Sequester - North Korea

It's been interesting to see the deployment of US Military assets to South Korean territory in recent days. A response to ongoing threats from the North. These show of force efforts are necessary and justified, but they also illustrate another factor. A few weeks ago, the Obama Administration took a very different course (quite literally) when they pretended that the sequester was preventing the deployment of a carrier to the Persian Gulf. It now seems evident that with the sequester having taken effect, the Administration has decided to stop playing games with national security.

The situation with the North is tense. But cognizant of this danger, we should nonetheless have confidence. In our Army, Marine Corps, Navy and Air Force we have the greatest military force in the history of the world. 

And the North knows it.

Obama’s British Problem

‘The United States has no truer friend than Great Britain’

President GW Bush, September 20^th 2001

The US-UK alliance brought down Nazism and defeated imperial Japan. For nearly half a century, it guarded the frontiers of democracy against communist aggression. This was the relationship that built the global economic expansion.
  
But in failing to support British sovereignty over the Falkland Islands, President Obama is undercutting our greatest friend. And understandably, the British are growing increasingly angry.

This isn’t a remote issue. It matters.

Like any friends, America and Britain sometimes disagree. Sometimes strongly. We disagreed with Britain on Suez. Britain disagreed with us on Vietnam. These occasional divergences continue to the present day. The US-UK intelligence relationship is deep but imperfect. Our extradition relationship is often frustrating. At the cultural level, we share many similarities alongside many differences – civilian gun ownership being one. And yet, our commonalities are overwhelming. A reality reflected in Afghanistan today.

To be fair to the President, his position towards the UK has been consistent if nothing else. First there was Churchill, then came the DVDs, next was the idiotic insult from a Foreign Service officer. Then, while standing next to the Queen, the President talked through the British national anthem. Not exactly a stellar record. 

But these errors are nothing compared to the President's position on the Falklands.

The Falklands, a set of Islands in the South Atlantic have long been a British overseas territory. Having failed to conquer the Islands during the 1982 Falklands War, Argentina, who claims the Islands as their own, now resorts to using diplomatic pressure to drive the UK to the negotiating table. This is a position contrary to international law and irreconcilable with freedom. Two weeks ago, the Falkland Islanders voted by a 99% majority to remain a British territory. Yet, in a pathetic acquiescence to Argentine pressure, the Obama Administration has decided to ignore this self-determination. And so, US policy is now at war with basic logic. Our position should be simple – ‘we support the UK’; the UK is our closest ally and the right to self-determination is our most sacred national belief. Instead however, our chosen policy is a flaccid lump of dishonorable weakness.

Some argue that the President is simply representing US interests. Far from betraying an ally they say, the President is trying to re-build increasingly important relationships with Latin America. This is a poor excuse. Our relationship with Latin America is obviously crucial. But if we’re unwilling to stand up for our most central values, then we’ll simply feed false but pervasive perceptions of an America devoid of values. Like Britain, Latin America wants an America that’s an honest friend. After all, that’s the only type of friend there is.

Again, let’s be clear. The relationship between the US and UK is not symbiotic and nor should we expect it to be. And yes, it’s true, too many Britons take a pathetic and intellectually redundant pleasure in a casual anti-Americanism. However, on essential issues of sovereignty, the UK deserves our unhesitating support.

In the end, this isn’t just about our responsibility as an ally, it’s also about our identity as a nation. We either stand for freedom or we don’t.

The protection of President Obama's family shouldn't be political football

The protection of President Obama's family shouldn't be political football. My latest @ The Guardian.

North Korea threats..

Apologies for the recent absence of posts, I've been very busy this week. However, I did want to do a quick piece on North Korea. Re- North Korea's continuing threats, it's my opinion that the Obama Administration has intelligence that the North Koreans may be planning a military skirmish - something like this. 

Why do I hold this opinion? Because over the past couple of weeks, President Obama has ordered B-52 and B-2 'show of force' flights over South Korea. That measure of forcefulness is unusual from this President. It's more reminiscent of President Bush's style. From my perspective, the most likely explanation is that Obama genuinely believes the North Koreans are serious about causing new problems. As a corollary, the President also probably feels that he has little choice but to take aggressive deterrent measures in response. I'd also imagine that there's a lot of behind the scenes work going on at the US Embassy in Beijing.  

Anyway, the US show of force is necessary. North Korea must know America's resolve.

Here's my North Korea piece for The Week from a couple of weeks back. 

And my North Korea piece for The Guardian from a while back.

A plan to solve America's debt crisis

This is an update on a debt reduction plan that I produced before Christmas. It takes into account the political developments that have occurred since that time. It achieves just under $5 billion in trend positive 10yr deficit reduction. 

I'm passionate about addressing the threat posed by America's ballooning debt. Some of my related thoughts can be found in the following links- the potential for a grand bargain, debt crisis, state finances, taxation, austerity.

The proposals that form my plan are targeted at four main objectives. 

1)Finding major savings in the Federal Budget, the pursuit of serious entitlement reform and the achievement of trend stable reductions to health care inflationary pressures.

2) Developing new sources of revenue but in ways that eliminate the tax code's current induced economic distortions and allow for rate reductions. And ultimately, for a debate about the size, nature and purpose of America's Federal Govt. in the 21st century.

3) Creating a foundation for sustained long term economic growth. 

4) The pursuit of a debt reduction plan that can get through Congress. In this sense, I've made many recommendations that are uncomfortable for me as a conservative.

Calculation Sources: The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CFRB), Budget Hero (BR) and my personal research. Where the available calculation values diverge, I've taken an average between them.

Key:

= Added Cost 
= Added Savings
 
Figures are 10 year numbers

Discretionary Spending (TOTAL - $960 Billion)
 

Cut Regular Discretionary Spending by 15%  -$960B

• I believe that the Federal Government has become too large and that it currently absorbs too great a % of GDP. It must be reduced in size. States must have greater responsibility and greater power.

Defense, Diplomacy & Security (TOTAL -$450 Billion)

Support President Obama's 10 year defense spending plan - $450B

• Though I believe that the Sequester defense cuts will be a disaster if allowed to continue indefinitely (please see my guardian op/ed), I support the President's ten year DoD proposals in their provision of a tough but practical approach towards balancing our national security/deficit reduction needs. Let me be clear, I do not accept combined sequester+Obama cuts. These would gut our DoD spending by $1 trillion/ten yr. However, $450 billion is doable.

Social Security (TOTAL -$533 Billion)

Raise the Normal Retirement Age to 68 -$160B

•  Americans are living longer. If my generation is to access Social Security, the program's eligibility age must rise.

Reduce Benefits for Wealthy Seniors-$80B

• Social Security should exist for the poorest Americans. Welfare for the wealthy makes little sense.  

Chain inflation measure to CPI -$120B

• The consumer price index reflects a more appropriate mechanism for determining Social Security benefit payments. After all, Social Security's objective is to assist seniors in their basic necessity purchases.

Reduce Spousal Benefits from 50% to 30% -$23B 

• This would reduce a problematic Social Security flaw.

Increase 'Years Worked' Benefit Calculation -$50B

• To tie in with a higher eligibility age, a longer work life calculation is needed. (I am using CFRB's 35-40 age calculation).

Include all New State and Local Workers in Social Security -$100B

• Again, everyone must pay in.

Healthcare (TOTAL -$720 Billion)

I like the Ryan Medicare plan, but in the interests of finding reforms that can get through Congress, these are some other proposals that I support. I have noted health care related tax reform under the revenue section. For more on my health care thoughts - go here.

Introduce Cost-Sharing Uniformity for Medicare -$100B

• This will help increase efficiency and reduce wasteful costs.

Raise Medicare Premiums to 30% of Costs -$120B

•  This is a tough one, but if we are going to restrain health care costs we must force people to take more personal responsibility.

Enact Medical Malpractice Reform -$80B

•  Ambulance chasers won't like it, but this is necessary. Frivolous law suits are out of control and we all pay more because of them. They also encourage unnecessary medical tests.
  

Increase the Medicare Retirement Age to 67 -$120B

• As with Social Security, we are living longer and working longer. If it's going to exist into the future, Medicare must reflect our changing demographics.

 Increase Drug Payment Costs for Higher Income Seniors-$280B

• Specific calculations according to BR. Seniors earning over $85,000 would pay higher drug payment costs.

Modify Federal Medicaid Funding to States by Reducing Match-Payment Baseline-$300B

•  The states must take greater responsibility for the health of their residents. The Federal Government must support these efforts, but by requiring greater state responsibility we can lower costs, increase efficiency and improve outcomes over the long term.

Adopt the Bowles-Simpson suggestion for Medicare SGR payments to Doctors +1% 2014 cut (Doc Fix)-$250B

• An effective 'Doc-Fix' ensuring that Doctors are willing to treat Seniors into the future requires money. This proposal will balance the imperative of finding lower trend costs with the maintenance of the Medicare moral guarantee.

Other Spending (TOTAL -$185 Billion)

Freeze Federal Civilian Pay for Four Years -$120B

•  Federal workers are well compensated. There must be shared sacrifice.

Reform TRICARE Payments as Proposed by former Defense Secretary Gates -$50B

• This would effect a small increase in TRICARE payments. TRICARE is on the path to bankruptcy if it doesn't receive reform.

Reduce Farm Subsidies -$80B

• Pork. It needs to go.

Cut All Earmarks -$30B (Accounting for some Earmarks Inevitably Remaining)

• The Federal Government should exist to provide for the basic welfare of all Americans. Congressional service should not be a conduit to the construction of a power-patronage network.

Increase NASA funding and reconstitute Mars mission- $95B

• Amidst all the cuts, it's important that we are able to inspire and to pursue the opportunities of science. Going to Mars would help make Maths and Science 'cool'. We would encourage greater academic success and a corollary gain in our national competitive economic strength. And... of course, we'd be advancing the frontiers of science! $95 billion seems a lot, but for what we would gain, it's a small price to pay.

Revenue/Subsidy Reform (TOTAL - $1.585 trillion)

Increase Federal User Fees -$40B

• I believe that it makes greater sense to tax consumption rather than income.

Sell Certain Government Assets -$80B

• We have too many under-utilized facilities that are expensive to operate.

Gradually Increase Gas Tax by 15 Cents per Gallon (with a $4/gallon total gas price ceiling) -$150B

• Please see my Guardian Op-Ed on this (please also note re-this article - my comment on Iraq concerns Iranian sponsored terrorism in Iraq and is not an anti-war statement- click the relevant hyperlink).

Introduce a soft drink 'sugar tax' of 1 cent per ounce  -$125B

•  As with cigarette taxes, it's important that people make a contribution to the corollary costs they impose on society in the health care arena. I don't support the NYC ban, but neither do I believe we should subsidize poor choices. This is an effective half-way option.

Simplify and Reduce Corporate Tax Rate to 23% - Neutral but long term savings/economic growth.

• If the corporate tax code is reformed so that all companies pay a baseline % without being able to 'loophole' jump their way into avoidance, the rate can be reduced and economic growth greatly stimulated.

 Improve Tax Collection -$20B

• By hiring more IRS investigators we can clamp down on those who think others should pay their taxes for them. Contrary to the attitude of some anti-tax folks, 'free riding' is not a conservative value.

Tax Fringe Benefits as Regular Income -$70B

• Value assessable gains which are received in the course of employment should be taxable.
  

Eliminate State and Local Tax Deduction -$550B

• Federal tax payments should be rooted in equalized income bracket/source considerations. A citizen in New York should not have his or her local/federal services subsidized by a citizen in Florida. If you want to live in a high tax state, then that's your prerogative and your financial responsibility.

Eliminate Subsidies for Bio-fuels -$100B

• These subsidies are neither economically nor environmentally logical. They exist as a form of deluded pork.

Replace Employer Health Care Exclusion with a Flat Credit (In Place of Excise Tax) -$400B

• Reducing health care costs by encouraging personal responsibility. Improving the fairness of the tax code by creating a level playing field for those who don't receive health care from their employer.

Reform Tax Code and Reduce Rates - Neutral

• Using the proposals above, Congress should work to reduce tax rates.

Conclusion 

Including the January 2013 tax increase on higher-income Americans (which CBO scores at $600 bn/10 yr), my approach would produce (forward trend stable - especially important for health care reforms!) debt reduction of $4.983 trillion.  Considerably more than the $4 trillion conventional wisdom target number.

 Photo Credit: CBS News

 

Why conservatives need to listen to Bill Maher

My latest @ The Week. Why conservatives need to listen to Bill Maher.

Senate Democrats and the politics of Clownsville

In a vote late last night, Senate Democrats passed their first budget for four years. Reading the details, it's become abundantly clear that they're living in Clownsville.

 

You might think that the word budget suggests at least some degree of consideration for fiscal reality. An expectation many Americans would probably share. Unfortunately, when it comes to this budget, fiscal reality is nowhere to be found.

Let's consider the details. The Democratic budget increases taxes by $1 trillion - and does so by reinforcing the Democrats deluded and mathematically unsustainable obsession with taxing the rich. Further, the budget does so little to restrain the growth of entitlements that it's truly laughable. Instead, it plays around the edges of Federal spending and finds a pathetic $900 billion in discretionary cuts - primarily by allowing 50% of the DoD sequester to go into effect. Thus we see it's essence. A hyper-partisan morass of mathematically absurd and strategically defective political delusions. It would gut the military in order to continue our national zombie walk into the fiscal abyss. This budget represents not just the willful ignorance of fiscal reality, but the absolute rejection of any semblance of fiscal reality. In short, it's a joke.

It's true, the GOP budget which passed the House last week is also highly partisan. But there's one major, foundational difference between the Democratic and Republican budgets. The GOP budget actually addresses our national deficit and our debt. And it does so in a trend stable way. For me, those two factors are the crucial litmus test for any budget. At a basic level, they illustrate a serious acceptance of fiscal reality. In terms of specific savings - where the Democrats find about $2 trillion in 10yr savings, Ryan's GOP budget finds $4.3 trillion. And for all the liberal whining that Republicans won't negotiate - Ryan has stood alone in his evident willingness to entertain serious compromise. (Beyond Congress, the President deserves some credit for his recent outreach to Senate Republicans. We'll see if he's serious or if he's playing more games). 

 

For my personal budget plan - Go here.

 Video which illustrates scale of debt crisis. Strangely, the production of a left wing group.

Iraq. In remembrance.

Yesterday I wrote about the politics of the Iraq War. 

However today, the day after the anniversary, it's time to remember. No politics, just solemn remembrance. These men and women gave everything for our country. They must never be forgotten. And their comrades must always be supported.

In defense of the Iraq War

My latest @ The Week. In defense of the Iraq War.

Federal Assault Weapons Ban

I'm glad to see that Senate Democrats have dropped their attempt at a Federal assault weapons ban. The reasoning for my satisfaction is simple. Local democracy knows best. Nothing stops New Yorkers from electing politicians who will restrict assault weapons in their state. But Washington DC should not create a one size fits all model of restriction. In addition, Feinstein's assault weapons ban included unconstitutional (in my opinion) magazine capacity limits. That was an excessive and unjustifiable encroachment onto second amendment rights. I've consistently said that I would support common sense gun reform. But common sense is not decided by Senate Democrats, it's decided by a bi-partisan collection of Senators and members of the House.

In case you're interested - why I believe that the second amendment is important.