Iran Deal Reached With World Powers Met With Mixed Reactions

This morning President Obama addressed the nation announcing that Iran and 6 nations have reached a deal to limit Iran's nuclear capabilities while lifting oil and financial sanctions. The deal comes after 20 months of negotiations signaling what President Obama hopes to be the signature diplomatic accomplishment of his presidency.

Speaker John Boehner has spoken out against the deal.“At the outset of these talks, the Obama administration said it would secure an agreement that affirmed Iran does not have a right to enrich and permanently dismantles the infrastructure of its nuclear programs." “The American people and our allies were counting on President Obama to keep his word.  Instead, the president has abandoned his own goals.  His 'deal' will hand Iran billions in sanctions relief while giving it time and space to reach a break-out threshold to produce a nuclear bomb - all without cheating." He continued, "instead of making the world less dangerous, this ‘deal’ will only embolden Iran – the world’s largest sponsor of terror – by helping stabilize and legitimize its regime."

Knowing of the possible actions by Congress against this deal the president stated simply “I will veto any legislation that prevents the successful implementation of this deal.”

Critics are suggesting that one possible reason that the administration struck this deal was to try and make an ally out of Iran. This would be a foolish expectation from a country that has made numerous threats against us and our allies, and once invaded our embassy holding captive our citizens.Many continue to be  wary of Iran, for good reason, as the government has openly supported terrorist organizations in the middle east, and has made significant threats against our ally Israel.

Some believe that the deal has little chance of being kept, and that the other parties of the deal will have little incentive to impose sanctions in the future if Iran fails to meet requirements.However, Secretary of State John Kerry believes this will stop Iran from having a nuclear bomb for more than a decade. “Iran will not produce or acquire highly enriched uranium or plutonium for at least 15 years,” he said. Measures to ensure this, he added, would “stay in place permanently.”

Watch Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech on the Iran deal:

John Oliver: Is it OK for Professional Sports Teams to Use Public Funding to Build Stadiums?

John Oliver a self declared sports fan went after major league sports teams on Last Week Tonight Sunday evening. His concerns come as several teams are currently asking for new stadiums and are threatening to move to other cities that will build new stadiums. 

His concern is imply that:“The vast majority of stadiums are made using public money,” said Oliver, citing a report from 2012 that revealed the staggering statistic that “$12 billion [was] spent on the 51 new facilities opened between 2000 and 2010.” In the last 30 years half of the stadiums in the U.S. have been built or rebuilt for major sports teams

He then noted that many of them “look like they were designed by a coked-up Willy Wonka.”

Oliver had one question for these exorbitant expenses: Why are tax dollars being used to fund stadiums? “Sports teams are wealthy businesses with wealthy owners and they still get our help,” Oliver said. “Pretending you’re poor is wrong. It wasn’t okay when Mary-Kate Olsen went through her hobo phase, and it’s not okay now!” He continued by saying: "A major review of almost 20 years of studies have shown that stadiums increase jobs, wages or tax revenues"

To prove his point about how cities have bent over backwards to keep sports teams happy, he noted that barely six days after Detroit declared bankruptcy, they got approval to spend more than $280 million in taxpayer money for a new arena for the local NHL team — even though the Red Wings owner, Mike Ilitch, is the founder of the Little Caesar’s pizza chain and worth an estimated $5.1 billion. As Oliver noted, “That’s a little hard to swallow.”

One economist was quoted saying that "rather than build a stadium you'd be better off flying a plane above a city and dumping a billion dollars on the populace and letting them spend it."

Due to the costs of these stadiums often these cities don't have the money to pay for schools and hospitals that they have desperate need of. 

Top Political Memes of the Week

It's been a wild week, check out this week's top political memes!

Confederate Flag Discussion Distracts From Major Issues Facing Our Nation

Image Source: Flickr

In case you have been hiding under a rock the last few weeks a mentally unstable young man entered a black church in South Carolina and killed 9 African-Americans. It was later discovered that Dylann Roof was a white supremacist with pictures found of him in front of the Confederate flag. Since then there has been a national debate about whether or not the confederate flag should come down from the South Carolina statehouse, which finally happened today.

Whether you see the Confederate flag as a symbol of hatred and racism, or of heritage and history, what we must realize is that this issue doesn't really affect most of us. Every day this story  has been the top of every news hour, and each day more important issues continue to be ignored. Why? Because they don't bring as much emotion to our hearts and excitement to our minds. Those in the news industry care more about the money they can make by talking about sensationalist stories rather than more pressing issues.

While the U.S. has been surrounded by news about the Confederate flag, major issues loom over the horizon. Our national debt has recently passed the $18.3 trillion mark. It is inexcusable for us to continue in a path that puts our spending on the backs of our children and grandchildren. If we were really paying attention to the news we would see the real effects of this debt on a nation as we observe Greece fall to pieces. Not to mention the increasing threat of a new financial crisis and our inability to handle it.

Not only should we be concerned about our national debt, but we should have concern for the labor market, which still faces record low labor participation rates, meaning that the fewest percentage of working age adults are currently working or seeking for work in decades. The 5.3% U3 number we hear on the news only includes part of the total number of unemployed persons, more than likely our real unemployment is at least 10%. We also fail to  realize that over 300,000 jobs that were created in the last year were in the food service industry and that wages have stagnated for years.

We are also in the midst of preparing for the campaign to elect the next president of our country. Many are getting distracted by flashy populist statements without considering fully where each individual stands on the issues. I recommend you visit the site ISideWith.com , and take their quiz to see who you side with on the issues.

During the flag debate we also saw Congress give President Obama massive amounts of leeway on trade issues by granting him Trade Promotion Authority, or Fast Track as it is also known. This version of Fast Track doesn't do nearly enough to put in place Congressional oversight over trade pacts that are in the works like the TPP and TTIP. Many have concerns over how these deals will take place, but the media has paid hardly any attention to these deals.

Even with this debate, the real issue we should be discussing is the need to reform the treatment of mental health in our nation, to help prevent tragedies like this from happening again because I can guarantee the real cause wasn't the Confederate flag.

We need to wake up as a nation and not be sucked as deeply into debates that have little real impact on the daily lives of most Americans. We cannot continue to be sucked into sensationalist stories and debates when there are more impactful issues that surround us on every side.

Independence Day 2015-Why We Are Celebrating Today

British colonies had been established on the North American continent for well over a hundred years. The French and Indian war had shortly been brought to peace just a decade earlier. For about two decades however, legislation had been passed with continued hostility toward the American colonies, without any representation. The intolerable acts drove the colonies to act. With the Boston Tea Party coupled with the battles of Lexington and Concord and Bunker Hill, the colonies had entered into pure state of rebellion. By summer it became clear that the crown was sending an expeditionary force to enforce it's will upon the colonies, and that this force would include foreign mercenaries known for their ruthlessness.

Congress had been meeting for months on the matter of independence. On June 11th it was decided that a committee to draft a resolution to declare independence should be formed. This committee was made up of John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Roger Sherman, Robert Livingston and a young Virginian named Thomas Jefferson. It was decided that Jefferson(the only member from the southern states) would be the member to write the initial draft. After revisions by the committee and by congress as a whole, the final document was voted on and accepted on July 2nd. Final approval came two days latter on July 4th, or the day we now refer to as Independence day. I wish now to quote from that document :

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

With those words on that day our founders staked our claim as a nation to independence. However, it was not ours to be had by merely laying claim to it. Our independence was not easily won. Many men gave their lives for the hope of a future nation, and for the hope that with such a nation our natural rights would be ours to be had for us and for generations to come. For 238 years now we have looked back to that founding, as our assertion that there are certain rights that no government should usurp without due process of law. This declaration established our reasons for breaking allegiance to our mother country, and firmly rooted within our culture the ideas of freedom from oppression and liberty of thought action. We as Americans have held their sacrifice as sacred within our hearts and we have honored them through the past two centuries.

Independence was won eventually, but it was not until another document was also written that our nation was on placed on a firm foundation. Our constitution was enacted  to ensure that these rights and privileges would continue to be protected. It established law and justice in our country as well as ways for individual citizens to address their grievances through a representative republic.

 This document established our country on a firm foundation of law and justice that has governed us well for over 200 years. Our path as a nation has not been the easiest, we have had times of prosperity and peace, and we have had times of depression and war. Overall though, we have shown that as we work together, not always agreeing but finding ways to compromise that we can accomplish great things. I do not believe that the days of our great accomplishments are past, and I still see America as a shining beacon on a hill, standing as an example that democracy can work.

As we celebrate our nation this Independence day let us not forget those who have sacrificed all to protect our nation and our freedoms. Let us remember them and honor them for their heroic sacrifice. Let us remember our founders and their great work. And let us look to the future with hope that the future years will bring hope and prosperity to our nation once again.

We are celebrating today because we have a great nation established on freedom and justice. Many have paid with their lives so that we may live in peace. So wave a flag, sing our national anthem, grill some hot dogs and watch some fireworks, but please remember what we are celebrating.

Whose Fault Is it That We Have a Do Nothing Congress?

Many vital issues are facing our country today. Most Americans have major concerns about our economy, our national debt, and illegal immigration. At a time of crisis like this, one might think our leaders would be fast at work looking for solutions to our problems. Instead, Congress is now in recess and could possibly only have 12 total days of work ahead of them before the November midterm elections.

What have they done to earn this vacation? Very little, in fact Congress is on track to produce the fewest number of laws ever. Congress has passed just 77 public laws this year, for a total of 142 since the beginning of this session, which began in 2013. This virtually guarantees the current Congress will be the least productive in U.S. history, well behind the famed “do nothing” Congress of 1948, which in fact passed more than 900 bills.

Instead of fixing our broken nation, we see that Congress has devolved into bickering and infighting. This Congress has produced the first government shutdown in almost two decades. The following graphic from the Pew Research Center shows just how bad Congress has been. 

The first thing you may notice is that only 108 of the laws that have been passed were substantive bills, meaning that they actually had an effect and weren’t just ceremonial measures. Next you will notice that this has been plaguing us for quite some time, the 112th and 113th sessions were both incredibly ineffective as we continue to see fights over the debt ceiling and spending cuts, but no real bills produced.

Who is to blame? Both sides are in reality, as neither side has been willing to bend on their issues. Since both parties control one house we can see this clearly. The Senate has failed to vote on nearly 350 bills that were passed in the House. The House has far fewer that have been passed in the Senate. Under Harry Reid's watch the Senate has been the least effective in decades.

Let's Get to work on Immigration Reform

I am a conservative and I support immigration reform. In fact I also support a form of amnesty for a good number of illegal immigrants that our currently in our country. Our country has been facing a long standing question on immigration reform, which is: What should we do about the 11 million undocumented illegal immigrants who are living in our country? Should we deport them all to their country of origin, grant them amnesty and let them stay with a path to citizenship or just continue to ignore the problem and hope that it just gets taken care of on its own.

Now let me make this clear I do support all current laws on the books and I think that Obama's actions of giving amnesty without legal backing is unconstitutional. It is his duty to execute the law as dictated by congress; he does not have the authority to pick and choose which laws to execute.

Being a firm believer that presidential authority has surpassed constitutional limits through  decades of overreach, I  firmly believe that the president's authority should be scaled back significantly. The easier it is for the president to act without restraints and checks, the easier it will be for an evil man as president to bring upon mankind tyranny and injustice.

As a full supporter of the law, I support congressional authority on this issue, as it is a national issue, which affects the entire country in trade, security, education, and health care.

Considering the events of the last few weeks, securing our border has never been more important. Before addressing the topic of what is being considered I want to first discuss where I have come from so maybe you will see how I have come to my point of view on the issue.

There was a point several years ago where I was all for kicking out every illegal immigrant from our country. They broke our laws, came here illegally and had to be punished for that no matter what. This lasted for a quite a while.

One day I shared these opinions with my mom and she responded by asking me "what about your Aunt?" I have an Aunt who had recently married my Uncle, a paranoid schizophrenic. She came here legally but lost legal status and just stayed here and has since struggled to work toward legal status. I thought about this for a little while.

Before this point I hadn't known anyone who was in the U.S. illegally. I was still stuck in my thoughts and opinions, but it started me thinking. If she were to be deported, what would be the impact on my uncle? He would probably have another episode or possibly something worse.

 While in college I talked to several people including a friend who was working on his path to citizenship. He was born in Canada, but moved to the U.S. around age 3. It took him over 18 years to be able to get citizenship. Even for those who marry citizens the path is not always clear or easy. It can be a long, laborious process that takes many years.

There was a time that we welcomed everyone to come to America. I’m not suggesting that we encourage everyone to come here, but by far we seem to believe that only a few people should come - that they should be similar to who we already are and should speak English perfectly. We used to be a melting pot of countries, ideas and immigrants, but now we are becoming more intolerant and ignorant of other cultures and beliefs.

 In 2007 I was in Las Vegas, and I saw many people whom I was familiar with take to the streets to rally for immigration reform that had been supported by President George W. Bush. This attempt at reform was struck down by congressional Republicans. A few years passed, and our country dipped into what is now being referred to as the Great Recession. I talked with friends of mine from Vegas who mentioned that many illegal immigrants were returning back to their countries due to lack of work. I wondered if this would continue. If so we would not have a problem anymore. The issue with that idea is that many of these people grew up in the U.S, and to them this is their country and many of them don't even speak the home language of their country of birth.

While interning in the Senate I had a long discussion once about my views on immigration with a fellow intern, during which we did some what-ifs. What if someone was brought here as a 2 year old and they are now 23, have never known the country they were born in, and only know this country as their home? How then do you justify punishing a 2 year old for the actions of their parents? I still remained pretty stiff in my response. I looked at what I felt is the burden of illegal immigration. If somehow we got rid of 11 million immigrants then maybe the 14 million people who are out of work would have enough jobs available for them. Maybe our school system would get better, maybe our country wouldn't have as much debt.

 I even thoroughly liked Mitt Romney's idea of self deportation by discouraging illegal immigrants through e-verify and similar methods. The change had started though, as I realized how my ancestors had come to this nation at a time when this land was a shining beacon to all who wanted a new life. We didn't tell others that they couldn't come to our nation because they were poor, or because they couldn't speak the language.

Instead we inscribed on the Statue of Liberty the phrase "Give me your tired, your poor/Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free."  

Now that I've addressed some whys of immigration reform, let's think about the what. What is being considered? The current senate bill that was passed last year included a long list of ideas including securing the borders, a path to citizenship for illegal's and changing and modernizing the rules for legal immigration to prevent such a backlog and some of the other issues occurring due to the current system.

A simple breakdown of the bill can be found here. I will not go into detail as you can find all of that information for yourself about some of the benefits here, here and here. I would also suggest taking a look at both the Heritage Foundation's opinion and the Cato Institute's opinion on the issues.  I will say a few words however. The bill calls for significant increases to border security through drones and electronic surveillance equipment in addition to the security increase we have seen in the last decade. It would establish a board made up of state leaders to determine when securing the border is complete, which would be made in a final decision by the Director of Homeland Security. Also it calls for an effective plan to enforce employers using documented legal employees which would most likely be through the e-verify system.

This bill may not be perfect, but so far it is the best plan that I have seen. We need our legislators to get to work on this issue now, and stop kicking it down the road for the next Congress to deal with.

Part of the bill also lays out a plan for dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants, giving preferred green cards for those who obtain advanced degrees in areas such as science, math, and engineering. In dealing with the 11 million illegal immigrants the plan calls for increased background checks for immigrants and increased cooperation between government organizations in order to respond to issues that come up. It would create a tracking system to make sure that those who come legally continue to abide here legally.

Those who are currently here illegally could apply for legal status if they pay a fine, pay back taxes, and if they pass a background check. They would then be on probationary legal status. However, for full legal status and a green card they would still have to get to the back of the line and wait for all security measures to be put in place. The earliest that any of them could become citizens is in the late 2020's. They also would not get access to public benefits, such as welfare, until granted full citizenship.

So what has been the response to this plan? Some republicans continue to raise the issue that amnesty supports tearing down our current system of laws and encouraging people to break them in the future, although the party seems split on the issue. Earlier this week there was some suggestion that maybe we should rethink pushing immigration reform right now coming from Senator Rand Paul (R-KY), but this was shot down by several republican members of congress including Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI)

Also, with this has come the issue of whether to pass a comprehensive bill or to go through the process of passing some of the bills piecemeal. Some members suggested that attaching amnesty would surely doom the bill.  The House is set to consider several portions of the bill in small pieces including security and legal immigration changes.

Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) has lead the front to support the bill from the republican side. He recently went to the senate floor to support reform at this time saying, “Here’s my encouragement to my colleagues who don’t agree with the bill that we’ve crafted – change it. Let’s work on changing it. If you believe that what we have today is broken, if you believe that the status quo on immigration is chaos and a disaster...If you believe our laws are not being enforced and we need to pass laws that force the administration – this one and a future one – to enforce our laws, let’s change it. I’m all ears." Surely none of us is opposed to enforcing our proper laws and having a president that supports and upholds the laws of the land are we? However the current system does not do that: it encourages the president to act on his own and not have to take responsibility for his actions.

He continued by saying, "But let’s not leave it the way it is, because the way it is chaos. It’s bad for our country. What we have today is not good for the United States. And our job as policy-makers is not just to come here and criticize. Our job is to come here and to make a difference. .. And what we have now just doesn’t work, it’s not good for our country. We can’t leave it this way. And we have a chance now to, I think, truly improve it. This is not an effort to force anything down anyone’s throat. This bill that we’ve worked on is a starting point. It’s not a take it or leave it proposition. It never has been....Let’s work together. Let’s come up with a solution that modernizes our legal immigration system so it’s good for our economy, that once and for all forces the administration – this one and future ones – to enforce our immigration laws, and that once and for all deals with the 11 million people that are here illegally in a way that’s fair and compassionate. But also fair to the people that did it right, and also a way that ensures that this never ever happens again.”

So what are my views on this issue? Greatly changed: partly due to an increased compassion for other people who I have met and who I have not; partly due to politics and seeing that real change could be made here and now and that we need more compromise; and partly because I understand that there are millions of people that are affected by living here illegally that could be productive members of our society if we allow them.

This plan is fair and fairly straightforward. It does bring about a consequence for those who have committed the crime of coming here illegally through fines, back taxes, a waiting period, and through back of the line status. It also upholds our laws by helping us to have 11 million immigrants become legal. I wonder sometimes how many crimes are not reported because someone is afraid to call the police out of fear that they or their parents might get deported over it. It would lay out a pretty clear plan that would have to be followed with the opportunities for our border to be secured and for people to be able to come to the U.S. legally in the future.

It also allows for the great American Dream to spread further to these people who have come here for a new life, one which they hoped would be better than the one that they left. There was a time when America was a shining beacon to the world of freedom for the oppressed peoples of the world. We even inscribed on the Statue of Liberty the phrase "Give me your tired, your poor/Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free." Those who would benefit from this bill are for the most part looking for hope and freedom, much like most of our ancestors when they came here. This plan gives them that hope. This hope and freedom was what we were founded upon. Let us not fail again to be the hope of a brighter day to the world by oppressing those within our country who wish to partake of the American dream.

Political Dummies: Debunking the Myth of Congressional Pensions

Welcome to Political Dummies, a new series where we break down political misconceptions, answer simple questions, and even fact-check viral claims. Today, we’re tackling a classic myth that just won’t die—one that’s been circulating online for decades.

The Claim: Do Members of Congress Get Full Pay for Life After One Term?

You’ve probably seen this claim floating around on social media: Members of Congress receive their full salary—$174,000 per year—for life, even if they only serve one term. Sounds outrageous, right? But here’s the truth: it’s completely false.

Where Did This Myth Come From?

This urban legend has been making the rounds since at least 2000, often resurfacing in chain emails, social media posts, and political discussions. The idea that all members of Congress, regardless of how long they serve, get full pay for life is misleading at best and flat-out wrong at worst.

The Truth About Congressional Pensions

Congress does have a pension system, but it operates under the same rules as other federal employees—meaning no one is getting a lifetime salary for just a couple of years in office. Here’s how it actually works:

• Minimum Service Requirement: To be eligible for a pension at all, a member of Congress must serve at least five years. That means a one-term House Representative (who serves just two years) doesn’t qualify. Only Senators, who serve six-year terms, would meet this requirement.
• Retirement Age Rules: Even after serving long enough to qualify, members can’t just cash in right away. They must:
  • Be 62 years old with at least five years of service.
  • Be 50 years old with at least 20 years of service.
  • Have 25 years of service, regardless of age.
• Pension Amounts Are Based on a Formula: The pension isn’t just a continuation of their salary—it’s calculated based on their highest three years of salary, years of service, and a multiplier (1.7% for the first 20 years and 1.0% for additional years).

Breaking It Down with Numbers

Let’s look at an example:

• A 25-year veteran of Congress retiring today would get about $67,250 per year in pension—far from their full salary.
• A three-term House Representative (six years of service) retiring at retirement age would receive about $17,588 per year. Generous? Sure. Full salary for life? Not even close.
• By law, the maximum pension a member can receive is 80% of their final salary—but that would require 67 years of service, which is practically impossible.

Bottom Line: The Meme Is False

The idea that members of Congress get "full pay retirement after serving one term" is a complete myth. While congressional pensions exist, they follow strict rules and are far from the golden parachutes that viral memes make them out to be.

Next time you see this claim pop up in your feed, you’ll know the truth—and now you can help shut down the misinformation!

Got another political question you want answered? Drop it in the comments, and we’ll tackle it in a future Political Dummies post!