Category Archives: Freedom

A four-run first-inning rally and a Jordan Brower home run in the early innings proved to be just enough for the Florence Freedom, presented by Titan Mechanical Solutions, in a 5-4 win over the Schaumburg Boomers Tuesday night at Boomers Stadium.

Jose Brizuela drew a two-out walk from Boomers (36-18) starter Kagen Hopkins (6-3) in the first inning, and Andre Mercurio followed by doubling just over the head of right fielder David Harris to score the games first run. Collins Cuthrell walked and then advanced to third as Jordan Brower doubled Mercurio home for a 2-0 Freedom (35-20) lead. Andrew Godbold capped the rally by lining a single to center, scoring both Cuthrell and Brower.

Schaumburg got two runs back against Jordan Kraus (8-3) in the bottom half, as Kyle Ruchim led off by reaching second base on a Taylor Oldham throwing error and later scoring from third on a wild pitch. Ryan OMalley later hit a RBI-single, diminishing Florences lead to two runs before Brower homered in the top of the third to re-extend the Freedom lead to three.

Jordan Kraus (8-3) labored with a high pitch count through six innings but allowed just two unearned runs, striking out five and walking two before Keivan Berges and newly-signed Jamal Wilson pitched perfect seventh and eighth innings, respectively.

With newcomer Pete Perez on the mound in the bottom of the ninth, however, Ruchim doubled to the warning track in left field with one out. After a strikeout, Zach Weigel delivered a RBI-single to score Ruchim, and after an infield single by Harris, Josh Gardiner lined a base hit to left field, scoring Weigel and putting the tying and winning runs on base. But Perez then got OMalley to ground out to shortstop, ending the game.

The two teams will play the middle game of the series Wednesday with first pitch scheduled for 11 a.m. at Boomers Stadium.

The Florence Freedom are members of the independent Frontier League and play all home games at UC Health Stadium located at 7950 Freedom Way in Florence, KY.The Freedom can be found online at FlorenceFreedom.com, or by phone at 859-594-4487.

Florence Freedom

Original post:

Freedom score early, hang on for road win against Boomers Tuesday; move to 15 games over .500 - User-generated content (press release) (registration)

Angolas Constitutional Court has ruled that a presidential decree that imposed severe restrictions on civil society groups violates the constitution. The ruling provides a big boost to nongovernmental organizations that operate in a politically contentious environment in which the courts typically side with the government.

Angolan President and MPLA leader, Jose Eduardo dos Santos attends a party central committee at a meeting in Luanda, Angola, December 2 ,2016.

Decree 74/15, signed by President Jos Eduardo dos Santos, required nongovernmental organizations to register with multiple authorities, including the Foreign Ministry, before they could operate and obtain a declaration of suitability. It also allowed authorities to determine the programs and projects that the organizations implemented.

To justify the restrictions, the government argued that it needed a strong tool to fight nongovernmental organizations that were involved in criminal acts, such as money laundering, or other activities that threatened Angolas sovereignty.

After the decree took effect in March 2015, several human rights groups faced difficulties accessing their bank accounts, as some banks demanded to see the required approvals, even though the government was not issuing such documents.

The Angola Bar Association challenged the decree before the Constitutional Court, arguing that it allowed excessive and unlawful interference by the government in the work of civil society.

In a ruling dated July 5, 2017, made public on July 14, the court found that the president lacked the competence to regulate nongovernmental organizations. The ruling acknowledged the governments concerns over the need to regulate organizations, but held that such regulation must come from the parliament.

The Constitutional Courts decision sends a strong a message to the government that the courts will step in to protect fundamental rights such as freedom of association. Its a breath of fresh air in a country where civil society struggles every day to operate free from political interference.

See more here:

Angola's Constitutional Court Upholds Freedom of Association - Human Rights Watch

Henry Erb, Target 8 investigator Published: July 18, 2017, 11:11 pm Updated: July 18, 2017, 11:32 pm

GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. (WOOD) James Hicks says he's one of the most hated inmates in the Michigan prison system.

It's because of all the help he's given to federal, state and local cops while he's been behind bars for the last 31 years. The list of his exploits is long and some lawmen he's worked with believe he's earned his freedom because of the risks he's taken and the value of what he's done.

According to letters written by top law enforcement officials, Hicks has helped convict a corrupt deputy warden for selling prison transfers to inmates. He helped make cases on other crooked prison employees 22 of them, Hicks says. He helped save a phone company $5 million with the breakup of an inmate-run credit card scam. He has worked to bust a major car theft ring.

He has also helped solve a couple of murders. The most recent resulted in the 2010 conviction of another inmate, initially imprisoned for another crime, for killing his girlfriend in Flint.

"I don't think there would have been a conviction without his involvement in the case," said Reymundo Mascorro, a now-retired Michigan Department of Corrections inspector who worked with Hicks on that last murder case. "He went above and beyond anything I've ever encountered in my 30 years."

In his youth, Hicks was one of the bad guys. He has convictions going back to 1972 for manslaughter, robbery and larceny. In 1986, he was sentenced to between 50 and 200 years in prison for the armed robbery of an illegal gambling house in Muskegon in which a man was shot and killed by one of the other bandits.

"I wasn't responsible for it, but I'm still responsible because I could have stepped up and stopped" it, Hicks, now in his 60s, said.

He said he has helped law enforcement from the inside to prove "to my father and mother that I am not that person that brought me to prison."

"I did it all because I know it was the right thing to do," he said.

It may have been right, but it put Hicks in serious danger.

Former prison inspector Mascorro said Hicks' "safety was jeopardized and he fully recognized it."

Hicks said he has been poisoned, beaten and stabbed. He said he has been cut seven times, but MDOC officials have records of only three stabbings. Hicks said that's because four of the incidents didn't require him to be sent outside prison walls to a hospital.

The MDOC says it tries to keep Hicks safe. You won't find his name or picture on the prison system's online inmate lookup, and Hicks has often been put in what prisons call 'protective custody.' But an MDOC spokesman says Hicks "often requests to be taken out of protective custody and returned to the general population."

That might be because even though protective custody may help to keep an inmate safe, it looks a lot like punishment.

"Basically, he's doing a maximum security sentence, limited movement," Mascorro explained.

It shows the difficulty the system has in dealing with inmates like Hicks. Protective custody isn't much of a reward for inmates who do the right thing.

"Exactly," Mascorro agreed, "that's the outcome of having helped."

Hicks won't be eligible for parole until 2030, when he'll be 77.

Members of law enforcement who Hicks has helped have written letters encouraging the parole board and governor to commute his sentence that is, shorten it and set him free. Commutation is sometimes used to reward good behavior. It's different from a pardon, which essentially forgives the crime.

Hicks has had the backing of the former head of the FBI in Michigan, state police detectives, MDOC employees and a former state legislator.

He even won the support of the man who got him convicted in 1986. Muskegon County's former chief trial prosecutor Les Bowen wrote in 2011 to the parole board that "Hicks is the only person I can think of who I believe has actually earned a sentence commutation."

Bowen wrote that he had never before written a letter supporting a prisoner's commutation, but backs Hicks because "the public good in this extraordinary case would be well served by commutation."

Hicks applied for commutation in 2005, 2012 and 2015. Despite the high-powered law enforcement support, the parole board and Govs. Jennifer Granholm and Rick Snyder said no.

It's hard to know why. Target 8 investigators used the public records law to get what little paperwork there is on MDOC's response to those applications, but the documents don't reveal any information about parole board discussions or provide any insight into the rejections. The letters Hicks got back say only that they found no merit to his requests.

"He's done this for years on major cases," former U.S. Attorney for Western Michigan John Smietanka said. "Why do they turn him down, I have no idea."

Smietanka, who has been voluntarily helping Hicks, said keeping him in prison "does not make any sense."

Hicks contacted Target 8 investigators through Smietanka because of his frustration with the system, even though it could put him in even more danger.

"I know the risks," Hicks said in a phone call.

The fact is, Hicks is up against a system that commutes and pardons very few. Since 2011, more than 3,000 Michigan inmates have applied to have their sentences commuted; only five were granted. Out of 689 pardon requests, just 11 were approved.

MDOC didn't respond to questions that Target 8 investigators hoped would reveal parole board's thinking about how and when sentences should be commuted.

Longtime Michigan prison reform organizer Kay Perry says the few inmates who actually get executive clemency are the sick and dying.

"That's a pretty narrow group of people to look at and I think there are a lot more people in the system who deserve a careful look to see if they aren't good candidates for commutation," she said.

Perry, who runs a reform group called MI-CURE, says the reason the parole board and governor grant commutations and pardons so rarely is based on fear that they might make a mistake and release someone who will commit a major crime. She thinks such decisions should be given to professionals who should start looking at inmates who have been inside the longest and who might have aged out of their prime crime years.

She says keeping some people in prison for long sentences "doesn't make sense to me."

Meanwhile, Hicks and his attorney say they will try again to convince the parole board and governor to release him.

"If the DOC's intent is to release people as law-abiding citizens, I think that's been accomplished with Mr. Hicks," Mascorro, the former MDOC investigator, said. "If he moved down the street from me, I wouldn't have a problem with him. I'd welcome him to the neighborhood."

Comments are closed.

Original post:

Inmate denied freedom despite years aiding authorities - WOODTV.com

Many Provo community members have been waiting for answers as to why Provos Encircle LGBTQ Family and Youth Resource Center was removed at the last minute from the Americas Freedom Festival parade lineup July 4.

According to Maxwell Eddington, program director for Encircle, the nonprofit organizations application was originally approved not for the parade itself, but for the group to march in the pre-parade. The pre-parade is not part of the official parade, and those marching in that portion are authorized to walk the entire route ahead of the parades beginning, but are not announced.

Eddington said the prospect of participating in the pre-parade was very important to all involved with Encircle. Clients, volunteers and community members spent many hours organizing and learning choreography for the parade. Eddington himself left a family gathering in Arizona a day early to march in the parade.

Late July 3, Encircle leaders received communication saying their application had been revoked.

I was in the car on my way to Utah when I was told it wasnt going to happen, Eddington said. Its been very tough for a lot of people and these are the people that need answers about why this has happened.

Eddington said there are two questions Encircle and its community wants answers to: First, why was Encircle not allowed to be in the parade? Second, will Encircle be able to participate in the pre-parade in the future?

Eddington and Encircle leaders may not ever get complete answers. Though Paul Warner, executive director of Americas Freedom Festival, met with the 11-member Festival board committee multiple times last week, the committee chose not to answer those questions directly.

Warner explained that according to Parade Guideline No. 3, The Executive Committee reserves the right to refuse an entry into the parade if, in its sole judgment, it determines that the entry is controversial, unlawful, political or otherwise considered to be inconsistent with the standards, theme, quality or purposes of the Freedom Festival.

According to its website, Americas Freedom Festival at Provo is a private, nonprofit, non-political foundation whose mission is to celebrate, teach, honor, and strengthen the traditional American values of God, family, freedom, and country.

Warner said a United States Supreme Court decision also backs up the organizations legal right to choose who fits that description and participates in the parade. The 1995 ruling, Hurley v. Irish American Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Group of Boston, held that private organizations, even if they are holding a public demonstration, were permitted to exclude groups if those groups presented a message contrary to the one the organizing group wanted to convey.

Warner explained the committee does not allow political or advocacy groups to participate in the parade. The committee allows politicians who currently hold office, but regularly turns down applications from political candidates, Warner said.

When asked by the Daily Herald about the inconsistent inclusion of groups like The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints missionaries who many see as an advocacy group Warner referred back to Parade Guideline No. 3.

As for an official statement from the committee on its decision regarding Encircle, Warner offered the following: Leaders of Americas Freedom Festival at Provo met recently with the executive director of Encircle House to discuss the misunderstanding related to the entry process for the July 4th Parade. They met to better understand each others mission and vision, and the meeting ended with a shared spirit of appreciation.

Other meeting discussion points centered on the unique contributions each organization makes to those it serves in Provo City and Utah County. Encircle House and Freedom Festival representatives have pledged to move forward as each continues to pursue their respective mission statements, Warner said in an emailed statement.

According to the Freedom Festival in earlier reporting, there were more than 100 planned entries in 2017s Grand Parade.

Encircle is not the only local nonprofit group to be denied entry to the parade. Warner said over the past three years, there have been more than 60 entries denied permission to participate. A number of other organizations also reached out to the Daily Herald to share their own stories of denials for parade applications. Some of these have applied for multiple years, and while a few have been cleared to walk in the pre-parade, there is still a feeling of frustration in being excluded from the parade itself.

One Provo nonprofit explained that because it participates in other parts of the festival, and wants that participation to continue, it accepts the committees decision on parade participation. But the nonprofit reapplies each year in hopes of walking in the parade.

Warner and Eddington said both groups are now focused on trying to put the entire experience behind them.

We want to focus all our energy and all our time on the youth and the families we serve, Eddington said. Having to spend so much time on this Freedom Parade experience, answering calls, etc. it has been hours of my time I couldve spent on youth programs.

Every minute of this weve taken from that goal, was a minute we could have used to make a family or youths life better.

Read the rest here:

Weeks later, Freedom Festival cites legal rights in defense of 11th-hour decision to nix LGBT group from parade - Daily Herald

(Moscow) Russia has introduced significant restrictions to online speech and invasive surveillance of online activity and prosecutes critics under the guise of fighting extremism, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today.

The 83-page report, Online and On All Fronts: Russias Assault on Freedom of Expression, documents Russian authorities stepped-up measures aimed at bringing the internet under greater state control. Since 2012, Russian authorities have unjustifiably prosecuted dozens of people for criminal offenses on the basis of social media posts, online videos, media articles, and interviews, and shut down or blocked access to hundreds of websites and web pages. Russian authorities have also pushed through parliament a raft of repressive laws regulating internet content and infrastructure. These laws provide the Russian government with a broad range of tools to restrict access to information, carry out unchecked surveillance, and censor information the government designates as extremist, out of line with traditional values, or otherwise harmful to the public.

Russias authorities are leading an assault on free expression, said Yulia Gorbunova, Russia researcher at Human Rights Watch. These laws arent just about introducing tough policies, but also about blatant violation of human rights.

Russiahas introduced significant restrictions to online speech and invasive surveillance of online activity and prosecutes critics under the guise of fighting extremism.

Russia should repeal the repressive legislation adopted in recent years, stop prosecuting critics under the guise of fighting extremism, and uphold its international obligations to safeguard free expression, Human Rights Watch said.

Human Rights Watch interviewed more than 50 lawyers, journalists, editors, political and human rights activists, experts, and bloggers and their family members, and analyzed laws and government regulations pertaining to internet content and freedom of expression, as well as indictments, court rulings, and other documents relevant to specific cases.

Some of the restrictive laws appear designed to shrink the space, including online, for public debate, especially on issues the authorities view as divisive or sensitive, such as the armed conflict in Ukraine, Russias role in the war in Syria, the rights of LGBT people, and public protests or other political and civic activism.

Curbing free speech serves to shut down public debate and denies a voice to anyone dissatisfied with the ongoing economic crisis or simply critical of Russias foreign policy, Human Rights Watch said.

We have dozens of cases where people were literally sent to jail, Andrei Soldatov, an investigative journalist and expert on internet freedom in Russia, told Human Rights Watch. That of course has its effect on the level and freedom for political and public debate in social media.

Other laws aim to undermine the privacy and security of internet users by regulating data storage, unjustifiably restricting users access to information, and ensuring that a wealth of data, including confidential user information and the content of communications, could be made available to authorities, often without any judicial oversight.

In 2016, parliament passed a set of counterterrorism amendments requiring telecommunications and internet companies to retain the contents of all communications for six months and the metadata for three years. The law makes it easier for the authorities to identify users and access personal information without judicial oversight, unjustifiably interfering with privacy and freedom of expression. A 2015 law that applies to email services, social media networks, and search engines prohibits storage of Russian citizens personal data on servers located outside Russia. A 2017 draft law aims to prohibit anonymity for users of online messaging applications, such as WhatsApp or Telegram.

The Russian government effectively controls most traditional media, but independent internet users have been openly challenging the governments actions, said Gorbunova. The authorities clearly view independent online users as a threat that needs to be disarmed.

Russian authorities have increasingly used vague and overly broad anti-extremism laws against people who express critical views of the government and, in some cases, have conflated criticism of the government with extremism. Laws adopted since 2012 in the name of countering extremism have served to increase the number of prosecutions for extremist offenses, especially online.

Based on the data provided by the SOVA Center, a prominent Russian think tank, the number of social media users convicted of extremism offenses in 2015 was 216, in comparison with 30 in 2010. Between 2014 and 2016, approximately 85 percent of convictions for extremist expression dealt with online expression, with punishments ranging from fines or community service to prison time. In the period between September 2015 and February 2017, the number of people who went to jail for extremist speech spiked from 54 to 94.

In the three years of Russias occupation of Crimea, authorities have silenced dissent on the peninsula. They have aggressively targeted critics through harassment, intimidation, and, in some cases, trumped-up extremism charges, including prosecution for separatist calls. Human Rights Watch found that most prosecutions of Crimean Tatar activists, their lawyers, and others were for peacefully criticizing the occupation.

Freedom of expression is one of the essential foundations of a democratic society and it extends not only to information and ideas that are received favorably but also to those that offend, shock, or disturb. The Russian government should respect and uphold the right of people in Russia to freely receive and disseminate all types of information protected under international human rights law, Human Rights Watch said.

Russias international partners should raise concerns at the United Nations Human Rights Council, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, and the Council of Europe about Moscows curbs on free expression, as well as in bilateral conversations with the Russian government.

Major internet companies operating in Russia, such as Twitter, Facebook, Microsoft, Google, and VK should carefully assess Russias government demands to censor content or share user data and refrain from complying where the underlying law or specific request are inconsistent with international human rights standards. They should not put people at risk, Human Rights Watch said.

The Russian government has been casting criticism of it as extremist, instilling fear and encouraging self-censorship, Gorbunova said. Today people in Russia are increasingly unsure about the boundaries of acceptable speech.

More here:

Russia: Assault on Freedom of Expression - Human Rights Watch

Editors note: This commentary is by John McClaughry, who is vice president of the Ethan Allen Institute http://www.ethanallen.org.

Last years debate on school centralization and this years battle over growth control have brought to center stage the question: What kind of future can we expect for Vermont? Two very different pictures have emerged. One is Vermont as Land of Freedom. The other is Vermont as Land of Community. These twin themes, freedom and community, have swirled back and forth throughout Vermont history, and indeed, through American history.

The Land of Freedom is the land of individual rights. It is the land of private property ownership, a competitive economic system, and the opportunity to grow and become. In the Land of Freedom, independent citizens, their property and their rights secured by a limited government, will be happy, productive, and compassionate toward the less fortunate. They will come together, not as subjects, but as free and independent citizens, to meet great crises and govern themselves.

The Land of Community is the land of working together, of shared values, of cooperation. It is the land of we, as in We dont want Vermont to turn into New Jersey. In the Land of Community citizens are expected to yield to the will of the majority rather than pursue their personal interests and private rights.

The Land of Freedom can be any scale, but the Land of Community has definite limits. For some purposes all of Vermont is a community. We were a community when as one we spoke out for halting the spread of slavery and sent our soldiers to save the Union. We were a community with all Americans when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor.

The freedom advocates are today on the defensive, as the centralizers and standardizers and controllers have the upper hand in our state government.

But in most things we do, Vermont is not a true statewide community, a fact long recognized in the old Mountain Rule, which alternated the governorship between the east and west sides of the Green Mountains. Bennington and Newport have very little in common, in any practical sense. The real battle for the soul of Vermont is over the extent to which the people in control of state government will force their idea of community on people who rarely have much in common.

The backers of the Land of Community idea seem always eager to homogenize our society. They want to equalize, standardize, and unify what they conceive to be the various diverse parts of a statewide community. In doing so they give short shrift to the advocates of freedom, for they see freedom and individual rights as bothersome obstructions to their goal of creating a Land of Community in all things, regulated and enforced by the central power in Montpelier.

It is the Land of Community people who think up school regionalization schemes, so that all communities will be efficiently managed from Montpelier to produce the same thing for all of our children. It is the Land of Community people who want growth managed from the center, for the benefit of everybody. It is the Land of Community people who deplore the private ownership of property, for they are convinced that with freedom and property, individuals will undermine their vision of the common good.

To the Land of Freedom people, individual liberty comes first. They believe that only independent men and women can govern themselves in a republic, and they believe that centralized control over the things that are locally different signals the beginning of a tyranny which aims to strip them of their rights. Thus they want to keep control of their childrens schools, and they oppose every attempt to strip them of their rights in land and, for that matter, their right to own guns.

The freedom advocates are today on the defensive, as the centralizers and standardizers and controllers have the upper hand in our state government. But the time may come when the pendulum swings back and I for one hope it does.

My signoff for that 1988 commentary was: This will be my last broadcast with you, for today I am becoming a candidate for the state Senate. Ive enjoyed doing these shows, and I hope you have enjoyed listening or if you have hated every minute of them, I hope Ive at least made you think.

Here is the original post:

John McClaughry: Freedom and community revisited - vtdigger.org

The death of Liu Xiaobo from liver cancer on July 13, under guard at a hospital in Shenyang, marks the passing of a great defender of freedoma man who was willing to speak truth to power. As the lead signatory to Charter 08, which called for the rule of law and constitutional government, Liu was sentenced to 11 years in prison for inciting the subversion of state power. Before his sentencing in 2009, Liu stood before the court and declared, To block freedom of speech is to trample on human rights, to strangle humanity, and to suppress the truth. With proper treatment and freedom, Liu would have lived on to voice his support for a free society.

While Lius advocacy of limited government, democracy, and a free market for ideas won him the Nobel Peace Prize in 2010, Chinas leadership viewed him as a criminal and refused to allow him to travel to Oslo to receive the award. Instead, the prize was placed on an empty chair at the ceremony, a lasting symbol of Lius courage in the face of state suppression. Beijing also prevented liberal Mao Yushi, cofounder of the Unirule Institute, from attending the ceremony to honor Liu.

IdealMentre

The mistreatment of Liu, and other human rights proponents, is a stark reminder that while the Middle Kingdom has made significant progress in liberalizing its economy, it has yet to liberate the minds of the Chinese people or its own political institutions.

The tension between freedom and state power threatens Chinas future. As former premier Wen Jiabao warned in a speech in August 2010, Without the safeguard of political reform, the fruits of economic reform would be lost. Later, in an interview with CNN in October, he held that freedom of speech is indispensable for any country.

Article 33, Section 3, of the PRCs Constitution holds that the State respects and protects human rights. Such language, added by the National Peoples Congress in 2004, encouraged liberals to test the waters, only to find that the reality did not match the rhetoric.

The Chinese Communist Party pays lip service to a free market in ideas, noting: There can never be an end to the need for the emancipation of individual thought (China Daily, November 16, 2013). However, Party doctrine strictly regulates that market. Consequently, under market socialism with Chinese characteristics, there is bound to be an ever-present tension between the individual and the state.

In an interview with the Wall Street Journal (September 22, 2015), President Xi argued that freedom is the purpose of order, and order the guarantee of freedom. The real meaning of that statement is that Chinas ruling elite will not tolerate dissent: individuals will be free to communicate ideas, but only those consistent with the states current interpretation of socialist principles.

This socialist vision contrasts sharply with that of market liberalism, which holds that freedom is not the purpose of order; it is the essential means to an emergent or spontaneous order. In the terms of traditional Chinese Taoism, freedom is the source of order. Simply put, voluntary exchange based on the principle of freedom or nonintervention, which Lao Tzu called wu wei, expands the range of choices open to individuals.

Denying Chinas 1.4 billion people a free market in ideas has led to one of the lowest rankings in the World Press Freedom Index, compiled by Reporters without Borders. In the 2016 report, China ranked 176 out of 180 countries, only a few notches above North Koreaand the situation appears to be getting worse. Under President Xi Jinpings consolidation of power in preparation for this years Party Congress, the websites of liberal think tanks, such as the Unirule Institute, have been shut down, and virtual private networks (VPNs) are being closed, preventing internet users from circumventing the Great Firewall.

Lius death is a tragic reminder that China is still an authoritarian regime whose leaders seek to hold onto power at the cost of the lives of those like Liu who seek only peace and harmony through limiting the power of government and safeguarding individual rights.

Read more here:

Liu Xiaobo: A Voice of Freedom - Cato Institute (blog)

The conservative House Freedom Caucus is unwilling to vote for the House budget resolution thats scheduled to be considered in committeeon Wednesday, a source told The Hill on Monday.

They dont want to vote for a vehicle to a tax package theyve not seen, the GOP source with knowledge of the conservative blocs thinking said.

Additionally, they have issues with the budget levels and would support something closer in line to the presidents budget, the source added.

The source added that Freedom Caucus has yet to issue a formal position for or against the budget, but notedthatspending and tax reform details are the primary concerns. An official position could be released later in the week.

Those cuts would come primarily from anti-poverty programs such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families welfare support, in part through introducing more work requirements to qualify for such aid.

The 31-member-strong caucus could sink a budget resolution on the House floor. With 218 votes needed to pass the resolution, the 240-member Republican caucus cannot afford to lose more than 22 votes. No Democrats are expected to vote for the resolution.

The Freedom Caucusis looking for a resolution to move forward, the source said.

Freedom Caucus member Rep. Dave Brat (R-Va.), who sits on the Budget Committee, told The Hill he's currently undecided on the GOP budget, predicting the vote will be close.

"In light of the healthcare cluster in the Senate," Brat said, "I need to see our tax plan [without] [the border-adjustment tax] as well as the welfare to work language in the budget instructions before I can vote yes."

Three Freedom Caucusmembers are on the Budget Committee, which would be able to pass the resolution out of committee without their support.

But the centristTuesdayGroup may also oppose the measure when it reaches the floor.

At the end of June, 20TuesdayGroup members signed a letter objecting to using the budget resolution to carry out large mandatory spending cuts, and demanding a bipartisan approach to the budget.

Absent such a bipartisan, bicameral agreement, we are reticent to support any budget resolution on the House floor, the letter said.

If the group were to sway just three more House Republicans to oppose the budget resolution, it could prevent the measure from moving forward.

Budget Committee Chairwoman Diane BlackDiane BlackConservative caucus withholding support from Republican budget Overnight Finance: Poll finds declining faith in Trump on economy | House panel to mark up budget | Freedom Caucus not on board | Trade officials outline NAFTA priorities Freedom Caucus won't support House budget resolution MORE (R-Tenn.) and House Speaker Paul RyanPaul RyanConservative caucus withholding support from Republican budget Steel industry urges House panel to adopt 'Buy America' rules GOP chairman gets hundreds of thousands of comments on tax reform MORE (R-Wis.) had been working to ensure that the budget offered in committee would be able to pass on the floor.

If they fail, however, they could still pass a shell budget resolution before striking a spending deal with Democrats that would serve only to pave the way forward for tax reform. The bill would include instructions that would allow tax code changesto pass through reconciliation, a workaround to the Senate filibuster.

Scott Wong contributed to this report

See the rest here:

Freedom Caucus won't support House budget resolution - The Hill

Even with some relief at the federal level regarding religious freedom, Americans, Catholics especially, must continue to pray and be vigilant to protect these liberties at the state and local level, said Auxiliary Bishop Eduardo A. Nevares at the annual Fourth of July Mass.

The liturgy at Ss. Simon and Jude Cathedral closed Phoenixs observance of the nationwide Fortnight for Freedom. The faithful remained after Mass to offer a Rosary for the United States of America.

Thanks be to God, much of the affront to religious freedom that the Obama administration was continuing to provide against the Church has now been suspended by President Trump, Bishop Nevares said, noting the power of prayer. Prayer is all important in this battle that we are in defending all our religious freedoms and religious liberty.

However, he said, the affront to our religious liberty and religious expression is not over. It might be paused from the federal government, but now it is being carried at the state and the city, county and local levels.

The bishop recalled a presentation from Alliance Defending Freedom founder Alan Sears, who along with his wife Paula was recently invested into the papal Order of St. Gregory the Great, that provided a list of several of these cases of peoples religious liberty being attacked:

The Huguenins are now compelled by law to compromise the very religious beliefs that inspired their lives. Why? Because it is a price of citizenship to go against your own conscience, Bishop Nevares said. Breanna and Joanna could face a $2,500 fine and six months in jail for every day they decline to produce and sell such art to the same-sex couple, he added.

Bishop Nevares also noted how gender dysphoria is being promoted among the youth, referencing a childrens book targeted to kindergarteners and drugs that postpone puberty so youth can decide their sex.

So, something that is normal, something that contributes to the dignity of the human person, something that is the design of Almighty God, is now being withheld from our young people, their gender, so that they can decide what gender they want to be, he said.

St. John Paul II said when he came to America in 1987, You are in a culture war, he said. My brothers and sisters, the war is just beginning and its not going to go away. We need to be strong and we need to be convinced of our Catholic principles and our Catholic faith. We need to be men and women willing to sacrifice for these great rights.

The bishop asked how the faithful should respond to attacks on religious liberty. If Jesus says prayer can move mountains, it can surely move the hearts of the secular society today in which we live, said Bishop Nevares. In particular, he added, is the importance of prayer in the home, that we pray with our children, and pray with our spouses for our children.

Secondly, he said, we need to be active participants in the voting process. Most of us vote in presidential elections, he added, but give little thought to lesser government officials such as school board members and legislators, yet they also have influence upon our culture and our Christian values and principles.

So, let us be active contributing Catholics and active contributing voters on each and every election that comes up so that we may once again be one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

After Mass, the bishop joined the faithful in praying the Rosary for the United States of America. They offered the intentions for each decade for the three branches of the federal government, state and local governments and the military services. Representatives from the Knights of Columbus, the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, the Cursillo movement, the retired police officers community and the veterans community took turns leading each decade. The faithful prayed for every U.S. state as they fingered each red, white or blue bead.

Manny Yrique, who came up with the Rosary and organized the event, said he was pleased with the participation and said that every individual is called to make a difference.

A woman from Indiana came and I gave her a rosary and told her to take it back to her parish, he said. We can change the world, but we have to do it one person at a time.

Brandon Trichel from All Saints Parish in Mesa brought his family to the Mass because, he said, theres no better way to celebrate freedom than to celebrate Christ.

Christ is truth. There is no truth without Him and no freedom without truth, he said. Its so sad in todays society, people think theyre free, free to express themselves, but theyre in bondage.

Josine Olakkengil, a parishioner at the cathedral, brought her family to the Mass because she said it is important to celebrate with other Christians. An immigrant from India, she said shes especially thankful for the freedoms her family enjoys in this country.

That community is important. In India, many of the people we lived around were Hindus, Olakkengil said. Theres a lot of persecution of Catholics and Christians, so compared to that, we have a lot of religious freedom here. But I heard of the infringements of these rights in the bishops homily and we need to pray that these rights are preserved.

See the original post here:

Faithful reminded freedom, prayer go together - The Catholic Sun

The American people love and support the freedom-loving people of Iran.

I would like to ask you today, are you ready to hold the mullahs accountable? Are you ready to hold Khamenei accountable? Are you ready for regime change? Are you ready to get rid of the greatest sponsor of terrorism in the world? Are you ready to restore freedom to Iran? Are you ready for honest elections? Are you ready for a democracy in Iran? Are you ready for equality in Iran? Are you ready for human rights in Iran? Are you ready for religious freedom in Iran?

Now is the time. When our forefathers met 241 years ago this time, they pledged their lives, their fortunes, their sacred honor, for a Declaration of Independence for a new America. Yes, from that we found life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And thats what we want for Iran today.

Republican Rep. Robert Pittenger represents the 9th Congressional District in North Carolina and serves on the House Financial Services Committee. This excerpt is from his remarks to the July 1 rally in Paris.

Follow this link:

Americans support freedom-loving Iranians - Washington Times