Rep. Mark Amodei Does Not Support Trump Impeachment Despite News Claims

Rep. Mark Amodei (R-NV) is Nevada’s only Republican Congressman House member and again confirmed to Breitbart News on Saturday that the media claims that he supports an “impeachment inquiry” are not accurate.

In plain English, Congressman Amodei does not support an impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump. Below is Amodei’s full statement following the media reports Twitter.

[rml_read_more]

“You’re sitting there going wow, look at this guy’s history,” Amodei said in an exclusive interview on Saturday. “I’m not a household name or anything like that, so you think I just lost my mind one day and ate some loco weed and called all the Nevada people in and said, ‘Here we go’? I guess the reason I’m not phenomenally agitated or whatever is is quite frankly I think that Humberto Sanchez’s article was fair and accurate. There’s confusion throughout the nation between what we did with the UC to send it to the appropriate committees, which the White House supports, and what Pelosi is doing. So it would certainly be news if that’s what I was saying I was in favor of. We got into some discussions about ‘what ifs’ and it’s like hey, let the committees do their work and see where it leads. Wherever it leads, it leads—let the chips fall where they may. But how you get from that discussion in context to ‘Oh my god he supports Pelosi’s thing’ is not true.”

Along with every other Congressman and Senator, Amodei does support a resolution that passed the House and Senate unanimously backing the “whistleblower complaint” and other info surrounding the Ukraine-Trump phone call to be transmitted to the appropriate committees. The bill is H. Res 576 and it passed the House 421-0.

“No,” Amodei again told Breitbart about the reports saying he supports impeachment.

Several national media companies claimed Amodei’s comments were part of an appearance of dissent in the GOP when it comes to the upcoming “impeachment inquiry” spearheaded by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats. The New York Times even published this graphic shortly after the media ran the story. This is now demonstrably false.

Please instruct anyone that says Amodei called for Trump’s impeachment that he does not support the impeachment of our President. He is our last Republican Congressman and we need to win in 2020.

Corporate Execs Throw Stockholders Under the Bus

Written By Ron Knecht

In college 50 years ago, I took Introduction to Political Science from Stephan A. Douglas.  Not the short, fat Little Giant who debated Abe Lincoln, but a tall, angular very good professor at Illinois.

[rml_read_more]

The mai
n thing I remember from his class is his explanation about a compelling revolution in political science and economics that began a decade earlier.  Traditionally, he said, political scientists sought to explain how political institutions, practices and processes worked to promote the public interest and common good even as participants pursued their special interests.  It was Pollyanna-ish: All for the better.

Then some iconoclasts said that’s not how things are at all.  Many institutions, practices, processes and especially politicians and bureaucrats don’t really promote the public interest.  Most work with special interests to promote their agendas at the expense of the public interest.  This insight, which today seems obvious, changed political science and helped foster a branch of economics known as public choice theory – which has produced a number of Nobel economics prizes.

Against the background of the Viet Nam war and turmoil in American politics in the 1960s, it was a bracing idea, and the insight quickly became a key part of my intellectual make-up.  It has served me well in politics and public service.

Now come our big corporate leaders with a perfect example of how political and economic behavior masquerades as public-spirited when it’s really completely self-serving.  The Business Roundtable, an association of chief executive officers of America’s largest companies, issued a new “Statement of the Purpose of a Corporation,” signed by 181 CEOs.

“While each of our individual companies serves its own corporate purpose, we share a fundamental commitment to all of our stakeholders,” they say.  They name those stakeholders: customers, employees, diversity and inclusion interests, suppliers, the communities where they work, environment and sustainability proponents.  Oh, yes, also “effective engagement with” company stockholders.

Since 1997, their periodic “Principles of Corporate Governance” statements have endorsed shareholder primacy: the idea that corporations exist primarily to serve stockholders.  In the New York Times Magazine on September 13, 1970, economist Milton Friedman, one of the intellectual giants of the 20th Century, said business executives who pursue a goal other than making money for their equity investors are wrong.

They are, he said, “unwitting pup­pets of the intellectual forces that have been undermining the basis of a free society these past decades.”  They become “unelected government officials” who essentially tax employees and customers.  They violate their legal and ethical fiduciary duties.

But the new diktat declares all “stakeholders” equal – leaving corporate moguls, our enlightened visionary betters, to decide how to serve many masters and balance everyone’s interests via corporate actions.

The concept of corporate stakeholders arose soon after the public choice revolution.  Originally, it was descriptive: It described groups affected by actions of corporations.  But once the term was invented, it morphed into a normative concept suggesting the stakeholders have some kinds of claims on the decisions of companies and their leaders that legitimately compete with the fiduciary duties owed to those who put their capital at risk by investing in the firm.

Now the CEOs have thrown in the towel and joined these predatory special-interest claimants.  Why?

It’s something I’ve observed the last 40 years in regulation, politics and business.  Essentially, executives are – surprise! – pursuing their own self-serving interests.  They want to be lionized everywhere as great leaders, compassionate souls, visionary intellectuals.  They want to use the resources their stockholders have entrusted to them to buy off everyone: unions, politicians, predatory special interests such as environmentalists, and the lamestream press.

Maximizing long-term discounted stockholder value within ethical norms crimps those aspirations.

This rot is clearest with regulated utilities, where executives can cut implicit (sometimes explicit) deals with regulators: We’ll do almost any foolish thing you want us to, as long as we can pass on the costs to ratepayers.

The problem started a century ago when large corporations were no longer managed by their primary owners, but instead by hired professional managers with their own self-serving agendas.  Ironically, consumers, employees and the real public interest in economic growth and fairness suffer with stockholders in this scheme.  Friedman was more accurate than he knew.

Ron Knecht has served Nevada as state controller, a higher education regent, college instructor, legislator and economist.  Contact him at RonKnecht@aol.com.

Medicaid Expansion Benefits Childless Adults Most

Nevada’s Medicaid Program gives assistance to half a million low-income adults and children in the state, according to the Guinn Center. This week they released a policy brief that shows which demographics benefit the most from a Medicaid expansion.

[rml_read_more]

The data shows that starting in 2013 Nevadans receiving Medicaid doubled from 299,548 enrolees to 654,943 enrollees in 2018. This is a 118 percent increase.

Surprisingly, the largest beneficiaries of the expansion to Medicaid are childless adults. The group most often excluded from Medicaid. about half of Medicaid enrollees is a non-elderly adult – making it the largest share of Medicaid recipients.

The list of counties with the largest amount of Medicaid recipients is the following:

Mineral County at 25.3 percent

Nye County at 23.7 percent

Carson City at 21.6 percent

Lyon County at 20.3 percent

Churchill County at 18.1 percent

Storey County at 18 percent

and Clark County at 17.3 percent

Male and female recipients have increased at similar rates, though women are overrepresented in the Medicaid population relative to their population in Nevada.

White beneficiaries of the plan have about doubled from 107,224 in 2013 to 238,324 in 2018. This is a 122 percent increase. Other has increased by 157 percent with a growth of 42,261 in the same time period. African Americans had the second-highest percentage increase at 147 percent with an increase of 81,284, and Latino enrollment went from 107,208 in 2013 to 216,606 in 2018 an increase of 109,398.

If Medicaid is further expanded, we should expect to see a similar increase across the state of uncovered younger adults using the expansion to their advantage.

Nevada Democrat Party Scraps Virtual Voting Plan For 2020 Primary, Try To Blame It On Republicans

Last week, the Democrat party decided to end plans to hold their primary voting in 2020 by tele-caucus. This would mean voters could pick their presidential nominee by phone.

[rml_read_more]

Party leaders released a memo that the dial-in voting plan was not “secure and reliable” to prevent meddling in the nominating election.

“We concur with the advice of the DNC’s security experts that there is no tele-caucus system available that meets our standard of security and liability,” DNC Chair Tom Perez said in a statement.

The DNC memo also attacked President Trump by somehow associating the lack of security in their system with the President allegedly ignoring threats to the U.S. voting infrastructure.

Nevada State Democratic Party Chair William McCurdy echoed the sentiment in a statement and blamed “Republican inaction” on voting security measures.

The Nevada GOP responded: “Republicans are not to blame for Chairman McCurdy’s lazy idea to nominate a Presidential candidate over a conference call,” Nevada Republican Party spokesman Keith Schipper said. “McCurdy should spend more time figuring out how to put on his caucus in a few months, and less time pointing fingers.”

State Democrats have six months to rework their caucus blueprint. they will now have a four-day in-person early causing period that will be expanded to include more absentee voters.

Democrats are saying that this will include more rural Democrat voters.

It is considerably lame to blame Republicans for the Democrats own failure to roll out a secure teleconferencing plan. It’s time to take it to them in 2020!

Subscribe To Our News and Issues

Join our mailing list to receive the latest news and updates from our team.

You have Successfully Subscribed!