November 11, 2016
Day 3: Still thinking
Yesterday, President Obama met with Donald Trump at the White House. It was the first time either of them had met. According to brief remarks made to the Press afterward, their collegial meeting lasted about one and a half hours.
The erudite will recall that “the first 100 days” is taken from a radio address given by Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s first term in office, in which during his first 100 days , and modeled after his plan to get Americans back to work, protect their savings and create prosperity, provide relief for the sick and elderly, and get industry and agriculture back on their feet.
Having read Trump’s goals for his first 100 days in office, it seems to me that there are some ideas I can support. Yet, there’s some pure bluster and ignorance designed for purely emotional appeal. I’ll separate fact from fiction, and we’ll have to wait and see how it all pans out.
See: donald-trumps-contract-w-american-voter
Trump’s objectives are in bold, my comments follow.
—/—
First: Constitutional Amendment for Congressional Term Limits – I have long supported that idea. Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell (R), however, opposes them – as, presumably, do some others. Whenever their income source or security is potentially challenged, they’ll fight. Which is probably all the more reason it ought to enacted. A Lifetime Limit of Eight terms in the House of Representatives (2 years x 8 terms=16 years), and a Lifetime Limit of Two terms in the Senate (2 terms x 6 years=12 years) for a combined total of 20 years Lifetime Total ought to be enough for anyone.
Second: Federal Hiring Freeze, to reduce federal workforce through attrition (exempting military, public safety, and public health) – I can understand that, and could go along with that for a period of time. Realize also that whenever any public action is required to be taken – such as “extreme vetting,” it is done by Federal Employees. So if their numbers are reduced, as a natural result, expect slow-downs and delays in any actions undertaken.
Third: Require that for every new federal regulation, two existing regulations must be eliminated – That’s unrealistic, and impracticable. It may be nice to think about, but as a blanket statement, it’s simply unrealistic.
Fourth: A 5 year-ban on White House and Congressional officials becoming lobbyists after they leave government service – TOTALLY in favor of this idea.
Sixth: Lifetime ban on White House officials lobbying on behalf of a foreign government – Totally in favor of, and the ban should extend to ALL former Federal Employees.
On the same day, I will begin taking the following 7 actions to protect American workers:
FIRST, I will announce my intention to renegotiate NAFTA or withdraw from the deal under Article 2205 – I have long advocated for changes to NAFTA, and other Free Trade deals to which the United States is a party.
SECOND, I will announce our withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership – TOTALLY in favor of this idea.
THIRD, I will direct my Secretary of the Treasury to label China a currency manipulator – Some say “yes,” some say “no,” but there is no disagreement China has bought American currency on the FOREX (Foreign Currency Exchange Market), and has purchased American indebtedness (T-bills, and other bonds). Mr. C. Fred Bergsten, Senior Fellow and Director Emeritus at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, put it this way: “Currency manipulation occurs when countries sell their own currencies in the foreign exchange markets, usually against dollars, to keep their exchange rates weak and the dollar strong. These countries thereby subsidize their exports and raise the price of their imports, sometimes by as much as 30-40%. They strengthen their international competitive positions, increase their trade surpluses and generate domestic production and employment at the expense of the United States and others.” There is significant evidence that China has engaged in that practice.
FOURTH, I will direct the Secretary of Commerce and U.S. Trade Representative to identify all foreign trading abuses that unfairly impact American workers and direct them to use every tool under American and international law to end those abuses immediately – TOTALLY in favor of this proposed action. As part of Free Trade Deals to which the United States is a party, there are numerous examples where factories have deserted American land for Foreign Shores. Most recently, Batesville Casket Company in Batesville, Mississippi announced that their factory in that town was closing, which would leave 200 employees without jobs… and will resume manufacturing in Mexico.
FIFTH, I will lift the restrictions on the production of $50 trillion dollars’ worth of job-producing American energy reserves, including shale, oil, natural gas and clean coal. – It’s a mixed bag. Because the law of conservation of mass states that “Matter is neither created, nor destroyed,” whatever physical matter is extracted from the Earth (such as coal, or oil) when burned, will produce waste equal to the volume burned. We do not have adequate or proper storage facilities for fly ash (coal ash), and our skies are not proper garbage receptacles for smoke from gasoline/diesel. NatGas, by comparison, is however, is a clean-burning fuel. We should not reduce or discontinue our research and development and implementation of Green Energy.
SIXTH, lift the Obama-Clinton roadblocks and allow vital energy infrastructure projects, like the Keystone Pipeline, to move forward – America has a miserable history when it comes to treatment of Native Americans, Blacks, Irish immigrants, and others, and the continued desecration of historical Native American burial grounds is unacceptable. There are better paths and options available, which must be considered and employed. How would you feel if a company wanted to put a pipeline through the middle of a cemetery where your relatives were buried? Further, the risks of damage from pollution from massive spills, fires and leaks which are posed from the KXL should be ameliorated significantly to reduce potential damage to waterways which are along the route.
SEVENTH, cancel billions in payments to U.N. climate change programs and use the money to fix America’s water and environmental infrastructure – While Climate Change is a reality, we must first care for our own. There are entrepreneurial opportunities in other nations to implement pollution-reducing equipment in factories, most notably in China and India. We cannot continue to subsidize their efforts, though we should encourage them. Using the money saved from ceasing payments to such programs would be wisely used to create a National Water Infrastructure.
Additionally, on the first day, I will take the following five actions to restore security and the constitutional rule of law:
FIRST, cancel every unconstitutional executive action, memorandum and order issued by President Obama – A moot point which is pure rhetoric. Presidents do not, and cannot issue UnConstitutional Executive Orders. They are subject to Judicial Review. If there was any question about the Constitutionality of any Executive Order, there would be a court case. Case in point, in 1952, the United States Supreme Court struck down President Harry Truman’s Executive Order 10340 which ordered Secretary of Commerce Charles Sawyer to seize control of a majority of the nation’s steel mills in anticipation of a steelworker strike during the Korean War. In Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, the SCOTUS held that President Truman lacked the constitutional or statutory power to seize private property. So far, during President Obama’s administration, there have been no judicial challenges to his Executive Orders.
SECOND, begin the process of selecting a replacement for Justice Scalia from one of the 20 judges on my list, who will uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States – Led by Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell, who is the Senate Majority Leader, the GOP-dominated Senate has been, and continues to be recalcitrant and actively rebellious and refused to perform to their Constitutionally-mandated duty and responsibility to give a hearing to Merrick Garland, who is President Obama’s SCOTUS nominee to replace the vacancy created by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. Judge Garland is the Chief Judge for the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, has served on that court since 1997, and has been widely praised by Republicans and Democrats alike. To intimate that judges do not uphold the Constitution (by stating that he will name judges “who will uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States” is a moot, rhetorical point, because in the oath of office they take – which requirement is found in Article VI of the Constitution (which states “The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”), all federal officials must take an oath in support of the Constitution. The oath is now taken by all federal employees, is set forth in 5 U. S. C. § 3331, and states: “I, ______, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.” As well, there is a second oath, found in the Judiciary Act of 1789, which “the justices of the Supreme Court, and the district judges, before they proceed to execute the duties of their respective offices” shall take. In December 1990 is was slightly modified from the form it had followed since that time, may by found at Judicial Oath, found at 28 U. S. C. § 453, and now reads as follows: “I, ______, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as ______ under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.” There is a combined modified oath which is sometimes also administered, and reads as follows: “I, ______, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as ______ under the Constitution and laws of the United States; and that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”
THIRD, cancel all federal funding to Sanctuary Cities – Easier said, than done. Moreover, there is NO official legal meaning to the term “Sanctuary City,” although it is often considered to be governmental bodies that have adopted policies which instruct local or state government employees not to notify the federal government of the presence of illegal aliens living in or passing through their communities, counties, or states. In 1996, the 104th U.S. Congress passed Public Law 104-208, which is also known as the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA), which requires local governments to cooperate with Department of Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Agency. Despite the law, however, some local governmental bodies have adopted policies contrary to the law, which may be by law (de jure) or by action (de facto). Further, the President does not have the legal authority to “cancel all federal funding.” The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 provides that the president may propose rescission of specific funds, but the rescission must be approved by the House of Representatives and the Senate within 45 days. In effect, the requirement removed the impoundment power, since Congress is not required to vote on the rescission and has, in fact, ignored the vast majority of presidential requests. The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 was passed because Congress believed that President Nixon was abusing his authority to impound the funding of programs he opposed. The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 effectively removed the impoundment power of the president and requires him to obtain Congressional approval if he wants to rescind specific government spending. President Nixon signed the Act with little protest because his administration was then embroiled in the Watergate scandal and therefore unwilling to provoke Congress.
FOURTH, begin removing the more than 2 million criminal illegal immigrants from the country and cancel visas to foreign countries that won’t take them back – A good idea, but there again, easier said, than done. It will be a costly proposition to taxpayers, to say the least. I support the idea.
FIFTH, suspend immigration from terror-prone regions where vetting cannot safely occur. All vetting of people coming into our country will be considered extreme vetting. – What is that? A new kind of “extreme” sport – extreme vetting? of course, to “vet” is the act of making a prior examination and critical appraisal before undertaking some task or further action. But what is “extreme”? Utmost? Exceeding the bounds of moderation? Last, or final? In this context, exactly what does “extreme” mean? Concerning “terror-prone,” the word “prone” means “having a natural inclination or tendency to something.” So is there truly a region of the world where terror is the natural inclination? I sincerely doubt it. This is so much bluff and bluster. Either people are “vetted,” or they are not. Presumably, he is referring to a proper and thorough background investigation on those seeking to enter the United States from Middle Eastern nations where Islam is the predominate religion… and where terrorist networks are known to exist or flourish. Of course, to perform such “extreme vetting” requires Federal Employees… which – as he stated earlier – he would enact “a hiring freeze on all federal employees to reduce federal workforce through attrition (exempting military, public safety, and public health).” Strictly speaking, those whom investigate the backgrounds of individuals seeking to enter the United States are NOT considered military, public safety, or public health. Should we ensure that people entering the United States are not convicted criminals, or have criminal intent? Yes. Will “extreme vetting” resolve any problem alleged to exist? Is there genuinely a problem in that area? The United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) estimated that in January 2012, there were 11.4 million unauthorized immigrants living in the United States, and found that “the number of illegal immigrants peaked around 12 million in 2007 and has gradually declined to closer to 11 million.” The Pew Research Center has estimated that “There were 11.1 million unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. in 2014, a total unchanged from 2009 and accounting for 3.5% of the nation’s population,” and that the United States’ “civilian workforce included 8 million unauthorized immigrants in 2014, accounting for 5% of those who were working or were unemployed and looking for work.”
Next, I will work with Congress to introduce the following broader legislative measures and fight for their passage within the first 100 days of my Administration: (Which is ironic, considering that he’s already lambasted Congress – with whom he must work – by saying “Drain the Swamp,” and criticizing Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, Senator Ted Cruz, and others against whom he spoke while campaigning.)
1.) Middle Class Tax Relief And Simplification Act. An economic plan designed to grow the economy 4% per year and create at least 25 million new jobs through massive tax reduction and simplification, in combination with trade reform, regulatory relief, and lifting the restrictions on American energy. The largest tax reductions are for the middle class. A middle-class family with 2 children will get a 35% tax cut. The current number of brackets will be reduced from 7 to 3, and tax forms will likewise be greatly simplified. The business rate will be lowered from 35 to 15 percent, and the trillions of dollars of American corporate money overseas can now be brought back at a 10 percent rate. – Again, in principle, it sounds good, but the practicality of it is questionable. Millionaires don’t spend more when they have more to spend. Only people who don’t have enough spend more. The Cost of Living is somewhat a fixed figure, insofar as there is a cost to live which is similar for the wealthy as it is for the poor. The fact that the wealthy may spend more for their milk, bread, eggs, toilet paper and beer is inconsequential. They won’t buy more just because they have more money to spend. They won’t buy more electricity. They won’t buy more gasoline. They won’t buy more clothing. So what MORE will they purchase with the MORE that they’re given? Will the wealthy suddenly decide to “create jobs”? Perhaps they’ll decide “oh, I’m going to open a chocolate cow factory, and give jobs to the peons and the poor”? Hogwash. Should Middle Class Americans get tax relief? HELL YES! In fact, I would say that Federal Income Tax should begin at $50,000, that the Standard Deduction ought to be $25,000, that the per child Child Tax Credit should be at least $5000, that one should NOT be required to file with the IRS until they make a minimum of $50,000, and that significant tax incentives should be given to families who seek to adopt children. Of note as well, during the two-term Republican Eisenhower Administration, Income Tax Rates upon the Wealthiest Americans was 90%+, and our nation grew like gangbusters. Concerning the “Repatriation Tax,” currently, there are – as stated – trillions of American dollars sitting in offshore accounts, which is subject to a 35% tax rate. In 2004, Congress passed the American Jobs Creation Act which gave a one-time tax break on income earned overseas, and lowered the rate to 5.25%. The law also prohibited using the money for using the money for executive compensation, dividends and stock investments. A 10% rate would be good, but a 15% rate would be better, and still nearly half the current rate of 35%.
2.) End The Offshoring Act. Establishes tariffs to discourage companies from laying off their workers in order to relocate in other countries and ship their products back to the U.S. tax-free. – Many so-called “Free Trade” advocates would oppose this out of hand. However, the manner in which Free Trade ideals have been implemented have been disastrous for the American worker, perhaps none more noticeable than off-shoring American jobs (closing domestic factories, and moving them overseas, where production and labor costs are lower, worker safety protections non-existent, etc.), and in turn, companies are given tax incentives for it all. That is morally and ethically wrong. Tariffs should have been reduced in conjunction with a series of observable guides which should’ve included assurances of worker safety, environmental guarantees, and other standards to which we Americans hold ourselves. We should NOT lower our standards, or evacuate to nations where such standards are non-existent, but should assist other nations by increasing their standards, and in exchange, when verified, reductions in tariffs would occur gradually. Should tariffs be established? To do so would trigger renegotiation incentives for NAFTA, CAFTA and other Free Trade deals. Of note, Illinois Senator Richard “Dick” Durbin (D) in the 111th Congress (2009-2010) offered S.3816, known as the “Creating American Jobs and Ending Offshoring Act,” which was introduced September 21, 2010, and failed.
3.) American Energy & Infrastructure Act. Leverages public-private partnerships, and private investments through tax incentives, to spur $1 trillion in infrastructure investment over 10 years. It is revenue neutral. – The Devil is in the details. What does a public-private partnership mean? Does it involve destruction of National Forests, Wildlife Preserves, and Wilderness Areas? Infrastructure needs in our nation are of paramount importance, and have lain neglected for far too long. There is NO QUESTION that our nation’s crumbling economic infrastructure needs are great, and the American Society of Civil Engineers has so stated. But again, what do those terms mean? What are the specifics? The Devil is in the details.
4.) School Choice And Education Opportunity Act. Redirects education dollars to give parents the right to send their kid to the public, private, charter, magnet, religious or home school of their choice. Ends common core, brings education supervision to local communities. It expands vocational and technical education, and make 2 and 4-year college more affordable. – Do colleges, and trade/technical schools need to be more affordable and cost effective? ABSOLUTELY YES! In principle, K-12 schools should be competitive (Ivy League universities are), and some are. Others are not. Should parents have options available to them for their childrens’ education? Yes. Should K-12 religious schools be subsidized by or with public tax dollars? No. Is Common Core bad? Establishing unified standards for children at all grade levels is not a bad idea, but excessive testing to determine to what extent those standards and objectives are being met is a patently absurd time waster for teachers and students alike. We need to take clues from other nations where their success in education is renown – such as Japan, Germany, Iceland, and France. Of note, like American children, French home-schooled children between ages 6-16 are required to meet certain standards. Failure to meet two consecutive outcomes automatically means the children must be placed in a mainstream school. French home-schooled children must meet these key competencies: Written and spoken French; Maths/basic sciences and technology; At least one foreign language; French, European and World history and geography & Art; Computer science; Social and civic competences, and; Initiative and autonomy. In addition, French home-schooled children are also required to demonstrate that they can: Ask questions; Make deductions from their own observations and documents; Be able to reason; Generate ideas, be creative and produce finished work Use computers; Use resources sensibly, and; Evaluate risks. How many American home-schooled children are held to such high standards? How many mainstream-schooled children are held to the same standards? In an address to the NAACP’s 91st Annual Convention Monday, July 10, 2000, Former President George W. Bush spoke of “another form of bias: the soft bigotry of low expectations,” which was a phrase coined by his speech writer Michael Gerson. Bush said that, “There’s a tremendous gap of achievement between rich and poor, white and minority. This, too, leaves a divided society. And whatever the causes, the effect is discrimination. My friend Phyllis Hunter (ph), of Houston, Texas, calls reading the new civil right. Equality in our country will remain a distant dream until every child, of every background, learns so that he or she may strive and rise in this world. No child in America should be segregated by low expectations, imprisoned by illiteracy, abandoned to frustration and the darkness of self-doubt.” It was also the time when he said that “no child should be left behind in America,” from which emerged the No Child Left Behind Act the following year.
5.) Repeal and Replace Obamacare Act. Fully repeals Obamacare and replaces it with Health Savings Accounts, the ability to purchase health insurance across state lines, and lets states manage Medicaid funds. Reforms will also include cutting the red tape at the FDA: there are over 4,000 drugs awaiting approval, and we especially want to speed the approval of life-saving medications. – This is the proverbial “red meat” to Republicans, who have sought to abolish the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA, or ACA, or colloquially as “ObamaCare”), since they helped pass it. Is the PPACA flawed? You bet’cha. Should it be fixed? Absolutely. But does it ALL need to be gutted? No, and here’s why. Perhaps the most onerous of it’s provisions is the “Individual Mandate” requiring all Americans to have health insurance. Interestingly enough, the “Individual Mandate” was a strictly Republican idea which was germinated in the arch-conservative, ultra-right wing Heritage Foundation think tank. See p51: heritage-foundation-national-health-care-paper Interestingly, there are numerous additional provisions which regulate the Insurance Industry and prohibit certain abuses for which they were infamous, such as charging more for women because they were women, denying payment for services rendered if an innocent mistake was made in the application, denying coverage because of “pre-existing” conditions, and more. Additionally, “sunshine law” provisions were included which require hospitals and other institutions to make public the prices they charge for procedures, to require physicians, hospitals, and Medical Schools to make known any relationships they may have with Pharmaceutical or Medical Device companies, and to improve patient care by refusing to pay for problems acquired during hospitalization that were unrelated to the admitting diagnosis, as well as refusing to pay for care required for readmission within 90 days if readmitted for the same problem – in essence, refusing to pay for sloppy and poor care, and premature or early discharge when a healing, cure, or improvement for the condition was not achieved in the initial admission. Are Health Savings Accounts the be-all, end-all answer to everything problematic in healthcare? No. Should Health Insurance be allowed to be sold across state lines? Absolutely, yes! Concerning Medicaid funds, states already have significantly enormous leeway to manage according to their unique needs. Regarding “red tape” at the FDA: Does it exist? Absolutely! Does it need to be eliminated? Unquestionably, yes!
6.) Affordable Childcare and Eldercare Act. Allows Americans to deduct childcare and elder care from their taxes, incentivizes employers to provide on-side {sic} childcare services, and creates tax-free Dependent Care Savings Accounts for both young and elderly dependents, with matching contributions for low-income families. – Some companies are already providing on-site child care services. These are all excellent ideas, and I would go at least one step further, and add that Medicare payments ought to be made to families who care for their elderly parents or relatives in their homes, in addition to allowing tax deductions for their care.
7.) End Illegal Immigration Act Fully-funds the construction of a wall on our southern border with the full understanding that the country Mexico will be reimbursing the United States for the full cost of such wall; establishes a 2-year mandatory minimum federal prison sentence for illegally re-entering the U.S. after a previous deportation, and a 5-year mandatory minimum for illegally re-entering for those with felony convictions, multiple misdemeanor convictions or two or more prior deportations; also reforms visa rules to enhance penalties for overstaying and to ensure open jobs are offered to American workers first. – Why not instead import the Great Wall of China (13,170 miles) piece by piece? We could get a discount! Why not instead erect an electrified fence like Nazi Germany, or Communist Russia? It could be a source of entertainment to watch people shot by guards while simultaneously fried by high-voltage current. Their corpses could be used to feed pigs, crows, or coyotes. And who wants to burden our Federal Judicial and Prison System with Illegal Aliens? Really. Why not just execute them, instead? (The reader should detect significantly dark sarcasm.) The cost of construction and maintenance for a wall idea (1,989 miles) is totally and ludicrously preposterous. Truth be told, Americans just won’t take certain jobs, most notable among them, agricultural jobs. It’s been that way for a very, very, very long time. Migrant Farm Labor has been, and continues to be performed by Legal Immigrants. The USDA states that “Wages, salaries, and contract labor expenses represent roughly 17 percent of total variable farm costs, and as much as 40 percent of costs in labor intensive crops such as fruits, vegetables, and nursery products. Hired farmworkers continue to be one of the most economically disadvantaged groups in the United States. The average number of hired farmworkers has steadily declined over the last century, from roughly 3.4 million to just over 1 million.” Even former Alabama State Senator Scott Beason declined to pick tomatoes when given the opportunity after authoring the state’s infamous HB56 law aimed at illegal immigrants, which in large part was struck down as UnConstitutional. Farmers’ livelihoods depend upon manual labor, much of which Americans simply refuse to perform.
8.) Restoring Community Safety Act. Reduces surging crime, drugs and violence by creating a Task Force On Violent Crime and increasing funding for programs that train and assist local police; increases resources for federal law enforcement agencies and federal prosecutors to dismantle criminal gangs and put violent offenders behind bars. – According to the FBI, the violent crime rate in the United States has steadily declined from 636.6 in 1996, to 372.6 in 2015, with a slight year-to-year uptick from 2014 to 2015. Again, the Devil is in the details, because there are numerous programs now existing which already do precisely that – “train and assist local police.” If “increases resources… to dismantle criminal gangs…” means invading private citizens’ homes, their persons and possessions, and increasing surveillance upon private law-abiding citizens, anyone would oppose that, just as I do. Violent offenders need to be “behind bars,” and not the friendly ones in your local neighborhood. Moreover, efforts should be made to rehabilitate convicts, because when they have paid their debt to society, they need to be able to effectively return to being productive members of society, rather than again being burdens upon society.
9.) Restoring National Security Act. Rebuilds our military by eliminating the defense sequester and expanding military investment; provides Veterans with the ability to receive public VA treatment or attend the private doctor of their choice; protects our vital infrastructure from cyber-attack; establishes new screening procedures for immigration to ensure those who are admitted to our country support our people and our values – The Defense sequester is an asinine political football employed by petulant legislators whose actions are reminiscent of petulant children. It should be eliminated. Understanding it, however, goes back to 1985 when it was initiated as part of the Budget Control Act, which required $50 billion in across-the-board cuts for defense in 2013, along with equal cuts to domestic spending. Frankly, however, the Pentagon is – as Dwight David Eisenhower warned in his Farewell Address – the principle purveyor of the “military-industrial complex” which has a budget more than the combined total of the next eight nations defense budgets – more than China, Saudi Arabia, Russia, United Kingdom, France, Japan, India, and Germany combined. That’s preposterously asinine in the most absurd manner. There is literally no sense in it, and no need for it. It is a waste of unparalleled proportions. It is greater, even, than the $14 billion in pallets of $100 bills that were flown from the Federal Reserve to Iraq over a period of a year and a half in an attempt to kickstart the Iraqi economy following the 2003 US invasion. Fraud, waste, and abuse are rampant in the Department of Defense, and since 2001, the Pentagon has been unable of performing an internal audit, though Congress has been leniently lax after requiring them to audit their books, and give an accounting for all they’ve spent. In fact, there’s AT LEAST $6.5 TRILLION in unaccounted-for money spent by the Pentagon. On top of that, there are unnecessary programs – among them, the notorious F-35 Lightning II jet, and the Littoral Combat Ship program – which have already cost the American taxpayer well over $1.5 TRILLION… and counting, are extremely cost-overrun, fraught with numerous problems, and are still incapable of performing even the most fundamentally simple tasks. Veterans should have the best healthcare, bar none. But then again, everyone should receive the same level and high quality of care. NO ONE should EVER get substandard care. Veterans should be able to get care from whomever they choose, and that care should be 100% paid for by taxpayers. Our nation’s infrastructure should be protected from cyber attacks. As far as “support our people and our values,” that is deliberately vague enough to be open to numerous interpretations. If it means a religious test, that’s UnConstitutional. If it means keeping out people who seek our destruction, I have no problem with it, because already have laws in place to handle precisely that.
10.) Clean up Corruption in Washington Act. Enacts new ethics reforms to Drain the Swamp and reduce the corrupting influence of special interests on our politics. – I am fully in favor of reducing the corrupting influence of special interests on our PEOPLE, which also means that I am 100% opposed to the SCOTUS decision in Citizens United v. FEC, and remain steadfastly convinced that it should be addressed with, by, and through Congressional legislation. If new ethics reforms will be a part of that, I’m all for it. But there again, the Devil is in the details.
On November 8th, Americans will be voting for this 100-day plan to restore prosperity to our economy, security to our communities, and honesty to our government.
This is my pledge to you.
And if we follow these steps, we will once more have a government of, by and for the people.
We have always had, and still have a “government of the people, by the people, for the people.” It just needs some fine-tuning every now and then. And now happens to be one of those times.
Filed under: - Even MORE Uncategorized!, - Politics... that "dirty" little "game" that first begins in the home. Tagged: Barack Obama, children, Democrat, Democrats, Donald Trump, education, First 100 Days, GOP, jobs, law, Obama, policy, politics, POTUS, President-elect, Republican, Republicans, Trump, Washington DC, White House 
