Monday, January 6, 2025

‘There’s other ways’: Homan says countries refusing to take back their illegal migrants won’t slow Trump’s agenda January 6, 2025 | Hailey Gomez | Print Article

 

‘There’s other ways’: Homan says countries refusing to take back their illegal migrants won’t slow Trump’s agenda

Daily Caller News Foundation

Incoming border czar Tom Homan said Sunday that even if foreign home countries refused to take back their illegal migrants, it still wouldn’t slow President-elect Donald Trump’s deportation plans.

Throughout his campaign, Trump vowed to shut down the southern border as the U.S. saw record-high encounters under the Biden-Harris administration, stating his second administration would conduct one of the largest deportation operations in U.S. history. On “Face the Nation,” CBS host Margaret Brennan asked the incoming border czar how he plans to carry out the process if some countries, like Venezuela, continue to deny repatriation requests.

“Well, first of all, we have President Trump coming into the Oval Office and he’s proven during his first administration. His leadership on illegal immigration was the game-changer because for instance, El Salvador wouldn’t take back MS-13 members when I was the ICE director,” Homan said. “It took President Trump 48 hours to get El Salvador to take back their criminal aliens into their prisons. Mexico didn’t want to do the ‘Remain in Mexico’ program, but President Trump was able to get ‘Remain in Mexico’ established in Mexico. He was able to get Mexico [to] put military in the southern and northern border. President Trump’s a strong president.”

“This administration has not forced these countries to take them back and we have what we call a third safe country. We already have countries talking about taking back people from other countries. For instance, Venezuela doesn’t take their people back. There’s other ways we can do it. There’s other countries [who’d] be willing to accept them,” Homan added.

With an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. as of 2022, President Joe Biden has attempted to reduce the number by sending Venezuelans back to their home country. However, Biden’s plans were halted by Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, who rejected deportation flights in February 2024.

WATCH:



Homan went on to state that while incoming officials are hoping Trump will be able to negotiate with Maduro, illegal immigrants will be deported to another country if their home countries will not accept them.

“We’re hoping that President Trump will work with Venezuela like he did with Mexico and El Salvador and get these countries to take them back. If they don’t, they’re still gonna be deported, they’re just gonna be deported to a different country,” Homan continued.

“We’re not gonna be held up on removing public safety threats in this country. We have to put the safety of the American people first,” Homan said. “We’ve had too many young women murdered and raped and burned alive by members of Venezuelan gangs. They need to be a priority under this administration. It’s [going to] be a priority starting day one and they will be deported.”

In addition to foreign home countries, Democrats in sanctuary cities have also attempted to push back against Trump and Homan’s plans. Officials like Democratic Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson, Democratic Tucson Mayor Regina Romero, and Denver Mayor Mike Johnston have vowed not to aid Homan or Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in removing illegal immigrants from their cities.

Homan has since warned the mayors and others, like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), that their efforts will not only fail to prevent deportations but could also result in “consequences” for those “who violate the law and try to prevent us from doing our job.”

Schumer offers up explanation for his party’s 2024 drubbing: Voters ‘didn’t realize how much’ Dems had done for them January 6, 2025 | Hailey Gomez | Print Article

 

Schumer offers up explanation for his party’s 2024 drubbing: Voters ‘didn’t realize how much’ Dems had done for them

Daily Caller News Foundation

Democratic Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said Sunday that voters “didn’t realize how much” the Democratic Party had done for them over the last four years heading into November’s elections, claiming it played a key role in his party’s demise.

President-elect Donald Trump scored a historic win for Republicans in November, winning both the Electoral College and the popular vote, while Vice President Kamala Harris failed to even match the numbers President Joe Biden had received in 2020. On “Meet the Press,” NBC host Kristen Welker questioned Schumer about his thoughts on the “root cause” of the Democrats’ loss, noting that Democratic strategist James Carville had blamed the state of the economy under the Biden-Harris administration.

“I told my caucus and I’ll say it here, too. We should regard this election, certainly, it was a loss, but it’s also a challenge, and we did some things right against very severe headwinds. We kept four of those seven contested Democratic seats, but we did some things wrong and we have to look in the mirror and see what we did wrong,” Schumer said.

“Then there’s some things we didn’t do that we should have done. One of the things we have to do is we must focus on the working families of America,” Schumer added. “We believe in them and we passed all kinds of legislation that helped them with the infrastructure bill which made our economy stronger and employed lots of people.”

Following Harris’ loss to Trump, Democratic lawmakers and political pundits questioned the pushback against their party from voters.

Election results showed that Trump not only gained 2.5 million more votes than in 2020 but also dealt a serious blow to Democrats’ hold on certain slices of the electorate, as Harris earned 7 million fewer votes than Biden in the 2020 race, according to The New York Times. While the vice president may have found some counties where she met or exceeded Biden’s vote totals, she failed to match Trump’s gains, falling short in three of the seven key swing states and in 80% of counties nationwide.


Schumer continued to list how Democrats helped push through the CHIPS Plus Act in 2022, a bill that included $52 billion for semiconductor manufacturing through 2025, $200 billion for federal science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) research, and tax credits for U.S. semiconductor manufacturing. The Democratic Senate majority leader additionally noted his party’s push to lower the cost of prescription drugs, a point Biden touted during his 2024 campaign.

WATCH:

The lawmaker went on to admit to Welker that while Democrats failed to show “empathy and concern,” voters also “didn’t realize” how the party had cared for them, stating that it’s an area Democrats will focus on in the future.

“But all too often Kristen we talked about the mechanics of the legislation and the details of the legislation and we really didn’t show the kind of empathy and concern to average or show enough of it to average working families who didn’t realize how much we had done and how much we care for them,” Schumer continued.

“So what we’re going to do is spend a lot of time talking to working families showing them how much we care about them and not just talk about legislation, but talk about the conditions that have made so many working families worried about their futures,” Schumer said. “That’s going to be a significant change, and obviously it will make a difference.”

After Biden announced his withdrawal from the 2024 presidential race and instead endorsed Harris in July 2024, some Democrats questioned whether the party would hold a primary, with major figures like former President Barack Obama initially withholding their endorsement of the vice president. However, despite never winning any delegates, Harris secured enough support from Democratic National Convention (DNC) delegates to become the party’s presumptive presidential nominee two days after Biden withdrew from the race.

‘Government overreach’: Liz Warren’s favorite agency just granted itself new powers to regulate checking accounts January 6, 2025 | Owen Klinsky | Print Article

 

‘Government overreach’: Liz Warren’s favorite agency just granted itself new powers to regulate checking accounts

Daily Caller News Foundation

The lame-duck Biden administration’s Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) issued a rule in December to curb overdraft penalties in what experts told the Daily Caller News Foundation is an example of government overreach that will ravage low-income Americans.

The CFPB — an agency that is considered the brainchild of Democratic Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren — finalized the rule just weeks before President-elect Donald Trump takes office, with the aim of forcing banks to either cap overdraft fees at $5, far less than the $35 average, or to provide the overdraft as a form of credit rather than a penalty. While the policy’s stated aim is to increase transparency and protect American depositors, experts told the DCNF it will force banks to implement more stringent rules on bank accounts, limiting access to credit and financial services for low-income Americans, and pushing more borrowers to turn to payday lenders, who typically charge far higher interest rates.

“This is a classic case of government overreach with regulators having no idea how private business works,” E.J. Antoni, a research fellow at the Heritage Foundation’s Grover M. Hermann Center for the Federal Budget, told the DCNF. “These new regulations would eliminate certain services and impose stricter rules on bank accounts predominantly held by low-income folks. If those people need an extension of credit because they don’t have sufficient funds to meet an immediate expense, they’ll be driven to even more costly payday lenders.”

While typical credit card annual percentage rates range from 15% to 30%, and personal loans are even lower, payday lenders often charge annual interest rates of anywhere from 300% to 500%, according to Mayo Employees Federal Credit Union. In 2022, 17% of households with checking accounts reported that they or someone in their family paid an overdraft fee, with households with incomes under $30,000 twice as likely to report at least one overdraft as those with incomes of $100,000 or more.

American household debt stood at a record high of nearly $18 trillion at the end of the third quarter of 2024, increasing by nearly $4 trillion from when President Joe Biden took office in the first quarter of 2021, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Credit card balances have also surged since the COVID-19 pandemic, with American households holding $1.17 trillion in credit card debt in the third quarter of 2024, up from $770 billion in the first quarter of 2021.


CFPB claims it has the legal authority to implement the regulation on the grounds overdrafts are loans and not penalties — an argument Erik Jaffe, partner at law firm Schaerr | Jaffe LLP, described to the DCNF as a “stretch.”

“The CFPB was given authority to regulate certain circumstances of consumer lending. As a result, the question is whether or not an overdraft on your checking account constitutes a short-term loan,” Jaffe told the DCNF. “It seems like quite the stretch. Banks charge customers a fee on overdrafts. The fee is not interest, as the length of time you take to pay back the fee does not change how much you owe. Interest must have a time component to it. It’s not like banks are giving customers with overdrafts money over time. They are just doing a courtesy of not bouncing a charge and embarrassing the customer.”

Jaffe also pointed out that the CFPB contradicts itself by attempting to re-classify overdrafts as a form of lending, while simultaneously permitting banks to charge overdraft penalties so long as they are under a certain dollar amount: “If the only way the CFPB has power to regulate overdrafts is by treating it as a loan, then why do they get to regulate the amount of penalty? If they concede it’s a penalty, then it is not within their purview. There’s an internal inconsistency here.”

The overdraft rule incurred immediate legal pushback following its finalization, with the American Bankers Association (ABA) filing a motion in the Southern District of Mississippi’s Fifth Circuit for a preliminary injunction on Dec. 12. Jaffe suggested legal challenges like the one from the ABA could be successful, particularly after the Supreme Court voted 6-3 in June to overturn Chevron deference — a legal theory that provided unelected bureaucrats with significant leeway to interpret statutory ambiguities.

“We no longer defer to an agency when they say ‘if you squint really hard this statute means I can do whatever the heck I want,’” Jaffe told the DCNF. “This CFPB rule seems to smell a bit like that. The agency appears to be saying ‘if we squint just right, overdrafts look like loans, and so we have the authority to regulate them.’ The courts will take it upon themselves to determine if this is the most natural reading, and will likely conclude it is not.”

Outside of the courts, Republican lawmakers have taken aim at the rule, claiming it will limit access to credit and describing it as an example of “midnight rulemaking” by the outgoing Biden administration.

“As I’ve said repeatedly, lawful and contractually agreed upon payment incentives promote financial discipline and responsibility and protect access to important financial services,” incoming Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Scott of North Carolina wrote following the finalization of the rule on Dec. 12. “With just over a month until the next administration takes over, Director [Rohit] Chopra should never have finalized this rule in the first place, and I look forward to working with the next CFPB Director to advance policies that prioritize consumers over political talking points.”

Incoming House Financial Services Committee Chairman French Hill of Arkansas echoed Scott’s sentiment in a Dec. 23 statement: “We told federal agencies — including the CFPB — to put their ‘pens down’ and stop all midnight rulemaking. Director Chopra blatantly disregarded our request by finalizing this rule. Capping overdraft services is another form of government price controls that hurts consumers who deserve financial protections and greater choice.”

Chopra is a longtime ally of Democratic Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, helping her establish the CFPB following the passage of the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reform law. Warren was instrumental in creating the CFPB, with former President Barack Obama describing the agency as “Elizabeth’s idea.”

“I also want to thank Elizabeth Warren not only for her extraordinary work standing up the new agency over the past year, but also for her many years of impassioned leadership, and her fierce defense of a simple idea: ordinary people deserve to be treated fairly and honestly in their financial dealings,” Obama said in a July 2011 speech touting the then-fledgling agency. “This agency was Elizabeth’s idea, and through sheer force of will, intelligence, and a bottomless well of energy, she has made, and will continue to make, a profound and positive difference for our country.”

Peter Earle, senior economist at the American Institute for Economic Research, told the DCNF the rule was the latest in a long line of “regulatory overreach” from the Biden administration.

“Capping overdraft fees by regulatory fiat is yet another example of regulatory overreach from the Biden administration, as it interrupts the pricing mechanism that reflects the costs and risks of providing overdraft services,” Earle said. “It’s not the first time, by far, that the outgoing administration has assumed that government knows better than private enterprises, consumers, and the price system, undermining the voluntary, cooperative commerce that drives competition and innovation.”

The CFPB and Warren’s office did not respond to requests for comment.

Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *