Powered By Blogger

Publius Speaks

Publius Speaks
Become A Follower

4/29/2017

100 Days of Being 'TRUMPED'


In a recent Associated Press Interview, Donald Trump said: “I think the 100 days is, you know, it’s an artificial barrier. It’s not very meaningful.”  However, back in the heat of the campaign for President, Trump said as he released his “Contract with the American Voter”” at an appearance in Gettysburg, PA on October 22, 2016: “What follows is my 100-day action plan to Make America Great Again. It is a contract between myself and the American voter.”

It continued: “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.” In that Plan, within the first 100 days of his administration, he promised to bring about many accomplishments by Executive Order.  So, either the 100 days has some relevance and meaning for his Contract, or it doesn’t.  It did in October of 2016; perhaps now, after an actual 100 days, he is changing his mind, as he often does.  

A fact-checker for the AP wrote on April 24th: “Trump has grown dismissive of the 100-day mark, calling it “ridiculous,” and now plays down his manifesto even as he boasts of his achievements. In the AP interview, he appeared to attribute the plan to his campaign staff, saying ‘Somebody, yeah, somebody put out the concept of a 100-day plan’.” 
Fact-checker: “During the campaign, Trump promoted a “100-day action plan” he characterized as “a contract between myself and the American voter — and begins with restoring honesty and accountability, and bringing change to Washington.  The Plan contains ambitious items like “a constitutional amendment to impose term limits on all members of Congress,” cancelling “all federal funding to sanctuary cities, tax reform, and fixing “America’s water and environmental infrastructure.”   Here is a link to a copy of said Plan:  http://citizensjournal.us/trumps-gettysburg-address-100-day-contract-with-the-american-voter/

Here is Trump's – signed! – "100-day action plan"pic.twitter.com/zHQV0o3WPlhttps://pbs.twimg.com/media/C97-2ZbWsAAriCQ.jpgHere is Trump's – signed! – "100-day action plan"pic.twitter.com/zHQV0o3WPlhttps://pbs.twimg.com/media/C97-2ZbWsAAriCQ.jpghttps://pbs.twimg.com/media/C97-2ZbWsAAriCQ.jpghttps://pbs.twimg.com/media/C97-2ZbWsAAriCQ.jpg The 100 days is an artificial measure of accomplishment, no doubt.  But it is a measure, and he himself invested that measure with a high degree of meaning and consequence when he touted his Contract with the American Voter at Gettysburg.  It is also a presidential tradition, now accepted as standard practice, as is the releasing of candidate tax returns so that the public can judge what manner of economic stewards are vying for the highest office in the land.  However, Mr. Trump seems to have difficulty knowing, remembering, or caring about what other presidents have done or accomplished.  His disdain for history and tradition – and even for consistency of democratic ideals, beliefs and values -- shows forth in so many ways.
The fact-checker, Aaron Rupar, has this to say about The Donald’s claim to have accomplished more than any president in the first ninety days: “Trump hasn’t shepherded a major piece of legislation through Congress, despite the fact his party controls both chambers. His second attempt at a Muslim ban executive order was blocked by a federal court. The Affordable Care Act repeal/replace package Congress considered last month had a 17 percent approval rating and didn’t go anywhere. The new package that’s in the works will make premiums spike for people with pre-existing conditions and hence will likely be just as unpopular.” 
For your information, here is an overview of each of Trump's orders (based on several News sources including NBC, CBS, Fox)

1. Executive Order Minimizing the Economic Burden of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
Signed: Jan. 20, 2017   Hours after being sworn in, Trump signed an executive order aimed at reversing the Affordable Care Act. It instructs the secretary of health and human services and other agency heads to "waive, defer, grant exemptions from, or delay the implementation" of any part of the law that places a fiscal burden on the government, businesses or individuals.

2. Expediting Environmental Reviews and Approvals for High-Priority Infrastructure Projects
Outlines how the administration will expedite environmental reviews and approval of "high priority" infrastructure projects,  and directs the Chairman of the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), within 30 days of a request, to determine a project's environmental impact and decide whether it is "high priority." Review deadlines are to be put in place by the CEQ's chairman.
3. Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States
Outlines changes to a few immigration policies, but most notably strips federal grant money to so-called sanctuary cities. In addition, the secretary of homeland security is ordered to hire 10,000 more immigration officers, create a publicly available weekly list of crimes committed by undocumented immigrants and review previous immigration policies. The order also creates an office to assist the victims of crimes committed by undocumented immigrants and calls on local and state police to detain or apprehend people in the United States illegally.
4. Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements
Directs federal funding to construction of a wall along the Mexico-U.S. border, instructs the secretary of homeland security to prepare congressional budget requests for the wall and to "end the abuse of parole and asylum provisions" that complicate the removal of undocumented immigrants. Calls for hiring 5,000 more Border Patrol agents, building facilities to hold undocumented immigrants near the Mexican border and ending "catch-and-release" protocols by which undocumented immigrants are not detained while they await court hearings.
5. Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States
Suspends the entry of immigrants from seven Muslim-majority countries — Syria, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Sudan, Yemen and Somalia — for 90 days and stops all refugees from entering the country for 120 days. Syrian refugees are banned indefinitely. During the time of the ban, the secretary of homeland security and secretary of state will review and revise the refugee admission process. Also in the order is the suspension of Obama's 2012 Visa Interview Waiver Program, which allowed frequent U.S. tourists to bypass the visa interview process.
6. Ethics Commitments by Executive Branch Appointees
Stops all executive branch officials from lobbying for five years after they leave office and places a lifetime ban on lobbying a foreign government. The order enacts a number of other lobbying restrictions, including, banning appointees from accepting gifts from registered lobbyists and banning appointees who were lobbyists from participating in any issues they petitioned for within the last two years.
7. Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs
States that executive departments and agencies must slash two regulations for every one new regulation proposed. Regulation spending cannot exceed $0, and any costs associated with regulations must be offset with eliminations. The order also directs the head of each agency to keep records of the cost savings, to be sent to the president.
8. Core Principles for Regulating the United States Financial System
Lays out the administration's "Core Principles" regarding the U.S. financial system, including:
  • Making regulation "efficient, effective and appropriately tailored"
  • Preventing government bailouts
  • Ensuring that U.S. firms are competitive with foreign companies
Directs the treasury secretary to review financial regulations and report back to the president 120 days later with a determination of whether current policies promote the "Core Principles."
9. Task Force on Crime Reduction and Public Safety
Directs Attorney General Jeff Sessions to create a task force that would propose new legislation to reduce crime, highlighting drug trafficking, illegal immigration and violent crime. The task force will submit yearly reports to the president.
10. Preventing Violence Against Federal, State, Tribal, and Local Law Enforcement Officers
Calls on the Justice Department to "enhance the protection and safety" of law enforcement by increasing penalties for crimes committed against officers. The AG is also instructed to review and determine whether existing federal laws adequately protect law enforcement and to propose legislation to better protect officers. The order directs the Justice Department to recommend changes in federal grant funding to law enforcement programs if they do not protect officers.
11. Enforcing Federal Law with Respect to Transnational Criminal Organizations and Preventing International Trafficking
Outlines the administration's approach to cutting down on organized crime — including gangs, cartels and racketeering organizations — by enhancing cooperation with foreign governments and the ways in which federal agencies share information and data. Identifies human trafficking, drug smuggling, financial crimes, cyber-crime and corruption as "a threat to public safety and national security."  The Threat Mitigation National Intelligence will review and recommend changes to federal agencies' practices in a report to be delivered to the president within 120 days.
12. Providing an Order of Succession Within the Department of Justice
Two weeks after Trump fired Acting Attorney General Sally Yates, this order changed the order of succession for Sessions, who won approval as attorney general. The sequence is: the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, the U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Illinois and the U.S. attorney for the Western District of Missouri.
13. Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda
Each agency must designate an official as its Regulatory Reform Officer (RRO), who will be responsible for reviewing current regulations and making recommendations to the agency head on how to modify them, honing in on certain regulations, such as those that are outdated or are perceived to curtail job creation.
14. Restoring the Rule of Law, Federalism, and Economic Growth by Reviewing the "Waters of the U.S." Rule
Calls on federal agencies to revise or eliminate a regulation put in place by former president Barack Obama called the Clean Water Rule. Signed in 2015, that rule expanded the number of bodies of water protected by the federal government to include streams, ponds and smaller waterways. Directs the administrator of the EPA and the assistant secretary of the Army for Civil Works to review the rule and propose a new one that either eliminates or revises Obama's rule.
The League of Conservation Voters slammed the move:  "This executive order is about one thing: protecting polluters at the expense of our communities and their access to clean drinking water."
15. White House Initiative to Promote Excellence and Innovation at Historically Black Colleges and Universities
Transfers White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities (WHHBCU) from the Department of Education to the Executive Office of the President. Trump met with dozens of HBCU presidents the day prior for a listening session, which many students and college leaders were quick to protest out of skepticism that the president was using the meeting as a PR stunt.
16. Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the U.S.
Revises Trump's original U.S. immigration ban, which was hit with dozens of lawsuits shortly after being signed in February and blocked by a federal judge in Washington state.  Iraq was removed from the list after the Iraqi government said it would increase information sharing with the United States. Like first Order, this was held up by a Federal judge.
17. Comprehensive Plan for Reorganizing the Executive Branch
Assigns the Office of Management and Budget director to propose a plan to "reorganize governmental functions and eliminate unnecessary agencies" in an effort to cut down on federal spending and improve "efficiency, effectiveness and accountability of that agency." Within 180 days, the heads of select agencies must submit individual plans to director Mulvaney, who will have another 180 days to send a plan to the president.  
18. The Revocation of Federal Contracting Executive Orders
Revokes key components of the Obama administration's previous order banning federal contractors from discriminating against employees on the basis of sexual orientation or identity. Gay rights advocates say the Executive Order hobbles several of Obama's previous orders by revoking the requirement that companies seeking federal contracts prove they've complied with federal laws banning discrimination based on sexual identity or orientation.
19. Promoting Energy Independence and Economic Growth
Directs the EPA to review another executive order, called the Clean Power Plan, signed by Barack Obama in 2014, which aimed to reduce carbon pollution from power plants, but was halted by the Supreme Court in 2016. Trump's new order also asks agencies to review any regulations that could "potentially burden the development or use" of oil, natural gas, coal, and nuclear energy resources.” Within 180 days, the agencies must submit reports to the Office of Management and Budget, which will take action to eliminate regulations.
20. Establishing the President's Commission on Combating Drug Addiction and the Opioid Crisis
Creates the "Commission on Combating Drug Addiction and Opioid Crisis," which will study the federal government's effectiveness in fighting drug addiction by reviewing funding levels, accessibility of treatment services, prescription practices and youth educational message, and report to the president within 90 days. Trump appointed Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey as commission head.
21. Omnibus Report on Significant Trade Deficits
Directs the Commerce Department and U.S. Trade Representative to compile a report on trade practices that contribute to the trade deficit. The report will look at each of America's trade partners.  Forms of discrimination the report will assess include non-tariff barriers, anti-dumping and intellectual property theft. Within 90 days, the report will be sent to the White House.  
22. Establishing Enhanced Collection and Enforcement of Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duties and Violations of Trade and Customs Law
Directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to develop a plan within 90 days to combat two types of non-trade barriers placed against the U.S.: anti-dumping and countervailing duties. Also directs the DHS Secretary and Treasury Secretary to step up seizure of counterfeit goods and protect American companies from intellectual property right infringement. of Form

24. 23. “Buy American, Hire American"
 The "Hire American" portion of the bill targets the H-1B visa program, which allows businesses to hire high-skilled workers from outside the U.S., by putting less emphasis on the lottery system used to determine which companies can sponsor visas. The "Buy American" portion directs agencies to tighten rules that give priority to U.S. companies when hiring contractors or purchasing goods. Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross must submit a review of "Buy American" loopholes within 220 days.

 Signed: April 21, 2017
 Secretary of the Treasury shall immediately review all significant tax regulations issued by the Department of the Treasury on or after January 1, 2016;  and, in consultation with the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs and OMB, identify in an interim report to the President all such regulations that:
(i)    impose an undue financial burden on United States taxpayers; (ii)   add undue complexity to the Federal tax laws; or (iii) exceed the statutory authority of the Internal Revenue Service.
The Secretary shall prepare and submit a report to the President within 150 days that recommends specific actions to mitigate the burden imposed by regulations identified in the interim report. 
25.  Agriculture and Rural Prosperity in America
Creates a task force, led by Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue, that will identify policy options to promote U.S. agriculture business and job growth in rural America. The task force must submit a report to Trump within 180 days.
26.  Review of Designations Under the Antiquities Act
Directs the Secretary of Interior Ryan Zinke to review federal monument designations — including national parks — made since 1996 that cover more than 100,000 acres of land. Under the 1906 Antiquities Act, presidents have the power to protect land.  EO names one national monument designation in particular: Obama's 1.35 million-acre Bears Ears National Monument in Utah. Zinke must submit a report to Trump within 45 days.
27. Enforcing Statutory Prohibitions on Federal Control of Education
Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos is directed to study federal overreach in local and state education systems.  As a strong advocate for charter schools, DeVos will determine within 300 days whether federal education regulations take control away from states in areas such as curriculum, school administration and textbook or library content.
28. Veteran’s Administration
Signed: April 27, 2017
 Sets up a special office to improve accountability at the VA and protect whistleblowers.  EO creates a new VA office to identify poorly performing employees (related to a scandal that engulfed the VA when poor hospital treatment and long wait times for care were uncovered). Trump and the VA director praised the signing as a step toward increasing accountability in the agency.
29.  Off-Shore Drilling
Signed:  April 27, 2017
Reverses President Obama’s December decision to remove most of the Arctic Ocean from the federal drilling program which would have blocked drilling in the Arctic for years to come.  Will also review the Obama administration’s five-year drilling plan, finalized in November, that restricts lease sales for new drilling to only the Gulf of Mexico and waters off south-central Alaska. Regulators will also reconsider government regulations on activities like seismic testing and will review decisions within the last 10 years to create offshore marine monuments and sanctuaries; reviewing the five-year plan is a lengthy process that Zinke predicted could take about two years. 
30.  Review of Trade Agreements
Signed: April 29, 2017
At this juncture, it is important to understand some important characteristics about Executive Orders (from Wikipedia and Venable.com): “Historically, executive orders related to routine administrative matters and to the internal operations of federal agencies, such as amending Civil Service Rules and overseeing the administration of public lands. More recently, presidents have used executive orders to carry out legislative policies and programs. As a result, the executive order has become a critical tool in presidential policy making. For example, President John F. Kennedy used an executive order to eliminate racial discrimination in federally funded housing.” 
  • They are orders issued by United States Presidents, usually directed towards officers and agencies of the Federal government; White House staff  work with the agency heads to ensure that they comply with the President's wishes. Moreover, there are some EOs that implement authority delegated directly to the President by Congress. Unlike the "politically enforceable" EOs mentioned above, the Trump White House would have to comply with any requirements under such a statute before issuing an order.
  • Have the full force of law, based on the authority derived from statute or the Constitution itself
  • The ability to make such orders is based on express or implied Acts of Congress that delegate to the President some degree of discretionary power (delegated legislation)
  • Executive orders are subject to judicial review and may be overturned if the orders lack support by statute or the Constitution

  • Major policy initiatives require approval by the legislative branch, but executive orders have significant influence over the internal affairs of government, deciding how and to what degree legislation will be enforced, dealing with emergencies, waging wars, and in general fine-tuning policy choices in the implementation of broad statutes.
  • The President can sign, revoke, or choose not to enforce or defend Executive Orders
  • Most EOs are directed to the heads of Executive agencies. Essentially, they are statements of the President's policy priorities, expressed in the most formal manner possible. As a result, they are only "politically enforceable" by the President against his appointees
  • What usually matters most is not the issuance of the Order but the actions taken by the agencies under the authority granted by their organic statutes to implement the President's policies set forth in an EO
  • Always keep in mind that there may be a significant delay between an EO from the White House and concrete implementation in the form of final agency rules.
  • While the country should expect the new administration to continue to issue executive orders, it should not conclude that each EO will result in a "sea" change.” 
What more did Donald Trump do during his first 100 days?  Not much, if you believe the progressive critics and major polls.  In an ABC News/Washington Post poll released Sunday, 53 percent of those surveyed disapprove of Trump's performance as president, and 56 percent say he's accomplished little or nothing in his first 100 days.” 
Before buying-in completely to such poll results, we must consider what happened in the last election, and that his followers are not buying this assessment at all.  They want to give him more time; they want to emphasize his strong positions taken, particularly in relation to foreign affairs.  They are proud that he is an authoritarian leader, tending to put other nations on notice that America is the strongest military power on this earth.  They are content to believe that the Donald has put America first, and that he is making America great again.
The other more progressive critics are pointing out his lack of leadership on major legislation, and his inability to get some things he wants done – like immigration bans and repeal of Obamacare. They tend to give him a failing grade in both domestic and foreign policy. 
But I want to conclude on a slightly different note, as I often do, because I believe his performance during these first 100 days indicates more about him (and his followers perhaps) than about his policies.   These EOs reveal several fundamental truths about Donald Trump which we ignore at our own peril:
.      He believes strongly that the way to get things done is to issue orders to underlings, to:

a.      Make it plain who is in charge
b.      Put the burden of producing results on someone else
c.      Leave open the option of being able to blame the underlings for any failures that may result
d.      Produce a product that can be discarded if necessary because of the time lapse between order and completion
2.      Unfortunately, he apparently believes that he can govern without the strong participation of the legislative branch of government

a.      This is an obvious clue to the authoritarian mind of Donald Trump
b.      Coming from the real estate development business, he obviously doesn’t believe in deal-making or price-setting or selling or contracting by committee; it all depends on the mind and the actions of the man in charge
3.      Donald Trump does not wish to be held in check by the Congress; that is not his way to conduct business.  Thus, he has gone beyond the limits of existing statutes and constitutional authority:
a.      setting bans on immigrants,
b.      limiting free speech, not only by silencing protestors at his rallies, but by eliminating an Obama order banning federal contractors from discriminating against employees on the basis of sexual orientation or identity.
c.      Proposing limits on access to all levels of internet service and proposing greater surveillance of people use of the internet
4.      It is quite clear that Trump thinks issuing orders is equivalent to accomplishing something; otherwise, how could he possibly claim to have accomplished more in his first ninety days (now 100) than has been accomplished by other modern-era presidents?  Let’s take another look at those EOs:
a.      Over two-thirds of the EOs require some sort of report, recommendations or decision before implementation can even begin to happen
b.      Periods for reporting or recommending vary from 45 days to 2 years.
c.      Many of the agencies being ordered to report or act, don’t even have the leadership personnel hired or appointed to carry out such orders
d.      How many reports or recommendations are stored in vaults somewhere un-read, un-remembered and un-cared-about?  Your guess is as good as mine, but I venture to say it adds up into the thousands! 
e.      Follow-up by Trump staff is of monumental importance in getting these EOs to their final destination where something of substantial import happens; their track record so far does not promise good results
5.      One of the items of importance that has no apparent backing or appearance is any follow-up with the public to let citizens know what progress is being made on the implementation of any of these Orders.  We hear a lot about proposed legislation on healthcare, immigration, tax reform, and the wall, but what will we hear about all these lesser EOs – little or nothing is my guess.

6.      Finally, Trump himself, has slammed the use of executive orders as an example of weak leadership and inability to work with Congress, and most of that criticism was directed at a president who had Republican majorities in Congress opposing him.  On CBS’s “Face the Nation” in August 2015, Trump said: “I don’t like executive orders. That is not what the country was based on.”  
His orders say a lot about how Trump wishes to govern: not by doing the hard work of constructing legislation to present to Congress, then working with Congress to amend or strengthen that legislation, support committee work without prejudicing the outcome, and help bring together bi-partisan coalitions to work on producing what is best for most of the People.  This is known in some circles as “how to govern.”  There is more to it, but even this small summary serves to illustrate the profound lack of governing skills that this administration exhibits or possesses.   Trump would rather issue Orders and call them accomplishments, even if they never materialize into full-blown actions that might benefit the nation and its People.

Thank goodness the first 100 days are over.  That brings us 100 days closer to the time we can rid ourselves of this blight on our democracy!


                                              

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              


4/15/2017

Values In Conflict: can Democracy survive?

It seems to me that so much time has been spent ridiculing and blaming Government and Politics for our fate that we have missed an important target for defining our present situation.  While “government” has failed us in some ways, it has been true to our ideals when it has taken on major concerns like retirement and long-term care for Seniors; access to special health care services for children and adults with special needs or challenges.  Government often shines when it handles natural disasters and national emergencies.  Government has demonstrated over and over that well-trained police and firemen can handle the most difficult situations.  Hospitals, public clinics, neighborhood health care centers do their jobs every day to heal and save.  Social Security (along with its health insurance components – Medicare and Medicaid) has enabled millions of Seniors to escape the debilitating poverty known to senior members of past generations.  There are many examples of government working to assist and to enhance the lives of ordinary people.  Government is not always “the problem.”  We have missed the target by aiming at government alone.  Even so, we cannot take government reform and re-structure off the table because ours is a system of governing that always demands renewal and reform to make it possible for greater citizen welfare, protection, benefit and involvement.


I am, however, increasingly concerned with the undemocratic system that has invaded government and accessed its structures as tools for spreading its own propaganda and its own ‘principles’ and modes of operation.  I believe the more important target for grievance, sometimes our condemnation, and certainly for continuous oversight is the private sector of industrial, for-profit services and financial speculation– CAPITALISM writ large! 
In effect, because of its purpose, mission and aims, industrialization/capitalism is always attempting to better its chances of success and profit by ever more intrusive and nefarious means.  Capitalism is not entirely known for its ethical behaviors, but for its manipulation of money, of property, of profit, of its labor force and of any entity that attempts to control its over-reach.  Industrialism/capitalism is not built on the same value structure that enervates democracy.  A very brief and generalized comparison of how much the systems differ in beliefs and values (ethical considerations), may serve to focus our attention.
CAPITALISM/                                                                                             DEMOCRACY

PROFIT is the overriding concern;  success is strong second/           Life, liberty and welfare or hap-                                                                                                                            piness of all are overriding con-                                                                                                                            cerns                

Uses & manipulates all aspects of operations for profit/                   Follows constitutionally-based legislative process to make laws that protect and defend the People and the nation; uses system of checks and balances

Treats Labor as expendable commodity; parts of profit equation/  Encourages and rewards people who initiate, create and produce; provides education, opportunities, incentives for well-being of all

Sees consumers as targets of manipulation, having few rights/       Treats people as sovereign;
                                                                                                                       possessing equal rights under law

Mission: to acquire money, property and status /                                Mission: to seek liberty                                                                                                                                            and justice for all

Motive: enhancement of wealth of company and stockholders/      Motive: enhancement of the                                                                                                                                 people’s rights, dignity, equality,                                                                                                                           opportunities and welfare

Seeks freedom from restrictions of business practices/                      Empathizes a balance between                                                                                                                             liberty and responsibility;                                                                                                                                       regulates society to enhance not                                                                                                                           deny well-being and happiness

Is organized and structured to enhance profits/                                   Organized to enhance life, liberty                                                                                                                          and pursuit of happiness or well-                                                                                                                          being

Demands company loyalty/                                                                        Encourages love of country; shown                                                                                                             by  taking mutual responsibility                                                                                                                             for maintaining ideals and                                                                                                                                     welfare of all   

Places material success and acquisitions above Law/                          Places the Law above the desires and status of individuals; reforms laws that discriminate against or de-value the rights and liberties of any cohort

Believes people are endowed with privileges based on status/       Believes people are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, among them life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

Believes that government oversight and regulation is anathema/    Believes oversight &enforcement                                                                                                                         of just laws are necessary to                                                                                                                                   equitable provision of                                                                                                                                             opportunities, rights, freedoms,                                                                                                                           justice

Asserts that government is society’s main ‘problem’/                        Asserts that government of, by                                                                                                                               and for the People is the basis of                                                                                                                           a stable, responsible, just,                                                                                                                                       dynamic and productive society  

There was a time, in its early stages, when industrialism/capitalism was built on an entirely different set of values – Protestant Christian values primarily.  Attempting to reclaim these ethical foundations, author Max Weber “drew a sharp line between capitalism and greed.”  Capitalism was based not on a desire to get rich, but on self-discipline, methodical effort, responsible stewardship, sober devotion to a calling and to a rational organization of life.
As one author (identified below) commented: “Weber’s ethical vindication of capitalism now seems to apply to an altogether different world.”  And then adds, as an example: “Finance is an ‘industry’ where innovation is hard to distinguish from rule-bending or rule-breaking; where the pay-offs from semi-legal and illegal activities are particularly high; where the gradient in expertise and pay between firms and regulatory authorities is extreme; where revolving doors between the two offer unending possibilities for subtle and not-so-subtle corruption; where the largest firms are not just too big to fail, but also too big to jail, given their importance for national economic policy and tax revenue; and where the borderline between private companies and the state is more blurred than anywhere else, as indicated by the 2008 bailout or by the number of former and future employees of financial firms in the American government.”  We have allowed the two realms to mesh to the extent that business interests now exercise major control over our ideals, our loyalties, our freedoms, our activities, our thinking, our habits, our institutions and our form of government.
What is surprising and disturbing is that we are not taking a substantial amount of time to discern and act upon this takeover.  We tend to overlook the contradictions and anti-democratic values inherent in capitalism, and are prone to a dangerously naïve point of view: that privatizing government functions is equivalent to a solution for operating smoothly and efficiently, and the ultimate answer for bettering our lives and liberties.  The years 1929 and 2008 stand as beacons of truth and reality in that foggy world of thought.   The more government relinquishes regulatory control of business enterprises, and allows those entities to control government, the worse off we are as a nation, thrown right back into the swamp of greed, short-cuts to profits, inadequate and unsafe products, and lack of inner controls to regulate bad practices like polluting our environment, insider trading, selling of unprotected and under-valued stocks, bonds and financial products.  Every time we listen to the snake-oil salesmen who promote “deregulation” we experience damage to our society and to our Republic.  

Checks and balances are at the core of our democratic system and yet we abandon that concept every time we buy into “privatization,” “deregulation,” and “government needs to be run like a business.”  What’s wrong with businessmen taking over government is epitomized by the accession of Donald Trump to the highest office in our nation.  His lack of knowledge of history and of governmental functioning; his authoritarian values, actions and behaviors are destructive of democracy and we will find it out too late if we allow this maniac to continue in office for a full term.  He, like many of his ilk from the business world (many of whom have used government money for personal comfort or aggrandizement), are not interested in the values of our democracy; they are interested in making money.  And, so far, the Donald has allegedly made millions from his candidacy and from his machinations in office.  This businessman is robbing our wallets and our purses. Trump Towers and Mar-a-Lago alone are cleaning up on hosting foreign dignitaries and special meetings and conferences, and the Russian connection may someday be known for what I believe it to be – an economic windfall for Trump Enterprises.  But, that’s enough about Donald Trump -- the plutocratic oligarch who continues to define the moral bankruptcy of Capitalism.  

Let us bring in someone who knows a whole lot more about this subject than I do.  “How Will Capitalism End?” is the name of a book of essays by Wolfgang Streeck.  Streeck is the Director of the Max Planck Institute for Social Research in Cologne, Professor of Sociology at the University there, and an Honorary Fellow of the Society for the Advancement of Socio-Economics.  In one review from the Times Higher Education, there is a comment that Streeck’s essays “will be at the center of social research for years to come.”  The book claims that after years of ill health, capitalism is now in critical condition.  Growth has given way to stagnation, inequality is leading to instability, and confidence in the money economy is evaporating.  According to one review, “the marriage between democracy and capitalism, ill-suited partners brought together in the shadow of World War II, is coming to an end.  Ours has become a world defined by declining growth, oligarchic rule, a shrinking public sphere, institutional corruption, and international anarchy” and he senses there is no political entity capable of rolling back the effects of this situation.   In his opening chapter, Streeck identifies five areas of “disorder” that he says herald the demise of capitalism.  Let us explore these from the viewpoint of values and how they do not, and have not, worked well for democratic society.  

Disorder #1:  Stagnation
Although the author cites several reasons for decline and stagnation, it is not my purpose to delve into economic theory nor economic statistical analysis in any substantive way.  My purpose today is to compare and contrast the values exhibited by capitalism and democracy. 
Streeck says that one of the major factors in the decline and stagnation of capitalism as a system is in the realm of ethics.  He cites de-regulation – removal of restrictions on corporate behavior – the circumventing of whatever rules were left, the ever-increasing inequality associated with the disproportionate growth -  especially in the banking sector- and the consumptive excesses of rich capitalist societies as contributing factors in the struggle to find more profit amid fewer new markets. 
He goes even further to suggest that natural resources are running low because of the excess demand of industries on those resources.  Inevitably, he brings up the matter of the “unavoidable degradation of the biosphere” as a serious breach of ethical consideration involving the “collective good.”  In other words, competitive production and consumption, plus the capitalist principle of infinite expansion, are colliding headlong with the finite supply of natural resources.  “No one seriously denies that the energy consumption patterns of rich capitalist societies cannot be extended to the rest of the world without destroying essential preconditions of human life” (perhaps he hasn’t met the deniers of the Trump administration, or those in the Congress!).

Streeck does not fail to include the critical denuding of the labor movement in his list of factors.  He avers that the making of labor into a commodity of industry has undone prospects for labor reforms and made employment itself much more precarious for a growing share of the population.   Hours given by families to employers have increased while wages have lagged behind productivity advances, most dramatically in the U.S., he indicates.  Destruction of trade unions “ha(s) caused residual unemployment of 7 to 8 per cent as the new normal.  Moreover, global mobility enables employers to replace unwilling local workers with willing…ones” at minimal cost in wages. 
“Capitalism without opposition is left to its own devices, which do not include self-restraint.  The capitalist pursuit of profit is open-ended, and cannot be otherwise.”  His description of the imminent future of the stagnant economy that looms ahead is somewhat forbidding, as he indicates that the struggle for survival will “become more intense.”  Rather than restoring protective limits rendered obsolete by globalization, “ever new ways will be sought to exploit nature, extend and intensify working time, and encourage what the jargon calls ‘creative finance’, in a desperate effort to keep profits up and capital accumulation going.”  Victimization, not only of Labor, but of many ordinary citizens is a profound probability.
Disorder #2:  Plutocrats and Plunder
There is no indication that the long-term trend towards greater economic inequality will be broken any time soon, or indeed ever.  Redistribution to the top thus becomes oligarchic: rather than serving a collective interest in economic progress, it turns into extraction of resources from increasingly impoverished, declining societies... The bond which tied the profits of the rich to the poor is severed, cutting the fate of the economic elites loose from that of the masses.”
This is a description of what has been happening for at least the last 30 years (since Ronald Reagan) and probably much longer to the extent that the rich have always been involved in restraining the poor fearing the takeover of their property and riches by an unruly mob of the unwashed and uneducated.  In these times, the rich have not only reduced the redistribution of their wealth through government deregulation and budget-cutting, they have embarked upon the nefarious enterprise of stealing (extracting) money from the (many) taxes paid by the middle class and working poor, increasing privatization of government functions through government contracts and lowering corporate and individual tax rates, but also by stashing their cash in off-shore bank accounts free from tax collection.  Now too, Streech points out, there are growing indications that because of the transnational character of fortunes, the super-rich are beginning to exit from their home countries to live in more (economically) hospitable environs.

I would caution that the two most potent upcoming means of Plutocratic plundering will be contained in items that are often too boring and daunting for the public’s taste or attention.  One is the 2018 Federal Budget which Trump has already revealed, but which Congress will surely amend (not necessarily in the best way).  Second, is the ‘reform’ of the Tax Code, which Mr. Trump may (or may not) get to before the summer recess.  Both items continue to be prime targets for private sector manipulation, and many of the provisions contained therein are the results of just such continued manipulation by the private sector Plutocrats.
Disorder #3:   Underfunding and Privatization

“Foremost among the causes of this shift (from the tax state to the debt state to the austerity state) were the new opportunities offered by global capital markets since the 1980’s for tax flight, tax evasion, tax-regime shopping and the extortion of tax cuts from governments by corporations and earners of high incomes.  Attempts to close public deficits relied almost exclusively on cuts in government spending....  As income gains accrued increasingly to the top 1 per cent, the public domain of capitalist economies shrank, starved in favor of internationally mobile oligarchic wealth.”
The mantra of lowering spending on government programs for the middle class and those living in poverty to “balance the budget” and to “lower the deficit,” has escalated in the 2018 Trump budget to an austerity level.  19 departments and 61 programs are being cut dramatically, and many will simply be eliminated.  At the same time, the rich corporations involved in defense and munitions will reap extreme profits under the many new contracts made necessary by the $54 billion dollar increase in the Defense budget. 

Privatization is being carried out “regardless of the contribution (that) public investment in productivity and social cohesion might have made to economic growth and social equity.”  Streech warns us that this austerity for the poor and enhancement of the oligarchs is another indication that “the economy of the oligarchs has been decoupled from that of ordinary people, as the rich no longer expect to pay a price for maximizing their income at the expense of the non-rich, or for pursuing their interests at the expense of the economy as a whole. 

Once again, the ethical dimension comes through the talk about economics.  We are being told in no uncertain terms that the rich are using government to separate themselves from any responsibility for the less fortunate in our democratic society.  There is no social contract left.  There is no mutual responsibility for each other.  There is not one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all.  There is brokenness, there is division, there is segregation. There is no longer a United States.  What there is constitutes two quite separate approaches to human endeavor and humane behavior.  The ethical foundations of Judeo-Christian scripture and religion are cast aside.  The basis of the Old Testament tithe for the poor has been lost; the golden Rule has been tarnished; the Prodigal Son cannot come home; the Good Samaritan turns his back on neighbors; and the role of the Judeo-Christian God as “Protector of the Poor and the Innocent” has been stripped of power.   
But those scriptures, and those religions, also have a warning for the oligarchs who wish to control the universe: “to whom much is given, much will be required” and “Woe to those who enact evil statutes, and to those who continually record unjust decisions, so as to deprive the needy of justice and rob the poor of My people of their rights"(Isa. 10:1-3) (see my Post of 12/24/2016 for much more)

Disorder #4:  Corruption

“Capitalism’s moral decline may have to do with its economic decline, the struggle for the last remaining profit opportunities becoming uglier by the day and turning into asset-stripping on a truly gigantic scale.  However that may be, public perceptions of capitalism are now deeply cynical, the whole system commonly perceived as a world of dirty tricks for ensuring the further enrichment of the already rich.  Nobody believes anymore in a moral revival of capitalism... it has more than ever become synonymous with corruption.

 It is at this point that some disagreement must be launched at the author (the book was published 21 days after the election of Trump and may not have been able to consider implications about the electorate).  Public perception of capitalism is apparently not quite as astute as Streech makes out.  The electorate that put Trump in office were immune to all the disorder within capitalism, and within the complicated life of this candidate.  They first touted him as a savvy businessman who would bring some order to what they conceived as disorder.   Instead he has brought nothing but disorder and chaos.  One of his many failings is his constant mind-change on policy which provokes a disorder of some magnitude amongst other countries.  Witness his recent bombing of a Syrian airbase from which Syrian planes took off to chemically annihilate innocent civilians.  This is in complete denial of his campaign rhetoric that eschewed any more involvement in Syria or other countries of the Middle East, except to annihilate ISIS.
In fact, as I have written before, Trump-backers, disconnected from reality, excused whatever he said or did in favor of a more authoritarian leadership style, most likely honed within the confines and influence of his capitalistic Trump Enterprises. His 2018 budget is the epitome of anti-social contract and anti-care for the less fortunate of this nation.  His attitudes toward nations and people are grounded, not in a Christian ethic of concern given without expectation of reciprocity, but in a capitalistic mode of competition, winning at all costs, and denigrating one’s rivals so that they appear to have lost or to have capitulated to a superior power. 

The followers of this wrongly-principled man include a cohort of Labor unions and their members, who obviously do not recognize, or perhaps do not understand, the enmity of capitalism and this specific capitalist toward the Labor movement.  Nor can they be aware of the imminent future of growing unemployment as capitalism increasingly seeks to employ technological means to replace humans at jobs that can be done by artificial entities.  These unions will have their day of reckoning, as did the traffic controllers under Reagan, when they will be thrown under the bus.  The wind-up for that throw has already begun in the Trump budget for 2018, and by his hiring freeze imposed upon certain departments of the federal government. 
Disorder #5:  International Anarchy

“Global capitalism needs a centre to secure its periphery and provide it with a credible monetary regime...when a centre was missing, and different powers aspired to take on the role, (it was) a time of chaos, economically as well as politically.”
Streech is talking here about the role that Great Britain played until the 1920s, and the United States played from 1945 until the 1970s. The period in-between and the period after the 70s are times of instability of which he speaks.  “Stability in currencies, backed up by a global banker of some integrity, is essential for trade and capital accumulation.  It is also essential for regimes on the periphery to allow and condone extraction of raw materials.”  And so, we come to the period at hand, about which he states:

“Contemporary capitalism increasingly suffers from global anarchy, as the United States is no longer able to serve in its post-war role, and a multipolar world order is nowhere on the horizon.  While there are (still?) no Great-Power clashes, the dollar’s function as international reserve currency is contested – and cannot be otherwise, given the declining performance of the American economy, its rising levels of public and private debt, and the recent experience of several highly destructive financial crises.  The search for an international alternative... is getting nowhere.”
He does mention our military might and isolationist trend as making the U.S. a reluctant leader in terms of becoming involved outside our borders, but again misses the point that the new “Leader of the Free World” is not reluctant to bomb another country’s infrastructure if that is what he thinks is needed to make him look strong.  We have regressed to “pre-emptive strikes” as policy.

We are in the realm of ethics once again, and we must discern the difference between capitalism and democracy.  Is global leadership based on strength and violence or on humanitarian efforts to address the needs and concerns of other populations around the globe?  In other words, as Streech suggests, are we the perpetrators “of sophisticated means of violence (special forces used for personal assassination; drones capable of killing almost anyone anywhere; supporters of torture and confinement in a worldwide system of internment camps; users of comprehensive surveillance mechanisms applied to potential opposition anywhere we choose) in order to inspire confidence in the United States as a ‘global enforcer’ of oligarchic property rights, and as a safe haven for oligarchic families and their treasure?”

Or, are we a nation dedicated to the advancement of human rights and human dignity, called to be “the Leader of the Free World” by supporting collaborative efforts through the UN to bring relief to countries suffering from disease, lack of resources like foods and grains, devastating natural disasters, and viral epidemics?  (will we stop paying anything to the UN and NATO as has been suggested?).  Are we a nation dedicated to world order based on peace and justice and non-violence (except in extreme cases where it is the last resort)?  Are we a nation called to be wise and prudent in our dealings with other nations by constitutionally mandating our Senate to ‘advise and consent’ to treaties, and by giving Congress the responsibility of declaring War?   It is eminently questionable that our President should have the assumed power of declaring any police action, skirmish or military offensive without the advice and counsel of this deliberative body.
Except in terms of a defensive response to an attack, it is, in my opinion, a travesty of separation of powers to allow a dictatorial premise to undo what the Founders gravely instituted for just this reason:  the President is not a King or dictator; he most assuredly should consult, and take with utmost seriousness the advice he receives from the separate but equal  legislative body— the Congress -- before taking any offensive warlike action against any nation or movement, and should, in most cases seek a declaration of war when this nation’s security is at risk.  It is a question of political process, but also a question of shared leadership and of ethical behavior.
Concepts like “Leader of the Free World” or “making America great” or “America First” have moral implications, but are not ethical concepts.  Capitalism per se has eschewed its original moral base – it is an amoral system built upon secular principles and concepts that often border on the immoral and the illegal. 

In contrast, Democracy has a basis in moral principles in almost every sphere of policy and operation, because democracy is built upon an ethical/moral base of people’s welfare and of human rights that help to ensure well-being.  However, it is abundantly clear that those democratic principles can also be disordered and corrupted by the acceptance of dubious principles from other areas of life, such as economics and capitalism.   Thus, the marriage of capitalistic and democratic principles is like a flawed road full of potholes and dangerous intersections.  But the acceptance by democracy of the amoral and immoral outcomes spawned by capitalism is a disorder and corruption that can no longer be tolerated (just as capitalism finds the “intervention” of political regulations to be intolerable).  It is past time to separate the two systems by removing the influence of capitalist currency and over-arching access from the halls of legislators and regulators, from the committee hearings and special meetings; from the parties and ‘conferences’ sponsored by capitalists seeking favors, delays, subsidies and inside information.  Yes, equal rights of access must still apply, but unequal amenities and unethical practices along with political control must be stifled and in most cases eliminated. 
The disordering and corruption of our democratic system by the Donald Trump’s (Koch’s and Abelson’s) of this world must stop. The conflicts of interest of this office-holder – and his whole nepotistic and Wall Street-based operation – must end.  Impeachment must be considered -- let’s not deny it.  His very presence in the oval office is an affront to our system of governance, to our democratic values and our moral foundation.  In 85 days, he has fashioned for himself the makings of ‘high crimes and misdemeanors!” – as were his Russian-enabled election, his monetary ties to Russian oligarchs, his appointments of “administrative de-constructors” and the use of his position to make money through his facilities like Trump Towers and Mar-a-Lago Resort.  The latest foray into Syria is also, in my estimation, a violation of the right of Congress to declare War unless there is an imminent threat to our nation (there wasn’t).  Moreover, his lack of complete divestiture means that he can – and undoubtedly does -- use his position to make money on stocks he or his family own in companies like munition-makers.  It has been reported that Trump owns stock in Raytheon, the maker of the missiles that now must be replaced (at $60 million total!) because of his decision to rain them down on that airfield in Syria! 

Democratic values (of, by and for the People) and Capitalism’s principles (do what it takes to build profit) do not mix.  They are incompatible and we must stop trying to pretend otherwise!

Postscript:  I do recognize that this comes across as a general indictment of all business and capitalistic enterprise.  Not so. There are many incidences when consultation and collaborative actions with business leaders and representatives is inescapable and totally necessary, but control over the process is not theirs to possess! This Post is, rather, an explanation and illustration of certain concepts and beliefs held as inviolable by corporations, financial entities and Big Business that are in conflict with the values of democracy.  Whether small business persons or all business enterprises accept and act upon those ethically questionable beliefs is not for me to decide; their words and actions reveal their commitments.  My point is that our government can no longer support the promulgation, acceptance and practice of their principles, in lieu of constitutional principles, as the basis of governance.  We must expunge their anti-democratic principles from our political and governmental structures, policies, behaviors, laws, and from all activities that affect the People, especially our elections, our legislation, and judicial decision-making.  This is not about placing blame; it is about what we are called to be, and about the necessity of continual renewal and reform of the processes of our representative democracy in accord with our constitutional principles and values.