Capitalism: Good for Michael Moore and Good for You, Too

Scott Blakeman /

Filmmaker Michael Moore has been entangled in a messy divorce for some time, and some of the findings revealed as a result of the divorce proceedings have shed light on the fact that Moore is not a “99 percenter.”

That shouldn’t come as too much of a surprise, though. He’s been among the “1 percent” for quite some time as a fairly successful filmmaker, creating lefty fan favorites such as Fahrenheit 9/11. And in his more recent film, Capitalism: A Love Story, Moore criticizes capitalism even though, thanks to capitalism, the film grossed over $17 million worldwide.

This “average Joe” has a net worth of $50 million. And as details have emerged, it has also become known that Moore and his ex-wife owned nine properties in New York and in his home state of Michigan, the prized property being a 10,000-square-foot, $2 million mansion on Torch Lake in Michigan.

Moore shouldn’t be condemned for owning big, expensive houses or for using his creativity to make lots of money by producing movies (albeit, movies that aren’t always factually accurate or based on reality). He should be praised for being an entrepreneur and a job creator. Just think of how many people were employed to build and maintain his houses and properties. And creating a movie is no small feat: Many are employed to produce, market, and distribute a film. Moore is actually a capitalist, whether he realizes it or not. He has created products that some people value and profits were bound to head in his direction.

The free market has not only helped Moore prosper; it has lifted millions out of poverty in America and throughout the world. It has raised the standard of living and spurred greater ingenuity and human flourishing. Moore should simply embrace the true benefits of capitalism—not only for himself but for everyone else, too.

Consensus Grows on Need to Address ICANN Accountability and Transparency - Daily Signal

Consensus Grows on Need to Address ICANN Accountability and Transparency

Scott Blakeman / Brett Schaefer / Paul Rosenzweig / James Gattuso /

Consensus is growing that accountability is the key to success for ICANN—the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers.

Earlier this week, the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, a non-partisan think tank that focuses on technological innovation, joined Heritage in calling for enhanced transparency and accountability before the United States relinquishes its role in managing ICANN.

In March, the U.S. National Telecommunications and Information Administration unexpectedly announced it did not intend to renew its contract to manage core functions of the Internet and mandated the organization consult with “global stakeholders” to agree on an alternative to the “current role played by NTIA in the coordination of the Internet’s [Domaine name system].”

The issue of Internet governance is critically important both economically and politically, and two broad concerns must be addressed: (1) preserving the freedom and vitality of the Internet from governments that would like to restrict it and (2) ensuring ICANN is sufficiently accountable and transparent in its decision-making, consultation and operation.

The first concern is the most obvious. Many nations, such as China and Russia, have made no secret of their desire to limit speech on the Internet that is critical of or damaging to their interests. Even some democratic nations have supported limiting undesirable speech or limiting economic freedoms online. And international organizations such as the International Telecommunication Union, an arm of the United Nations, have expressed a strong interest in playing a role in Internet governance. NTIA has explicitly disallowed any proposal that would replace NTIA’s role with a “government-led or an inter-governmental organization solution.” Congress and the administration must remain firm on this principle.

The second concern is less obvious, but potentially just as serious. ICANN could—either in bowing to political pressure or of its own volition—abuse its authority by limiting or favoring certain domain names, neglecting service of domain names of politically disfavored groups, facilitating efforts to censor content, expanding its activities beyond core activities to financing Internet access in developing countries, or leveraging its market dominance to gauge registrars, registries or users.

Currently, accountability and transparency in ICANN is lacking, and interested parties have voiced their concern. At a London meeting this past June, the ICANN’s Generic Names Supporting Organization issued an unprecedented unanimous statement expressing unease with ICANN’s current lack of transparency and accountability.

Over the weekend, ITIF issued a detailed set of principles on how ICANN can be made more accountable. They include separation of policy making, dispute resolution and implementation; enhanced transparency of ICANN deliberations and activities through publicly available independent audits and details of ICANN board meetings; restricting revenue and budget to core activities; and increasing the threshold necessary for final approval of policy decisions. Importantly, ITIF calls for these accountability steps to be taken before NTIA allows the current ICANN contract to expire.

The principles outlined by ITIF are consistent with those recommended by Heritage Foundation analysts in June. The Heritage analysts recommended the U.S. not end its role in the assignment of Internet names and numbers before adequate checks and balances are put in place to ensure that an independent ICANN acting without U.S. oversight is transparent and accountable and cannot be hijacked by governments or intergovernmental organizations.

Exclusive Interview: Rick Perry Says Deploying Troops to Border Sends a ‘Powerful Message’ - Daily Signal

Exclusive Interview: Rick Perry Says Deploying Troops to Border Sends a ‘Powerful Message’

Scott Blakeman / Brett Schaefer / Paul Rosenzweig / James Gattuso / Josh Siegel /

Texas Gov. Rick Perry compares the role of National Guard troops at his state’s border to the deterring effect that cop cars stationed along neighborhood roads have on crime.

Perry, in an exclusive interview with The Daily Signal, said even though the 1,000 military troops he activated to help manage the border crisis in his state will not be authorized to make arrests, the sheer presence of the military will deter illegal activity.

“It’s a powerful reminder that what you are doing is a crime,” said Perry, who has been a critic of the White House’s response to the border crisis. “It’s just like a law enforcement effort in your neighborhood, where you see a parked patrol police car on the corner, and the bad guys see it and don’t commit a crime.”

By announcing plans to deploy the National Guard to the border on his own rather than through the federal government, Perry has the power to order the troops to make arrests and apprehensions.

But Perry, perhaps responding to critics who worry about the troops’ lack of training in immigration law, told The Daily Signal he has decided not to give arrest power to those deployed to Texas’ border with Mexico.

“Their real job is not apprehension,” Perry said. “Border Patrol apprehends.”

National Guard on the Border

In 2006, President George W. Bush sent 6,000 troops to the four border states. They repaired and built fences and roads, and conducted surveillance, among other duties.

Troops in that deployment did not have apprehension and arrest powers.

“What you are doing is a crime,” says @GovernorPerry of illegal immigrants.

Troops were similarly limited when President Obama eventually extended that deployment while ordering a second wave of National Guard forces to Texas, California, Arizona and New Mexico in 2010.

With troops’ responsibility likely to be limited again this time, Border Patrol agents who are responsible for apprehending and arresting illegal immigrant crossers argue that the National Guard will make little impact.

Border Patrol union representatives told The Daily Signal last week they worry the troops will interfere with agents’ work.

>>> National Guard Would Be Waste of Resources, Border Patrol Agents Say

Perry, who says he has talked to Border Patrol agents about his decision, believes otherwise.

“They aren’t displacing Border Patrol,” Perry said. “It’ll be just like how we partner with law enforcement. They want to see the border secure, so they won’t resist the assistance. Just the presence and knowledge that they’re deployed will have a powerful message.”

The troops that are due the border next month will actually work side by side with police officers of the Texas Department of Public Safety, not alongside Border Patrol.

The state officers are there as part of Operation Strong Safety, a Perry initiative approved last month that sent state troopers to the border to assist local law enforcement.

Just like the National Guard, state and local law enforcement officers can only defer to the Border Patrol those they suspect have entered the country illegally.

Stopping Smuggler and Criminals

Not including the deployment of the 1,000 troops, Perry said there are already 300 state and National Guard troops at the border for Operation Lone Star, an annual joint military and civil humanitarian medical mission.

“For those who say, ‘This is very out of the ordinary,’ the National Guard being at the border is not an unusual situation,” Perry said. “There’s troops at the border every year and there’s troops there now.”

Can the National Guard help Texas stop the surge of crossings on the border?

Perry hopes the new troops will send a message to drug cartels and other criminal groups that he says have exploited the latest border trend — the surge of Central American children coming across the Rio Grande Valley.

“There has not been as much focus on the drug smugglers and other criminals because of these children,” Perry said. “There’s been an effort by the cartels to distract Border Patrol into taking care of these kids. The danger that this situation presents for ordinary Texans and Americans has not been a focus of the mainstream media.”

>>> Brooks County, Texas: Ranchers Help Round Up Illegals Who Skirt Checkpoint

Perhaps realizing the threat, President Obama dispatched a team to the border last week to determine whether a federally organized National Guard deployment was necessary.

No matter what Obama decides to do, Perry has said he intends to ask the federal government to pay for his deployment of 1,000 troops, estimated to cost $12 million a month.

Perry, who warned the Obama administration about the border crisis in his state more than two years ago, did not speak with the president’s team while it visited Texas.

“This [the National Guard deployment] is important for the peace of Texas and the country,” Perry said. “I had to make a decision.”

Progressive Leader Outlines Plan to ‘Take Down’ Free-Market State Policy Groups - Daily Signal

Progressive Leader Outlines Plan to ‘Take Down’ Free-Market State Policy Groups

Scott Blakeman / Brett Schaefer / Paul Rosenzweig / James Gattuso / Josh Siegel / Bruce Parker /

The recent Netroots Nation gathering, billed as a “giant family reunion for the left,” included a directive from one leader of a progressive state policy network to “take down” conservative state policy organizations nationwide.

Arshad Hasan, who moderated a breakout session called “Stink Tanks in Your State: Inside the State Policy Network,” called on attendees to attack state policy groups from Michigan’s Mackinac Center to Vermont’s Ethan Allen Institute.

“The next step for us is to take down this network of institutions that are state-based in each and every one of our states,” Hasan said.

Your Heartland Institute, your Mackinac Institute and my state’s Ethan Allen Institute, although they are ultra-conservative and lead us to a set of policies that would not be passed in a state as liberal as Vermont, pitch themselves as third-party validators—‘Hey, we’re just here for research, and we want to help you figure out the best public policy.’

Hasan, whose ProgressNow organization oversees left-wing state advocacy groups in 22 states, seeks a network of policy groups that promote progressive ideas and causes. Hasan also railed against the money donated to conservative groups. (The combined annual contributions to ProgressNow’s 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) units in 2012 totaled $3,660,155.)

Hasan’s major complaint with state policy groups such as Mackinac Center and the Ethan Allen Institute came down to their effectiveness. Hasan, an activist in Vermont, was especially impressed with the Ethan Allen Institute.

“It’s 2-to-1 Democratic in [Vermont’s] state Legislature … yet because we have to deal with the Ethan Allen Institute—a member of SPN—we can’t achieve our policy objectives as progressives, because they do an excellent job,” he said.

So the state that elects a socialist for U.S. senator cannot get paid sick leave passed. The state that believes, ‘Hey, we all have an obligation to each other, including in our health care,’ can’t pass a tax on soda.

Hasan leveled a similar charge of effectiveness against Michigan’s Mackinac Center.

The Mackinac Institute is not some small group of kooks who’ve come up with this right-wing set of theories. They are a powerful, unfortunately, well-respected group of policy writers and lobbyists who’ve radically changed this formerly bright blue, formerly very wealthy, formerly Democratic state into this sci-fi dystopia.


‘No Way’ Obama’s Climate Change Plan Will Reduce Temperatures, Says Rep. Mike Kelly - Daily Signal

‘No Way’ Obama’s Climate Change Plan Will Reduce Temperatures, Says Rep. Mike Kelly

Scott Blakeman / Brett Schaefer / Paul Rosenzweig / James Gattuso / Josh Siegel / Bruce Parker / Kelsey Harkness / Alex Anderson /

Following a speech about extremism at the Environmental Protection Agency, Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Pa., called the Obama administration’s climate change proposal a “public relations piece.” He told The Daily Signal there’s “no way” the administration’s current plan will reduce global temperatures and warned of the “unintended consequences” for the American people.

Guatemala Wants $2 Billion for Border Crisis. Why One Activist Says U.S. Should Ignore It. - Daily Signal

Guatemala Wants $2 Billion for Border Crisis. Why One Activist Says U.S. Should Ignore It.

Scott Blakeman / Brett Schaefer / Paul Rosenzweig / James Gattuso / Josh Siegel / Bruce Parker / Kelsey Harkness / Alex Anderson / Marianela Toledo /

Guatemalan President Otto Perez Molina says $2 billion in federal aid and other U.S. investment in Central America could help end the flood of immigrants across the U.S. southern border.

But it’s a fool’s game, says the leader of a charity serving immigrants from Honduras.

“I think giving money to these governments is a serious mistake,” said Francisco Portillo, president of the Honduran Francisco Morazan Integrated Organization in Miami. “Corruption in our country [Honduras] is huge, no limits. And the money they are talking about is coming from our taxes.”

Giving money to Central American governments in Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador is basically the same as throwing it away, he said.

Instead, Portillo said, President Obama and Congress should “ensure it is spent on helping these children who are returned to their countries.”

Guatemala’s Molina said to “attack the root of the problem,” the United States needs “to think about making investments in countries such as Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras.”

Since 2008, according to a Washington Post report, the United States has sent about $528 million to the three countries for security and law enforcement. The U.S. Agency for International Development in 2012 spent $148.4 million among the three countries for education, economic development, democracy, environment, heath and more.

But things not only haven’t improved, they’ve gotten worse. Nearly 60,000 unaccompanied children have already crossed the border this year.


Panel: Obama’s Emissions Regulations Mark ‘Unprecedented’ Executive Expansion - Daily Signal

Panel: Obama’s Emissions Regulations Mark ‘Unprecedented’ Executive Expansion

Scott Blakeman / Brett Schaefer / Paul Rosenzweig / James Gattuso / Josh Siegel / Bruce Parker / Kelsey Harkness / Alex Anderson / Marianela Toledo / Natalie Johnson /

The Environmental Protection Agency kicks off public hearings today on its new carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas emissions regulations for power plants. But before the public has its chance to weigh in, the EPA’s plan evoked harsh reactions from a Heritage Foundation panel.

Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Pa., joined the Competitive Enterprise Institute’s William Yeatman and David Kreutzer, a Heritage Foundation research fellow in energy economics and climate change, at the event, “Extremism at the EPA.”

“We sure as heck don’t need rogue agencies that continue to do things and change policy that has not been approved by the public,” Kelly said.

>>> Exclusive Interview: Rep. Mike Kelly on Obama’s Climate Plan

Kreutzer cited a Heritage Foundation study to highlight the steep effects of regulating coal-fired electric power plants out of the market, noting that if the administration were to pursue its “war on coal,” employment would fall by 500,000 jobs by 2030.

“These are very costly regulations that aren’t going to have a measurable impact on the world temperature in a hundred years,” Kreutzer said. “The social cost of carbon does not get them out of that.”

“We sure as heck don’t need rogue agencies,” says Rep. @MikeKellyPA of @EPA.

The loss of these coal-based plants would also cause a family of four’s income to drop by $1,000 per year—a $16,500 loss from now to 2030—which would equate to a $1.47 trillion drop in the nation’s aggregate gross domestic product.

>>> Climate Change Is a Fact. But These New Emissions Regulations Won’t Help the Environment.

Kreutzer said the models used by the EPA to measure carbon’s effect on temperature have been “terrible” at predicting the degree of the earth’s warming.

Yeatman also opposed the EPA’s attempt to regulate carbon, pointing to Congress’ inability to pass cap-and-trade legislation as an indicator of the agency’s executive overreach.

A senior fellow specializing in energy policy and global warming at CEI, Yeatman explained the “most aggressive” regulatory action the EPA can take through the states is called the federal implementation plan, a measure he described as “regulatory takeover” because it involves the “seizure” of a state’s regulatory rights.

>>> How Washington Is Sneakily Implementing Cap and Trade

“The previous three presidential administrations—George W. Bush, William Clinton and George H.W. Bush—their EPA’s promulgated a total of five Clean Air Act federal implementation plans,” Yeatman said. “President Barack Obama, through his administration thus far, has promulgated 51.”

Yeatman describes this glaring difference as an “unprecedented expansion” of federal power, saying that the power allotted to the EPA through its most recent rule was unintended by Congress.

“[The rule] doesn’t have a clear congressional mandate—if anything I’d say all the evidence suggests the exact opposite, the Congress would have in no way intended this,” Yeatman said. “If Congress hasn’t enacted a climate policy, then why the heck is the EPA?”

Export-Import Bank Goes Under the Microscope for Allegations of Fraud, Corruption - Daily Signal

Export-Import Bank Goes Under the Microscope for Allegations of Fraud, Corruption

Scott Blakeman / Brett Schaefer / Paul Rosenzweig / James Gattuso / Josh Siegel / Bruce Parker / Kelsey Harkness / Alex Anderson / Marianela Toledo / Natalie Johnson / Melissa Quinn /

Lawmakers will examine allegations of fraud and corruption at the Export-Import Bank today as a House subcommittee probes the embattled agency’s operations.

Led by Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, the Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on Economic Growth, Job Creation & Regulatory Affairs will examine multiple allegations of wrongdoing that have plagued the Export-Import Bank.

Witnesses include Export-Import Bank Chairman Fred Hochberg, former bank employee Johnny Gutierrez and Heritage Foundation research fellow Diane Katz.

In a statement to The Daily Signal, Jordan said:

I think it is time to wind down the Export-Import Bank. I hope we can start that process this year.  It is a program that allows Washington to pick the winners and losers. Too often, big businesses and powerful special interests get their way in Washington while regular hard-working Americans get left behind.

Hopefully this hearing will shed light on the Johnny Gutierrez situation, and give Americans a better insight into how their tax dollars are once again being used to give taxpayer-funded handouts to big, well-connected corporations.

The subcommittee’s hearing comes as Congress debates the future of the Export-Import Bank, which provides taxpayer-backed loans and loan guarantees to foreign companies and countries. The 80-year-old agency’s charter expires Sept. 30, and lawmakers on Capitol Hill are considering whether the bank should be shuttered.

Allegations of Corruption

Ex-Im’s supporters, who include President Obama, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers, argue the bank is a boon to small businesses and helps create jobs in the United States.

Its critics, which include House Financial Services Chairman Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas, Heritage Action for America and Americans for Prosperity, say it furthers cronyism and corporate welfare.

A 2013 report from Ex-Im’s inspector general called attention to the bank’s shortcomings and characterized Ex-Im as demonstrating “weakness in governance and internal controls for business operations,” Katz noted in a column for The Daily Signal.

>>> At Least 74 Cases of Fraud and Corruption at Ex-Im Bank Since 2009

Last month, the Wall Street Journal reported the bank suspended or removed four officials “amid investigations into allegations of gifts and kickbacks, as well as attempts to steer federal contracts to favored companies.”

“I think it is time to wind down the Export-Import Bank,” says Rep. @Jim_Jordan.

According to the allegations, Gutierrez, who worked in the short-term trade finance division, accepted cash payments in exchange for helping a Florida-based company receive financing from the bank. He was placed on leave as the bank continues to investigate.

Gutierrez’s identity was the only one of the four employees under investigation confirmed, and Ex-Im hasn’t released any information about the investigations to the public, the Journal noted.

Gutierrez refused to appear voluntarily before the subcommittee. In response, Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa, R-California, subpoenaed the former Ex-Im official. He said in a statement:

The recently reported allegations against Mr. Gutierrez are extremely serious and shake the very core of the taxpayer-funded Ex-Im Bank. Congress needs to know exactly what occurred in this corruption scheme and will learn from both Mr. Gutierrez and Ex-Im Bank Chairman Hochberg what actions the bank is taking to ensure that the organization will eradicate this culture of corruption.

But, according to Katz, “the Journal article tells only part of the story.”

A review of government documents conducted by The Heritage Foundation found there have been more than 74 cases of fraud and corruption at Ex-Im since 2009. Additionally, dozens of fraud cases involving those benefiting from Ex-Im financing have been referred to the Department of Justice for prosecution. Katz pointed to several examples:

[T]he bank approved 96 loan transactions in a two-year period for Gangland, USA, which purported to export electronics from Miami to South America. According to prosecutors, company owner Jose L. Quijano received more than $3.6 million in fraudulent loans from the bank.

Similarly, the bank approved 18 loans involving $13.6 million to Leopoldo Parra, who pleaded guilty in 2012 to wire fraud and conspiracy to commit money laundering. According to prosecutors, Parra and his co-conspirators fraudulently obtained the loan proceeds and used them for personal gain.

In addition, Ex-Im employees have doubts about their superiors’ ethical conduct. In a 2013 government survey, 42 percent of those working at the bank agreed with the statement, “My organization’s leaders maintain high standards of honesty and integrity.” Meanwhile, half “agreed they can disclose a suspected violation of any law, rule or regulation without fear of reprisal.”

Debate Over Reauthorization

Hensarling is leading the fight against reauthorizing the bank and convened a Financial Services hearing last month examining Ex-Im’s fate. In a statement issued last week, Hensarling praised the Oversight Committee for delving into the allegations of fraud. He said:

The allegations of kickbacks and corruption at the Export-Import Bank are as disturbing as they are serious. At our recent Financial Services Committee hearing on Ex-Im reauthorization, the bank’s chairman refused to answer repeated questions about whether he was aware of a criminal investigation into these allegations. So I’m pleased the Oversight and Government Reform Committee is taking this action.

But supporters contend the instances of fraud within Ex-Im are limited and small in the scope of the agency. Tony Fratto, former spokesman for President George W. Bush and one of the most vocal of the bank’s supporters, said last week fraud was inevitable in any instance where commercial transactions are involved. At a debate over the bank at the American Enterprise Institute, he said:

Anywhere you put money and programs and human beings together, you have the opportunity for temptation and corruption. It’s always going to be there. You can see it lots of places where you have commercial transactions.

Fratto went on to note that many trade and finance ministers abroad look to export financing to combat corruption because of the oversight official export agencies have.

But opponents disagree.

Dan Holler, communications director for Heritage Action, told The Daily Signal the bank needs more scrutiny. He said:

The Export-Import Bank is finally coming under congressional scrutiny, and that is a very good thing because too many federal agencies operate on autopilot. In addition to shining a light on corruption and poor business practices, the hearing will likely make clear the bank must expire because it cannot be reformed.

Sen. Joe Manchin, D-West Virginia, is set to introduce a bill reauthorizing the bank for another five years.

Rep. John Campbell, R-California, also announced a potential for legislation that would reauthorize the bank with a number of reforms. A bill has yet to be introduced.

Some insiders speculate Ex-Im’s reauthorization could be attached to a continuing resolution that funds the government, as the fiscal year’s end coincides with the agency’s expiration. If members decide not to pass the continuing resolution, another government shutdown could occur.

One of the World’s Biggest Sources of Oil Is Right Here in America - Daily Signal

One of the World’s Biggest Sources of Oil Is Right Here in America

Scott Blakeman / Brett Schaefer / Paul Rosenzweig / James Gattuso / Josh Siegel / Bruce Parker / Kelsey Harkness / Alex Anderson / Marianela Toledo / Natalie Johnson / Melissa Quinn / Rob Nikolewski /

SANTA FE, N.M.—Oil production in New Mexico keeps on booming, and it could continue to do so for some time.

“I think the forecast is great,” said Parker Hallam, president and CEO of Crude Energy in Dallas. “I’m excited.”

The Permian Basin, located in eastern New Mexico and West Texas, recently has become one of the world’s biggest sources for crude oil.

The Bakken formation in North Dakota, the Eagle Ford “play” in South Texas and the Permian Basin are each producing more than 1 million barrels of oil per day, with the Permian leading the pack at 1.6 million barrels a day.


Domestic production has grown so large that last month, the International Energy Agency announced the United States surpassed Russia and even Saudi Arabia in oil production.

In New Mexico, field production has doubled in the past three years and is on the verge of surpassing 10 million barrels a month, according to figures from the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

“I think the next 10 years, we can expect to see three to 3-and-a-half million [barrels a day from the Permian Basin],” Hallam said. “We could see even more than that.”

The reason?

Horizontal drilling, using hydraulic fracturing—“fracking.”


Federal Health Program Under Fire: ‘Karl Marx Couldn’t Have Come Up With This’ - Daily Signal

Federal Health Program Under Fire: ‘Karl Marx Couldn’t Have Come Up With This’

Scott Blakeman / Brett Schaefer / Paul Rosenzweig / James Gattuso / Josh Siegel / Bruce Parker / Kelsey Harkness / Alex Anderson / Marianela Toledo / Natalie Johnson / Melissa Quinn / Rob Nikolewski / Kenric Ward /

A federal program designed to make Americans “healthy people” is getting broader.

Healthy People 2000—launched by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to address obesity—initially was supposed to address the differences in health outcomes between wealthy and non-wealthy.

By 2010, the mission was expanded to eliminate, not just reduce, health disparities.

Healthy People 2020 is moving the goalposts yet again—“to achieve health equity, eliminate disparities and improve the health of all groups.”

According to the HHS directive, “Achieving health equity requires valuing everyone equally with focused and ongoing societal efforts to address avoidable inequalities, historical and contemporary injustices, and the elimination of health and health care disparities.”

“Karl Marx couldn’t have come up with this,” says Richard Williams, vice president for policy research at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University and a 27-year veteran of the Food and Drug Administration.

They have decided that ‘racism’ is a determinate of health. They are concerned about ‘residential segregation’ and ‘perceptions of discrimination. If you try hard enough, and they have, virtually every aspect of society can be related to health, such as quality of housing.

Among the overarching objectives is “Environmental justice: supporting the rights of all people to live in a healthy environment.”

Critics suggest that manipulating market economics—while expanding the federal bureaucracy—lies at the core of the agenda.

“Now we want to make all the world’s wages better. That’s real mission creep,” Williams said.