Mediaboss Marketing

Sign Up for

Our free email newsletters

In the wake of every House Republican voting against impeaching Donald Trump, it's reasonable to see the GOP as the president's party, remade in his image. But to truly understand the transformation of the Republican Party during the Trump years, we actually should focus on someone else: Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio). Jordan's journey from gadfly loathed by party leadership to ranking committee member, presidential confidant, and party leader exemplifies how the GOP has changed in the Trump Era and how Trumpism won't be easily undone after the 45th president leaves office.

The ideological transformation of the Republican Party has been ongoing for more than a half century. What was once the party of moderates like Dwight Eisenhower and liberals like Nelson Rockefeller, dominated by figures from the two coasts and stalwarts in the Midwest, slowly became a staunchly conservative party centered in the South.

By the time Jordan was first elected to Congress in 2006, the highly conservative Texan George W. Bush was president. But Bush had a pragmatic streak. He cut bipartisan deals on education and immigration reform (which failed thanks to a revolt led by conservative talk radio), added a prescription drug benefit to Medicare, and preached compassionate conservatism.

The story of the party's move towards total war politics and Trumpism is the story of how Jordan's breed of politics eclipsed Bush's brand of conservatism.

Jordan was one of the most conservative members of the House during his first two terms. But he was also insignificant with Republicans in the minority. Once the Tea Party wave swept his party to power, however, Jordan was flush with new hardline allies. He was elected to lead the Republican Study Committee, a large conservative group within the new Republican majority.

Within months, he had become a thorn in the side of House Speaker John Boehner, insisting that failing to raise the debt ceiling would not result in the United States defaulting, and opposing a leadership proposal for addressing the matter. His staff even conspired with outside groups to pressure Republicans to vote against Boehner's proposal. Two years later, Jordan was a key player in forcing a government shutdown because President Obama would not agree to delaying and defunding his signature health-care legislation for a year a tactic Boehner had warned would leave leading Democrats grinning because they "can't believe we're this f---ing stupid." Though Republicans were widely perceived to have lost the shutdown battle, Jordan was unrepentant.

He believed that Democrats could be compelled to capitulate through the use of hardline tactics, brinkmanship, and a total unwillingness to compromise.

In 2015, Jordan became the founding chairman of the House Freedom Caucus, a smaller, even more hardline group that would come to fight against numerous leadership initiatives. By that fall, Freedom Caucus members against Jordan's counsel pushed Boehner into early retirement and helped scuttle the candidacy of Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy to succeed him.

While 70 percent of Freedom Caucus endorsed Paul Ryan to succeed Boehner, it was only after he made them numerous promises to secure their support. Even so, Jordan and his allies would make Ryan's life difficult as they had Boehner's. So much did leadership worry about Jordan that when House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz announced he would resign from Congress in 2017, leadership helped recruit Rep. Trey Gowdy to run for the position to ensure that it wouldn't fall to Jordan.

In an interview after retiring, Boehner called Jordan a "legislative terrorist" and an "asshole."

In an earlier era, a figure like Jordan who constantly picked fights with his own party's leadership would have faced serious repercussions. Banishment to the most insignificant and unpleasant committees, an inability to get things done for his home district, perhaps even a primary challenge.

But in an era with a proliferation of conservative media talk radio, cable news, and digital outlets someone like Jordan could instead become a star by picking the same fights. Conservative media is a business and the best radio and television comes from black and white content strongly voiced opinions, clear convictions, exhortations to principles, things that stir emotion and keep the audience tuned in. That meant that someone like Jordan preached what viewers and listeners the Republican base heard every day. Further, his style of politics made for far more compelling radio or television than a committee chairman or Republican leader explaining why divided government or Senate rules necessitated compromises.

This fit between the business interests of conservative media and his politics made Jordan one of the heroes on the conservative airwaves and a frequent guest. Stardom gave him too much of an independent power base by the mid-2010s for leadership to punish him meaningfully. He didn't need them for fundraising, and any attempt at discipline would've sent him scurrying to the airwaves to fight back. In the end, it might've been leadership who lost the fight because conservative media had the ear of exactly the sorts of voters who showed up in low turnout Republican primaries, the most critical elections in most Republican districts in an era of geographic polarization.

But while conservative media helped to make Jordan impervious to leadership criticism, it didn't make him part of that leadership. His elevation came thanks to Trump. Jordan caught the ear of Trump, and became a confidant and one of the president's fiercest defenders.

When Republicans lost control of the House in 2018 and Ryan and Gowdy retired, new House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy and the Republican Steering Committee installed Jordan, with encouragement from Trump, as the ranking member of the Oversight Committee. This was a significant change from 2017, when there was doubt the Steering Committee would choose Jordan given the animosity from many Republicans towards him. And then as impeachment hearings were about to begin in front of the House Intelligence Committee, McCarthy made the unusual move of temporarily removing another Republican to add Jordan to the committee. McCarthy saw great benefit in Jordan's trademark aggressive questioning and vigorous defense of Trump.

During those hearings, Elise Stefanik, long seen as the anti-Jim Jordan, a leadership ally, one of the most moderate Republicans in the House, and someone previously focused on solutions and bipartisanship, became an instant sensation with Jordan-like questioning and charges against Democrats, and even joined him for press conferences. Reporting indicates that this was a savvy move for Stefanik both in her Republican-leaning district and within the House GOP.

While it's unquestionably easier for leadership to be aligned with Jordan in the minority, when they have no responsibility for governing, it's also true that the onetime leadership antagonist is now the top Republican on a key committee and a major spokesman for the House GOP. Stefanik's move exposes how Jordan's tactics are what Republican voters want from their elected officials. Far from an outsider, Jordan is now part of the Republican establishment one that sees politics much more like he does than George W. Bush. And that's not likely to change even when Trump leaves office, be it in 2021 or 2025.

For better or worse, it's Jim Jordan's GOP now.

Want more essential commentary and analysis like this delivered straight to your inbox? Sign up for The Week's "Today's best articles" newsletter here.

The rest is here:
How a 'legislative terrorist' conquered the Republican Party - The Week

The romance between American voters and the bodacious, burgeoning Trump economy has intensified. The political implications are many and none other than CNN spells things out.

As 2019 comes to a close, the U.S. economy earns its highest ratings in almost two decades, potentially boosting President Trump in matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next years election, writes Grace Sparks, an associate producer for CNN.

Its not just loyal Republicans who are swooning over the economy, though. A new poll from the network found that 76% of Americans overall say the economy is good, That includes 97% of Republicans, 88% of conservatives, 75% of independents, 80% of moderates, 62% of Democrats and 56% of liberals. Everybodys pretty happy.

Another 68% overall say the economy will still be good a year from now. That includes 89% of Republicans, 84% of conservatives, 68% of independents, 69% of moderates, 52% of Democrats and 48% of liberals.

The CNN poll of 1,005 U.S. adults was conducted Dec. 12-15, right in the middle of the impeachment wars.

As perceptions of the economy have brightened, the poll also shows matchups between the top Democrats vying for the 2020 nomination and Trump tightening. In October, four Democrats tested in hypothetical head-to-head contests with Trump among registered voters lead by anywhere from six to 10 percentage points. Now, just two of those candidates hold edges, Ms. Sparks advises.

They are Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders, who lead by five and four percentage points, respectively.

The tighter margins against the president come as favorability ratings appear to be sliding for the top Democratic contenders, Ms. Sparks writes.

IMPEACH-MESS

Merry Impeachmas remains the rallying cry of the moment among Democrats. The phrase, tweeted out by Washington Post reporter Rachael Bade, became a strategic social media hashtag.

And then there is Merry Impeach-mess.

The phrase was coined by Family Research Council president Tony Perkins, who says the mess part belongs to the Democrats.

This entire impeachment charade isnt serious and neither are its advocates. Think about it: This is the first modern impeachment without a scrap of bipartisan support. Not a single Republican voted in favor of the articles and worse for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, multiple Democrats voted against them, Mr. Perkins notes.

So when Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch goes on television and wishes people a Merry Christmas, the Left isnt upset about December 25th. Theyre upset about every other day of the year that President Trump is moving faith and the freedom of religion forward. When you get right down to it, liberals dont have many options. This impeachment is their last-ditch effort to preserve the Lefts secular domination of the culture. And they have everything to lose, Mr. Perkins explains.

THE BORDER EFFECT

The Federation for American Immigration Reform has revealed a potential effect of immigration on the U.S. House. Things could change.

The presence of all immigrants (naturalized citizens, legal residents, and illegal aliens) and their U.S.-born minor children will redistribute 26 seats in the House in 2020. To put this number in perspective, changing the party of 21 members of the current Congress would flip the majority in the U.S. House, the independent research organization says in a new report.

Of the 26 seats that will be lost, 24 are from states that voted for Donald Trump in 2016. Of states that will gain House seats because of immigration, 19 seats will go to the solidly Democratic states of California, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Illinois. Texas is the only solidly Republican state that gains, while Florida is a swing state.

Elsewhere, Ohio will have three fewer seats in 2020, Michigan and Pennsylvania two fewer seats. Those states predicted to lose one state each: Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, West Virginia and Wisconsin.

Meanwhile, California will gain 11 seats, New York and Texas four each, Florida three; New Jersey two. Illinois and Massachusetts each gain one additional seat. The findings are based on the patterns of new arrivals. Most of the immigrant populations take up residence in a limited number of states.

If immigrants were evenly spread throughout the country, they would have no impact on the distribution of House seats, the research said.

BOOKMAKERS: TRUMPS GONNA WIN

Despite officially being impeached, President Trumps odds of reelection have slightly improved, according to betting aggregators US-Bookies.com. Over the past week, Mr. Trump went from 1/1 to 10/11 to win the 2020 presidential election, the organization said.

Despite all the fanfare about the presidents impeachment, the reality is that this is highly unlikely to materialize into a conviction, says industry analyst Alex Donohue. The betting markets now suggest the upshot of this entire process is that Trump is more likely to win 2020.

The bookmakers live election tracker currently gives Mr. Trump a 47.6% chance of winning, up from 40% at the beginning of December.

The odds that Mr. Trump gets convicted by the Senate are currently 8/1. While this isnt a dramatic long shot, the 1/16 odds that he wont get convicted by the Senate suggest that its much more likely that the impeachment wont pass. Trump also has 1/10 odds to finish his first term in office, indicating that he should be here to stay, says Mr. Donahue.

POLL DU JOUR

33% of Americans are paying a lot of attention to the 2020 presidential election; 31% of Republicans, 28% of independents and 42% of Democrats agree.

27% overall are paying some attention to the election; 29% of Republicans, 25% of independents and 28% of Democrats agree.

24% say they are paying only a little attention to the election; 28% of Republicans, 23% of independents and 22% of Democrats agree.

15% overall say they are paying no attention at all to the election; 12% of Republicans, 24% of independents and 8% of Democrats agree.

Source: AN ECONOMIST/YOUGOV poll of 1,500 U.S. ADULTS conducted Dec. 14-17.

Kindly follow Jennifer Harper on Twitter @HarperBulletin.

Go here to see the original:
Inside the Beltway: 76% of Americans say the economy is good - Washington Times

The top San Antonio stories of the year included allegations of domestic violence involving a top mayoral candidate, the immigration crackdown at the border and its impact on the city, and repeated questions about the slow-moving $450 million makeover of Alamo Plaza.

Greg and Annalisa Brockhouse at the Brockhouse election night party at Violas Ventanas on June 8. The couple now says Annalisa Brockhouse filed a false police report and a 2009 domestic violence incident didnt happen. But evasions during the campaign make it difficult to know what to believe.

A top story prize goes to Greg Brockhouse, an ambitious former councilman who would have bested Mayor Ron Nirenberg at the ballot box if not for an unfortunate incident in his past that he thought he had nipped in the bud.

In 2009, Brockhouses wife, Annalisa, called 911 to report that her husband, who had recently lost his job and had been drinking a lot, grabbed her and threw her to the ground. She told police that Brockhouse was trying to hit her and she kept trying to push him off, according to a police report.

After the Express-News obtained the report and revealed its contents in March inconveniently, in the heat of the mayors race Brockhouse repeatedly denied to local media that he knew anything about it. Likewise, city officials insisted the report did not exist.

Story:Past domestic violence allegations emerge against mayoral candidate Greg Brockhouse

Amid the candidates evasions, a local movement sprang up dubbed Met: Diversity Defeating Violence, bringing renewed focus to the issue of domestic violence here, where at least 29 people were killed in family violence incidents last year.

Eventually, after Brockhouse lost the runoff election in June, he and his wife acknowledged in a television interview that she had called police and accused him of domestic violence. But Annalisa Brockhouse blamed herself and her postpartum depression for an argument that she said escalated to the point that she made a false police report against her husband.

Brockhouse admitted that he and his wife had arranged to have the report legally expunged: a process they initiated shortly before Brockhouse launched his first campaign for City Council.

Related:Annalisa Brockhouse says she called police on her husband in 2009 even though he never harmed her

This rendering shows the appearance of Alamo Plaza under a master plan that would include an interpretation of the south wall and historic main gate of the mission and 1836 battle compound, made of structural glass. Other features include a 135,000-square-foot museum; historic footings of the historic walls displayed under structural glass; and interpretation of an acequia, or water canal, on the west end of the plaza.

After years of planing and fundraising, the project finally got a green light for construction to begin, despite litigation involving historic cemetery claims, opposition to potential building demolitions and lingering concerns about pedestrian access to one of San Antonios most cherished public spaces.

The Texas General Land Office and nonprofit Alamo Trust now manage a portion of the citys Alamo Plaza that falls within the historic footprint of the Mission San Antonio Valero and 1836 Alamo compound. The $450 million, public-private renovation includes $100 million committed by the state and $38 million from the city.

Under the plan, much of the plaza that had been within the walls of the mission-fort will be lowered 18 inches and enclosed with a 42-inch-high wall. The projects first phase may start in February with the relocation of the 1930s Cenotaph from its current spot to the south end of the plaza.

Story:Legal battle looming over Alamo cemetery in downtown San Antonio

The Tap Pilam Coahuiltecan Nation and Alamo Defenders Descendants Association have lawsuits pending against the Land Office, city and Texas Historical Commission that seek to force the project to include comprehensive studies on the location and boundaries of cemeteries at the Alamo, among other matters. Bones and partial skeletons have been found during excavatons in the Alamo church.

Another concern is possible demolition of the 1921 Woolworth Building for a museum to house a $15.5 million collection donated by rock singer Phil Collins. The building once housed one of several local lunch counters that peacefully integrated in 1960.

Related:After listening to intense criticism, San Antonio commission approves first phase of Alamo overhaul

A Border Patrol Agent rescues a seven year old boy from Honduras after he fell out of a make shift raft and lost hold of his mother as Border Patrol agents respond to three rafts crossing the Rio Grande River in Eagle Pass, on Friday, May 10, 2019.

The border was in turmoil all year. Immigration courts were closed due to the government shutdown and reopened, the citys migrant center opened and closed, and the fates of asylum-seekers after crossing the border altered drastically from getting released into the country as their court cases played out, to being detained and sent back to Mexico or Guatemala.

In the spring, the federal government proceeded with plans for more border wall, which was expected to slice through protected habitat, a butterfly center and the grounds of a small church. Environmentalists and indigenous groups began sounding the alarms, worried the steel bollards and 150-foot enforcement of the border wall would destroy their land. U.S. Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Laredo, eventually added language in a budget deal protecting many, though not all, of the threatened areas.

By the end of March, tens of thousands of migrants were crossing the border and presenting themselves to the Border Patrol: the highest monthly arrest figures in years. They overwhelmed Border Patrol stations, and the Trump administration began releasing hundreds every day in communities all along the border.

Story:'No other solution': With children in tow, mothers' journey ends in death at the border

Meanwhile, San Antonios bus station downtown became a highly trafficked way station as migrants arrived from the border on their way to stay with family sponsors around the country.

To deal with the influx, the city ran an emergency Migrant Resource Center, where it provided food, clothes, toiletries, toys and medical services. The migrants slept at Travis Park Church. Overall, the city - in partnership with Catholic Charities, the Interfaith Welcome Coalition and the Food Bank - aided more than 32,000 migrants. Most were asylum-seeking families from Central America, though waves of Cuban, Haitian and African migrants also arrived.

The flow of migrants slowed down in the fall, and the Trump administration issued a new, controversial policy: Migrant Protection Protocols, also known as Remain in Mexico. Border Patrol agents stopped releasing migrants into the U.S. and instead began sending them back into Mexico to await their hearings. There, migrants are being kidnapped and extorted by gangs and have little to no access to legal representation.

Related:Kidnapped and attacked in Mexico, migrants are giving up their asylum claims

Julin Castro, a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, carries a rose given to him by a supporter as he leaves a rally at Hemisfair Park in San Antonio April 10. His campaign should be measured with different yardstick.

Among the crop of Democratic candidates for president this year, arguably none was more fixated on the plight of undocumented immigrants than former Mayor Julin Castro, who visited an encampment of hundreds who were stranded by the Remain in Mexico program.

Castro has struggled to gain traction in the polls, but his ongoing candidacy is big news here, where he was born and raised and served as mayor for more than two terms.

Story:San Antonios Julin Castro aims at the rich with wealth inequality tax

Hes the only Latino whos running. He also was the first Democrat with an immigration plan. He called for decriminalizing border crossings, a proposal that transcended conventional arguments for immigration reform. He earned a burst of attention after the first debate when he lectured former El Paso Rep. Beto ORourke on a section of federal law that made crossing the border a criminal offense.

Long after ORourke dropped out, Castro remains in the race but didnt meet the polling threshold for the December debate.

Related:Julin Castro sees lift in polls despite being knocked off debate stage

Lake Dunlap property owners have created a model of collaboration with the Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority that could work for other nearby lakes.

The Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority planned to drain lakes McQueeney, Placid, Meadow and Gonzales until more than 300 property owners sued to stop the agency from doing so.

Two other lakes on the Guadalupe River have disappeared after spill gates on the aging dams there collapsed without warning: Lake Wood in 2016 and Lake Dunlap in May. The GBRA, which owns the dams, ordered the four remaining lakes to be drained, saying the structures were old, unsafe and lacked funds for repair. The state agency also outlawed recreational activities at the lakes.

Story:End of an era: Imminent danger along the Guadalupe will force the drainage of four lakes

The legal action saved the lakes, and some of the bans on recreation have since been lifted. But the conflict is far from resolved. Those who are suing the GBRA argue the agency must repair or replace the six dams it owns, while the GBRA argues the law does not require replacing those structures.

Lake Dunlap property owners arent waiting for the courts. In October, they agreed to form a water control and improvement district and place it on a ballot, perhaps in November. If approved, the owners would tax themselves and the GBRA would kick in some money to repair the dam and refill the lake.

Related:Quest to limit GBRAs spending fails

Texas Organizing Project supporter Kevin Lemelle had his thoughts on his cape. Lemelle celebrated with fellow supporters after the San Antonio City Council voted 8-3 to pass a revised sick leave ordinance on Thursday, Oct. 3, 2019. City Council members Rebecca Viagran, Manny Pelaez and Clayton H. Perry voted against the ordinance.

Another seemingly endless court battle the fight over paid sick leave roiled the City Council.

An ordinance requiring San Antonio employers to provide paid sick leave to an estimated 354,000 workers who dont get the benefit was scheduled to take effect Dec. 1. But that was before state District Judge Peter Sakai sided with a coalition of local firms and business groups that wanted to stop the law from taking effect while they challenge it in court.

Story:Judge stops San Antonios paid sick leave ordinance from taking effect

The law would require all companies and nonprofits to give part-time and full-time employees one hour of paid sick time for every 30 hours worked. Progressive groups had gathered more than 140,000 signatures to put the matter to a vote in November 2018, but the City Council adopted the ordinance outright last August.

The coalition sued the city in July to invalidate it, arguing it violates the state constitution by requiring employers to do more than the states minimum wage law requires. The lawsuit was paused to allow a council-appointed commission to make revisions, but business groups revived their lawsuit in November.

Related:Over business leaders objections, San Antonio City Council approves revised sick leave ordinance

FILE PHOTO Jonathan Saenz, president of Texas Values, leads a press conference for Save Chick-fil-A Day for religious freedom in the central court outdoor rotunda at the Texas State Capitol.

Only slightly less controversial than paid sick leave was the City Councils decision in March to cut Chick-fil-A out of an airport concessions contract. Councilman Roberto Trevio led the charge to exclude the fast-food chain, citing its history of donating to faith-based organizations that oppose same-sex marriage.

Mayor Nirenberg, meanwhile, said the chain was excluded because it doesnt open on Sundays, when a lot of travelers pour through the airport.

Story:Chick-fil-A Alamodome: New documents shed light on S.A. City Councils controversial vote and a never-before-seen proposal

Coming amid the mayors race, this put some wind in the sails of Brockhouse, who was looking to distract voters from that pesky, previously mentioned police report. It also inflamed conservatives across Texas and led the Legislature to pass a bill that prohibits government entities from taking adverse action against a person or business based on an affiliation with a religious organization.

But Chick-fil-A flipped the script in November when it announced its foundation would halt donations to three faith-based groups, causing formerly sympathetic conservatives to suddenly spit out their chicken nuggets.

Related:Brockhouse apologizes to Chick-fil-A for San Antonios decision to remove restaurant from airport plan

Another major story this year explored evictions San Antonios high rate of evictions. Between 2011 and 2018, the number of eviction lawsuits filed in Bexar County rose by more than one-third, the largest jump among Texas's five most populous counties.

Teresa Garcia says the couple can barely make ends meet on their monthly income from Social Security and disability checks for Joe, who lost a leg from diabetes complications.

During that time, almost 86,000 cases ended with families losing their homes.

Story: Kicked Out: An Express-News investigation into evictions

Experts say the figure could be low because its impossible to know how many tenants left before going to court. Records dont show why people were evicted, either. But housing advocates suspect the growing number of evictions can be blamed on a number of things, including rising housing costs that have placed more people in financial jeopardy in San Antonio, recently ranked as the poorest large city in the country.

Housing advocates say some landlords are driving and profiting from the city's eviction epidemic. One San Antonio landlord, Bexar Met Property Management, was behind more than 900 eviction filings last year. The company controls 21 properties in San Antonio and has been accused of failing to make repairs and keeping shoddy accounting practices, even though it receives millions of dollars in federal rental subsidies each year.

Related:Kicked Out: How we reported this series

Another bad-news story this year was that of King Jay Davila, an 8-month-old infant who was reported kidnapped by his purported father, Christopher Davila, in early January after Davila stopped at a gas station.

The maternal grandmother of baby King Jay Davila watches with sorrow as doves are released during a Feb. 2 ceremony to remember her 8-month-old grandchild.

Police immediately noticed that Davilas story was suspect. Moments before he went inside the gas station, Davila checked twice to make sure the driver door to the car was unlocked, according to surveillance footage. Moments later, a woman later identified by police as Davilas cousin walked directly to the vehicle without hesitation, opened the drivers door, entered the vehicle and drove away.

Several days later, Davila changed his story and claimed King had died after the car seat holding the boy fell off a bed and hit the floor. He said he did not call 911 because he panicked. He led police to a Northeast Side field, where he had buried King in a backpack.

Story: Family of missing S.A. baby slam SAPD as authorities search a West Side park

Davila was arrested and charged with injury to a child causing serious bodily injury by omission, a first-degree felony, and tampering with evidence, along with two other unrelated charges.

Police also charged Davilas mother, Beatrice Sampayo, 64, and his cousin, Angie Torres, 45, with tampering with evidence for their roles in allegedly trying to cover up the death by helping stage the fake kidnapping.

Related:'That's my blood': Stunned to learn of King Jay's death, San Antonio man says baby is his son

Yet another high-profile crime occurred Jan. 10, when San Antonio hairstylist Nichol Leila Olsen and her two daughters were found shot to death in a luxury home in a gated subdivision in North Bexar County.

The relationship between Nichol Olsen and her boyfriend, Charles Wheeler, has come under intense scrutiny since Olsen and her two daughters were found shot to death in Wheelers home near Leon Springs on Jan. 10.

The deaths remain shrouded in mystery because the case is still open as the Bexar County Sheriffs Office and the FBI continue investigating. Authorities havent yet released any findings on what provoked the violence or who was responsible.

Olsen, 37, and her daughters, Clark High School cheerleader Alexa Denice Montez, 16, and Leon Springs Elementary student London Sophia Bribiescas, 10, were found close together in an upstairs hallway at a million-dollar house in the Anaqua Springs Ranch development. At the time, the residence was owned by Olsens boyfriend, Charles Edward Wheeler, now 32, a former rodeo competitor turned business owner in the oil field industry.

Story:A single mother, her millionaire boyfriend and how their storybook romance ended in horror

The Bexar County Medical Examiners Office quickly ruled Olsens death a suicide and her daughters deaths as homicides. Autopsies found Olsen and Montez had each been shot once in the head. Bribiescas suffered a gunshot wound to her head and neck. A handgun was found near Olsens body.

Within days of the shootings, Bexar County Sheriff Javier Salazar described Wheeler as a person of interest, but not a suspect. More than 11 months later, sheriffs officials havent publicly cleared Wheeler, but now say they cannot discuss who is or isnt a potential person of interest in the case.Wheeler has never been charged. His attorneys denied that he committed any crime and said they welcomed the FBIs involvement in the case.

Related:Mourners reject suicide ruling in triple shooting at gated San Antonio-area community

Staff writers Silvia Foster-Frau, Peggy OHare, Emilie Eaton, Scott Huddleston and Marina Starleaf Riker contributed to this report.

Design by Mark Dunphy.

Real news. Real trust. Real community.Subscribe to the San Antonio Express-Newsto support quality local journalism.

Today's Paper

Read the original here:
The Express-News Stories of the Year 2019 - San Antonio Express-News

Among Florida Republicans, the song remains the same on immigration. Like his predecessor did for years, Gov. Ron DeSantis is once again calling for the Florida Legislature to require private businesses to use the E-Verify program to check the immigration status of new employees. Once again, Republican lawmakers are unlikely to do it because the states economy cannot function without the cheap labor of undocumented immigrants. The posturing reflects the Republicans hypocrisy on immigration, touting punitive approaches while quietly acknowledging the need for workers but refusing to embrace comprehensive reforms.

For a decade , former Gov. Rick Scott and now DeSantis campaigned on requiring the E-Verify system to identify undocumented immigrants and then pushed the Legislature to approve it. Scott, now a U.S. senator, signed an executive order shortly after taking office in 2011 requiring state agencies that report to the governor to use E-Verify to determine the immigration status of all new employees, a practice now used by about 20 other states. But the Republican-controlled Legislature consistently has ignored the governors calls to extend the practice to private employers, and for good reason.

First, the E-Verify system is cumbersome to use and imperfect. Critics point out that undocumented immigrants have figured out ways to avoid detection through the use of forged documents, stolen Social Security numbers and other techniques. More importantly, large segments of the states economy depend on cheap labor supplied by undocumented immigrants. These are often the workers picking crops in the fields, cleaning hotel rooms, building apartment buildings and working in restaurants for little pay and under conditions few American citizens with better options would accept. Who would fill those jobs?

The reality is the consequences of denying any employment to undocumented immigrants in Florida would be sweeping. There are an estimated 850,000 undocumented immigrants in the state. Thats roughly 20 percent of the immigrant population, and about 1 in 14 children in Florida is a U.S. citizen living with at least one undocumented family member. Imagine the ripple effect in public schools, social service programs and neighborhoods throughout Florida if suddenly thousands of families had no income and no way to find work.

Against that backdrop, Republican lawmakers apparently cut a deal this year. They passed legislation that DeSantis sought to ban sanctuary cities. Those dont actually exist in Florida but it was a nice public relations stunt that had the side benefit of serving as another attack on home rule. In exchange, legislation that would have required use of the E-Verify system quietly died.

But E-Verify never really goes away. DeSantis has again made it a priority, raising the typical unsubstantiated claims that it would help reduce crime by undocumented immigrants. Senate President Bill Galvano, R-Bradenton, made clear this week that he opposes requiring E-Verify as an additional burden on private businesses. And dozens of Florida business leaders -- including executives from the cruise lines, the construction industry and health care companies -- have warned that "mandating a flawed and costly system will devastate our economy.'' Get ready to watch a familiar re-run of rhetoric when the Legislature convenes in January.

This is a snapshot of the hypocrisy of Republicans on immigration. They want to sound tough about cracking down on undocumented immigrants to respond to the fears of voters who worry about crime or losing their own jobs. But they dont want to lose the cheap labor and harm the Florida economy. The real solution is not requiring E-Verify. It is national immigration reform that fixes a broken system, recognizes the need for legal workers and provides a reasonable path to citizenship for the millions of undocumented immigrants who are already here.

Editorials are the institutional voice of the Tampa Bay Times. The members of the Editorial Board are Times Chairman and CEO Paul Tash, Editor of Editorials Tim Nickens, and editorial writers Elizabeth Djinis, John Hill and Jim Verhulst. Follow @TBTimes_Opinion on Twitter for more opinion news

Continue reading here:
The Republican hypocrisy on immigration | Editorial - Tampa Bay Times

WASHINGTON An estimated 800,000 immigrants who are working legally in the United States are waiting for a green card an unprecedented backlog in employment-based immigration that has fueled a bitter policy debate but has been largely overshadowed by a border wall and the Trump administrations focus on migrant crossings from Mexico.

Most of those waiting for employment-based green cards that would allow them to stay in the United States permanently are Indian nationals. And the backlog among this group is so acute that an Indian national who applies for a green card now can expect to wait up to 50 years to get one.

The wait is largely the result of an annual quota unchanged since 1990, and per-country limits enacted decades before the tech boom made India the top source of employment-based green card-seekers.

The backlog has led to competing bills in Congress and has pitted immigrants against immigrants, setting off accusations of racism and greed and exposing a deep cynicism about the prospects for any kind of immigration reform in a polarized nation.

The debate centers on the potential benefits of a quick fix to alleviate the wait times for those already in the backlog versus a broader immigration overhaul that could allow more workers to seek permanent residency, address country quotas and expand the number of available green cards.

Among those pushing for a quick resolution are business leaders, who worry that a congressional stalemate doing nothing at all could push Indian workers out of the United States and cause others to seek easier paths to citizenship in other countries.

What does that ultimately mean? Valuable, skilled people decide they should leave because theyre never going to get what they had hoped for, said Bruce Morrison, a lobbyist and immigration lawyer who wrote the last bill that increased the number of employment green cards in 1990, when he was in Congress representing Connecticut.

ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW ADVERTISEMENT

And valuable people dont come because they figure our system is so broken they cant see their way through it. Therefore, other countries bidding for these skilled workers get those workers.

Companies in America move jobs abroad to employ those skills elsewhere. And American prosperity suffers.

The crisis of employment-based green cards burst into the open in October after a narrow bill to address the issue nearly passed the Senate in a unanimous consent motion, after sailing easily through the House.

But Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., and other critics of the Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act, which aims to provide relief to Indians by eliminating the country quotas for employment green cards, said it isnt so simple.

Because the bill did not increase the overall number of green cards, they argue the backlog will worsen, waiting times for all nationalities will extend to 17 years, and a trickle-down effect will make it difficult for working professionals from anywhere other than India to come to the United States.

Durbin and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., each proposed their own, more comprehensive bills.

On Tuesday, Capitol Hill aides said there was possible deal under discussion, but it was unclear whether it would materialize, and how soon.

View post:
Employment green card backlog tops 800,000 - The Gazette