Month: January 2018

The Donald Trump administration hopes to unveil a new Labor Department regulation in June requiring drug testing for unemployment benefits.

Republicans used the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to repeal an Obama-era regulation that limited states’ ability to limit drug testing for people who apply for unemployment benefits.

After President Trump signed the CRA repealing the Obama-era regulation, House Ways and Means chairman Kevin Brady (R-TX) said:

President Trump just signed into law my bill that abolishes an Obama-era rule. After five years of battling with the Obama Department of Labor, states like Texas will now be allowed to drug test folks on unemployment to ensure they are job-ready from day one. This is a win for families, workers, job creators, and local economies.

Chairman Brady proposed the bill with Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), who sponsored the Senate version of the CRA.

American unemployment claims remain at a 17-year record low, and American consumer sentiment reached its highest level since 2000, according to the University of Michigan.

Republicans argued that the 2016 unemployment rule only allowed unemployed Americans to submit to drug testing if they were in occupations that typically required testing, which includes airline pilots, flight crews, air traffic controllers, commercial and public transit drivers, as well as any job that requires Americans to regularly carry a firearm.

The Labor Department signaled that it planned to issue a more expansive rule redefining which jobs will have to submit to regular drug testing for unemployment claims.

In the Trump administration’s roadmap for new regulations, the Labor Department stated that “states no longer have authority to drug test unemployment compensation applicants for whom suitable work is only available in occupations that regularly conduct drug testing for unlawful use of controlled substances.”

The Labor Department said that it will issue a notice of proposed rulemaking that “will identify the occupations that regularly conduct drug testing.”

Strategic Services on Unemployment and Workers’ Compensation President Doug Holmes said if they wish to be paid through state unemployment benefits, they need to make themselves able and available to work, and that includes passing a drug test.

Holmes suggested, “This is an insurance program, it’s not public assistance.”

Holmes then continued, arguing that the previous Labor Department rule was too restrictive.

He explained:

An individual has to be available and able to work. If they’re not available and able to work, week by week by week, then they don’t meet the requirements to be paid unemployment compensation benefits. If an individual has a significant problem that renders him or her unavailable to work, the appropriate response is to refer them to a place to get help. They should not be paid unemployment benefits.

The regulatory agenda said that the Labor Department plans to release its proposed rule in June.

Labor Department spokesman Eric Holland revealed that the agency is “diligently working on a new proposal regarding unemployment compensation drug testing that will be substantially different from the prior rule.”

“When it is ready, we will publish it in the Federal Register for review and comment by the public,” Holland added.

Can a society “progress” too far? For one UK woman, the answer is a resounding, “Yes.” She learned the hard way that when a society champions itself as “progressive,” there are serious consequences. And those consequences can backfire at any given moment.

One woman went in for a very private and personal cervical smear test and specifically asked for a female NHS nurse to administer the exam. What she got, however, was something else entirely.

According to the Times, the woman said she was “embarrassed and distressed” when a man with “a deep voice summoned her for the intimate procedure.”

She explained that the nurse “had an obviously male appearance … close-cropped hair, a … large number of tattoos and facial stubble.”

The patient then voiced her concern and expressed there must have been some mistake. The nurse, however, let her know there was no mistake. “My gender is not male,” he said. “I’m a transsexual.”

TRENDING: KJU’s Military Fleeing as Reports Suggest What Soldiers Really Do on Leave

Of course, the woman decided not to proceed with the exam.

The woman told the Times it was “weird where somebody says to you: ‘My gender is not male’ and you think: ‘Well, what does that even mean? You are clearly a man.’”

The patient then sent an official letter to complain about the situation. She wrote, “People who are not comfortable about this are presented as bigots and this is … kind of how I was made to feel about it.”

The NHS sent a formal apology to the woman. “We apologized to this patient for the recording error and because the staff member accepted they didn’t manage the situation appropriately; the patient needed to feel listened to. Trust policy is to consider seriously all requests for clinicians of a particular gender.”

This incident, however, raises broader concerns as the UK’s governing Conservative Party is considering proposals which would allow people to legally change their gender without a doctor’s diagnosis.

Opponents of the legislation argue that allowing people to change their gender whenever they so desire would make instances like the one mentioned above more common.

“Politicians have not thought through all the implications of allowing self-certification,” said James Caspian, a psychotherapist who specializes in working with transgender people. He also explained that these situations would occur more often if “self-certification went ahead.”

He’s absolutely right.

RELATED: Johns Hopkins Psychiatrist Reveals Truth of What Really Happens to Transgender Men

Issues are bound to arise when you allow people to dictate their gender on a whim. This case is a prime example of such consequences.

Sadly, though, these types of complaints may soon be commonplace. And those who do not accommodate requests like the one mentioned in this article? Accusations of “hate crimes” or at the very least “hate speech” will likely become commonplace as well.

So, can a “progressive” society progress too far? Absolutely. And unfortunately it doesn’t seem as if anyone is stepping on the breaks.

H/T Breitbart

Please like and share this story on Facebook and Twitter and let us know what you think about this crazy incident.

What do you think of the NHS’s reaction to this incident? Scroll down to comment below!

Movie producer and tough-guy Clint Eastwood has one-upped Hollywood by casting real-life members of the military in his latest film “The 15:17 to Paris,” which tells the story of how three American heroes helped prevent a terrorist attack on a train from Belgium to France in 2015.

In what Variety magazine called an unprecedented move, Eastwood cast the three Americans as themselves.

Anthony Sadler, 23, National Guard Spc. Alek Skarlatos, 22, and Air Force Airman Spencer Stone, 23, will star in the movie that shows how they intervened when Islamic militant Ayoub el-Khazzani opened fire on a train filled with 554 passengers.

Eastwood’s movie is based on the book “The 15:17 to Paris: The True Story of a Terrorist, a Train, and Three American Heroes,” written by the men with the help of Jeffrey E. Stern.

The film follows the course of the men’s lives and highlights the events that shaped them, ultimately preparing them for the moment when they faced the terrorist.

TRENDING: Trump Finds Way for Post Office to Make Money Again, Charge Liberal Organization

The BBC reported that El-Khazzani was heavily armed when he boarded the train. A French passenger encountered El-Khazzani on the way to the restroom. A scuffle ensued and the gun went off. A French-American passenger was reportedly injured by the shot.

Within moments, Sadler, Skarlatos and Stone were among the passengers who stepped in and stopped El-Khazzani.

In an interview with CBS, Skarlatos said his reaction was a “gut instinct.”

Stone told CBS that the gunman seemed “ready to fight to the end,” adding that he and his friends were also ready to do what needed to be done to stop the terrorist.

The men were awarded the Legion of Honor — France’s highest award — for their bravery.

The movie will no doubt highlight how ordinary men can overcome adversity and accomplish extraordinary things.

In an interview with Entertainment Weekly, Eastwood said the movie was a tribute to the common man.

When asked about casting the heroes as themselves, Eastwood said that he looked at others who could do the job, but he was struck by how the faces of the heroes were unique. He added that it would be “an interesting experiment.”

RELATED: Clint Eastwood Tells Audience That Political Correctness Is “Killing Us”

Interesting and encouraging.

Watch the trailer for the movie below.

If “The 15:17 to Paris” has the same reception as other Eastwood projects like “Sully” and “American Sniper,” which also focused on real-life heroes, it will be a box-office hit.

Share this story on Facebook and Twitter to let everyone know about Clint Eastwood’s latest movie about American heroes.

What do you think about Eastwood using real-life heroes in this movie? Scroll down to comment below!