The following link is an extensive analysis for who John Faso is, what his positions and actions have been over the many years he has been in politics, and clearly contradict his current attempt to appear more moderate. Although this is a long document, it is well worth going through and using as an ongoing reference.
HERE IS AN OMINOUS AND IMPORTANT ARTICLE FROM: KAVIPS.WORDPRESS.COM
This item (was) buried in a (Trump Administration) Memorandum to several heads of departments…
Sec. 3. Enforcement of All Laws for Entry into the United States. I direct the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the heads of all other relevant executive departments and agencies (as identified by the Secretary of Homeland Security) to rigorously enforce all existing grounds of inadmissibility and to ensure subsequent compliance with related laws after admission. The heads of all relevant executive departments and agencies shall issue new rules, regulations, or guidance (collectively, rules), as appropriate, to enforce laws relating to such grounds of inadmissibility and subsequent compliance. To the extent that the Secretary of Homeland Security issues such new rules, the heads of all other relevant executive departments and agencies shall, as necessary and appropriate, issue new rules that conform to them. Such new rules shall supersede any previous rules to the extent of any conflict.
Here is what is problematic with this. Sure, current laws can be rigorously enforced. But that is just campaign talk, Current laws are always enforced to the same standard extent to which they are written by those working day in and day out. Although we may like not to have tough laws enforced, we understand that IF they are in place, the legal system recognizes their right to be used (as long as such is Constitutional).
But focus on this part of the above quote:
“The heads of all relevant executive departments and agencies shall issue new rules, regulations, or guidance (collectively, rules), as appropriate, to enforce laws relating to such grounds of inadmissibility and subsequent compliance. To the extent that the Secretary of Homeland Security issues such new rules, the heads of all other relevant executive departments and agencies shall, as necessary and appropriate, issue new rules that conform to them. Such new rules shall supersede any previous rules to the extent of any conflict.”
Let’s walk through this… New rules will be issued by the heads of the departments. They can be capricious, random, or prejudicial. They can be made up on the spot; there is no way to know. For example based on some stories already told, you can be forced to present your phone with password. .. or… you will be body cavity searched, … or… you can be held indefinitely without further notice.
As with any law change or new power grab, in the hands of good people they can be tolerated if they are only used on known criminals. But in the hands of bad, they can destroy a nation through their random use..
Essentially this single clause should be considered an enabling act, one wide open which as with that of Hitler, simply says that all rules will now be made solely by X and must be carried out exactly as X says.
Recent Faso votes against environmental protection and worker protection.
Disapprove Disclosure of Payments by Resource Extraction Issuers Rule – Vote Passed (235-187, 10 Not Voting)
The measure would disapprove of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) rule issued in July 2016 that requires resource extraction issuers (companies that extract oil, natural gas or minerals) that are registered in the United States to provide detailed, public reporting of certain payments to governments that equal or exceed $100,000 per project annually. Rep. John Faso voted YES
Disapprove Stream Buffer Rule – Vote Passed (228-194, 10 Not Voting)
The bill would disapprove the Interior Department’s Stream Buffer Rule requiring that surface coal mining operations be designed to minimize the amount of waste placed outside the mined-out area, thus minimizing the amount of land disturbed. Rep. John Faso voted YES
Disapprove Labor Law Rule – Vote Passed (236-187, 9 Not Voting)
The bill would disapprove a Defense Department, General Services Administration and NASA rule that requires federal contractors to self-certify violations of 14 specified federal labor laws and equivalent state laws. The laws include the Fair Labor Standards Act, Occupational Safety and Health Act, National Labor Relations Act, Davis-Bacon Act, and Americans with Disabilities Act, among others. Rep. John Faso voted YES
Disapprove BLM Methane Rule – Vote Passed (221-191, 20 Not Voting)
The bill would disapprove, under terms of the Congressional Review Act, a Bureau of Land Management (BLM) rule issued last November that requires oil and gas producers to implement measures that reduce natural gas waste. Rep. John Faso voted NO
ANYONE CAN SIGN UP TO RECEIVE ONGOING INFORMATION ON CONGRESSIONAL VOTES AT: http://www.congress.org/congressorg/megavote/
I’m usually skeptical about Andrew Cuomo’s talk and actions, but this one he really seems to have gotten right in calling for a NY Constitutional Amendment to protect a woman’s right to choose. Here is his statement and a link to support this amendment.[click on “Add your name now….”]
From: Governor Andrew M. Cuomo [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 3:43 PM
Subject: New York won’t go back
Today I was proud to stand with Planned Parenthood and activists for women’s rights from across the state. In keeping with New York’s tradition of standing up for women’s rights, I pledged that all we have achieved for women in New York will never be undone. In fact, we are taking the fight even further.
I’m proposing a constitutional amendment to once and for all guarantee a woman’s right to choose in New York by enshrining the protections established by the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling into the New York State Constitution.
We have made tremendous progress and no matter what happens at the federal level, I promise you we won’t go back.
Add your name now to support my proposal for a constitutional amendment protecting a woman’s right to choose in New York. Adding your name only takes a moment, but sends a powerful message that you believe in protecting the rights of women in New York.
As Washington seeks to limit women’s rights, we will protect them. We will not allow the progress of the women’s movement to be stopped, and we must seize this opportunity to bring the state and the nation forward and stand up for women’s health. Make no mistake, we will always protect the right to choose in New York.
At a House Oversight Committee hearing, House Republicans convened a panel on denying access to birth control coverage with five men and no women. As Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney asked, where are the women?
The Republicans have now introduced a bill, apparently supported by Chris Gibson, that would give any and all insurance companies and employers the right to deny birth control coverage for all women for any reason—all they have to do is say they have some moral or ideological objection to providing such coverage—there doesn’t even have to be a religious basis for this.