After the revelation that 24 Republicans actually voted against disallowing the use of taxpayer money for transgender surgery in Missouri, what happens next?
As written by Allen B. West:
Last week we shared with you the horrific revelation that 24 Republicans voted against the amendment of Missouri Rep. Vicki Hartzler to block taxpayer funding to gender dysphoric hormonal treatments and gender reassignment surgery in the military.
However, what I found most disconcerting were the reports and no refute of SecDef James Mattis calling Rep. Hartzler requesting she withdraw her amendment. If anyone is confused, let me remind you, the Origination Clause in the Constitution states that all matters concerning revenue generation must originate in the House of Representatives. The “People’s House” holds the purse strings, not the Pentagon.
But, there are other things happening in the Pentagon that are troubling for me, and should be for you.
As reported by The Daily Signal, “As Congress considers green projects in a military spending bill, the Trump administration hasn’t staked out a strong case on whether to roll back the Obama administration’s aggressive push for biofuels, wind, solar, and other renewables in the military.
During his confirmation hearing Tuesday, Trump nominee for Navy secretary, Richard V. Spencer told the Senate Armed Services Committee that he was watchful of climate change. The committee unanimously approved Spencer. “The Navy, from my briefings to date, is totally aware of rising water issues, storm issues, etc.,” Spencer said. “We must protect our infrastructure, and I will work hard to make sure we are keeping an eye on that because without the infrastructure, we lose readiness.”
This week, the House has debated the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2018. Last month, the Republican-controlled House Armed Services Committee passed an amendment by Rep. Jim Langevin, D-R.I., directing the Defense Department to assess 10 bases in each branch most threatened by climate change, and for the Pentagon to count climate change as a security risk to deal with—even as several government audits in the last two years have found the alternative energy sources haven’t been efficient for the DOD. A 2015 study by the Union of Concerned Scientists, an environmental advocacy and research group, warned that 128 U.S. military bases could be submerged because of rising sea levels.”
Are Republicans in charge or not? I mean seriously, we are expending resources and worried about military bases being submerged due to “rising sea levels?” This reminds me of the absolutely chucklehead moment when Georgia Democrat Congressman Hank Johnson proposed that stationing more Marines on the island of Guam would cause the island to tip over. Don’t believe me, here is the video, and as Ricky Bobby would say, “this just happened.”
So, we are to trust our military bases and installations to the party of folks who believe they’re going to tip over, or be submerged? I was stationed at Camp Lejeune for three years, and ran along the Atlantic oceanfront often, and was never concerned about the ocean overtaking the base, nor the swamps overflowing. Amazingly enough, we have a GOP-controlled Congress that seems more concerned about transgender and climate change issues in our military — and who is in charge?
“Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., and Rep. Warren Davidson, R-Ohio, each sponsored their own amendments to strike the Langevin provision. Perry’s proposal would remove the language to save money for the Pentagon, while Davidson’s amendment would strike down a 2015 executive order by President Barack Obama that requires the military to meet emission reduction targets. However, neither of the Republicans’ amendments will likely make it to the floor despite clearing the rules committee, said Myron Ebell, director for the Center for Energy and the Environment at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
Trump signed an order rescinding Obama’s Executive Order 13653 directing the Department of Defense and other departments to use resources to prepare for the impact of climate change. However, Trump hasn’t rescinded this executive order, which is the amendment Davidson is offering would undo, Ebell noted. “The Pentagon has bought into climate change because it makes it politically more acceptable to people who wouldn’t normally like the Pentagon,” Ebell said. “Another reason is that it’s another means to enhance the portfolio and receive more funding, even if it’s not part of the essential mission.”
READ MORE HERE: