World Health Organization’s ‘Global Governance’ Gambit Is A Threat To Democracy
The World Health Assembly is set to vote on giving WHO the sole ability to determine public health emergencies and the global response.The World Health Assembly is set to vote on giving WHO the sole ability to determine public health emergencies and the global response.The U.N. Is Planning To Seize Global ‘Emergency’ Powers With Biden’s Support
The proposal might be the biggest attempted power grab in the history of the United Nations. If approved, the United States as we know it could cease to exist.22 Democrats fight to keep COVID emergency alive, but fail in decisive Senate vote
The U.S. Senate voted Wednesday on a Republican resolution to terminate the COVID-19 national emergency first declared by former President Donald Trump on March 13, 2020.
To the chagrin of a gang of Democratic lawmakers keen to preserve emergency powers in the name of "consistency," the resolution, first introduced by Republican Rep. Paul Gosar (Ariz.) passed the Senate without amendment by a Yea-Nay vote of 68-23.
Facing significant Democratic opposition, it previously passed the House on February 1 in a 229-197 vote.
Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R--Ala.) noted Thursday, "The national emergency gave the government unprecedented power over our lives. Those days are coming to an end."
The Democrats and lone independent who opposed the executive's relinquishment of emergency powers were:
- Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut;
- Cory Booker and Bob Menendez of New Jersey;
- Maria Cantwell and Patt Murray of Washington;
- Ben Cardin and Chris Van Hollen of Maryland;
- Debbie Stabenow of Michigan;
- Tina Smith of Minnesota;
- Tom Carper of Delaware;
- Tammy Duckworth of Illinois;
- Kirsten Gillibrand and Chuck Schumer of New York;
- Mazie Hirono and Brian Schatz of Hawaii;
- Ed Markey and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts;
- Jeff Merkley and Ron Wyden of Oregon;
- Alex Padilla of California;
- Jack Reed of Rhode Island; and
- Peter Welch (D) and Bernie Sanders (I) of Vermont.
It will now go to President Joe Biden for ratification. A White House official has indicated that Biden will ultimately sign it into law, reported the Hill.
"The President strongly opposes HJ Res 7, and the administration is planning to wind down the COVID national emergency and public health emergency on May 11. If this bill comes to his desk, however, he will sign it, and the administration will continue working with agencies to wind down the national emergency with as much notice as possible to Americans who could potentially be impacted," said the official.
In January, the White House stated, "If the PHE were suddenly terminated, it would sow confusion and chaos into this critical wind-down. ... Due to this uncertainty, tens of millions of Americans could be at risk of abruptly losing their health insurance, and states could be at risk of losing billions of dollars in funding."
The Associated Press noted that Biden's forthcoming ratification of the resolution will be the second time in recent weeks the president has signed legislation he previously made a big show of opposing.
On March 20, he signed into law a resolution to block a radical Washington, D.C., crime bill, disappointing many of the 173 Democrats who had voted against it in Congress.
White House officials indicated that Biden's latest acquiescence has much to do with timing, granted the resolution was initially set to deprive the executive branch of the wide-reaching powers, which it had temporarily enjoyed, back in February.
Biden was aiming for May 11 as the date on which to wind down the national COVID emergency status.
Rep. Dan Kildee (D-Mich.) told The Hill that Biden's apparent about-face was "frustrating"; at best an "unacceptable lack of clarity in their message to us."
"This is a problem," added Kildee.
Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) said, "I find it surprising and I'd like to see a little more consistency."
Democratic Rep. Rick Larsen (Wash.) said in January that ending the emergency "would be harmful and irresponsible."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Democrats seek to prolong the COVID-19 health emergency
Democrats are apparently unwilling to turn the page on the pandemic this week and move beyond a framework of perpetual emergency, particularly if that might mean significantly less power for the Biden administration — power to achieve political ends tangential to American health and safety.
The White House indicated Monday that the president, who declared "the pandemic is over" in September 2022, will bring an end to COVID-19 national public health emergencies on May 11. The timeline is not entirely arbitrary, suggested the White House; this "would align with the Administration's previous commitments to give at least 60 days’ notice prior to termination of the [public health emergency]."
The timing of the White House announcement certainly was not arbitrary, coming several hours before the U.S. House of Representatives voted on whether to call off the emergency straightaway.
Democrat Rep. Frank Pallone (N.J.) said that Republican Kentucky Rep. Brett Guthrie's "Pandemic Is Over Act" would "abruptly and irresponsibly end the COVID-19 public health emergency virtually overnight."
The act passed in the House, with the vote going primarily along party lines, 220 to 210.
Guthrie had introduced the act on Jan. 17, just days after the Biden administration authorized the twelfth extension of the COVID-19 public health emergency, noting, "It is long overdue for President Biden to end the ... emergency and relinquish the emergency powers that he just renewed again."
"The Pandemic Is Over Act sends a loud and clear message to President Biden: the American people are tired of living in a perpetual state of emergency, and it’s long overdue for Congress to take back the authorities granted under Article 1 of the Constitution," he added in a statement upon the act's introduction.
Guthrie and other House Republicans have evidently been tired of this state of things for some time, having written to Biden and HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra in February 2022, stressing, "It is time for your administration to abandon its overbearing and authoritarian approach and show the country that the COVID-19 emergency is over."
While the "Pandemic Is Over Act" passed, The Hill indicated that Democrats will likely spike it in the Senate. Failing that, Biden may exercise his veto power.
According to Fox News Digital, Biden is incentivized to stick to his preferred timeline. His student loan forgiveness program depends upon the legal argument that COVID is an ongoing public health emergency.
Without the emergency, Biden may lack the authority. After all, he characterized the plan as a way to provide families "breathing room as they prepare to star repaying loans after the economic crisis brought on by the pandemic."
In advance of Biden possibly feeling the need to exercise his veto power, his administration is suggesting a punctual return to normalcy might prove disastrous.
The Office of Management and Budget claimed that the immediate repeal of the public health emergency would have "highly significant impacts on our nation's health system and government operations," creating "wide-ranging chaos and uncertainty."
The OMB further threatened that "if H.R. 382 becomes law and Title 42 restrictions end precipitously, Congress will effectively be requiring the Administration to allow thousands of migrants per day into the country immediately without the necessary policies in place."
Despite the OMB's intimation, Guthrie maintains, "Nothing in my bill ends Title 42 despite the Administration stating it would. The Biden Administration, and Biden Administration alone, controls Title 42."
The Kentucky Republican added, "That statute was written in 1944, before the authority of a public health emergency even existed. If the Biden administration chooses to end Title 42 when the PHE ends without working with us to secure the border, that’s just another one of his failures to add to the list."
The New York Post reported that should the act ultimately pass, the development of vaccines and treatments will be shifted away from the direct management of the federal government. Additionally, upon the emergency's expiration, people will have to pay out-of-pocket costs for vaccines and treatments; those with private insurance significantly less so.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
There can be no ‘amnesty’ on lockdowns without a reckoning
Unending ‘Emergency Powers’ Enable Authoritarian Behavior Such As Suspending Elections
The United States will be operating under a falsified state of emergency through yet another hotly contested election.
Republicans victorious in PA as voters make it easier to limit Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf's emergency powers in face of COVID-19 shutdown
Pennsylvania Republicans got a big win earlier this week after voters decided to make it easier for the state legislature to limit the emergency powers of the governor — in this case, Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf, WHYY-TV reported.
What are the details?
The decision came through a pair of ballot measures voters narrowly passed, the station said.
Republican lawmakers — who control the legislature — have struggled with Wolf over his orders in response to COVID-19 over the last year, WHYY said, adding that their efforts to curtail Wolf's orders through legislation, which requires a two-thirds majority, and in court have failed.
But now one of the constitutional amendments voters approved gives lawmakers the ability to end emergency orders with a simple majority vote, the station said. The second measure limits the governor's emergency orders to 21 days.
More from WHYY:
The state's current COVID-19 emergency order, last renewed for 90 days in February, is set to expire this week ahead of business restrictions lifting on Memorial Day. It's unclear at the moment if Wolf intends to renew the declaration to give his administration the flexibility to extend lockdowns if cases were to suddenly rise. The other new law would limit that order to 21 days.
House Majority Leader Kerry Benninghoff and Speaker Bryan Cutler, both Republicans, said in a joint statement that their victory doesn't mean COVID-19 responses will be handled irresponsibly, the station said.
"This decision by the people is not about taking power away from any one branch of government," Senate President Jake Corman and Majority Leader Kim Ward, both Republicans, said in a joint statement, according to WHYY. "It's about re-establishing the balance of power between three equal branches of government as guaranteed by the constitution."
What did Wolf have to say?
A Wolf spokesman said the administration declined to comment until the official results come in, the station said, although the state's Emergency Management Agency criticized the amendments, saying they "have the potential to politicize future disasters and their management" and that the agency is "extremely disappointed that our efforts ... could be constrained by partisan politics, which has no place in emergency response efforts."
Anything else?
But the Wall Street Journal's editorial board applauded voters' decision to make it easier to limit Wolf's emergency powers, calling it a "rebuke" of his "endless pandemic diktats." Still, the piece cautiously wondered "whether Mr. Wolf will deign to obey the voters or look for some legal ruse to get around them."
Today's top stories
www.theblaze.com
www.theblaze.com