Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

🚨 MONTANA Update: Bitcoin Reserve bill HB 429 failed to pass a second reading in the Montana House. It is now effectively dead. The vote was 41 - 59. It was largely partisan, but many Republicans voted against the bill. ANALYSIS: HB 429 failed in the House, largely due...

Bitcoin_Laws's profile picture

Bitcoin Laws

17,801 subscribers

67,858 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr •via X (Twitter)

FinanzenWissenschaft & TechnologieNachrichten & Politik
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

11 Kommentare

Profilbild von Bitcoin Laws
Bitcoin Lawsvor 1 Jahr

What stood out to me was the fiscal conservative opposition: “I ran as a fiscal conservative…This smacks of speculation…It’s taxpayer money and we need to protect it." "This is speculating with hard earned income from citizens of the state.”

Profilbild von Bitcoin Laws
Bitcoin Lawsvor 1 Jahr

But, fiscal conservatives also supported the bill: "I’m a fiscal conservative. You can’t make money without taking some risk." "The greatest risk is leaving the money we've collected at the mercy of inflation." "If we can grow this money, we can give more back to taxpayers."

Profilbild von Vance Ginn
Vance Ginnvor 1 Jahr

How Trump and Congress Can Correct Biden’s Financial Policy Failures: Check out my latest piece:

Profilbild von Logan Manhart
Logan Manhartvor 1 Jahr

Very sad. Montana will regret this in a few years.

Profilbild von Oliver Koblížek 🍩
Oliver Koblížek 🍩vor 1 Jahr

Add the bitcoin price at the time of rejection to your website.

Profilbild von Boyd Cohen
Boyd Cohenvor 1 Jahr

Thanks for the additional color on why. It’s clear we have a very long way to go. It’s obviously much more than having a few orange pilled legislators in each state proposing SBR bills. They won’t get them across the line without more bipartisan buy-in and citizen engagement which means a much wider education strategy

Profilbild von Bitcoin Laws
Bitcoin Lawsvor 1 Jahr

My reading from these proceedings is that, more than orange-pilling, what's most important is crystal clarity in the bills themselves about processes, reporting, and accountability. Ultimately there seemed to be just too many unanswered questions about how it would work.

Profilbild von SumOfCharacter
SumOfCharactervor 1 Jahr

Wasn't a bitcoin bill, it was a strategic asset reserve that included crypto & precious metals.

Profilbild von ₿itcoin IS the Revolution 🇺🇲 ⚡ 🇸🇻
₿itcoin IS the Revolution 🇺🇲 ⚡ 🇸🇻vor 1 Jahr

I was against it passing because it says "digital assets". It should read a Bitcoin, only strategic Reserve. Otherwise the shitcoiners get to weasel their way in at some point down the road. The scammers need to move out of Montana and they need to move out of the US.

Profilbild von ITB1
ITB1vor 1 Jahr

No one cares Montana will buy back far higher

Profilbild von SP✨
SP✨vor 1 Jahr

They still think Bitcoin is speculative? What a joke. You will be left behind.

Ähnliche Videos

EXPOSING JARED POLIS' $4 MILLION SLUSH FUND! Colorado House Democrats Voted for $4 Million Slush Fund for Governor to Fight Trump amid Fears of Federal Funding Losses This year, Colorado has seen some of the most extreme legislation in recent memory. From attempts to abolish the Second Amendment, to repealing our Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, the current group of Colorado Legislators are pushing an extreme far-left agenda. And with the Trump Administration in Washington, there are real concerns that Colorado will continue to lose Federal Tax Dollars due to the State’s extremism. So, the Democrats in the State House have passed a bill to give the Governor’s Office $4 million to be used in legal fights against the Trump Administration. This is in a year where our State is facing a $1 billion budget shortfall, due to the excessive spending of these legislators. This $4 million in taxpayer money will be taken from the “Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act Cash Fund,” and the Governor will be able to use this money with no accountability. In this short video, Brandon highlights this horrible bill and plays Rep. Ken DeGraaf’s floor speech where he outlines arguments against this abuse of taxpayer funds.
14:58

EXPOSING JARED POLIS' $4 MILLION SLUSH FUND! Colorado House Democrats Voted for $4 Million Slush Fund for Governor to Fight Trump amid Fears of Federal Funding Losses This year, Colorado has seen some of the most extreme legislation in recent memory. From attempts to abolish the Second Amendment, to repealing our Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, the current group of Colorado Legislators are pushing an extreme far-left agenda. And with the Trump Administration in Washington, there are real concerns that Colorado will continue to lose Federal Tax Dollars due to the State’s extremism. So, the Democrats in the State House have passed a bill to give the Governor’s Office $4 million to be used in legal fights against the Trump Administration. This is in a year where our State is facing a $1 billion budget shortfall, due to the excessive spending of these legislators. This $4 million in taxpayer money will be taken from the “Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act Cash Fund,” and the Governor will be able to use this money with no accountability. In this short video, Brandon highlights this horrible bill and plays Rep. Ken DeGraaf’s floor speech where he outlines arguments against this abuse of taxpayer funds.

FreeStateColorado

14,558 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

BREAKING: President Biden just explicitly called out Speaker Mike Johnson on the Ukraine Funding bill. "Early this morning, the United States Senate voted overwhelmingly by a margin of 70-29 to move forward with the bipartisan national security bill. Now it moves to the House, and I urge Speaker Johnson to bring it to the floor immediately. There is no question that if the Senate bill is put to a vote in the House of Representatives, it would pass. So I call on the Speaker to let the full House speak its mind and not allow a minority of the most extreme voices in the House to block this bill from even being voted on." Shouldn't the House vote? Isn't that what Democracy is about?
0:40

BREAKING: President Biden just explicitly called out Speaker Mike Johnson on the Ukraine Funding bill. "Early this morning, the United States Senate voted overwhelmingly by a margin of 70-29 to move forward with the bipartisan national security bill. Now it moves to the House, and I urge Speaker Johnson to bring it to the floor immediately. There is no question that if the Senate bill is put to a vote in the House of Representatives, it would pass. So I call on the Speaker to let the full House speak its mind and not allow a minority of the most extreme voices in the House to block this bill from even being voted on." Shouldn't the House vote? Isn't that what Democracy is about?

Ed Krassenstein

1,253,158 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

Constitutional Amendment Bill (N0.3) unanimously passes to committee stage The contentious Constitutional Amendment Bill (N0.3) unanimously passed to the committee stage in the National Assembly earlier in the afternoon after the opposition neglected or failed to call for a critical division of the house for MPs opposed to the legislative changes to vote against it. About 30 MPs were opposed to the bill in its entirety after a record-breaking fierce debate. The failure by the opposition to call for division of the house let the bill, which has far-reaching political implications, pass to the committee stage unanimously, without formal opposition. In terms of process, the presiding officer first judges the will of the house using a voice vote ("Ayes" vs. "Nays"). If an MP challenges the presiding officer's ruling, they then can call for a division of the house. Bells are rung to summon all lawmakers to the chamber, the doors are locked, and MPs must physically move to opposite sides of the house (or have their names recorded) to provide an exact, verified tally of votes. A minimum simple majority was required to pass the bill to the committee stage. The committee stage of the bill is the third step in the legislative process. It is a detailed, clause-by-clause examination of the proposals that takes place after the second reading and general debate. During the committee stage, the house resolves into a committee of the whole house rather than meeting as the standard legislative body, allowing for more conversational and repeated speaking opportunities. Members meticulously scrutinise each section or clause of the bill. The committee goes through the bill clause-by-clause sequentially, voting on each clause or block of clauses. MPs and ministers can propose specific alterations, additions, or removals to individual clauses. Any proposed amendment is debated, and the committee votes on whether to accept or reject the change. Once the committee finishes reviewing all clauses and finalising amendments, the bill moves to the report stage, where the committee officially reports its work back to the house for final confirmation before the third reading. Because it is where the exact wording of the proposed law or amendment is finalised, this phase is often heavily debated. For example, this bill required intense, late-night debate in the National Assembly last night before advancing to the committee stage. After the amendments have been adopted, another vote is called in the house to pass the bill by a two-thirds majority before the same process is repeated in the upper house, senate. If senate makes some changes to the bill, it then goes back to the lower house, National Assembly, for voting before being to sent to the President for assent.
0:55

Constitutional Amendment Bill (N0.3) unanimously passes to committee stage The contentious Constitutional Amendment Bill (N0.3) unanimously passed to the committee stage in the National Assembly earlier in the afternoon after the opposition neglected or failed to call for a critical division of the house for MPs opposed to the legislative changes to vote against it. About 30 MPs were opposed to the bill in its entirety after a record-breaking fierce debate. The failure by the opposition to call for division of the house let the bill, which has far-reaching political implications, pass to the committee stage unanimously, without formal opposition. In terms of process, the presiding officer first judges the will of the house using a voice vote ("Ayes" vs. "Nays"). If an MP challenges the presiding officer's ruling, they then can call for a division of the house. Bells are rung to summon all lawmakers to the chamber, the doors are locked, and MPs must physically move to opposite sides of the house (or have their names recorded) to provide an exact, verified tally of votes. A minimum simple majority was required to pass the bill to the committee stage. The committee stage of the bill is the third step in the legislative process. It is a detailed, clause-by-clause examination of the proposals that takes place after the second reading and general debate. During the committee stage, the house resolves into a committee of the whole house rather than meeting as the standard legislative body, allowing for more conversational and repeated speaking opportunities. Members meticulously scrutinise each section or clause of the bill. The committee goes through the bill clause-by-clause sequentially, voting on each clause or block of clauses. MPs and ministers can propose specific alterations, additions, or removals to individual clauses. Any proposed amendment is debated, and the committee votes on whether to accept or reject the change. Once the committee finishes reviewing all clauses and finalising amendments, the bill moves to the report stage, where the committee officially reports its work back to the house for final confirmation before the third reading. Because it is where the exact wording of the proposed law or amendment is finalised, this phase is often heavily debated. For example, this bill required intense, late-night debate in the National Assembly last night before advancing to the committee stage. After the amendments have been adopted, another vote is called in the house to pass the bill by a two-thirds majority before the same process is repeated in the upper house, senate. If senate makes some changes to the bill, it then goes back to the lower house, National Assembly, for voting before being to sent to the President for assent.

TheNewsHawks

17,671 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

SB1054 was presented on the House floor today, proposing to continue taxpayer-funded scholarships as a form of reparations for the descendants of those harmed or killed in the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre. While my heart goes out to those families, this bill does not provide direct support to the actual survivors of this historical injustice. Instead, it places the financial burden on today’s taxpayers for actions committed over 100 years ago by other people—something I believe is not the responsibility of today’s Oklahoma taxpayers. To shift this bill from what I view as a liberal policy to a more conservative approach, I filed an amendment that would have required: •A minimum 2.5 GPA (to match Oklahoma’s Promise), and •An essay on the history of the Tulsa Race Massacre, for students to be eligible for the scholarship. This would have made the scholarship merit-based rather than an entitlement, encouraging academic achievement and a deeper understanding of Oklahoma’s history. A motion was made to table my amendment, but it was voted down 51 to 30. As a result, the amendment was debated and considered on the floor. Ultimately, my amendment failed with a vote of 40 YES to 45 NO. The underlying bill, SB1054, narrowly passed the House with a vote of 54 YES to 28 NO. I am considering seeking further action on this legislation.
12:48

SB1054 was presented on the House floor today, proposing to continue taxpayer-funded scholarships as a form of reparations for the descendants of those harmed or killed in the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre. While my heart goes out to those families, this bill does not provide direct support to the actual survivors of this historical injustice. Instead, it places the financial burden on today’s taxpayers for actions committed over 100 years ago by other people—something I believe is not the responsibility of today’s Oklahoma taxpayers. To shift this bill from what I view as a liberal policy to a more conservative approach, I filed an amendment that would have required: •A minimum 2.5 GPA (to match Oklahoma’s Promise), and •An essay on the history of the Tulsa Race Massacre, for students to be eligible for the scholarship. This would have made the scholarship merit-based rather than an entitlement, encouraging academic achievement and a deeper understanding of Oklahoma’s history. A motion was made to table my amendment, but it was voted down 51 to 30. As a result, the amendment was debated and considered on the floor. Ultimately, my amendment failed with a vote of 40 YES to 45 NO. The underlying bill, SB1054, narrowly passed the House with a vote of 54 YES to 28 NO. I am considering seeking further action on this legislation.

Gabe Woolley

11,631 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

🚨 Five top Democrats on the Maine Legislative Council voted AGAINST a bill that would ban ai-generated child porn The vote kills the bill from reaching committee, so it will not even receive public debate House minority leader Billy Bob Faulkingham can’t believe it… “Well, that was interesting. Just got out of leg council today where I'm in Augusta. We were voting on bills — but the one that really blew my mind was a bill sponsored by a Democrat that would prohibit child pornography created by AI. And of course, even though a Democrat sponsored that bill, I voted yes for it because I think child pornography is absolutely disgusting no matter how it's created. Unfortunately, that bill failed to get entered into the second session because the majority of Democrats voted against letting that bill in, even though it was sponsored by a Democrat. I don't understand the reasoning why you would not want to go against child pornography, but that actually happened today”
1:15

🚨 Five top Democrats on the Maine Legislative Council voted AGAINST a bill that would ban ai-generated child porn The vote kills the bill from reaching committee, so it will not even receive public debate House minority leader Billy Bob Faulkingham can’t believe it… “Well, that was interesting. Just got out of leg council today where I'm in Augusta. We were voting on bills — but the one that really blew my mind was a bill sponsored by a Democrat that would prohibit child pornography created by AI. And of course, even though a Democrat sponsored that bill, I voted yes for it because I think child pornography is absolutely disgusting no matter how it's created. Unfortunately, that bill failed to get entered into the second session because the majority of Democrats voted against letting that bill in, even though it was sponsored by a Democrat. I don't understand the reasoning why you would not want to go against child pornography, but that actually happened today”

Wall Street Apes

942,896 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

At the Capitol this past week, Senate Bill 135 passed committee, framed as an education funding bill. But the fine print tells a different story. The bill would alter TABOR’s limits and could permanently end TABOR refunds. Only a small fraction of the new revenue would be required to go to education in the first year, while roughly $600 million could flow into the state’s General Fund for “any other purpose.” That means much of the money wouldn’t necessarily reach classrooms, teachers, or students, it would simply give lawmakers a blank check. #copolitics
0:47

At the Capitol this past week, Senate Bill 135 passed committee, framed as an education funding bill. But the fine print tells a different story. The bill would alter TABOR’s limits and could permanently end TABOR refunds. Only a small fraction of the new revenue would be required to go to education in the first year, while roughly $600 million could flow into the state’s General Fund for “any other purpose.” That means much of the money wouldn’t necessarily reach classrooms, teachers, or students, it would simply give lawmakers a blank check. #copolitics

Independence Institute

10,065 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

THIS IS WHY REPUBLICANS ARE REVOLTING AGAINST THE DOJ FUND. According to reports from a closed-door Senate meeting, the Acting Attorney General could not guarantee that the proposed $1.776 billion anti-weaponization fund would exclude January 6 defendants. That got lawmakers' attention. The concern wasn't about the size of the fund. It was whether people convicted of assaulting police officers during the Capitol attack could potentially receive compensation from it. That's why opposition isn't just coming from Democrats. It's coming from Republicans who say that possibility is a political and moral nonstarter.
0:31

THIS IS WHY REPUBLICANS ARE REVOLTING AGAINST THE DOJ FUND. According to reports from a closed-door Senate meeting, the Acting Attorney General could not guarantee that the proposed $1.776 billion anti-weaponization fund would exclude January 6 defendants. That got lawmakers' attention. The concern wasn't about the size of the fund. It was whether people convicted of assaulting police officers during the Capitol attack could potentially receive compensation from it. That's why opposition isn't just coming from Democrats. It's coming from Republicans who say that possibility is a political and moral nonstarter.

Brian Allen

41,661 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

REP. BURCHETT ON HIS TALIBAN FUNDING BILL: “IF THEY’RE NOT DOING IT, WHY WON’T THEY PASS IT?” Rep. Tim Burchett Press Office is blasting the Senate for failing to act on his bill to stop U.S. taxpayer dollars from reaching the Taliban - nearly a year after it passed the House. When told that Senate Majority Leader John Thune said he hadn't seen the bill and that NO VOTE is currently scheduled, Burchett wasn't buying the excuses. “$40 million a week... and if they're not doing it, then why the heck won't they just pass it anyway?” Burchett suggested too many people have a stake in keeping the money flowing and questioned why the Senate continues to delay action. When asked by Alison Steinberg whether he believed Thune's claim that he hadn't seen the bill, Burchett replied: “I personally asked him about it.” “I just don't think he cares. It's not a top priority.” The bill passed the House. The question now is: Why is it collecting dust in the Senate while millions continue flowing into Afghanistan?
1:42

REP. BURCHETT ON HIS TALIBAN FUNDING BILL: “IF THEY’RE NOT DOING IT, WHY WON’T THEY PASS IT?” Rep. Tim Burchett Press Office is blasting the Senate for failing to act on his bill to stop U.S. taxpayer dollars from reaching the Taliban - nearly a year after it passed the House. When told that Senate Majority Leader John Thune said he hadn't seen the bill and that NO VOTE is currently scheduled, Burchett wasn't buying the excuses. “$40 million a week... and if they're not doing it, then why the heck won't they just pass it anyway?” Burchett suggested too many people have a stake in keeping the money flowing and questioned why the Senate continues to delay action. When asked by Alison Steinberg whether he believed Thune's claim that he hadn't seen the bill, Burchett replied: “I personally asked him about it.” “I just don't think he cares. It's not a top priority.” The bill passed the House. The question now is: Why is it collecting dust in the Senate while millions continue flowing into Afghanistan?

LindellTV

38,741 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Colorado - Report Regarding the Illegal Who Threw Molotov Cocktails at Pro-Israel Protesters. Was This the Fault of Colorado’s Democrats? Yes. Mohamed Sabry Soliman arrived at LAX on 8/27/22 on a B1/B2 nonimmigrant visa with an authorized stay through 2/26/23, but he overstayed and never left. The Colorado legislature passed Colorado Senate Bill 276, which the Colorado Governor signed on May 23, 2025. The bill aims to protect undocumented immigrants by restricting state cooperation with ICE. There was a heated debate on the House floor. The 22 House Republicans fought the bill, knowing the dire consequences. Not only was it unsafe for Colorado citizens, but it also strained Colorado taxpayers with over $544 million already spent on illegal immigration services. Republicans tried to bring forth an amendment stating that if the bill violated federal law, it would automatically be repealed. It was voted down by every Democrat in the House. The sponsor of the bill was Lorena Garcia. Lorena, a far-left Democrat, could be seen wearing a pin on her shirt that stated “Globalize the Intifada.” Rep. Scott Bottoms, one of the few Republicans in the Colorado House, warned the legislature in a heartbreaking speech that eventually, enough citizens would be r*ped, injured, and m*rdered that the federal government would need to step in and pull funding until the issue was resolved. He warned everyone. It looks like defunding and “step 2”, as he referred to in his speech, is all Colorado has to look forward to now. America, look at Colorado. If your state is taken over by Democrats, this is what you have to look forward to. I suggest getting your act together.
6:52

Colorado - Report Regarding the Illegal Who Threw Molotov Cocktails at Pro-Israel Protesters. Was This the Fault of Colorado’s Democrats? Yes. Mohamed Sabry Soliman arrived at LAX on 8/27/22 on a B1/B2 nonimmigrant visa with an authorized stay through 2/26/23, but he overstayed and never left. The Colorado legislature passed Colorado Senate Bill 276, which the Colorado Governor signed on May 23, 2025. The bill aims to protect undocumented immigrants by restricting state cooperation with ICE. There was a heated debate on the House floor. The 22 House Republicans fought the bill, knowing the dire consequences. Not only was it unsafe for Colorado citizens, but it also strained Colorado taxpayers with over $544 million already spent on illegal immigration services. Republicans tried to bring forth an amendment stating that if the bill violated federal law, it would automatically be repealed. It was voted down by every Democrat in the House. The sponsor of the bill was Lorena Garcia. Lorena, a far-left Democrat, could be seen wearing a pin on her shirt that stated “Globalize the Intifada.” Rep. Scott Bottoms, one of the few Republicans in the Colorado House, warned the legislature in a heartbreaking speech that eventually, enough citizens would be r*ped, injured, and m*rdered that the federal government would need to step in and pull funding until the issue was resolved. He warned everyone. It looks like defunding and “step 2”, as he referred to in his speech, is all Colorado has to look forward to now. America, look at Colorado. If your state is taken over by Democrats, this is what you have to look forward to. I suggest getting your act together.

Sarah Fields

27,885 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Virginia House Bill 1369 is DEAD and failed to pass This is the bill Democrats quietly tried to pass that would have made it illegal to know where the money sent to nonprofits go “It says, no state agency responsible for the administration of federal funds shall impose a requirement on a nonprofit charitable organization providing a federal public benefit to determine or otherwise require proof of eligibility of any applicant for such benefits” “The way this works is the state agency, which is handing out your tax dollars to nonprofits and charitable organizations, cannot go and require those charitable organizations to make sure that the people they're handing your money out to actually qualify for the money that they're getting” If it wasn’t for public outrage over this bill it likely would have flown under the radar and passed
0:56

Virginia House Bill 1369 is DEAD and failed to pass This is the bill Democrats quietly tried to pass that would have made it illegal to know where the money sent to nonprofits go “It says, no state agency responsible for the administration of federal funds shall impose a requirement on a nonprofit charitable organization providing a federal public benefit to determine or otherwise require proof of eligibility of any applicant for such benefits” “The way this works is the state agency, which is handing out your tax dollars to nonprofits and charitable organizations, cannot go and require those charitable organizations to make sure that the people they're handing your money out to actually qualify for the money that they're getting” If it wasn’t for public outrage over this bill it likely would have flown under the radar and passed

Wall Street Apes

69,861 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

🔥🚨BREAKING: After announcing that he was starting a fund from his money with Oprah, Dwayne ‘The Rock’ Johnson is now asking for donations to assist the victims of the Maui fires in Hawaii as he surveys the area. The $5 million dollars that him and Oprah gave was only the startup fund which means taxpayers are being asked to help by donating to their fund. The money that Dwayne and Oprah donated actually went to their company. Not one dollar has gone to the victims. In theory, what they did would be no different than a during a standard company start-up. They put funds up to create a system to receive funds. Why do the victims of Maui have to wait on taxpayer dollars when $10 million dollars are in their ledger’s balance?
2:25

🔥🚨BREAKING: After announcing that he was starting a fund from his money with Oprah, Dwayne ‘The Rock’ Johnson is now asking for donations to assist the victims of the Maui fires in Hawaii as he surveys the area. The $5 million dollars that him and Oprah gave was only the startup fund which means taxpayers are being asked to help by donating to their fund. The money that Dwayne and Oprah donated actually went to their company. Not one dollar has gone to the victims. In theory, what they did would be no different than a during a standard company start-up. They put funds up to create a system to receive funds. Why do the victims of Maui have to wait on taxpayer dollars when $10 million dollars are in their ledger’s balance?

Dom Lucre | Breaker of Narratives

7,922,465 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

Controller of Budget has faulted the Sovereign Wealth Fund Bill (see quoted tweet) on a number of issues: · The Bill is silent on the relationship between the Sovereign Wealth Fund & the Consolidated Fund & therefore the Controller of Budget's Office has no oversight power of withdrawals from the Sovereign Wealth Fund. It presents a grave risk · Regarding the capitation of the Sovereign Wealth Fund, the Controller of Budget wants all proceeds to first be credited into the Consolidated & then be routed to the Sovereign Wealth Fund through Parliamentary appropriation. As it is, the Bill undermines Article 206 of the Constitution · The Sovereign Wealth Fund Board, as constituted in the Bill, is susceptible to executive capture & there is need to amend the Bill & provide for independence non-voting observation to mitigate this risk · The Bill is too broad on investment guard rails. There's need for a Statutory Investment Policy, reviewed once every 3 years, for the Fund that is approved by Parliament. There's also need for an independent advisory committee & performance benchmarking against publicly available targets · The Bill vests withdrawal from the Sovereign Wealth Fund on the Cabinet Secretary. This needs to change & be vested with Parliament & require express approval in writing from the Controller of Budget. There needs to be a Statutory Withdrawal Guide capping annual withdrawals as a proportion of the fund
6:17

Controller of Budget has faulted the Sovereign Wealth Fund Bill (see quoted tweet) on a number of issues: · The Bill is silent on the relationship between the Sovereign Wealth Fund & the Consolidated Fund & therefore the Controller of Budget's Office has no oversight power of withdrawals from the Sovereign Wealth Fund. It presents a grave risk · Regarding the capitation of the Sovereign Wealth Fund, the Controller of Budget wants all proceeds to first be credited into the Consolidated & then be routed to the Sovereign Wealth Fund through Parliamentary appropriation. As it is, the Bill undermines Article 206 of the Constitution · The Sovereign Wealth Fund Board, as constituted in the Bill, is susceptible to executive capture & there is need to amend the Bill & provide for independence non-voting observation to mitigate this risk · The Bill is too broad on investment guard rails. There's need for a Statutory Investment Policy, reviewed once every 3 years, for the Fund that is approved by Parliament. There's also need for an independent advisory committee & performance benchmarking against publicly available targets · The Bill vests withdrawal from the Sovereign Wealth Fund on the Cabinet Secretary. This needs to change & be vested with Parliament & require express approval in writing from the Controller of Budget. There needs to be a Statutory Withdrawal Guide capping annual withdrawals as a proportion of the fund

Julians Amboko

51,626 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Not one single person who turned up the protest against the Live Births Bill answered my question about why they were there and what they were protesting against. Even the co-founder of the SA Abortion Action Coalition refused to answer my question. I think it's because there is no rational explanation for being for third trimester abortion in a scenario where the bill allows babies to be delivered alive after 28 weeks and until birth. This group of protestors would have been forced to justify why they think a mother has a right to deliver a dead baby in the third trimester and for 99% of Australians that is an extremely unreasonable thing to be justifying. I'm still shocked that the Live Births Bill failed to pass by one vote but I know that it will pass in the not too distant future. It has to. We cannot keep needlessly injecting babies with poison right up until birth and delivering them dead.
0:33

Not one single person who turned up the protest against the Live Births Bill answered my question about why they were there and what they were protesting against. Even the co-founder of the SA Abortion Action Coalition refused to answer my question. I think it's because there is no rational explanation for being for third trimester abortion in a scenario where the bill allows babies to be delivered alive after 28 weeks and until birth. This group of protestors would have been forced to justify why they think a mother has a right to deliver a dead baby in the third trimester and for 99% of Australians that is an extremely unreasonable thing to be justifying. I'm still shocked that the Live Births Bill failed to pass by one vote but I know that it will pass in the not too distant future. It has to. We cannot keep needlessly injecting babies with poison right up until birth and delivering them dead.

Dr Joanna Howe

27,373 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Rep. Roy: “I'm in my office now, continuing to work today. Got some meetings with the White House and others this afternoon. We're working in good faith… I want to be clear, there's a lot of progress made it that is reflected in the bill. There are some very good things in the bill, but it is such a big bill with so many complexities, I'm trying to be honest about what I'm seeing, which is that we see the front load of the tax policy and the back load of the spending restraint,”
0:47

Rep. Roy: “I'm in my office now, continuing to work today. Got some meetings with the White House and others this afternoon. We're working in good faith… I want to be clear, there's a lot of progress made it that is reflected in the bill. There are some very good things in the bill, but it is such a big bill with so many complexities, I'm trying to be honest about what I'm seeing, which is that we see the front load of the tax policy and the back load of the spending restraint,”

Rep. Chip Roy Press Office

57,094 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

The Left is the same everywhere so pay attention to this “Here's something that will send a chill down your spine” The Left wing political Party in Australia introduced a bill to steal residents private land without compensation. Every member of the Left voted in favor of it “Introduced a bill in the upper house called the Use of Vacant Land Bill, and under it, if you own any vacant land, it can be taken by the state government or local council without being paid one cent and without your permission. The problem with that bill was every single member of the Labor Party in the upper house supported it — all nine members of the Labor Party of South Australia supported a bill that was a direct attack on your private property rights and to me, that says it all.” Luckily the bill was struck down but every member of the Left party voted in favor of it to steal private land without compensation
0:39

The Left is the same everywhere so pay attention to this “Here's something that will send a chill down your spine” The Left wing political Party in Australia introduced a bill to steal residents private land without compensation. Every member of the Left voted in favor of it “Introduced a bill in the upper house called the Use of Vacant Land Bill, and under it, if you own any vacant land, it can be taken by the state government or local council without being paid one cent and without your permission. The problem with that bill was every single member of the Labor Party in the upper house supported it — all nine members of the Labor Party of South Australia supported a bill that was a direct attack on your private property rights and to me, that says it all.” Luckily the bill was struck down but every member of the Left party voted in favor of it to steal private land without compensation

Wall Street Apes

67,131 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

🚨 Confronting the Co-Sponsors of the Stop Nick Shirley Act: Under bill AB 2624, this video would be illegal. All an “immigration support service provider” would need to do is give you a paper saying you cannot post the video, and you would face a minimum $4,000 fine plus court costs and attorney fees. CHIRLA the co-sponsor of this bill, has received over $80,000,000 in taxpayer dollars to help illegal immigrants. It does not allow public entry into its building and is rumored to be tied to the cartels. When I tried to speak with a employee, they all fled and closed the building. What do they have to hide while using taxpayer funds to operate? This is why they need this bill to pass so they can shield the public from looking into California’s corruption. EXPOSE IT ALL.
2:54

🚨 Confronting the Co-Sponsors of the Stop Nick Shirley Act: Under bill AB 2624, this video would be illegal. All an “immigration support service provider” would need to do is give you a paper saying you cannot post the video, and you would face a minimum $4,000 fine plus court costs and attorney fees. CHIRLA the co-sponsor of this bill, has received over $80,000,000 in taxpayer dollars to help illegal immigrants. It does not allow public entry into its building and is rumored to be tied to the cartels. When I tried to speak with a employee, they all fled and closed the building. What do they have to hide while using taxpayer funds to operate? This is why they need this bill to pass so they can shield the public from looking into California’s corruption. EXPOSE IT ALL.

Nick shirley

856,479 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

🚨 BREAKING: Senate Bill 323, which would criminalize abortion in South Carolina for all parties willfully involved, including the mother, has failed to advance out of subcommittee in the South Carolina Senate Medical Affairs Committee. Four Republican Senators abstained on the bill, which killed the bill, at the behest of leading Pro-Life organizations such as SC Citizens for Life, Palmetto Family, and Students for Life of America | Pro-Life Gen. While Senate Bill 323 is not an equal protection bill, it would have been the strongest anti-abortion law in America, being the first to place a meaningful deterrent against women seeking abortion. As a result of this vote, thousands of babies will continue to be murdered each year in South Carolina. It is abundantly clear that Pro-Life opposition to Senate Bill 323 killed the effort. Abortion remains legal across the country, including in red states controlled by Republicans, thanks to the opposition of Pro-Life organizations to bills that would criminalize abortion.
0:48

🚨 BREAKING: Senate Bill 323, which would criminalize abortion in South Carolina for all parties willfully involved, including the mother, has failed to advance out of subcommittee in the South Carolina Senate Medical Affairs Committee. Four Republican Senators abstained on the bill, which killed the bill, at the behest of leading Pro-Life organizations such as SC Citizens for Life, Palmetto Family, and Students for Life of America | Pro-Life Gen. While Senate Bill 323 is not an equal protection bill, it would have been the strongest anti-abortion law in America, being the first to place a meaningful deterrent against women seeking abortion. As a result of this vote, thousands of babies will continue to be murdered each year in South Carolina. It is abundantly clear that Pro-Life opposition to Senate Bill 323 killed the effort. Abortion remains legal across the country, including in red states controlled by Republicans, thanks to the opposition of Pro-Life organizations to bills that would criminalize abortion.

Foundation to Abolish Abortion

10,956 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

Today in the House, members voted down a measure to restrict Trump's authority to continue attacking Iran by a vote of 214-213. We paid a visit to the office of the only Democrat who voted with Republicans, Rep. Jared Golden from Maine. Had he voted with his party, the bill would have passed. There is no good reason to have voted against this bill. This is an unjustified, unprovoked war is destabilizing the region and the global economy. It should be ended immediately.
2:13

Today in the House, members voted down a measure to restrict Trump's authority to continue attacking Iran by a vote of 214-213. We paid a visit to the office of the only Democrat who voted with Republicans, Rep. Jared Golden from Maine. Had he voted with his party, the bill would have passed. There is no good reason to have voted against this bill. This is an unjustified, unprovoked war is destabilizing the region and the global economy. It should be ended immediately.

Medea Benjamin

115,695 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten