.

The instructions alone for the typical 1040 tax form used by most Americans has grown from just two pages in 1935, to 241 pages today.
Citizens Against Government Waste is the nation's largest nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to eliminating waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement in government.

Pizza Delivered to Harvey Victims

Source: Christian and Missions Alliance

Ever had pizza delivered to you via a boat? Yesterday Rob Searing and another volunteer from the Southwestern District delivered more than 25 pizzas to an apartment complex. The buildings were not flooded but inaccessible by car.

Little Caesars donated the pizzas with the stipulation that they were for the kids who couldn’t go outside and play. The restaurant manager wanted them to have something fun, so he sent the pizzas with the understanding that the adults were only allowed to eat what the kids couldn’t finish.

In addition to delivering pizzas, Rob and the other volunteer picked up five guys from the same apartment complex to help them find food, groceries, and baby necessities for their families.

“We actually Facetimed their children while we motored down the flooded road—much to the amusement of all aboard,” says Rob.

How to Volunteer
Teams or individuals interested in volunteering in the Houston area for three to five days may contact Charles Smith at chazzguy@gmail.com. Let him know your skills (including cleaning). Volunteers must be able to work in heat (around 90 degrees and 70-percent humidity) and wear task-appropriate attire.

Earlier teams will be involved in debris removal, sprayer cleaning, and disinfecting. Later teams will likely be involved in construction and remodeling.

Raise More than a Quarter Trillion Dollars of Tax Revenue by Ending Tax Subsidies for Unauthorized Employment of Illegal Aliens

Source: Center for Immigration Studies

Washington, D.C. - September 3, 2017 (The Ponder News) -- Aliens enter the United States without authorization for many reasons, but for most of them the goal is to secure employment at much higher wages than are available in their native countries. While breaking the law provides very significant economic benefits to these illegal workers and to the businesses that hire them, it comes at a cost to American workers. According to Harvard economist George Borjas, recent empirical research indicates that American workers suffer a reduction of $99 billion to $118 billion in annual wages because of illegal immigration.1

The economic rewards of unauthorized employment of aliens are not limited to the higher wages of the illegal workers and the lower labor costs of their employers. Unauthorized alien workers and their employers also enjoy multi-billion dollar tax deductions and tax credits that were enacted into law for the benefit of law-abiding workers and businesses.

When Congress returns from summer recess on September 5, it is expected to focus attention on a major reform of the federal income tax system, including a combination of lower rates and other tax incentives to families and to businesses. The largest challenge facing tax reformers is finding sufficient additional revenue to pay for the tax cuts and tax incentives they promised to the people who elected them. In fairness to the American families and businesses to whom these tax cuts have been promised, and in particular to the American families whose household incomes have been diminished by illegal immigration, Congress should consider eliminating unwarranted tax breaks to unauthorized alien workers and their employers.

Each of the following reforms — one that eliminates a tax subsidy for employers of unauthorized aliens and the other that eliminates a tax subsidy for the unauthorized workers — comes with an estimate of the additional revenues that would be raised by the reform. Together they could raise $296 billion over 10 years — more than a quarter-trillion dollars.

1. No Deduction for Wages Paid to Illegal Aliens. Section 162(e) of the Internal Revenue Code denies a deduction for "illegal payments". Even though it is illegal to employ unauthorized alien workers, the IRS has ruled that section 162(e) does not apply to the wages paid to those aliens, even if the employer knowingly broke the law.2 On January 3, 2017, Rep. Steve King and eight other members of Congress introduced H.R. 176, the New Illegal Deduction Elimination Act, Section 2 of which would amend section 162(e) to clarify that no deduction is allowed for wages paid to unauthorized alien workers. H.R. 176 provides employers a "safe harbor", allowing a deduction to employers that used the Department of Homeland Security's free, online E-Verify system to confirm the employee's eligibility to work.

The amount of wages paid to unauthorized alien workers cannot be known with certainty. One of the most extensive studies of unauthorized immigrants in the United States was conducted by the Pew Hispanic Center in 2009.3 According to that study, there were approximately 8.3 million undocumented immigrants in the U.S. labor force,4 a figure that Pew more recently estimated had fallen to 8.0 million.5 Pew estimated the median household income of unauthorized worker families to be approximately $36,000 and that there were approximately 1.75 workers per household, implying median per-worker earnings of $20,571.6 Multiplying Pew's estimated number of unauthorized alien workers by the earnings-per-worker estimate yields an estimated total of wages paid to unauthorized alien workers of approximately $165 billion.

Many unauthorized workers are employed in the "underground economy", i.e., by households and other employers that are not reporting or paying payroll taxes and presumably are not deducting the wages. A 2013 report by the Social Security Administration estimated that, of approximately seven million alien workers in various irregular work statuses in 2010, approximately 3.1 million (44 percent) had Social Security numbers (mostly false or fraudulently secured), while approximately 3.9 million (56 percent) were working in the "underground economy"7 On the assumption that employers reported payroll taxes and claimed wage expense deductions only for the 44 percent of unauthorized workers who could produce an SSN, and that most employers deducted wages at or near the corporate tax rate of 35 percent, we estimate that disallowing a deduction for wages paid to unauthorized alien workers would increase federal tax revenues by approximately $25.4 billion per year (35 percent x 44 percent x $165 billion), or $254 billion over 10 years.

2. Deny Refundable Tax Credits to Illegal Aliens. Section 24(a) of the Internal Revenue Code allows a $1,000 per-child tax credit for taxpayer's whose earnings fall below a specified threshold. The Child Tax Credit is refundable to the extent it exceeds the taxpayer's tax liability, in which case it is referred to as the Additional Child Tax Credit or ACTC. A 2011 report by the U.S. Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration explained that aliens authorized to work in the United States are required to obtain a Social Security number (SSN).8 For aliens who need to file U.S. federal tax returns for other reasons, such as to claim refunds of withholding tax on dividends, the IRS issues Individual Tax Identification Numbers (ITINs). Unfortunately, according to the inspector general, the IRS had been permitting aliens to claim ACTCs on returns that reported an ITIN rather than a Social Security number.

The payment of ACTCs to illegal aliens is arguably a direct violation of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996 ("PRWOA"), which expressly provides that an illegal alien "is not eligible for any Federal public benefit." The IRS has applied the PRWOA rule to prohibit payments of Earned Income Tax Credits to ITIN filers, but based on a questionable interpretation of the law has allowed ITIN filers refunds of ACTCs.9

According to the Inspector General, "[b]ased on claims made in Processing Year 2010, disallowance of the ACTC to filers without a valid SSN would reduce Federal outlays by approximately $8.4 billion over 2 years," i.e., $4.2 billion per year. Although the inspector general's figures are based on 2010 fiscal data, Treasury Department tax expenditure estimates indicate that the total child tax credit expenditure was virtually unchanged between 201010 and 2017.11 Accordingly, based on the inspector general's report, we estimate that limiting the Child Tax Credit to taxpayers with Social Security numbers would increase federal tax revenues by approximately $4.2 billion per year, or $42 billion over 10 years.

REPUBLICAN LEADERS CALL ON TRUMP TO KEEP DACA

Source: National Immigration Forum

Washington, D.C. - September 3, 2017 (The Ponder News) -- As discussions at the White House continue on the fate of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), Republican leaders in Congress are urging President Trump today to keep the program in place.

“I don’t think he should do that. I believe this is something Congress has to fix,” said House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wisconsin) today, in answer to a question on whether President Trump should end DACA.

“I’ve urged the president not to rescind DACA, an action that would further complicate a system in serious need of a permanent, legislative solution,” said Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah). “Like the president, I’ve long advocated for tougher enforcement of our existing immigration laws. But we also need a workable, permanent solution for individuals who entered our country unlawfully as children through no fault of their own and who have built their lives here. And that solution must come from Congress.”

“Over the coming months, I’ll be working closely with my colleagues in Congress and with the administration to pass meaningful immigration reform that will secure our borders, provide a workable path forward for the Dreamer population, and ensure that employers have access to the high-skilled workers they need so succeed in our technology-driven economy,” Hatch continued.

Meanwhile, more than 350 business leaders and entrepreneurs from across the country signed onto a letter urging the president to preserve DACA and calling on Congress to pass permanent legislation for Dreamers.

“We applaud Republican leaders for speaking out to protect DACA recipients,” said Ali Noorani, Executive Director of the National Immigration Forum. “Their support is indicative of widespread support across the country for a permanent solution to address the situation of our nation’s Dreamers.”

Jewish Woman Fired for Observing Passover

Source: Beckett

Washington, D.C. - September 3, 2017 (The Ponder News) -- An Orthodox Jewish woman who was fired from her job at the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority for observing Passover is asking the nation’s highest court to hear her case. Last month, in Abeles v. Metropolitan Washington Airport Authority, Susan Abeles appealed to the Supreme Court to hold her former employer accountable for unjustly firing her from her job of 26 years for observing the first two and last two days of Passover. A ruling from the high court could protect the right of all religious federal employees to live their faith without fear of losing their jobs.

Susan Abeles was a statistician at the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (MWAA), the government agency that operates both Reagan National and Dulles International Airports, for 26 years. She observed Passover every year without incident until 2013, when she was punished and forced to retire despite following leave protocol. Today, Becket and Jews for Religious Liberty, an association of Jewish lawyers and rabbis, filed a friend–of-the-court brief asking the Supreme Court to hear Ms. Abeles’ case, arguing that the lower court decision “will inhibit Jewish religious exercise within the federal workplace and could easily result in a de facto government hiring ban on Orthodox Jews.”

“Talk about chutzpah,” said Eric Rassbach, deputy general counsel at Becket, a non-profit religious liberty law firm. “The Airports Authority says it was okay to fire Ms. Abeles for observing Passover because it hasn’t said anything openly anti-Semitic. If that becomes the rule, then federal agencies will have a license to terminate all of their religious employees, as long as they are careful to hide their tracks. Even Pharaoh honestly admitted that he was discriminating against Jews.”

Jewish religious law prohibits work during the first two and last two days of Passover. Millions of Orthodox Jews like Ms. Abeles have observed this important holiday for thousands of years. Despite following the MWAA’s leave policy for decades, Ms. Abeles was accused of not following protocol and forced into retirement in 2013. She sued the MWAA, which claims it is exempt from both the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) and the Virginia religious freedom laws, giving it free rein to avoid all anti-discrimination laws. In July 2017 Ms. Abeles, asked the Supreme Court to hear her case.

“The Airports Authority claiming to be above the law adds insult to injury,” said Rassbach. “The Supreme Court should take this case to ensure that people of all faiths can observe their deeply held beliefs in the federal workplace without facing discrimination or being forced out of their jobs.”

Ms. Abeles is represented by Nathan Lewin of Lewin & Lewin.