Morning Wire - Biden Admin Targets Conservatives & Net Neutrality Revived | 1.20.24

Episode Date: January 20, 2024

The Biden administration targeted Florida for medicaid audits, DHS used terrorism grants to publish anti-conservative propaganda, and net neutrality is revived by FCC. Get the facts first with Morning Wire. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

A government watchdog group has uncovered evidence that the Biden administration targeted red states for Medicaid audits. The test is are other democratic states subject to these same audits? I think often the answer is no, and I think that that's the case here. Which states were targeted and what evidence was uncovered? I'm Georgia Howe with Daily Wire editor-in-chief John Bickley. It's January 20th, and this is a Saturday edition of Morning Wire. A new investigation found that the Department of Homeland, security used anti-terrorism money to pay activists to produce self-described propaganda aimed

at countering misinformation on topics like racial justice. This is an outrageous use of taxpayer money. I mean, that's obvious. But it is also a serious violation of the duties of office. It is another reason why Mayorka should be impeached. And several groups are warning that reinstating net neutrality will cause digital discrimination and kill internet innovation. Net neutrality has an always will be an unnecessary and waitful effort to gain increased government control over the private sector. Thanks for waking up with Morning Wire. Stay tuned. We have the news you need to know. An investigation into federal records finds that Biden administration health officials may have

targeted red states for Medicaid audits. According to emails, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid services did not apply the same standards to blue states. Here with more is Daily Wire culture reporter, Megan Basham. So, Megan, who conducted this investigation and what did they find? So this came from the watchdog group, government accountability and oversight. And they reviewed about 3,000 pages of FOIA emails and some other records from CMS. And they found that CMS targeted red states like Florida, Texas, and Missouri for investigations regarding improper use of Medicaid dollars. Now, that's centered on a provision of the Social Security Act that allows state and local governments to raise Medicaid funds by taxing health care providers. So the federal

government then matches those funds that are raised through that tax, and the state's Medicaid agency disperses the money to hospitals that treat Medicaid patients. And every state but Alaska uses this option to cover hospital shortfalls in Medicaid payments. But there are a number of states, including both red and blue states, that make special arrangements for distributing the funds to private providers that accept Medicaid. And that's allowed within certain parameters. CMS launched audits only into red states to see if they were violating those parameters. So these FOIA records showed CMS was especially focused on Florida. And that, of course, is noteworthy, as Governor Ron DeSantis is vying to be the next Republican nominee for president.

So Jason Waita, Florida's secretary of the Agency for Healthcare Administration, told me he noticed a ramp up in these audits as Governor DeSantis's presidential prospects were rising. The decision makers that are on these emails, the higher level political folks, not only do they not audit California, they're also treating California with kid gloves. But with respect to Florida and Texas, you see a very aggressive type of focused audit. So that raises a lot of question marks in my mind. It certainly suggests weaponization. And in one email, an official admitted that CMS was, quote,

aware that other states have similar hospital tax arrangements, but a second staffer replied that he'd been instructed by the office of the administrator, which is a role appointed by the president, that Florida is, quote, the only one we have a concern on. CMS officials were talking about tight deadlines in early 2023 in a way that seemed to be tied to the election calendar. And right around that time, Biden went to Florida to criticize Florida's handling of its Medicare program. CMS also intended to release a report on its Florida audit right before the Iowa Republican

primary. And then there was just who was involved in these investigations. The emails showed higher level administration officials that you wouldn't normally expect to be involved in this kind of thing, emailing directives about how and when these investigations should proceed. Here's what Waita told me about that. So when we see these emails in the first instance in 2022, 2023. We have no idea that folks from the White House were even involved in these kinds of decision making. And it took the release of these FOIA documents to show that they were really the puppet masters here. So these emails showed that some high-ranking officials in the White House's Domestic Policy Council and HHS, who were political appointees, were involved in directing these

investigations. Though notwithstanding the unequal application of scrutiny, was there reason to believe that Florida was particularly out of compliance? Waita told me there's no evidence that Florida did anything to draw CMS's particular attention, and Florida and Texas are now suing CMS to stop its oversight. Well, a disturbing report. Megan, thanks for reporting. Anytime. A new report shows that the government paid activist groups hundreds of thousands of dollars to target conservative groups.

The Media Research Center on Earth documents showing that the Department of Homeland Security used something called the targeted violence and terrorism prevention program to pay children and Democrats to create, quote, propaganda to counter extremism. Daily Wire investigative reporter Luke Roziak, who is first with that story, joins us now to discuss. So, Luke, do I have that right that DHS paid to create what it called propaganda? Hi, John. Yeah, you do. And to be clear, that's not us calling it propaganda. That's what the grant application said. It said that because of quote unquote extremism, the government, should pay $700,000 to create, quote,

community-created counter-propaganda. That's the actual language. It added, again, quoting here, propaganda can be used for socially beneficial purposes. A professor at the University of Rhode Island who successfully applied for the grant said that, quote, propaganda and misinformation concerning topics, including immigration and racial justice,

had become disruptive, necessitating a response. So the issues where there are some major legitimate policy disputes and that involve more subjective debates. Right. The group used DHS money to pay people $250 per article to write blog posts advancing various democratic opinions, from pushing social media censorship to criticizing stand-your-ground laws. And to be clear, the government actually paid someone to write these posts.

Yeah, they called the group Courageous Rhode Island and said that media literacy training was especially needed there because the Southern Poverty Law Center identified several active hate groups in the state and that some participants of the January 6th, quote, insurrection were from Rhode Island. It planned to train nearly 7,000 teachers to talk about controversial current issues in class. Here's a clip from the group's launch.

Propaganda and disinformation were largely wielded by governments and corporations, but now anyone, young or old, can share disinformation, conspiracy theories, hoaxes. Courageous Rhode Island is a new initiative, that works to build the media literacy competencies of Rhode Islanders through training, tools, and community conversations. With funding from a 700,000 federal grant from the Department for Homeland Security, we are building a network of partners and collaborators who use the power of media literacy and deep listening to prevent targeted violence.

They seem to want to rebut, oftentimes mainstream conservative ideas, like opposing legal immigration, on the idea that they could set someone off down a path towards violent extremism. A courageous R.I. official said that they wanted to, quote, help them before they get to the point where they could be radicalized so much that they turn to violence. Pretty extreme rhetoric there. So who actually benefited? Who actually received this money? The grant went to the University of Rhode Island's media education lab, with much of the work being done by an affiliated actively. nonprofit called Media Literacy Now. In addition to the DHS grant, the Media Lab and Media Literacy Now got money from the State Department, which isn't supposed to operate domestically, to have German disinformation activists train U.S. school teachers.

The DHS money created this group that served as a hub for government officials, anti-speech activists, and generic groups to coordinate. Here's Rhode Island Secretary of State Greg Amor at the group's launch. Misinformation is an existential threat to our Democratic Republic. We have become so focused on individual rights, we have forgotten about the collective good. It is only Americans who can author our destruction. And so we need to make sure that we are on the front line that that doesn't happen. Now, there's already been a response from some lawmakers to your report, correct?

Right. Senator Josh Hawley, a member of the Homeland Security Committee, wrote a letter to DHS Secretary of Newarkas following the Daily Wire's story. We talked to the senator. Here's what he had to say. He's using taxpayer dollars to do it. We're talking about hundreds of thousands, millions when you put it all together, millions of taxpayer dollars going to leftist groups that are being paid by the department to create counter propaganda on topics like immigration, racial justice, COVID, and vaccination,

which means that if you've raised questions about the border being open, the fact that we have a completely open border overrun with drugs, overrun with criminality to cartels, your government is paying. someone to create propaganda to counter you, to attack you, to silence you. Yet more coming to light on this disinformation industry. Luke, thanks for reporting. Anytime, John. That was Daily Wire investigative reporter, Luke Roziak. President Biden's FCC, the Federal Communications Commission, is moving forward with net neutrality rules that were overturned during the Trump administration.

Here to discuss is Daily Wire reporter Amanda Presto Giacomo. So Amanda, Amanda, what exactly? is the FCC proposing and why is it happening now? Hey, Georgia. So the FCC wants to reclassify the internet as a telecommunication service under Title II of the Communications Act of 1934. This was done during the Obama years and then overturned in 2017. Basically, the FCC is arguing that this would give them more control to regulate internet service providers and force them to treat all internet communications equally. As for why this is happening right now, the agency's commission was deadlocked for years at

two to two, but the Biden administration was recently able to get Democratic Commissioner Anna Gomez confirmed by the Senate, and she breaks that tie. Right. This was a pretty hot button issue a few years ago. Why are proponents in the FCC arguing this is necessary? Yeah, it's been years since these regulations have been enforced and the promised demise of the internet has not come to fruition. Still, though, proponents say these regulations are necessary because it gives the government power to prevent internet service providers from acting unsavory. They won't be able to block any lawful content, intentionally slow down services, or create these so-called internet fast lanes for companies and consumers who pay premiums. I will note, though, former FCC chairman Ajipai who helped overturn net neutrality, he did at the time implement transparency rules so that internet service providers have to

disclose instances of blocking or throttling. And what's the argument against net neutrality? Opponents say the problems net neutrality will supposedly fix just don't really exist. And they say the repeal has spurred private investment, created much more infrastructure, and overall helped consumers get more bang for their buck. Pye in 2022, for example, he said the light touch market-based approach, which, by the way, started under the Clinton administration, has led to a 172% boost in fixed broadband speeds in just those four years,

a 300% boost on the mobile side, and has allowed millions more Americans to have access to the Internet than they did in 2017. I also spoke to Tom Shats, the president of citizens against government waste, and he said the move to re-implement net neutrality is about politics. And he argued that the FCC doesn't even have the legal authority to go through with this in the first place. So this is all about politics and policy and the Biden administration, not just trying to take more control over the internet,

but a lot of other industries. The Supreme Court has already ruled that the current status, the Restoring Internet Freedom Act, is constitutional. And there is really nothing that gives the FCC, the authority to go and overturn that. Shatz also warned that there are additional regulations in these proposed Biden-era rules that didn't even exist in 2015, and he believes those will prove especially harmful to consumers. Of course, the FCC said it wouldn't engage in regulation, but they're doing that not just through net neutrality, but their digital discrimination rules as well. But if

there are price controls, which is essentially what regulation would do, there will be less innovation. There will be fewer services. He also warned that these additional regulations will open up far more lawsuits from political activists. If there are regulations from the FCC that set these rules in place, it always makes it easier for people to file complaints, file lawsuits. And again, this is more about politics than it is about anything practical related to the need to exert greater control over the internet. Okay, so where? Where do you? Okay. So where Where does this proposal go from here? They're going to have public comment on this pretty soon, and then a vote, and that vote is expected to pass three to two on party lines.

But then, you know, it's going to be challenged in the courts. A lot of split opinion on this issue. Amanda, thanks for reporting. Anytime. That's all the time we've got this morning. Thanks for waking up with us. We'll be back this afternoon with an extra edition of Morning Wire.