A disappointing press corps

President Obama held a press conference at the White House on December 19, 2014 prior to his departure for a two week vacation in Hawaii for the holidays.   Watching the entire one hour press conference revealed yet again how fatuous the press has become. 

Two issues that were discussed – the hacking of Sony Corporation and the opening of diplomatic relations with Cuba – revealed that the press members the president selected to ask questions are reluctant, if not incapable, of asking difficult questions of the president.   Here are two questions that should have been asked but were not:

Reducing tragic police encounters

Amid the debate, protest, and violence that followed the recent grand jury decisions in Ferguson, Missouri and Staten Island, New York what can be learned?  Can the incidence of violent civilian-police contact be reduced and the outcomes of such contact mitigated?

Some have described the deaths as indicative of a broader pattern of rampant unjustified police violence by white officers motivated by racism against black men. They call for a national conversation on race and the overhaul of police departments.  Others question the linkage of the events with a broader pattern motivated by racism and increasingly reject demands for redress of past oppression. In the end, making race the focal point of discussion will generate a great deal of emotion, but may be ineffective and even counterproductive in reducing violent civilian-police contact.

The pathway to preventing such incidents for Americans of all races is through better policing and the transformation of a mindset, often concentrated in dangerous neighborhoods, that is hostile to acceptable social norms.

Thank you officer

Thank you officer for putting on the uniform every day and going out into the night to face danger on my behalf.

Thank you to your loved ones who must worry about you responding to danger each and every day.

Thank you to the 126 families of police officers killed in the line of duty in 2013 for the sacrifice your family has made on my behalf.

Thank you for the restraint you show every day as you confront the worst among us.

Invest in Gateway Cities: Thinking Out of the Box Car

In 1858 Oliver Wendell Holmes coined the phrase “The Hub” by referring to the Massachusetts State House as "The Hub of the Solar System.”   The moniker now refers more broadly to the entire city. It is time to reassess the title and place greater economic development emphasis on the Gateway Cities of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

The Commonwealth designates 26 municipalities as Gateway Cities that serve as regional economic centers.  Governor Deval Patrick and his Secretary of Housing and Economic Development Greg Bialecki deserve credit for initiatives that directed strategic investment in infrastructure, job creation, and affordable housing to these cities since 2008.

Economy disappoints voters

The stock market is at record highs and the unemployment rate dropped to 5.8 percent last month, but exit polls from the recent mid-term election indicate voters have a negative view of the condition of the economy and the direction of the country.  Nearly half think life will be worse for the next generation.

The dichotomy can be explained, at least in part, by the need for more anti-poverty entitlements, a decline in labor participation (those who have given up looking for work), the predominance of part-time work in the jobs that have been created since the Great Recession, and by a growing income gap and more pronounced wealth gap that began opening in 1989 and continues to the present.

Mid-Term Election Opportunties

Republicans won federal and state elections last evening in a landslide.   Control of the U.S. Senate will shift to the Republicans in January.  The Republican majority in the House of Representatives will expand by at least a dozen.  Thirty-one of fifty states will have Republican governors.

Even Massachusetts elected a Republican, Charlie Baker, as its governor. Though the bluest of blue states retained a 100% Democrat congressional delegation that will have little influence in the 114th Congress.

Vote for "Balance of Power"

In the next few weeks ballots will be cast to elect members of the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate.  This election is vitally important to the “balance of power” principle established at the founding of the nation.  This may seem alarmist to some, but there is clear and convincing evidence of a shift in power to the executive branch of the federal government in recent decades that has accelerated and broadened with each successive administration.

Executive power expansion is enabled by the failure of congress to assert its authority.  A modern shift in congressional loyalty from the institutions of the House of Representatives and Senate to political party has permitted an uncontested expansion of executive power.  In the past, the congress, in a bipartisan manner, rabidly defended its constitutional authority and prerogatives from encroachment by the executive branch.

Moonbats and haters no more

Most people over the age of 30 get nostalgic for a time gone by – more so with increasing age. Human beings tend to remember the good and forget the bad.   But is the longing for a time gone by just nostalgic sentiment and affection for happier times or were things really better?  Like most things the answer is mixed.  Much in our lives has improved in the last half century.  But it is clear that a major shift in social relationships is underway that is decreasing civic engagement and negatively influencing political discourse.

In 2000 Robert D. Putnam provided an excellent description of the decline of “social capital” in Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community.  Bowling Alone documents the decline of social engagement and civic life in traditional community groups such as churches, Elks Clubs, PTAs, and bowling leagues.  The precise cause of the decline is not clear, but it appears generational shifts, social upheaval, and increasingly technology, are major contributors.

The president and his family are not safe

I took the time today to watch the full 3.5 hour House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing on the failure of the Secret Service to stop Omar Gonzalez from entering the White House on September 19, 2014.  Secret Service Director Julia Pierson was the primary witness.

The take away from this hearing is that the Secret Service is not prepared to protect the President of the United States and his family.

It was clear that the Secret Service is headed by a bureaucrat. It needs a hard nose field agent who will take whatever action is necessary to protect the president and his family and suffer no fools in the pursuit of duty.  Director Pierson should be immediately fired.

Muslims must defeat the jihadi ideology

President Obama last week outlined his plan to “degrade and ultimately destroy the terrorist group known as ISIL.”  Obama contends ISIL poses a threat to U.S. citizens and interests in the Middle East.   If left unchecked he said the group could pose a threat outside the region, including the U.S., but ISIL does not yet pose a clear and present danger.  Under the doctrine of preemption established by President G.W. Bush, and followed by President Obama, the U.S. will take limited action against ISIL to prevent its further development as a threat to U.S. interests in the Middle East and the U.S. homeland.

The details of Obama’s plan and the participation levels of coalition members will be sorted out in the coming days and weeks.  The announced total complement of U.S. military personnel in Iraq will immediately rise to about 1,500.  No U.S. ground maneuver units (e.g. combat brigades and divisions) will deploy.  The plan calls for Iraqi forces and Syrian rebels to take the ground battle to ISIL under an air umbrella provided by the U.S.  The ground component requires much greater clarification as it is fraught with complexity and risk.

Remember those who fight and die

On Wednesday evening President Barack Obama presented his plan to address the growing strength of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).   The President was under considerable pressure to do something about ISIL.  Public opinion polling following the beheadings of two Americans by ISIL indicated growing public support for action.  Congressional leaders appear to support the effort.

An additional 475 military personnel will join over 1100 personnel already in Iraq.  If the past is any indicator that number will grow.  Navy F/A-18 and Air Force F-15 and F-16 aircrews have conducted 154 missions against ISIL thus far.  U.S. special-forces are deployed with Iraqi and Kurdish forces to provide intelligence, coordination, and targeting assistance according to press reports. 

   

There is a great divide between the men and women serving in our military and those who make decisions about placing them in harm’s way.  The President met with congressional leaders on Tuesday to seek their support for his actions against ISIL.  Neither the President nor the congressional leaders are veterans.

Officer Darren Wilson deserves justice too

The violence, media frenzy, statements by public officials, and involvement of federal officials following the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri on August 9, 2014 by Officer Darren Wilson is creating an environment in which Officer Wilson’s right to due process and equal protection under the law may be jeopardized.

The shooting of Michael Brown by Officer Darren Wilson must be thoroughly and fairly investigated.   Every American has an interest in ensuring that police use appropriate force when executing their duties.  In cases where the use of force is fatal that requirement for scrutiny goes up.  When the victim is unarmed the standard is even higher in determining justifiable or unjustifiable homicide.

Climate change thoughts

Like so many issues today climate change has been politicized.   A movement more akin to a religion blames every calamity on climate change and questioning of their conclusions is treated as heresy. Those in opposition reject any evidence of warming with cynicism rather than healthy skepticism.  It is hard for a citizen to form a solid opinion on such an important topic.

A serious effort to better understand the issue through a review of related literature makes it clear that the science is not as open and shut as some believe.   That does not mean there is not climate change, or that we should not act to address it, but there are too many failed predictions and unanswered questions to conclude the “science is settled.”  For example, the first Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report of 1990 predicted temperature and sea level rise that has not come to fruition.

The United States Geological Survey (USGS) reports in the “The Sun and Climate” report that the Earth has warmed .99° F since 1860, and about half of this could be due to increased solar radiation.  However, .648° F of the .99 F° increase occurred from 1970 – 2000.  Solar radiation change can only account for .198° F of the .648° F increase; “the rest could be due to greenhouse warming or some other cause.”

Crippling our children with debt

The U.S. must address deficit spending and the national debt in a rational manner in the near term or face a reckoning in highly unpopular but unavoidable and debilitating reduced benefits, increased taxes, or a combination of the two.  A looming rise in interest rates to historically normal levels will exacerbate the situation.   A divided nation must debate fundamental philosophical positions about the size and role of government and find an acceptable path forward before circumstance forces bad choices.

The national debt is made up of two components 1) debt held by the public (foreign an d domestic) in the form of Treasury securities and 2) IOUs held by the federal government that are owed to other federal government accounts such as Social Security.  The principal on debt held by the public is about $13 trillion and the annual interest payment is $218 billion.  The principle on IOUs held by the federal government is about $5 trillion and the annual interest payment is $146 billion.

The unholy alliance of concentrated power

Concentrated political and economic power in the federal government and very large corporations is a threat to liberty and opportunity.  Further, political leaders have formed a relationship with corporate and other special interests whereby support flows from one to the other resulting in distorted access, policy, law, and regulation.

Political leaders of both parties seek financial support for election and personal enrichment.  It is about them – not the American people.   The combination of concentrated power in government and corporations, and the alignment of interests between the two are a significant danger.

The expanding mass of government in its physical bureaucracies and the body of laws and regulations it propagates, increasing centralization to the federal level,  and growing power within the executive are clear threats to liberty.  Corporate consolidation through mergers and acquisitions has created behemoths of economic power and political and social influence that also threaten liberty in a manner that often goes unnoticed by the public.

Following the Great Recession of 2008 there was an outcry about banks that were “too big to fail.”   It was expected that the issue would be addressed through legislation commonly called Dodd-Frank, but today more assets are held by fewer banks.  The too big to fail banks are in fact bigger today.  The five largest U.S. banks (JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, and Goldman Sachs) have assets in excess of $11 trillion.   Five banks hold 56% of all banking assets in the United States.

Less like a president than a king

The Supreme Court ruled recently in a rare unanimous decision that President Obama exceeded his authority in making three appointments to the National Labor Relations Board.  The ruling was reflective of a long brewing constitutional conflict – the unchecked expansion of federal executive power.

Executive power expansion began soon after the republic’s inception and accelerated in recent decades to a new level.  The core constitutional “balance of power” principle may be at risk.

Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. authored “The Imperial Presidency” in 1973 and coined a phrase that is increasingly used to describe presidents since Reagan.  A Google search for “imperial presidency” returns 84,000 hits for Reagan; 130,000 for Clinton; 188,000 for Bush (may capture both); and 225,000 for Obama.

Presidential Action Recommendations for the Border Crisis

Kris W. Kobach, Secretary of State for Kansas, appeared on CNN on July 17, 2014 to discuss the crisis of unattended minors arriving at the southwest border of the United States.  He made three very important recommendations for action by President Obama that require no legislative action and rest within his executive authority.

I have researched the foundations of Secretary Kobach’s comments and recommend them as further action the President could take to resolve the crisis at the border without legislative action, but has not:

1. Issue a Section 212F Proclamation using the authority vested in the President and expressed in a previous proclamation on August 4, 2011.  That Proclamation stated, “NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, by the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, as amended (8 U.S.C. 1182(f)), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, hereby find that the unrestricted immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of persons described in section 1 [DESCRIBE CRISIS POPULATION] of this proclamation would be detrimental to the interests of the United States.  I therefore hereby proclaim that:  The entry into the United States, as immigrants or nonimmigrants, of the following persons is hereby suspended:  [DESCRIBE CRISIS POPULATION]

Is the Unemployment Rate Meaningful?

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported earlier this month that 288,000 jobs were created in June and the unemployment rate decreased to 6.1%.  Headlines in response to the June report were positive.

A look beyond the headlines reveals that unemployment and under-employment remain in an unhealthy state.  The BLS “U6” report is a broader measure of unemployment that includes those marginally attached to the labor force.  The U6 unemployment rate was 12.1% in June and may represent better the condition of the job market.

The labor participation rate in June was a disappointing 62.8%.  The labor participation rate is the percent of the working age population that is actually working or seeking work.  In June, 156 million of the 248 million people of working age were working or seeking work.  146 million were employed and 9.5 million were unemployed – generating the unemployment rate of 6.1%.

They must go home to Central America

The flood of Central American minors arriving at the southwest border of the United States is a complex issue. It may be easier to look at this issue in two ways — push and pull.

It is not violence in Central America alone nor is it border insecurity that caused the crisis. It is a combination of both: the conditions in Central America and poor U.S. policy that provided the conditions for the surge to the border by unaccompanied minors.

Central Americans are being pushed from Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala largely because governments there are corrupt, opportunity is rare, and violence is high. When these conditions deteriorate to a point where people feel desperate, they take desperate action, such as the journey to the border.

The Push and Pull to get to the border

The flood of Central American minors arriving at the southwest border of the United States is a complex issue.  It may be easiest to look at this issue in two ways – Push and Pull.   It is not violence in Central America alone or poor border security alone that caused the crisis.  It is a combination of both the conditions in Central America and poor U.S. policy that incent the migration.

Central Americans are being pushed from Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala largely because government is corrupt, opportunity is rare, and violence is high.  When these conditions deteriorate to a point where people feel desperate, they will take desperate action.

Balancing Borders and Brotherhood

The plethora of legal and illegal immigration issues confronting the U.S. will not be resolved in 2014, but can and should be resolved in 2015.  Resolution will require a common sense approach that focuses on the interests and desires of most U.S. citizens over those of special interests of both the left and right.

Any resolution should extend mercy and compassion to the migrant – legal and illegal – consistent with the history of a generous nation, but in a manner that does not jeopardize national security or subject citizens to undue economic and social burdens.

The 2013 U.S. Senate “Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act, S.744” was an initial step toward resolution; however, like most such expansive proposals, S.744 is highly flawed.

Afghanistan Withdrawal: President Obama gets it right

President Obama announced on May 27^th a scaled back plan to withdraw from Afghanistan by the end of 2016.  The proposal will reduce the present 32,000 troops to 9,800 by the end of 2014 with final withdrawal by the end of 2016.  The proposal is subject to the approval of a bilateral security agreement (BSA).  The current Afghan president, Hamid Karzai, has refused to sign a BSA, but his probable successors indicate they will sign such an agreement.  

The President’s announcement represents a sharp pull back from the previous plan to retain 10 to 15 thousand U.S. personnel in Afghanistan for ten years.

Sgt. Bergdahl Prisoner Exchange

Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl was released by the Taliban to the control of U.S. Special Forces on June 1, 2014 after nearly five years of captivity. In exchange the U.S. released five senior Taliban leaders held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.  The circumstances of Bergdahl’s capture, the context of a broader U.S. policy to negotiate with the Taliban, and the potential long term repercussions of the exchange are controversial.

Threats to Liberty - Expanding Government

Liberty is the indispensable principle that underpins the uniqueness of the American founding and experience.  Yet, Americans have ceded a great deal of their liberty to government.    The relinquishing of liberty did not come as some feared – surrendering a way of life to the point of a foreign sword.  Rather, it was a gradual abdication of responsibility for one’s own destiny by an increasingly self-indulgent and distracted citizenry to an ever expanding, and increasingly centralized government.

Threats to Liberty – Federalism Diminished Through Aid

Federalism is the concept of shared sovereignty whereby constituent parts (states) join with a central governing authority (U.S.) in a union. There was great debate among the Founders about how much power the federal government should have.  They knew it needed to be more than it was under the Articles of Confederation, but they also did not want a unitary state where all power is held centrally and distributed to lesser administrative units as the central authority sees fit.

The federal government, though intended as limited and specific in its powers, has grown exponentially since the founding of the United States, particularly in the 20th and 21st centuries.  There are differing opinions about the value of a dominant federal government, but it is clear that the structural check on the growth of federal power – Federalism - is substantially diminished and the United States is de facto becoming a unitary state.

The federal government was envisioned by the founders and framed within the Constitution as limited in its powers.   The federal system itself, whereby power was divided between the national government and the states was a mechanism to check the power of the national government.  The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution affirms specifically this principle, stating, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Over the course of the last 100 years relative power has tilted to the federal government. State governments are growing in size, but they are weakened relative to the federal government in large part by dependence on federal aid and submission to the coercion of the strings attached to it.  The states have largely become an extension of the federal government.

For example, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts adopted the federal Common Core educational curriculum in 2010 despite the clear success of a curriculum and assessment system implemented in the 1990s that has led to Massachusetts ranking at the top of educational performance for decades. Why -  because access to federal education funds were contingent on adopting the Common Core.

The diminution of the states began in earnest in 1913 with the passage of the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution that established the income tax.   Unprecedented growth spawned by the inflow of revenues and creation of aid programs for states expanded further in the New Deal of the 1930s, the Great Society programs of the 1960s.

According to the non-partisan State Budget Solutions, “states received $5.27 trillion from the federal government since the start of the 21st century. Since 2001, 34 states saw over 30 percent of all their collected general revenue come from the federal government” and the trend is of increasing dependence.   The federal system is at risk when states are dependent on the federal government and must accept the strings that accompany those funds.

The Foundations of Liberty

The blessings of Liberty have been experienced throughout history by a relatively small percentage of human beings. 

Until the 17th century, when the age of reason took hold, human beings were no more than the chattel of pharaohs, emperors, kings, czars and caliphs, supported often by popes, bishops, and imams. It took millennia to establish the basic foundations of our innate human rights and centuries more to define them fully and create mechanisms to protect them in constitutions and law.

 
 Pharaohs enslaved whole populations to die at the whip building pyramids in their honor.   The Roman Emperor Crassus lined the Appian Way from Rome to Capua with over 6000 crucified men to make the point that he would not abide any rebels.   Throughout the many empires and invasions from West to East and East to West there was horror, torture, and death to accompany the imposition of a new ruler.  Those who survived the killing were often enslaved.

The Population Reference Bureau estimates that 108 billion people have inhabited the earth across the history of human existence.   Only about one percent of all human beings who have ever lived have experienced liberty as experienced by citizens of the United States.   It is only very recently that the value of the individual human being, constituted with rights, has emerged.

The philosophers and scientists of the Enlightenment, such as Francis Bacon, Isaac Newton, and John Locke, led a redirection of human history.  Bacon introduced the scientific method of inquiry into the natural world.   Newton, an English physicist and mathematician, led the scientific revolution and is regarded as one of the greatest scientists of all time.  John Locke was an English philosopher who later in the 17th century built upon the ideas of Bacon and other period philosophers to introduce the concepts of “natural rights” and consent of the governed as the basis of “political legitimacy”.

In particular, the ideas of John Locke were of great interest to the founders of the United States and many appear in the Declaration of Independence as it conveys our foundational principles.  The natural rights concept appears in the Declaration as “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”   These unalienable rights are innate.  They are not granted as a legal right through the benevolence of a king or the decree of a president or prime minister. Rather, they are a birth right.

The Declaration also fully conveys the concept of political legitimacy within its text, stating that governments can only derive “their just powers from the consent of the governed.”   This was a complete rejection of the monarchy.  No longer would political power convey through inheritance of title, but only through the consent of the governed.

Nearly 240 years later, these same aspirations expressed by a young and newly declared nation are the desire of many and the reality for few.   According to the Economist Group Democracy Index approximately 15 percent of the world’s 167 countries can be considered full democracies where the electoral process is legitimate and civil rights are assured.   Less than 12% of the world’s population today can claim fully the rights and protections envisioned in the Declaration of Independence.

The Declaration lays forth our aspirations and foundational principles.  The United States Constitution makes those aspirations and principles whole in form and substance to “secure the Blessings of Liberty.”

The Constitution was completed in 1787 and consisted of seven articles.  The first three described the formation and powers of the Congress, Presidency, and Judiciary respectively, while the remainder were procedural, such as the process for amending the Constitution.  The Constitution laid out the mechanisms by which the “consent of the governed” would be obtained and executed.

Eighteen months after the original signing of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights (the first 10 Amendments to the Constitution) was signed and forwarded to the states for ratification. It was subsequently approved and became an integral part of the Constitution in 1791.  The Bill of Rights was the culmination of John Locke’s “natural rights” concept and secured in detail the fundamental rights necessary to liberty.

Of course, liberty was not the right of all U.S. citizens until the Thirteenth Amendment abolished slavery, the Fifteenth Amendment enshrined the right to vote regardless of race or color, and finally the Nineteenth Amendment provided for women’s suffrage in 1920.    Hence, it is little more than 100 years ago that all citizens of the United States fully participated as individuals in giving their consent to be governed and fully received their birthright to liberty. 

Liberty and its blessings are rare in the human experience and fragile.  Those blessed by it should protect it.        

Why "Liberty Takes Effort"?

Liberty Takes Effort was selected as the title of this blog because liberty is the indispensable principle that underpins the uniqueness of the American founding and experience.  Effort must be put forth in a vigilant manner to protect it.

The blog’s perspective and topics will flow from the thesis that liberty remains the key to happiness and prosperity, and the concern that liberty is eroding. It will hopefully serve as a clarion call to United States citizens to recognize the essential value of liberty and to protect it from further government incursion.

The images of Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, James Madison, and Benjamin Franklin, the architects of the Declaration of Independence and United States Constitution, were selected as the background image of this blog because the blog author holds them in high esteem.  Their intellect, courage, and faith formed what was to be the most powerful nation on Earth, its citizens were guaranteed liberties and rights such as the Earth had never known, and its economic dominance unquestioned for over a century.  Their ideas and opinions in large part remain valid and relevant today.

Abraham Lincoln’s picture is also included in the background images because he ended the blight of slavery and opened the door to the blessings of liberty for all.

The Liberty Takes Effort blog is intended as a place for respectful conversation.  The author encourages comments.  It is his hope that through respectful conversation, where all stipulate the good intentions of others, that common opinions might emerge.  Disagreement is inevitable, but it is far better to disagree with others while knowing why and to what degree the disagreement exists than to simply reject the opinion of another out of hand.

All comments will be reviewed by the blog author to prevent comments that in his view are irrelevant, in error, or disrespectful of others.  Any modern day reader of online comments knows how quickly they devolve into partisan name calling.   The role of the mediator is to improve the conversation, not to censor.

Finally, let me say that the blog title and background images were selected with considerable care.  The author was warned that the use of the word LIBERTY and the images of the notable figures in the background may diminish participation because the word and images have been co-opted by extremists of the right.  I understand the basis for this concern, but reject the notion that a word so central to our experience must be abandoned or the images of such great men cast aside for fear that they invoke extremism. They belong to extremists only as long as we allow it.