Trump versus reality: Is this claim even remotely true?


Trump, today: "It was the biggest Electoral College win since Reagan."
Reality: It was one of the smallest Electoral College wins since Reagan


ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTES
525 - 1984, Reagan 
489 - 1980, Reagan 
426 - 1988, Bush 
379 - 1996, Clinton 
370 - 1992, Clinton 
365 - 2008, Obama
332 - 2012, Obama
304 - 2016, TRUMP
286 - 2004, Bush 
271 - 2000, Bush 

ELECTORAL COLLEGE MARGIN
512 - 1984, Reagan 
440 - 1980, Reagan 
315 - 1988, Bush 
220 - 1996, Clinton 
202 - 1992, Clinton 
192 - 2008, Obama
126 - 2012, Obama
77 - 2016, TRUMP
35 - 2004, Bush 

5 - 2000, Bush 

EPA staff told to prepare for Trump executive orders - sources

Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt testifies before a Senate Environment and Public Works Committee confirmation hearing on his nomination to be administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency in Washington, U.S., January 18, 2017. REUTERS/Joshua Roberts
By David Shepardson, Timothy Gardner and Richard Valdmanis

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Staff at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency have been told that President Donald Trump is preparing a handful of executive orders to reshape the agency, to be signed once a new administrator is confirmed, two sources who attended the meeting told Reuters on Wednesday.

A senior EPA official who had been briefed by members of the Trump administration mentioned the executive orders at a meeting of staffers in the EPA's Office of General Counsel on Tuesday, but did not provide details about what the orders would say, said the sources, who asked not to be named.

"It was just a heads-up to expect some executive orders, that's it," one of the sources said.

The second source said attendees at the meeting were told Trump would sign between two and five executive orders.

Trump administration officials did not respond to requests for comment.

Trump has promised to cut U.S. environmental rules - including those ushered in by former President Barack Obama targeting carbon dioxide emissions - as a way to bolster the drilling and coal mining industries, but has vowed to do so without compromising air and water quality.

Trump has also expressed doubts about the science behind climate change and promised during his campaign to pull the United States out of a global pact to combat it. Since his election in November, he has softened that stance, saying he would keep an "open mind" to the climate accord.

Trump's pick to run the EPA, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt, is scheduled to face a Senate confirmation vote on Friday, according to a Senate aide, after a contentious hearing last month in which lawmakers pressed Pruitt on his ties to the oil industry. Pruitt sued the EPA more than a dozen times to block its regulations while he was the top prosecutor for the oil and gas producing state.

Trump and Pruitt's positions have worried EPA staff, who are concerned the new administration will cut the EPA's budget, critical programs and scientific research. [nL1N1FR1JK]

Some Republican lawmakers, emboldened by Trump's election, have raised pressure on the EPA in recent days.

On Tuesday, Rep. Lamar Smith, chairman of the House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space and Technology, asked the EPA's inspector general to investigate whether EPA staff were using encrypted messages to coordinate efforts to derail the new administration's agenda, in possible violation of federal records laws.

Earlier this month, Rep. Matt Gaetz introduced a 45-word bill to "terminate" the EPA - a piece of legislation that is not expected to pass.

US Economic Freedom Has Hit a Historic Low. What Happened?

It’s already been eight years since the Great Recession, yet the U.S. economy has been just inching along, with its productivity flagging and millions being locked out of the labor market.

One critical underlying factor for this lack of economic dynamism has been the startling decline of America’s economic freedom, an unfortunate legacy of Barack Obama’s eight-year presidency.

The Heritage Foundation’s 2017 Index of Economic Freedom—an annual global study that compares countries’ entrepreneurial environments—highlights the urgent need for the U.S. to change course. For the ninth time since 2008, America has lost ground.

According to the 2017 index, the U.S. ranks 17th out of 180 rated economies, lagging behind other comparable advanced economies such as Switzerland (fourth), Australia (fifth), Canada (seventh), and the United Kingdom (12th).

The U.S. remains mired in the ranks of the “mostly free,” the second-tier economic freedom status into which it dropped in 2010.

Since 1995, the index has measured a nation’s commitment to limited government and free enterprise on a scale of 0 to 100 by evaluating four critical policy pillars, including rule of law and regulatory efficiency.

These commitments have powerful effects: Countries achieving higher levels of economic freedom consistently and measurably outperform others in economic growth, long-term prosperity, and social progress. Those losing freedom, on the other hand, risk economic stagnation, high unemployment, and deteriorating social conditions.


In fact, America’s standing in the index had dwindled steadily during the Obama years. This largely owed to increased government spending, regulations, and a failed stimulus program that enriched the well-connected while leaving average Americans behind.

Registering its lowest economic freedom score ever, America continued its string of discouraging trends in the 2017 index. Obama’s Washington-first, government-centric approach to policymaking has inflicted long-term damage to U.S. economic growth.

A substantial expansion in the size and scope of government under the Obama administration—including through new and costly regulations in areas like finance, health care, and the environment—has hit wide swaths of the economy, affecting almost every American in some way and reducing opportunities for nongovernmental production and investment.

The growth of government has been accompanied by increasing cronyism that has undermined the rule of law and perceptions of fairness.

Our nation’s fiscal health has been grossly dented as well. The national debt has nearly doubled since 2009, growing from $10.6 trillion to around $20 trillion. In dollar terms, this is the largest increase in the national debt in U.S. history.

In practice, all of these negative developments that undercut America’s economic freedom have amounted to a gradual slide toward a more heavily bureaucratic state and an increasingly politicized economy over the past eight years.

Today, the imperative to restore America’s economic freedom and thereby revitalize vibrant entrepreneurial growth is stronger than ever. Americans deserve better, and they can do better.

It should be noted that free-market capitalism built on the principles of economic freedom does not just conserve the status quo. In many cases, it overturns and transforms. It pushes out the old to make way for the new so that real and true progress can take place. It leads to innovation in all realms: better jobs, better goods and services, and better societies.

The 2016 election was a game-changer. America has been given an incredible and unique opportunity to move away from Obama’s failed liberal policy agenda and toward an agenda that strives to restore America’s economic freedom and spur dynamic growth.

The Heritage Foundation has introduced such a plan, called “Blueprint for Reform: A Comprehensive Policy Agenda for a New Administration in 2017.”

It is time to act on this plan and once again unleash economic freedom and flourishing in America.

Commentary by Anthony B. Kim (@AKFREEDOM). Originally published at The Daily Signal.

Trying to quit? Tips from former smokers can help you succeed


(BPT) - Since the Surgeon General released the first report on smoking in 1964, the smoking rate among adults has decreased from 42 percent to 15 percent. Though great strides have been made, more than 36 million adults in the United States continue to smoke cigarettes, claiming nearly half a million lives a year and leaving 16 million others to live with an illness or disease caused by smoking. There are now more former cigarette smokers than current smokers in the United States, and more than half of all people who have ever smoked have quit, according to the CDC.

If you're still smoking and would like to quit, you're not alone. Nearly seven out of 10 cigarette smokers want to quit for good. Although each person's journey to a tobacco-free life is different, knowing what's worked for others could help you find what works for you. Participants from CDC's Tips From Former Smokers(TM) campaign share what worked best for them in their journeys to quitting smoking.

Choose a quit date and support team

Tiffany Roberson, 35, of Louisiana started smoking when she was just 19, despite having watched her own mother, a smoker, die of lung cancer. Over the years, Roberson tried to quit multiple times but struggled to stay quit for good. When her own daughter turned 16, she was inspired to try again. This time, a combination of tactics helped her succeed.

* A nicotine patch helped control her cravings. She chose it because it was discrete and easy to use.

* She chose a quit date. To avoid the temptation to smoke, she stayed busy on that day.

* She told her daughter and another relative she was quitting so she would be accountable for staying smoke-free. Her relatives supported her with a daily text of encouragement, noting the day of her progress-"Day 2 without smoking" and, eventually, "Day 365 without smoking."

* During work breaks, she drank water instead of smoking.

Create accountability

Beatrice Rosa-Swerbilov, 40, from New York tried her first cigarette at just 7 years old, and became a regular smoker at age 13. Although she had tried many times before, she quit for good after her 11-year-old son wrote her a letter asking her to quit smoking. Here are her success strategies.

* Avoiding triggers-things or situations that made her crave a cigarette. For example, going out for drinks with friends was a trigger, so Rosa-Swerbilov gave up doing that for a while.

* Creating accountability for herself by telling everyone that she was quitting. Her hope was that if someone did see her smoking, they would say "Oh, I thought you quit," thus holding her accountable for her decision to quit smoking.

Manage stress

Amanda Brenden, of Wisconsin, began smoking in fifth grade and was a daily smoker by age 13. She would duck outside during the day - even during Wisconsin winters - to smoke. By college, she was smoking a pack a day. When she got engaged and found out she was pregnant, she tried to quit, without success. The stress of being a pregnant college student drove her back to cigarettes. Her daughter was born two months premature and today still struggles with asthma. Breathing problems like asthma are common in premature babies.

* Stress was a trigger for Brenden, as it is for many smokers. In a smoking cessation class, she learned stress reduction techniques. She also relied on support from her family.

* When Brenden feels frustrated, she exercises to release her negative energy rather than reaching for a cigarette.

Substitute positive for negative

James Fulton, 40, of New York, began smoking at 14 to emulate his father, a smoker who was well-respected in their community. When decades of smoking began to affect his health, Fulton created a plan for quitting that included replacing negative behaviors with positive ones.

When he felt a craving for a cigarette, he used a nicotine patch or chewed sugar-free gum. He's learned to rely on exercise, becoming an avid cyclist and swimmer.

Rebecca Cox-MacDonald, 57, of Texas, also found exercise to be helpful in quitting. Surrounded by a family of smokers, she started smoking as a teenager. Multiple events inspired her to try quitting a final time; her father died of a smoking-related illness, she watched the health of other relatives who smoked deteriorate, and she developed severe gum disease-a risk for smokers-that required her to get bone grafts and dental implants.

She quit and committed to a healthier lifestyle that included regular exercise like running and getting treatment for the depression that had been a major factor in keeping her smoking.

The CDC's Tips From Former Smokers campaign brings together science-backed health information and quitting tips drawn from the real-life experiences of former smokers. For more information about how you can quit smoking, including tips from successful former smokers, visit the CDC's Quit Guide online.

Killing the Klan with Kindness

By David Gornoski

As part of my ongoing project to introduce Jesus's ethic of nonviolence to the public, I've launched my new A Neighbor's Choice media platform and, with it, a very enjoyable radio discussion I had with Daryl Davis, star of the new documentary Accidental Courtesy. The film is available in select theaters. It will debut on Itunes on Feb. 21. 

Watch the film's trailer:





A vaunted African American blues musician who has played with some of the all-time greats, Daryl Davis uses his love of music and Americana to reach out and befriend leaders of the KKK. "How can you hate me if you don't even know me?" he asks them.


My interview with Daryl Davis showcases the difference between Jesus's personhood ethic and collectivism. In it, Davis recounts a lifetime of courage and daring encounters leaders of the Klan. Instead of writing them off due to their nasty ideology, he patiently gets to know them. Many of the Klansmen end up bonding with Daryl and, as a result, renouncing their membership in the KKK.

Daryl Davis's insistence on seeing ideologues as persons pierced through the deep-seated veil of collectivism and brought human compassion to his enemies. Some leaders of leftist groups like the NAACP and Black Lives Matter have attacked him for the same reason the Pharisees attacked Jesus: they are focused on winning and beating the enemy group. Daryl wasn't.

Ironically, his face-to-face fellowship approach over collective fear and anger caused real transformation and renunciation of violence. He models a beautiful path towards racial healing and respect for individual persons. Please enjoy my interview with Daryl Davis.




David Gornoski
David Gornoski
David Gornoski is your neighbor – as well as an entrepreneur, speaker and writer. He recently launched a project called A Neighbor’s Choice, which seeks to introduce Jesus’ culture of nonviolence to both Christians and the broader public.

This article was originally published on FEE.org. Read the original article.

Unions Play Politics While Membership Tanks

Union memberships keep declining. The latest Bureau of Labor Statistics report on union membership found the trend has not changed. This time, it's declined to the lowest point in United States history since the agency began keeping track.

In 2015, the public and private sector union membership rate was 11.1 percent of the combined workforce. It dropped to 10.7 percent in 2016, a loss of 240,000 union members.


For some perspective on the staggering losses unions have suffered, in 1983, the first year comparable data is available, labor unions had 17.7 million members. In 2016, there were only 14.6 million members. The hollowing out of union membership would be much worse if not for the public sector, where the membership rate is five times higher than the private sector.


Why the Decline?


Why is union membership, especially in the private sector, on a continuous decline? In part, many labor unions, like the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), have become appendages of the Democratic Party and reliant on government to ease union organizing rather than provide value to workers.


For example, the SEIU spent tens of millions of dollars worth of membership dues on politics in the past couple of election cycles, with nearly all the contributions going to Democrats. Such political bias is a turnoff to many union members. A large minority of union members vote Republican every election, and that was no different in this past election.


Additionally, if union membership continued to fall during the Obama administration, which did everything in its power to help unions at the expense of worker choice, then it's obvious something is wrong. Unions need to switch up the playbook on how to attract members. Perhaps use more membership dues on activities that directly benefit workers, like training and education, instead of politics and corporate campaigns.

But so far, the SEIU and their ilk have chosen to double down on politics and smear tactics.

Over the last several years, the SEIU spent millions of dollars funding the "Fight for $15," a union front group, and paying high-profile consulting firms like Berlin Rosen to attack companies they wish to organize. While its primary purpose is to advocate for a $15 an hour minimum wage, its second purpose is to smear companies that the SEIU wants to organize.
Instead of organizing with the intent of gaining worker support, the SEIU applies public pressure and attempts to intimidate employers into signing card-check neutrality agreements, which take away workers' right to a secret-ballot election.

Focus on the People

Politically minded unions should heed the advice of one of their own, United Auto Workers Secretary-Treasurer Gary Casteel:

This is something I've never understood, that people think right-to-work hurts unions … To me, it helps them. You don't have to belong if you don't want to. So if I go to an organizing drive, I can tell these workers, 'If you don't like this arrangement, you don't have to belong,' versus, 'If we get 50 percent of you, then all of you have to belong, whether you like to or not.' I don't even like the way that sounds, because it's a voluntary system, and if you don't think the system's earning its keep, then you don't have to pay."
Unions need to stop forcing themselves on workers and seeking government privilege to do so. The only way to reverse Big Labor's downward spiral is for unions to prove their worth to workers, something unions generally seem unwilling to do.

Trey Kovacs
Trey Kovacs
Trey Kovacs is a policy analyst at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, where he focuses on the economic impacts of labor policy.
This article was originally published on FEE.org. Read the original article.

Republicans Are Already Trying to Raise Taxes

Republicans in the House of Representatives are inadvertently setting a nasty political and economic trap for Donald Trump. Yes, it’s the Republicans, not the Democrats, who are ready to administer an unnecessary black eye to the new President. That’s not their intention, but it manifestly will be the result.

The vehicle for this unwitting GOP punch is a new exaction called the border adjustability tax. This levy will cost American consumers at least a trillion dollars over the next ten years. Knowing how Washington politicians calculate these things, you can bet the amount will end up being considerably more. Prices for everyday items, such as socks, shoes and household appliances, will go up. So will tech devices like the iPad, not to mention automobiles and trucks. Gasoline? Millions of Americans will pay an additional 30 cents or more per gallon at the pump. Lower-income and struggling middle-class Americans will get hit the hardest.


Few people are even aware of what the Republicans are getting ready to hit them with. There has been virtually no debate or public discussion about this new, horrible tax, yet in one of those strange fits of collective, self-destructive behavior, numerous GOP lawmakers are ready to enact it.


Here’s how, in essence, this sneaky, anti-consumer tax works. Importers will no longer be allowed to deduct an item as a business expense. To simplify things, let's say a store imports a pair of sneakers for $40 and then sells them for $50, making a $10 profit on which it would owe taxes. Under the Republican plan, however, the retailer wouldn't be able to deduct the $40 it paid for the sneakers. In fact, it would owe taxes on the entire $50! And who, ultimately, pays this tax? You, the consumer, in the form of higher prices or fewer choices of where you can shop. Retailers and their customers will be hit.


Many oil refiners import crude oil to turn into gasoline. This new tax will sharply raise their costs, which will spell pain when you fill up your tank. Worse, some could be forced out of business or have to sharply curtail operations, as drivers cut back on buying the suddenly more expensive fuel.

Companies like BMW, Toyota, Mercedes, Honda, Nissan and Hyundai have major manufacturing operations in the U.S. that employ tens of thousands of workers in good-paying jobs. These companies’ costs will soar because they import numerous parts for the vehicles their workers assemble.

The Loophole of All Loopholes


But wait, it gets worse. Another feature of this bizarre GOP scheme gives exporters a gargantuan tax break by, in effect, not taxing their export revenues. Let's say a corporation sells a piece of machinery to Iran for $5 million, which cost only $4 million to produce. That means $1 million in taxable profit. Under the new Republican scheme, however, that $5 million received from the mullahs wouldn’t be taxable. Instead of a $1 million profit, the corporation, for tax purposes, would have a $4 million loss. Loophole doesn't begin to describe this "tax break."


No wonder companies like Boeing, GE and other big exporters are orgasming over this GOP "reform."


Big breaks for big companies, higher prices for beleaguered consumers. Why are the Republicans doing this? They say the revenue raised will help finance a huge tax cut, such as getting rid of the death tax and the horrific alternative minimum tax, cutting the corporate tax rate from its disastrous 35% to a highly stimulative 20% or less and very meaningfully lightening the tax burden on individuals. These are all extremely exciting ideas and would do wonders for the economy.

But enacting a big, brand-new tax to finance cuts in old taxes is a dangerous business, especially in the way the Republicans are going about it. Democrats will gleefully remind voters why prices are going up, conveniently ignoring the tax cuts. Moreover, the GOP border adjustment tax is a but a small step away from a full-blown value added tax, which has financed the bloating of governments around the world. Democrats will someday be back in power, and they won't hesitate to either ramp up this GOP-created tax or go for the VAT. This would be hypocritical--rip apart the Republicans over this tax, and then go on to compound their felony. A VAT would crush future U.S. economic growth rates, just as it has in Europe and elsewhere.


Consider this astonishing fact: In the mid-1960s government spending in Europe as a proportion of their economies wasn't much different from our own. Growth rates matched or exceeded ours. Then Europe discovered the VAT. Spending ballooned and growth slowed to a crawl, consistently clocking in at significantly lower levels than Uncle Sam's.


Republicans also claim their new tax would help exports. In the real world it would do no such thing, as astute tax expert Dan Mitchell has explained (see this and this).


The GOP should drop this tax scheme. Why create unnecessary conflict and damage our new President? Republicans shouldn’t be constrained by the Congressional Budget Office's antiquated way of measuring the economic impact of changes in taxes. Drop the green eye shades, and go for big cuts that would turbo-charge the economy.

Republished from Forbes.
Steve Forbes
Steve Forbes
Steve Forbes is an American publishing executive, who was twice a candidate for the nomination of the Republican Party for President. Forbes is the Editor-in-Chief of Forbes, a business magazine. Forbes was a Republican candidate in the 1996 and 2000 Presidential primaries. Forbes is the son of longtime Forbes publisher Malcolm Forbes, and the grandson of that publication's founder, B.C. Forbes.
This article was originally published on FEE.org. Read the original article.