2016-08-25



There should be little doubt that the U.S. economy is in significant trouble. Indeed, objective criteria, as well as spokespersons from both sides of the political spectrum, indicate an economy approaching crisis levels. A survey of views illustrates the challenge:

The latest report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics reveals that “Real hourly compensation decreased 0.4 percent…”

The Bloomberg news service reports:

“One in seven U.S. households has a negative net worth, as student loans and credit cards plunge a diverse group of people-including those with good jobs-into the red… Almost 15 percent of Americans, or 47 million people, live below the poverty line, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Then there are the people loaded up with debt. Even people with good jobs can owe so much on credit cards, student loans, or mortgages that, on paper, they’re worth less than zero. About 14 percent of U.S. households fall into this category, with a negative net worth, according to an analysis this month by the New York Federal Reserve. Add up all their possessions-cash, property, retirement accounts-and subtract all their debts, and one in seven Americans ends up in the red. Overall, U.S. households have $12.3 trillion in debt, according to another New York Fed report, released this week.”

Liberal-oriented truth-out.org notes:

“…the evidence shows that living-wage, family-sustaining positions are quickly being replaced by lower-wage and less secure forms of employment. These plentiful low-level jobs have padded the unemployment figures, leaving much of America believing in an over-hyped recovery… New research is beginning to confirm the permanent nature of middle-income job loss. Based on analysis that one reviewer calls ‘some of the most important work done by economists in the last twenty years,’ a National Bureau of Economic Research study found that national employment levels have fallen in U.S. industries that are vulnerable to import competition, without offsetting job gains in other industries. Even the Wall Street Journal admits that ‘many middle-wage occupations, those with average earnings between $32,000 and $53,000, have collapsed.”

The financial source Profitconfidential notes that Washington is “hiding” inflationary statistics.

“According to government statistics, inflation was held to just 0.6% during the first seven months of 2015. Unfortunately, that data disregards the most basic items that everyone uses, including food and energy costs… (Alternative non-government measures of inflation tell a completely different story. The Chapwood Index is an alternative inflation indicator that looks at the unadjusted costs and price fluctuation of the top 500 items that Americans spend their money on in the 50 largest cities in the country. (Source: chapwoodindex.com, last accessed September 22, 2015.) The index looks at the fluctuations in the cost of items such as Advil, Starbucks coffee, insurance, gasoline, tolls, fast food restaurants, toothpaste, oil changes, car washes, cable TV and Internet service, cellphone service, dry cleaning, movie tickets, cosmetics, gym memberships, home repairs, piano lessons, laundry detergent, light bulbs, school supplies, parking meters, pet food, and People magazine. For example, in 2014, the [official consumer price index] CPI rose 0.8%. But according to the Chapwood Index, major cities like New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Diego, and Boston saw inflation for the trailing 12 months (through to June of this year) run over 10%.”

Ignoring real inflationary numbers has a dire effect on senior citizens, who have suffered through more years without a cost of living increase in their social security checks than at any other time in living memory.

Republicans have been sharply critical of the President’s economic policies. GOP candidate Donald Trump uses the worrisome economic statistics as a bludgeon against opponent Hillary Clinton, who has pledged to continue the Obama legacy. His web site states:

“… let’s look at what the Obama-Clinton policies have done nationally.Their policies produced 1.2% growth, the weakest so-called recovery since the Great Depression, and a doubling of the national debt.”

“There are now 94.3 million Americans outside the labor force. It was 80.5 million when President Obama took office, an increase of nearly 14 million people. Home ownership is at its lowest rate in 51 years…”

“Nearly 12 million have been added to the food stamp rolls since President Obama took office. Another nearly 7 million Americans were added to the ranks of those in poverty.”

“We have the lowest labor force participation rates in four decades. 58 percent of African-American youth are either outside the labor force or not employed. 1 in 5 American households do not have a single member in the labor force…Meanwhile, American households are earning more than $4,000 less today than they were sixteen years ago.”

While substantial disagreement exists about the remedies that should be applied to America’s broken economy, the reality that a crisis exists is one which has fairly widespread support.

False Report on Progress vs. ISIS

The U.S. House of Representatives Joint Task Force on U.S. Central Command Intelligence Analysis has released explosive initial findings. The committee is comprised of Congressman Pompeo (R-CA), Congressman Brad Wenstrup (R-OH), and Congressman Ken Calvert (R-CA.)

A whistle blower alleged that intelligence produced by U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) had been manipulated to present an unduly positive outlook on efforts to train the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) and combat ISIS. The Task Force found:

“though investigations into the whistleblower’s allegations continue, the Joint Task Force has conducted sufficient investigation to reach certain interim conclusions… Based on its own investigation, the Joint Task Force has substantiated that structural and management changes made at the CENTCOM Intelligence Directorate starting in mid-2014 resulted in the production and dissemination of intelligence products that were inconsistent with the judgments of many senior, career analysts at CENTCOM. These products were consistently more optimistic regarding the conduct of U.S. military action than that of the senior analysts. Based on specific case studies evaluated by the Joint Task Force, during the time period evaluated by the Joint Task Force, CENTCOM produced intelligence that was also significantly more optimistic than that of other parts of the Intelligence Community (IC), and typically more optimistic than actual events warranted. Additionally, many CENTCOM press releases, public statements, and congressional testimonies were also significantly more positive than actual events.”

According to Rep. Pompeo:

“After months of investigation, this much is very clear: from the middle of 2014 to the middle of 2015, U.S. Central Command’s most senior intelligence leaders manipulated the command’s intelligence products to downplay the threat from ISIS in Iraq. The result: consumers of those intelligence products were provided a consistently ‘rosy’ view of U.S. operational success against ISIS. That may well have resulted in putting American troops at risk as policymakers relied on this intelligence when formulating policy and allocating resources for the fight. “The cultural breakdown in Central Command’s intelligence process resulted from an administration-wide understanding that bad news from Iraq and Syria was not welcomed. Claims that ISIS was the ‘JV team’ and that al-Qaeda was ‘on the run’ were both a result-and a cause-of the politicization of intelligence at CENTCOM. This intelligence manipulation provided space for both ISIS and al-Qaeda to grow and it put America at risk. Intelligence products always contain some level of uncertainty. But during this period, nearly every error was in one direction: downplaying the threat from radical Islamic terror consistent with the administration’s narrative that this threat was not significant. I urge the Department of Defense Inspector General to hold accountable the intelligence leaders that failed our service members fighting our wars on the ground.””

In March, CENTCOM chief General Lloyd J. Austin III testified:

“[D]espite the many challenges that exist in U.S. Central Command’s (USCENTCOM) area of responsibility (AOR), we do see progress being made in a number of areas. We are hurting our adversaries, while helping our partners assume a larger role in providing for the security of the region. Their conventional military capabilities far outreach those of any possible hostile adversary, and our core partnerships remain strong. At the same time, while weaker and under threat, political institutions throughout the region, including in Iraq and Afghanistan, are withstanding pressure from extremist groups and outside actors. Moreover, we have 84,000 U.S. troops in the AOR with an unmatched ability to provide rapid reinforcement in response to unforeseen contingencies. They are the best and most capable military forces in the world. Their presence and many contributions are making a significant difference in what is a very important part of the world.”

The progress of American actions against ISIS has become a significant issue in the 2016 presidential campaign. Republicans have accused President Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton of underestimating the danger from the terror group and engaging in actions which allowed ISIS to flourish, particularly the withdrawal of all U.S. forces from Iraq.

Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, retired U.S. Army chief of staff, maintains that had President Obama allowed American forces to remain in Iraq longer, ISIS would not have become the force it now is.  Other critics cite Obama moves such as ousting Libya’s former strongman as creating additional conditions that allowed ISIS to thrive. The critics’ position that Obama failed to realize that comprehend the danger from ISIS is substantiated by the President’s January 2014 comment calling ISIS a “JV team.”

GOP candidate Donald Trump openly blames Obama for ISIS’ existence, which Republicans describe as a “rhetorical flourish” meant to emphasize the President’s negligence in allowing the group to grow and thrive. In a peculiar turn of events, many Democrats blame the Iraq war for opening up the opportunity for ISIS to gain power. However, that position puts Democrats in a critical position against their own presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, who, as a Senator, supported the war.

ISIS was created by a Jordanian, al-Zarqawi, during the (Bill) Clinton Administration. Initially attached to al-Qaeda, Al-Zarqawi pledged allegiance to Osama Bin Laden. Al-Zarqawi was killed by U.S. forces in 2006, during the Bush presidency.

In 2010, Bakr al-Baghdadi took over, ended the relationship with Iraq and adopted the new name in 2013.

Stealing the 2016 Presidential Election

The lack of voter trust in the integrity of the voting process, blatant acts of rule breaking by the Clinton machine, and a refusal by judges to allow common sense voter id measures to survive, point to an upcoming election debacle unlike anything ever seen in U.S. history.

Since 2014, Democrat appointed judges have outnumbered Republican appointed judges. “This will affect America for a generation, long after the internecine battles on legislative issues are forgotten,” stated Senator Charles Schumer in a NY Times article

With a greater inclination for judicial activism than their predecessors, current judges are having an impact in areas far beyond the traditional realm of the judicial branch. That expanded influence is becoming very pronounced in the area of elections.

Despite extensive, well documented cases of voter fraud and many studies by nonpartisan (and even liberal-leaning) organizations that indicate that voter registration rolls have significant numbers of ineligible and deceased voters, courts are handing down decisions that strike down state voter ID laws.

True the Vote notes:

“The real threat is that recent federal court rulings against multiple states’ common-sense voter ID laws twist the Voting Rights Act from a law intended to stop racial discrimination into one that transfers the power to determine routine election procedures-which the Constitution delegates to the states-to the judiciary.”

Judicial bias has encouraged activists seeking to undermine an honest balloting process.

True the Vote provides an example indicating that key swing state:

“Ohio is totally targeted for fraud… Just as Hillary Clinton allies have done in other states across the country, the Left has launched a multi-front legal onslaught challenging election integrity measures in Ohio, a key swing state with a history of voter fraud. While other Democrat-backed lawsuits have mostly focused on fighting states’ voter ID laws, in Ohio they have sought to block voter roll cleanup efforts; eliminate laws requiring full and accurate completion of absentee- and provisional-ballot forms; and bring back the state’s ‘Golden Week,’ an extra seven days of early voting starting 35 days before Election Day during which people can register and vote on the same day – positions favored by the Left that accommodate fraud. “What happens in Ohio is we see people come from other states such as California and Massachusetts where they know their vote doesn’t matter, and exploit the loopholes…”

The challenge is particularly pronounced when the Clinton political machine is involved. From scandals involving unlawful contributions traced back to the Chinese military in the 1990’s to the rather blatant actions committed during this year’s Democrat primary against challenger Bernie Sanders, the Clinton machine has excelled at illegally gaming the system.

Writing in the Huffington Post, Riley Waggaman found:

“Election ‘Shenanigans’ Have Defined the Democratic Primaries – and Benefit Hillary Clinton… Even Nate Silver, widely regarded as the Gandalf of statistical analysis, still can’t figure out how Clinton won in Iowa and Massachusetts… With a lead of two-tenths of 1 percent, Hillary Clinton was declared the winner of the Iowa Caucuses. … the Des Moines Register’s editorial board wrote that ‘[the Iowa Democratic Party’s] refusal to undergo scrutiny or allow for an appeal reeks of autocracy’…To make matters worse, results from 90 precincts were reported ‘missing.’“

In Arizona, numerous problems occurred on the day of primary voting, but the problems mostly affected Sanders supporters. The Clinton campaign had managed to get most of their supporters to vote early by mail.

John Fund, reporting for National Review, describes how the courts have ignored well-documented, blatant, and obvious attempts at fraudulent voter registration:

“Three federal courts have thrown out voter-ID laws in North Carolina, Texas, and Wisconsin in recent days… According to a Pew Research Center survey, only 31 percent of Americans were confident that “the votes across the country were accurately counted” in the 2012 election.”

“… A separate Pew survey in 2012 found that one out of eight voter registrations is inaccurate, out-of-date, or a duplicate. Some 2.8 million people are registered in two or more states, and 1.8 million registered voters are dead.”

“… In 2014, political scientists Jesse Richman and David Earnest, writing in the Washington Post, summarized their finding, based on their examination of thousands of voter interviews from the Cooperative Congressional Election Study: ‘Our best guess, based upon extrapolations from the portion of the sample with a verified vote, is that 6.4 percent of non-citizens voted in 2008…” (in Michigan [Prject Veritas])

“… told different poll workers he was Detroit mayor Mike Duggan, Wayne State University Law School dean Jocelyn Benson, and columnist Nancy Kaffer of the Detroit Free Press – all whom strongly oppose voter-ID laws. In each case, poll workers offered him primary ballots for the person he was claiming to be. He was also offered the ballot of legendary Michigan rapper Eminem, whose real name is Marshall Bruce Mathers III. In all but one sting, the poll workers offered him a ballot, though he never actually accepted a ballot or cast an illegal vote.”

Unlawfully altering the results of a presidential election is not an exceptionally difficult task. Voter fraud in a few key precincts in just a few swing states could change the entire outcome. There is growing and substantial evidence that the ground work for engineering an illegal outcome has already been laid.

The Venezuelan Example

In August, Americans were focused on the Olympics in Brazil, but it is the South American nation of Venezuela that deserves the most attention.

The Washington Post recently noted:

“Venezuela is […] well past the point of worrying that its economy might collapse. It already has. That’s the only way to describe an economy that the International Monetary Fund thinks is going to shrink 8 percent and have 720 percent inflation this year […]”

“… This is an entirely man-made catastrophe. Venezuela, by all rights, should be rich […] it has more oil than the United States, or Saudi Arabia, or anyone else for that matter.”

Bloomberg notes that:

“Catastrophe Is the New Normal for Venezuelans […] The fact is, the Maduro government may have lost its way, but it’s still got an iron grip on this nation of 30 million people. And that residual clout, coupled with disarray among the president’s political foes, has given the regime the benefit of public doubt even in desperate times.”

The Obama Administration’s policy choices have a number of similarities to Venezuela, where, despite reaping a fortune from its oil industry, (recent profits have declined due to lower oil prices)  the government has ruined its national economy. An MRCTV review noted:

“The Venezuelan economy failed a long time ago […] it failed thanks to the collectivist policies of former President Hugo Chavez and current President Nicolás Maduro. Anyone with functioning eyes could see it.”

During the almost eight years of the Obama Administration, the U.S. national debt has doubled, regulations have increased, and property rights have decreased. The President has openly voiced his contempt for the private sector with phrases such as, when speaking of businesses, “You didn’t build that.”

Vast annual deficits continue to occur. Despite all that spending, nothing has been gained. A sixth of the economy, that portion involving health care, has come under government control. Poverty hasn’t been reduced, infrastructure remains deficient, the armed forces are dwindling due to lack of funds, and U.S. students lag behind their peers. Home ownership is down, as are middle class job opportunities. Senior citizens have received lesser cost of living increases than at any time in memory, and even the program the Administration remains proudest of, Obamacare, is beginning to sink into a fiscal crisis of its own.

The problems may not end when the Obama Administration leaves office. Potential successor Hillary Clinton has promised to continue his policies.

Since the start of the Obama Administration, Washington has, in the President’s words, been “fundamentally transformed.” It has come to resemble nations with government-run health care, and centralized economies with more controlled markets. But in several ways, it has moved beyond economics and into the realm of a more tightly-guided political environment with agencies such as the Internal Revenue Service, the Department of Justice, and the Environmental Protection Agency being used to punish those with views that differ from the White House, much as Venezuelan authorities have sought to suppress dissent in their nation.

That reality poses a threat to the future of prosperity and freedom for American citizens. Much of the media, and the usual collection of cultural commentators, appear to have missed the resemblance and the lesson that should have been learned.

In the 2016 election cycle, Senator Bernie Sanders openly advocated socialist solutions to many of America’s challenges. Hillary Clinton, who initiated concepts such as Obamacare, has come very close to echoing Sanders’ policy choices. Where would those policies lead the U.S.? A look at how they fared in Venezuela is instructive.

The CATO Institute noted that socialist policies destroyed the Venezuelan economy:

“Milton Friedman once said that, if you put the government in charge of the Sahara desert, there’ll eventually be a shortage of sand. No wonder that, after 14 years of socialist government, Venezuela – the country with the world’s largest oil reserves – is currently importing gasoline. This fact highlights Venezuela’s painful descent into chaos, as the economy crumbles and the nation’s social fabric unravels. Socialism has turned Venezuela into an authoritarian basket case that thousands try to escape every year. […] Despite receiving over $1 trillion in oil revenues since 1999, the government has run out of cash and now relies heavily on printing money to finance itself. The result is the highest inflation rate in the world: officially 56 per cent last year, although according to calculations by Steve Hanke of Johns Hopkins University, the implied annual inflation rate is actually 330 per cent.”

“Venezuela was once South America’s richest country, taking in immigrants from all over the world. For many years, it was also a remarkable democracy in a region where most nations were ruled by military dictatorships. Today, socialism has turned Venezuela into an authoritarian basket case that thousands try to escape every year. With millions of Venezuelans no longer willing to put up with deteriorating living conditions, and a government willing to take whatever means necessary to hold on to power, it looks like the worst is yet to come.”

Crisis at Sea

Perhaps it is a problem considered too unpleasant to report, but the reality of America losing its crucially required lead in sea power is one of the most important, and under-reported, news stories of our time.

While both American and its NATO partners have engaged in significant under-funding of their fleets, Russia and China have moved forcefully to upgrade their equivalents in both quantity and quality. As firm allies, the two are rapidly moving into a position to dominate the oceans.

As the New York Analysis has previously reported China already has more submarines than the U.S., and its navy will be larger than America’s within four years.

A National Interest review adds these factors:

“A not-so-fun fact you may not know: China has the world’s largest collection of sea mines. Just how many you ask? Estimates vary; however, some see Beijing holding 80,000-100,000 sea mines.”

China also the ability to unleash vast amounts of missiles at American ships, whose ability to deter that attack would be overwhelmed both by the sheer numbers of the weapons launched, as well as by the fact that Beijing’s use of anti-satellite weapons would leave the U.S incapable of sensing and preparing for attacks.

China is now developing the infrastructure to support its global maritime ambitions. In addition to engaging in joint maneuvers with Moscow in the Mediterranean, building offshore facilities in the South China Sea, and developing allegedly civilian bases on both sides of the Panama Canal, it is now breaking ground on a naval base in Africa. According to an NPR report, “The location is Djibouti, on the coast of Africa, at the mouth of the Red Sea, looking across at the Arabian Peninsula.” – in other words, a very strategic location.

China’s axis partner Moscow has been diligent and ambitious in its naval efforts as well, both in returning to its cold war base in Cuba, spending more-a lot more-on its navy, and in developing cutting-edge vessels.

The Sputnik News service reports:

“Russia’s Severnoye Design Bureau has started working on the Project 23560 Leader-class destroyer that will combine the features of a destroyer, large antisubmarine warship and guided missile cruiser. The ship will most likely be nuclear powered. It will be capable of spending up to 90 days offshore without additional refueling or support.”

Moscow has asserted its power below the waves. The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) reveals:

“Russia is expanding its undersea operations as part of a broader strategy of coercion aimed at its neighbors, NATO, and the United States. Russia has a long history of emphasizing its maritime capabilities for the purpose of strategic signaling, including the use of targeted provocations. Suspected territorial incursions in the Baltic Sea and provocative patrols in the North Atlantic have caused alarm among NATO and partner nations, in part because they have underscored the extent to which NATO and regional partner antisubmarine warfare (ASW) capabilities have atrophied since the end of the Cold War. […] Moscow has demonstrated an unwavering commitment to the development and maintenance of its submarine-based strategic deterrent and has emphasized nonnuclear submarine capabilities, certain surface warfare capabilities, and long-range antiship missiles over carrier battle groups. […] In Northern Europe, the Russian Navy’s use of submarines to signal presence, reach, and power achieves an effect that is disproportionate to the resources committed. NATO and partner nations do not currently possess the ability to quickly counter the Russian undersea challenge in much of the North Atlantic and Baltic Sea.”

The United States Naval Institute outlines how, since 2008, Russia has asserted itself at sea:

“Russia’s two showcase ships, the aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsovand nuclear-powered cruiser Pyotr Veliki ( Peter the Great ), deployed to the Mediterranean and Caribbean in flamboyant fashion, operating with former Cold War allies and adversaries alike. Russian naval aviation began flying patrols in the Norwegian Sea and off Alaska with regularity. In effect, Moscow was announcing that the Russian navy was back. […] The most publicized project is the development of the new Borey-class nuclear-powered ballistic-missile submarine (SSBN), planned to initiate eight hulls by 2017. The class leader, the Yuri Dolgorukiy , was commissioned in 2009 in St. Petersburg, following 25 years of sporadic construction, but follow-on building is adhering closely to original schedule. […]The Yasen class of up to ten nuclear-powered guided-missile submarines (SSGNs) is led by the Severodvinsk , which was commissioned in 2010 after a 16-year building process. […] Surface-combatant construction is following the same trend. The 2007 launching of the Steregushchiy , a 2,100-ton corvette touted for her low-observable design along with a high degree of automation and combat-systems integration, signaled Russia’s return to developing its own surface-warfare fleet. […] The Russian icebreaker inventory is a special case, dwarfing the rest of the world’s fleets. Her six nuclear icebreakers (four oceanic, two coastal) are designed to maintain the Northern Sea Route for commercial as well as military purposes. The aging Russian fleet will be augmented by a third-generation nuclear-powered vessel, capable of operating near the coast as well in the deep waters of the Arctic Ocean. “

While not making headlines in America, Europe has taken notice. An article in the British newspaper, The Sun, recently worried that:

“Vladimir Putin is assembling a secret fleet of super submarines which could topple NATO and plunge the world into war. A report by naval experts warns that Russia already has a small but sophisticated army of subs which are capable of launching missile strikes across the globe. […] The deadly group of stealthy underwater weapons are currently patrolling the world and have already reportedly breached UK waters having approached the Royal Navy’s base in Faslane, Scotland. Russia is stepping up its secret submarine programme to ‘Cold War’ levels and experts warn NATO members “no longer” have the defenses to stop the aquatic death machines. Andrew Metrick, who co-wrote the report for the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), said: ‘Russia operates a small number of very small, nuclear powered submarines that are capable of diving in excess of several thousand meters.'”

What has been America’s reaction to this growing and very authentic threat?

As noted recently by Randy Forbes, the chair of Congress’s Subcommittee on Sea power, America’s 30-year shipbuilding plan forecasts a reduction in undersea force structure from 52 attack submarines today to 41 in the late 2020s, as well as the retirement without replacement of our 4 SSGN guided missile submarines, and roughly 60 percent of our undersea payload capacity.

Forbes notes:

“submarines are already in short supply. A few months ago, Admiral Harris testified that the Navy could meet only 62% of his demand for attack submarines. More recently, I have received data from the Navy showing that overall in FY17 we will be able to fulfill only 42 percent of our combatant commanders’ global demand for submarines. I fear this shortfall will only grow more acute as our SSN force structure shrinks and the undersea domain continues to grow in importance…”

Forbes noted that Congress seeks to prevent the Obama Administration from inactivating half of the Navy’s cruisers and deactivating one of ten carrier air wings. The U.S. navy has already been reduced from a high of 600 ships to approximately 274.

Originally posted on New York Analysis of Policy and Government.

Show more