The Positive of Reaching the Debt Limit

In about a week (the date is unsure - estimated at 17 October), the government will no longer be able to borrow money to keep operating at the current level of expenditure.  I have read that we spend about $2 billion a day more than what comes in via revenue.  So what we have is a cash flow issue, and we need to cut $2B per day (or about $750B per year) to remain solvent.  Any business owner knows a negative cash flow is not sustainable long term, yet the government has been doing this for decades.

So, starting soon, the government will have to make tough choices that are solely within the authority of the Executive Branch.  Some say the government will default on it's debt payment - that is only one choice the President has (and it would be a disastrous choice at that).  Sure, the Congress has authorized many more programs than can be funded under the current cash flow, but the reality means its up to the President to make those tough choices of what continues since Congress can't in a timely manner.  The situation has given the President the unprecedented opportunity to take bold action and provide some fiscal responsibility back into government.

To be fair, I am no fan of this President.  In fact, I think it is brutally obvious he is the worst President in the last 100 years (there were some pretty bad Presidents in the reconstruction era, so it would be presumptuous to say "worst ever" at this point).  However, this would be an opportunity to shine, and perhaps to regain some positive legacy.  And Obama is in a unique political position to pull it off.  I just don't think he will.

So what would Ron do?  Here are my suggested priorities of funding, and suggested approaches.

1) Service the Debt - We need to do this as multiple administrations and both parties have signed our future away.

2) Maintain the National Defense - Keep the DoD and Intelligence services funded as needed to protect our borders and safety.  However, this doesn't mean at current levels.  Reduce our current deployment expenses.  Don't start any new overseas initiatives and reduce the current ones.  And eliminate some of the big ticket ships-planes-tanks-satellites we are building to save some big bucks.

3) Eliminate a Cabinet Department (not just rearrange the deck chairs).  Education and Labor are the usual suspects, but think out of the box.

4) First blush, spread the remaining cuts evenly (percentage wise) across all the remaining Departments,  including the so called "Entitlements".  Perhaps limit Social Security to 5% cut, but this area is a big budget item and balancing cannot happen without cuts.

You do not solve a $750 Billion problem with small steps.  Major programs and efforts need to be cut, like an Aircraft Carrier, a couple Army Divisions, a Cabinet office, etc.  This is the only way to reach the cost target.  And we need to realize we can no longer fund the world, so an easy one is to stop the foreign aid program till we get back on our own feet.  I also don't believe that entitlements cannot be trimmed drastically.  There are many subsidies which are non critical to food and shelter safety nets.

Yes, there will be pain in the country, for at least a year as the economy adjusts.  And there will be stories of children being harmed by the loss of Head Start.  On a personal level, as a civil servant, I may lose my job as well.  However I believe the generosity of Americans will rise to the occasion in the private sector and through individual choice to support those in need, as has historically been done and as it should be done.

The fact is the country cannot sustain what is currently being funded.  We are running a fiat economy now which is not infinitely sustainable.  Just as it would have been better for Bush to have let Lehman Brothers fail, it is better to take the pain now while we can still recover.

Unlike the current Political leadership, I am willing to negotiate :)

Furlough Bullying

So we are a week into the shutdown/Furlough. It's clear to me that both parties wanted it to happen, mainly to just blame the other guy.  But thats not the point of this post.

What is truly shocking is the level of pettiness of the administration. They are actually spending effort (money) to "shut down",  Examples include:

  The blocking of open air monuments, 
  Forcibly closing private businesses on parkland that are not within gates
  Evicting (elderly) people from their privately owned homes if they are on Federal land. 

That is not leadership, its bullying.  To make it clear, the administration is SPENDING MONEY to do things that do not have to be done.  Just close the gates, send the Rangers home (most of them), and stop harassing citizens.  It costs the government NOTHING to NOT block off scenic vistas on roads, to NOT harass private businesses and people who have property on Federal Land.

Of course, they allow a march for ILLEGIAL IMMIGRANTS on the National Mall, but give a $100 ticket to a citizen for running on the paths.  Go figure...  

Overlooked part of Snowden Saga

   Many have written of the acts and potential fate of Edward Snowden for disclosing classified information regarding the government sponsored invasion of privacy.  While that is interesting, and worthy of intense debate, it is well covered by others.  What I feel is not being covered are the acts and fate of the other players in this drama – the ones who may have broken their oaths to the Constitution to implement the programs Mr. Snowden felt obliged to expose.  The purpose of this column is to create a starting point for that discussion.

  As far as I can tell, all members of the government from the President to the Congress to the Judiciary to the lowliest Civil Servant takes an Oath to protect and preserve the Constitution of the United States.  In fact, the Presidential Oath says nothing except to protect the Constitution.

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

            Oath of Office for the President

  The Constitution is the highest law of our land.  It cannot be changed except by Amendment, though through the years Judicial decisions have weakened and changed the meaning of several parts via fiat, with the (mostly passive) support of the Legislative and Executive branches.  Given that a (the?) main purpose of the Constitution is to protect the Citizens from the Government, it makes sense that the government organs would follow this path.  To date, a vast majority of the Citizenry seems to either not have noticed, or not cared enough to complain.  It is interesting that the current events in Egypt reflect their populace caring enough to act as the freely elected Islamists infringed on their constitution.

  The programs exposed by Mr. Snowden clearly are unconstitutional per the 4^th Amendment.  That is, the actions of the government are clearly illegal. 

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

(http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution.html) 

  The question at hand is how to correct this illegality (since the programs continue), and what are the penalties for those who broke the law.  Also, identification of WHO should be held responsible is not always clear.

  It would be easy to point a finger at the National Security Agency, or other intelligence agencies, and feel the culprit has been found.  But in my view the responsibility is with those in charge who ordered or sponsored the activity more so than those who implemented it.

  Though we really don’t know, I suspect the program originated in the Executive Branch, somewhere in the National Security Apparatus.  So the first person with responsibility is not the person who “thought” of the idea (as many ideas both good and bad are brought forth), but the person who “approved” the implementation.  The President(s) in place, as the leader of the Executive branch and ultimate approver during this activity, should be held accountable, as well as their staff who assisted in circumventing the Constitution -such as their Legal Counsel.  How far it goes should be decided by Grand Jury or Impeachment proceeding.

  Impeachment may be difficult as the Legislative branch leadership is also culpable.  It is acknowledged by their pubic pronouncements that both the Majority and Minority leadership of both the House and Senate were briefed and continue to support the activity.  As are the majority of members in the House and Senate Select Intelligence committees who necessarily approved the program.  The only legislators that could ethically sit in judgment would be those who were themselves not tainted by the approval process of this activity.

  I am also curious as to what kind of Federal Judge would find a compelling argument to approve the vast and ubiquitous invasion of privacy without a probable cause.   We can safely assume that the judges chosen for the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court are not chosen for their vigorous defense of personal freedom or individual liberty!  But it takes a special level of hubris or incompetence to blatantly disregard such a fundamental freedom.  This is the person (after the President) who holds the highest level of responsibility and deserves the strictest punishment for failing the constitution.

  Since I know the Politicians involved would not do the honorable thing and resign, I believe the only way forward would be to begin the process of impeachment of current officers, and a special prosecutor for those no longer serving.  This would be a far reaching and painful process, but one that is needed to restore the rule of law within the government.  A government that has grown contemptuous of personal liberty.  For those that saw the erosion of our liberty is required to protect us from threats, I need only to quote perhaps the wisest and most intelligent person to ever live in this land, and one who also lived in a time of great peril…

“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

-       Ben Franklin