Solution for United States, Back to Basics, the Constitution

The United States has managed since the turn of the century to take a budgetary surplus and strong economy and turn the economy on its head while having two Presidents, one from each the Democrats and the Republicans, spend the nation into depths of deficit spending and rising national debt rivaling that of the worst of Europe. With the spiraling increases in the debt of the United States reaching levels that have required a number of increases in the established debt ceiling simply to make interest payments and meet salaries and other budget necessities, the United States has found itself in the position of having to monetize its own debt as China and much of the rest of the world refuse to invest in what is seen as a lost cause driving headlong into financial oblivion. Despite predictions from leading economists, the public does not appear to hold much trepidation towards the financial catastrophe which is looming if something is not done to address the ever bulging deficit spending and the massive amounts being added to the national debt. The manufactured crisis at the end of last year labeled the Fiscal Cliff turned into more of a showcase for pontificating politicians and gasping talking heads all attempting to work up some concern with the public mostly to no avail. Then, even when the politicians simply kicked the can down the road for a few months, there was no eruption of shock or anger but simply a collective shrug of indifference. The neglect shown towards fiscal responsibility by the Washington elite has been a perfect representation of indifference and replete with total disregard to any consequences or warning which predicted the potential doom that would eventually result if spending was continued with such disregard.

 

The one semi-amusing side effect of the fiscal mismanagement has been the many disparate solutions, warnings, predictions, and long winded prognostications given from all fronts and political orientations which managed to cover almost every angle one could imagine. There have been those who claim that the government was executing the correct fiscal plan by applying increased government spending which would boost the economy resulting in collected taxes covering the increased spending and then some thus solving the problems. Others have called for austerity measures and universal spending cuts across the board as the only way to address the deficit problems. There have been calls to increase taxes, decrease taxes, end many tax deductions, go to a flat tax, and just about any other tax program ever invented, all of them come replete with graphs, spread sheets, and pages of justifications which show that each and every solution should produce the desired results. Perhaps the complete idiocy existing in the economic and fiscal debate where every possible solution can be shown to work despite many being polar opposites, it is no wonder that the public has simply disowned the problem and just walked away. How can anybody care when everything is claimed to be the solution and everything that is done simply makes the problem that much worse.

 

What is needed is a vision which has a historic record of proven fiscal success which cannot be dismissed. Oddly enough, the United States has what might be the best guide to fiscal and economic success and productivity. The really strange thing about this guide is that even though it has never been followed to the letter, simply making a concerted and honest effort to run the government by its dictates and restrictions have resulted in nearly one-hundred-fifty years of economic stability and low, often no, taxes. This guideline is what may eventually be proven to be the greatest single document providing a blueprint for responsible governance. The document, of course, is the Constitution of the United States. The Constitution was not followed to the letter from the very start but it did act as a restraint for over a century. The initial serious onslaught on the United States Constitution was in the 1860’s with the onset of the American Civil War.  President Lincoln suspended many provisions of the Constitution and placed unrivaled power in the hands of the President and neutralized the power of the other two branches. Unsurprisingly, by the end of the Civil War the United States had run up a healthy deficit. Despite that deficit, the return to Constitutionally guided and limited government following the Civil War the United States rebuilt and even spread her territories and soon had paid off all of the debt. The final daggers into the heart of the Constitution came in 1913 with the enactment of two Amendments, Amendment XVI and Amendment XVII. The Sixteenth Amendment established the personal Income Tax Amendment which was supposed to never rise above a paltry three percent nor be applied to anyone below the top ten percent of earners. All of these guarantees soon proved to be completely false. The Seventeenth Amendment provided for the direct election of Senators which removed the last vestiges of power which the Constitution had allocated solely for the States. This was the final nail which would lead directly to the over-centralization of power being stolen by the central Federal Government in Washington. Even with this death knell the Constitution still retained sufficient restraining power to beat back the onslaughts against its original intents that it would take another fifty years before the final assault destroyed any restraint on Federal spending. It was these ideals and ideas which began with Franklin Delano Roosevelt with Social Security and Unemployment Insurance that brought on the end. With Lyndon Baines Johnson and his Great Society, the Constitution gave out its last gasp and the financial difficulties that accompany unrestrained, undisciplined, expansive spending slowly led to the financial difficulties currently plaguing the United States. Perhaps a return to the ideals and ideas first instituted with the original Constitution could forge the necessary restraint that would lead the United States back to fiscal solvency and responsibility. By showing such restraint and self-discipline the Americans would be rewarded with a growing economy and a positive and promising outlook for the future. That is the power of the United States Constitution and the promise the writers left to their countrymen into the future.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Prisoners, Politics, Policies, Perceptions, Principles and Pardons

Once again the news is filled with denunciations, demands, pleas and outright indignations all demanding Israel release or commit to actions which will alleviate the reasons, conditions and complaints in order to mollify and end the hunger strike by Palestinian prisoners. It is not a new set of circumstance as this exact scenario has been played out before much to the delight and satisfaction of those who constantly call for Israeli surrender no matter the reason, situation or possible deleterious results which will be caused. The last time there were hunger-striking terrorist prisoners, we add the modifier terrorist in order to clarify exactly the kind of people and the reason for their detention as such is important, the world, or at least the Europeans and their cohorts from the left, made a set of demands with attached admonitions which revealed their duplicity. Now that the precedent and full consequences for particular actions have been established, this time around only the bald demand need be voiced as the rest of the limitations are understood. But what are the demands and the options the Israelis may utilize in addressing this situation?

The initial picture is a select number of Palestinians held due to their ties to terrorist activities. Some are under what is known as Administrative Detention, a charge left from the British Mandate legal system where those responsible for planning, arming, or other direct means of assisting terrorist activities were placed in custody for the increased safety of the peoples as a whole. Such incarcerations usually have an upper limit to the length of time such a prisoner may be held though there is no limit as to how many times they may be held or the frequency. Neither of these latter conditions applies to those currently involved in the hunger strikes and many of the strikers are imprisoned for actual terror acts. The one part of this entire affair which will never likely be explained are the limitations placed on the country or other administrative body under whose jurisdiction the hunger-striking prisoners are held. They are required to have a neutral physician determine the rationality and sanity of the prisoner and if they are found to be of sound mind, then they must be advised that their actions are harmful to their general health and could, if carried to its logical end, result in death. This is the limit in which the government may intercede concerning the hunger-striking prisoner. If the prisoner should expire as a result of their refusal of nourishment the state is not seen as being responsible. Should the state intervene and force-feed the hunger-striking prisoner, the act is viewed as a denial of the prisoners’ rights and such actions may lead to sanctioning the state. In a nut shell, Israel is left powerless to act in any manner to provide sustenance as long as the prisoner is deemed rational. So, if Israel were to force-feed any of the hunger-strikers, they would very likely find themselves charged with crimes against humanity as they would have denied the prisoner their human rights. If Israel followed international law and allowed the hunger-striker to starve and die, the firestorm that would follow would be beyond any such outrage ever before seen. That leaves Israel with only one option, to capitulate to the demands of the hunger-striking terrorist prisoners and release them to resume their organizing, assisting and implementing terror attacks against Israeli civilians. This is the unspoken desired result those protesting Israeli lack of actions in preventing the adverse effects of starvation from inflicting the hunger-strikers.

The real problem Israel is currently facing is a direct result of their former actions. Many, ourselves included, advised not to give in to an early release or any other demand made by the initial hunger-striking terror prisoners. This is not to say that Israel should have allowed the prisoners to starve themselves to death. There is a technicality which can be applied to make a kind of end-run around the noninterference clause within the applicable international law. The law states that if a prisoner should be determined to be in an impaired state of mind and possibly not fully cognizant of the imminent danger their actions are causing, then the prisoner may be hospitalized and fed. The only qualifying requirement is the documentation of their limited capacity by two neutral physicians. It is highly doubtful that two such physicians could be procured to make such a determination and thus allow Israel to address the threats of prisoners starving themselves to death while not surrendering to the demands for release or any other demands. No doubt Israel would probably be called to account for their actions for feeding terrorist prisoners against their declared intentions and will to starve themselves to death in order to bring condemnations upon Israel. It is not too late for Israel to implement this method for addressing such protestations in a way which will blunt the indignations from the world’s busybodies while also rendering hunger-strikes as an ineffective ploy robbed of its impact and denying the intended result. Sometimes it becomes dizzying witnessing the lengths and depths many in the world will travel simply to condemn Israel.

On another front of this situation, Israel should refuse to allow any advantages to come of not only the hunger-strikers but also those rioting and attacking security forces in supposed support of the hunger-strikers. We say supposed support as it is a relative call as to how much of the current increased violence is directly due to the prison hunger-strikers and how much is simply instituted in order to attempt to interrupt the joys and revelry associated with the joyous Purim celebrations throughout Israel this week. If Israel were to react with panic and surrender to increases in violence perpetrated by the Palestinians, the result would be a never ending spiral of increased violence. This has been the exact reaction to apparent Israeli restraint in the face of violence perpetrated against her citizens in the past. When Israel attempted to simply wait out increased violence of previous intifadas instead of mobilizing and restoring order; their lack of action was perceived as weakness and resulted in more violence, increased destruction, higher death toll, additional casualties and a greater intervention in order to restore order and calm. Each time Israel has appeased such pressure tactics such as these hunger-strikes which are coordinated with allied NGOs, leftists, and other anti-Israel and anti-Zionist groups and governments, Israel has simply guaranteed more similar actions with ever increasing demands attached. In every instance where some act was initially met with Israeli compliance and surrendering before coordinated world demands, the action would be repeated and escalated with demands eventually surpassing even the ability of the most permissive and tolerant of Israeli society to agree it was necessary to meet the demands in the hopes of restoring peace and order. This use of escalating threats tied to ever increasing demands has become the normal operating procedure of the Palestinian Authority with its preconditions, Hamas and their rocket barrages and has even spread to the anti-Zionist allied groups in Europe, the Middle East and world-wide. Since Israel gives in to some minor action and continues to capitulate through numerous and ever-increasing escalations; whenever Israel finally refuses and takes whatever actions are necessary to restore order, the result is the same calamitous cacophony of shrill denunciation thrust upon Israel for having the audacity to defend her people, country and even existence. The intent of the most minor act of defiance should be treated the same as the eventual escalation of such similar act if Israel can ever expect to live with the same peace and tranquility afforded other nations. It is not as if the boisterous cacophony if indignations would be any more or less than when after numerous escalations Israel finally resists the blackmail that is at the heart of the terrorist onslaught faced by Israel daily. The friendship of the world which is offered before every demand for Israeli concessions, usually land for the promise which matters not as it will never be met, will likewise not be forthcoming but withheld with yet another concession brought forth as the new parameter necessary for their friendship. The friendship of much of the world will remain denied to Israel until she learns that the world only loves those who demand their respect. Capitulation begets further demands, standing one’s ground is the only path which eventually leads to respect, the first requirement for friendship. Simple stated, capitulators will capitulate themselves to death, both literal and figurative, while the steadfast will dictate the terms and gain respect and be the ones whose friendship is sought. Israel needs to soon choose which side of this fence they will be found, lying helplessly defeated and trounced on the side of the capitulators or standing strong with pride among the recognized nations of the world. Let us hope and pray they choose to stand among the nations.

Beyond the Cusp

Republicans and the Empty Promise Syndrome

First off we need to define the Empty Promise Syndrome, sometimes called the Wimpy argument quoting the Popeye cartoon character who was always offering to “Pay you next Tuesday for a hamburger today.” Those cartoons must have had many Republican politicians earning money on the side as extras on the set as Wimpy never seemed to have any shortage of hamburgers to gulp down. To trace the beginning of the Empty Promise Syndrome infecting Republican politicians we need to go all the way back to 1986 of the Reagan Presidency and the Immigration Reform Bill which legalized at a minimum the three-million illegal aliens residing throughout the United States while promising to address and provide for a system of border enforcement which would make the borders of the United States virtually impenetrable. Currently there exist an estimated eleven- million to possibly over eighteen-million illegal aliens, the euphemistically denoted undocumented workers, citizens without papers, undocumented aliens, and any other of a half dozen terms which dance around but would never use such a harsh and loaded term as illegal. Somehow the agreement to grant citizenship today and impose enforcement tomorrow never quite delivered when tomorrow rolled around, a lot like Wimpy who can never be found on Tuesdays. But there are so many other examples that we had best stick to the two latest in the series.

 

If we were to remember back to just before Thanksgiving and on close to Christmas and then New Years the news reports were all buzzing about some looming doomsday threat called the Fiscal Cliff. The Republicans demanded spending cuts which would be at least equal to any tax increases. They would have preferred, or so they claimed, to have far more of the deficit cut by spending cuts than relying on tax increases. President Obama was insistent that the deficit reduction be levied completely by increased taxes on the rich as they had to be made to pay their fair share. With what were defined in perfect threats from on high was this sequester which would cut spending severely without any concerns for what was necessity and what was less vital and would destroy uncountable programs for the poor, the elderly, the children, the ecology, the Earth, the whatever you cared about and especially the military while ending the great recovery we have been experiencing (though many myself included are loathe to see any solid signs of this recovery unless that is what higher grocery prices are now called). In the end, President Wimpy offered spending cuts by March 1 for taxes on the rich today and the Republicans gave Obama everything he requested and set a new sequester date to force spending cuts as promised.

 

Well, here we are fast approaching March 1 and President Obama is demanding changes in the code resulting in more tax revenue and attempting to reduce spending cuts in any programs or departments with possible exceptions of certain areas the President finds unnecessary such as the Military. It is likely that President Obama would gladly put off any spending cuts forever and simply rearrange the tax codes and eliminate deductable items or at least reduce them or cap them all in order to cut the deficit without cutting spending. Actually, the President has even proposed that his adjustments to tax deductions and the tax codes will produce so much deficit reduction that he will even be able to propose additional spending with the extra funds his accounting has predicted. If the Republicans allow the President to fiddle with the tax code and tax deductions in lieu of the spending cuts promised at the end of last year’s Fiscal Cliff negotiations, they will have forfeited the collateral supposedly granted them of tax increases on the wealthy then for spending cuts and only spending cuts now. This simply means that if the President insists on increasing tax revenues instead of more spending cuts the Republicans should stand loudly upon the promise by the President that this would be the time for spending cuts and only spending cuts. Force the argument to be either the President reaches an agreement on spending cuts or President Obama will be responsible for the sequestration cuts when they occur. Force the choice on President Obama and the Democrats by passing a spending cuts bill which delivers what was promised and announce that the House of Representatives has met their responsibility and produced legislation for rational and safe spending cuts to reduce the deficit and that it is now left to the Democrat controlled Senate and the President to meet their obligations and keep their promises. After all, it is not like the across the board cuts required by the sequestration alternative would actually be anywhere near as debilitating as has been expressed by the fear mongering going on in some of the media and the White House.

 

Then there is another repeat performance being played out in Congress and that is once again immigration reform. This is forming up to be a complete and exact repeat of what occurred during the second half of President Reagan’s time in the White House and many of the exact same players are simply dusting off their old scripts and adjusting a few numbers and going through the same motions using the same terms and offering the same old lies as promises. As the old adage says, “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.” There is absolutely no reason for the Republicans, and any Democrats who actually care about the rule of law and the safety of the United States, allowing any form of amnesty or forgiveness and allowances to remain inside the borders, let alone working, for the approximately eleven million illegal aliens until there exist in place solid and uncompromising enforcement procedures that include security controls, observation abilities, formidable border barrier systems, and every possible technique applied and utilized to prevent any further illegal infiltrations. There can be no allowance of we will secure the border next Tuesday for total amnesty, or whatever sly and misleading name it be given, today. That was the basic promise which was never intended to be kept in 1986 and will likely be the offer given once again with every single amount of deceit included today.

 

There is one large and very unfortunate problem with the above. The truth be told there are many Republican who desire the lie of enforcement later for allowance and a path to citizenship today as that way they can unfurl the banner of supporting a closed border while not actually getting a closed border. Both sides, the Democrats in order to gather more voters for their candidates and the Republicans to provide less expensive labor for certain industries and businesses, honestly work together to guarantee that those they allowed into the United States are rewarded every so many years with citizenship and at the same time keep the border porous letting in the next wave of voters and workers enter the United States illegally to the benefit of both sides coffers and votes for reelection. One should not be too surprised then when once again we will witness a deceitful front played by those for whom taking a strong stand against illegal immigration and its effects upon the United States once again feign disgust when their votes allowing for immediate forgiveness in any form for the illegal immigrants currently in the country allowing them to remain, keep their jobs, and eventually gain an easy path to full citizenship while enforcement of our laws and control of the border are put aside to be addressed later. Of course later never comes as it is always now and later is, well, later. Do not expect this round to result in anything which falls far from the indecency pulled over on the American people in 1986 when Reagan allowed amnesty on the promise of future enforcement. We are still waiting for that later enforcement and who knows which later will arrive first; the last one or the one we can expect in the near future when the grand immigration compromise is announced with great fanfare and applause all around. My bet is neither enforcement will materialize before the Congress and some future President assure us that these thirty-some-million undocumented citizens will be the last and by allowing them legalization and documentation it will facilitate their soon enforcing our laws and border, and then there will be three soon to come promises.

 

Beyond the Cusp