Really? No, Really?

publius911Leave a comment

8/11/25

Like learning that there is no real Santa Claus, many are shocked that Democrats are actually touting their effort to confer citizenship on illegal aliens so they can vote. (See the recently exhumed Beto O’Rourke for confirmation.) Did you think they were being altruistic by opening our borders to any and all? Many screamed that this was an invasion but did not see through the haze of “human tragedy” spewed by the Marxist Democrats. The ultimate goal was always there. Flood the country with people, any people. Create “sanctuary” cities and states that have co-opted federal programs like Medicare and Medicaid, SNAP and others, as incentives to entice residency. It increased the numbers in those cities and states resulting in more Marxist Democrat Congressional seats which provides power while simultaneously, reducing the influence of non-Marxists.

This also explains the concerted effort to thwart the removal of the tens of millions that were not just let in, but also encouraged and abetted. I’m not sure why the legacy media was all in on this plan. Some may be re-thinking it as the places where they live continue to degrade. The personal protections they enjoy may not be enough as blue cities and states devolve into war zones and fiscal ruin because of their efforts. Car jackers don’t ask if you are “someone” before they pull open the door.

Will the “clean up” of Washington DC do anything on this issue?

My optimistic take is that the large embedded swampers are probably secretly hoping he succeeds in making DC safe again. When you can get shot, stabbed and or car jacked anywhere you live, work and are entertained, I have to think that survival instincts kick in. Will some of the never Trumpers finally come to see his worth? Well, as I said, I’m an optimist. It just may be the catalyst for gaining support for policies that put Americans first, including who can vote.

Rigging the Game

publius9111 Comment

8/6/25

The headlines are all about how congressional districts are drawn. Gerrymandering is named after a Massachusetts politician who was the first to use district drawing to favor his political party. Gerry (hard “G” by the way), was combined with “salamander” for the shape of a district that was drawn. Cue the current Illinois Congressional district map.

The battle for supremacy in US politics is in the state houses. This is where the power to affect outcomes is most pronounced. That is, without Congressional districts that can be won and controlled, there can be no federal power. The partisan drawn districts determine who controls Congress.

It’s been over a century since Gerry’s first 1812 “gerrymandering” and it has only led to more of it. The result is the current morass separating Americans. The political divide is most evident in the way we assemble Congress. With districts that do not reflect a mix of political views, each party has “locked” in safe seats throughout the country. Representatives no longer have to run campaigns building large war chests  that further their insulation from competition. They can ignore constituents who do not hold their party’s orthodoxy and worse, they reflect the loudest of those within their district even if not that of the majority.

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 poured gas on the issue of Congressional districts. It requires there to be carved out “minority” districts. As is/was the case with affirmative action, combating discrimination with more discrimination doesn’t work. It is high time for any and all references to anyone other than an individual to be purged as has been done with college entrants. It is long overdue for congressional districts to be drawn not on the color of the residents but on those attributes that are germane to governance. The criteria should be, the number of citizens, those who are eligible to vote, and smallest physical size and geometrically sound shape. There is sufficient data and mapping software available to achieve a much more logical outcome.

The registered party of the citizen is immaterial in this scheme. Removing party labels is critically important to begin the process of knitting back the fabric of our society. Representatives should no longer be able to hide out in the shadow of one or the other party. They will more likely have to move to positions that have appeal to the majority of their constituents who now reflect a more diverse mindset. That is, the center with minority extremes no longer holding sway over the majority. My suggestion.

Step 1 – Repeal the Voting Rights Act of requiring minority districts

Step 2 – Collect data on the number of citizens and where they reside (Census upgrade)

Step 3 – Create and apply universal mapping software that utilizes citizens data with geo mapping to create compact physical areas for representation.

“New” Security Arrangements

publius9111 Comment

5/15/25

It appears that President Trump is looking to lock the world into economic ties that would give pause to international conflict going forward. By having significant resources of your country invested in another, the thinking goes that you would not want to jeopardize those resources with physical harm. While all conflict may not be thwarted, the existence of your riches being put at risk will lead to diplomatic versus militaristic solutions.

It seems to me that this is a modern twist on the Middle Ages method of security arrangements. Then the kingdoms regularly housed significant family members in competing kingdoms. There, should a conflict arise, the family member(s) would be used to exacerbate or quell the hostility. Inter-kingdom marriages and other exchanges furthered the ties between entities creating alliances. One could surmise it eventually led to today’s European Union. That Trump is using significant economic ties is a throwback to those early days.

How Much is the Federal Government Worth to You

publius911Leave a comment

2/27/25

We consumers are making decisions on what to buy every day. Do I get the premium brand ice cream of the store labeled one? Do I drive 4 more blocks to save a penny per gallon on gas? Can I afford that vacation or should I save the money for my retirement? These are real decisions that are made every day across America and by folks in every socioeconomic stratum. The lack of information available has thwarted our ability to make the same decisions when it comes to our federal government? DOGE has changed that.

Any discussion of value must begin with the service/product being provided. Just what is being offered for “consumption”? In the case of the federal government, it is supposed to be spelled out in the Constitution. Clearly outlined in the preamble are the two things; personal safety including defense of our territory, and coordination of economic activity. While the particulars of these two delineated functions are left to the interpreter, it is clear that over the course of our nearly 250 years as a country, the definitions have been severely expanded.

Most Americans understand the need for money to be spent on our “defense”. Does that include sex change operations for servicemen and women? What about funding of United Nations  “peacekeeping” forces stationed in remote African countries? CIA activities in Panama? Is healthcare a “right” that the government is bound to provide? Is personal economic success (ex. universal income) part of the promotion of general welfare? We voters only get to answer these questions through our elected Representatives who may, or more likely, do not have any clue on whether these are proper expenditures. They are relying on bureaucrats who are “experts” on the situations. Many of whom are employed because we are spending the money so as to be heavily biased.

Through DOGE, we are seeing more clearly how far afield of the Constitutional dictates we have veered. A return to basics where we question every dollar can help voters gauge which candidates are being better stewards of their money. With the findings being presented through DOGE, voters must ask the question, “Do you support this expenditure and if so, why?” Through the revealing of each check being signed by our government, we better understand the worth of that purchase against our value proposition. We can then apply it to the representative’s/candidates’ answer.

Instead of choosing who to represent you by which color lawn sign they use, the light of knowing where your tax dollars are being spent will provide more substantial reasons on which to make your selection. How much is that worth to you?

OMG! What if he didn’t Win

publius911Leave a comment

2-18-25

When you see the depth of integration of critical race theory and its offshoot, diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI), you realize how close we were to losing our country. Talk about the end of democracy! The listing of contracts now cancelled, that were devoted to “educating” our teachers, administrators and government workers is staggering. (See doge.gov) I suspect that there are tenacles yet to be uncovered and some  have taken root requiring diligence to make sure that weed does not grow or return.

With all the gnashing of teeth on the left, you had to know that there was much to lose and right they were. Their whole effort of inculcating our society with the divisiveness of DEI is being shuttered. Apparently, the democrats were all in and now that it is being destroyed, so is their one plan. With no plan B, they are resorting to a “your mother wears combat boots” arguments.

Making some of the DOGE’s work stick will show the true colors of our supposed conservative republicans. As I wrote many months ago, it’s all fun and games until you’re talking their sacred cows. Those nasty little earmarks have a way of showing up at the most inopportune times. Even if our esteemed congressmen and women don’t follow through on making these “adjustments” permanent, there should be substantial savings sufficient to offset at least a sizable portion of the expected tax policies. Watch the red ink flow when we get to that fork in the road.

At least for now, there is a bending of the curve in a positive direction rather than a deep dive on our way to oblivion.

Concentration of Risk

publius9111 Comment

2/1/25

While the air tragedy at Reagan International Airport is still being investigated, one issue that has to be considered is why we have our entire center of government located in one geographically dense area? The airport has the busiest runway in the country because many of our federal leaders and employees use it for its convent location to their offices. In my business days, we evaluated the concentration of risk. That is, did we have too many customers and their properties in one area such that an event that affects them would cause the company financial harm. Apply that to our federal government, and the easy decision would be to minimize the risk by dispersion. It is ironic that the helicopter involved was on a training run to react to getting our leaders to a safe spot in the event of an attack, the most prominent, though not the only risk.

Indeed, there has ben much conversation about moving the federal bureaucracy closer to the people and areas they oversee. Agriculture to Nebraska, FBI to Detroit, Energy to Texas etc. have all been raised previously. With the understanding that we now have the technology that facilitates this kind of physical organization, it is incumbent upon our leaders to start the process of de-risking our exposure to a single event that could wipe out our entire federal government. There is no better time than now to give placing whole departments and agencies throughout the states. DC real estate is already devoid of employees who are working remotely. There is a concerted effort to decrease the size of the federal workforce and a move to another location could prompt many to seek employment elsewhere. All of the money that goes into the DC area can benefit those recipient locals and create economic growth while the DC area remains vibrant with its myriad of lobbyists and NGOs.

Let us take this opportunity to finally act on a long envisioned effort to put our government closer to those it is supposed to serve while the same time improving our ability to withstand a catastrophic event.

Turning the Light Back On

publius911Leave a comment

12.11.24

The best way of securing lasting change is through persuasion. To draw someone to your position, It is far better to convey something they desire than to impose it. Human beings naturally seek comfort and the freedom to pursue that which they desire. Nowhere in the history of the world has that been easier to achieve than in the United States of America. Indeed, it is those attributes that has born the USA moniker, “the shining beacon on the hill”. It is time for the US to turn that light back on.

Rather that foist our way of life on others, we should extol and exhibit our long referenced but rarely articulated, American values. For me, those values are, we derive all our freedom from God; the inalienable right to life, to speak freely, to pursue those things that satisfy one’s desires and the personal responsibility to consider others in that pursuit. These values manifest themselves in a governance system that intrudes lightly and only exists to defend its people and inalienable rights. It bends to the will of the people who are the source of its authority.

Previous attempts to “spread democracy” have failed in most cases because it was forced. Other cultures do not hold the same foundation of inalienable rights contained in our Declaration of Independence that is the basis of our Constitutional Republic. Rather, we should succeed domestically beyond expectations and create the proverbial light to which the moth is attracted. People around the world should see our success in economics and personal freedoms as so attractive that they insist they too realize those same things in their countries.

By showing the world once again of the might of our system through economic prowess and a highly satisfied citizenry, other leaders would be foolish to ignore seeking ways to emulate the USA. The “experiment” started 250 years ago proved to be the most powerful force moving people from bondage and poverty to freedom and prosperity. It is high time to show the world, and not force it, that the capitalistic economic system, girded by strong underlying values, is the brightest path to realizing the dreams of human being everywhere.

Turning the lights back on will require a return to a more responsible governance system. Many ox will need to be gored to shift  the power center from the state back to the people. Growth of the state has undercut both individual and commercial responsibility. Both have become overly dependent on the state for their well-being, if not their very survival, in contravention of our underlying values. We need to instill in our young that they must be responsible for their own well-being. That they have a responsibility to be productive and contribute to the whole of society through their independence. Companies must understand that they too have an obligation to conduct their activities knowing that failure rests on them and no calvary is coming to bail them out if they fail.

The state must see that in the creep in the size and scope of  its reach has exceed well beyond its documented role. Putting the genie back in the bottle will yield a great example of what unleashing the power of people can do for prosperity and happiness. Doing less will actually yield much more and turn the light on brighter than ever.

Unforced Error Number 2?

publius9112 Comments

11/25/24

With the pick of Lori Chavez-DeRemer for Labor Secretary, Trump has made another tactical mistake. Her voting record  speaks volumes to her position as a labor advocate/activist. Most glaring is her support for the “Protecting the Right to Organize Act” in 2023, one of only 3 republicans that did so. This legislation would have outlawed right-to-work legislation in the states, and  provided unions with untoward tools that favor them and handcuff management in organizing efforts. It would have furthered the strength of public unions which counters the stated efforts to curtail the behemoth federal government. Is it going to be resurrected?

How this selection squares with DOGE is lost on me. Both Musk and Ramaswamy anticipate struggles with unions on reductions in force. Their intentions are put against the backdrop of greater numbers of federal employees who increasingly join unions.

 “According to new numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), more federal workers joined unions last year.  Federal density in 2023 was 25.1%, up from 24.4% in 2022.” (https://www.afge.org/article/union-membership-in-federal-sector-went-up-in-2023/)

So why put in place a person who will likely, based on past performance, be a hinderance to Trump’s state objective of “draining the swamp”? Why the nod to Union Leader Sean O’Brien simply for speaking at the RNC convention? History has shown that every time we acquiesce to the left, they simply push for more. Right-to-work laws are at the heart of personal freedom. That they can be taken away by this incoming administration is an affront to those who support a vastly reduced influence of large labor groups on our federal, state and local governments and overall economy.

I suspect that hoards of federal employees will seek to join unions looking to preserve their jobs. They are hoping to hide behind antiquated rules put in place to by those who drink at the union trough. With a swamp subservient Washington DC court now packed with a majority of left wing Democrats, the resistance needs no more help. Certainly, not from someone who has the bully pulpit and power to make significant positive change.

Chavez-DeRemer should follow the route Matt Gaetz took. Take a walk through the Senate offices and gauge the sentiments for her appointment and once done, bow out gracefully saving Trump from yet another embarrassing failed appointment.

Ignorance is Bliss

publius911Leave a comment

11/8/24

Lo and behold, the sun came up on November sixth despite the rantings of those with the malady, “Trump deranged syndrome”. They are not seeking treatment so the ranting will continue unabated and therefore, we have a choice to make. Do we continue to listen to their arguments so that we are educated sufficiently to know how to counter them, or do we simply ignore them? I’m choosing the latter.

I religiously digested leftist information. I read Politico, Huffington Post, Daily Beast, The Atlantic et al. I watched Morning Joe,  Jake Tapper, Nicolle Wallace and even Rachel Maddow (on occasion). I thought it imperative that I learn what the left thought in order to better understand my own positions. Truth is, I had a very hard time doing this and I question if I really retained much other than, “these people are crazy”. Invariably, I came away thinking everything they are saying about “us” is really commentary on themselves. They were the threat to democracy.

Thankfully, we had the outcome we did last Tuesday. It freed me from the grip of needing to know. I no longer have to understand the other side. They’re losers and continuing to wallow in their mire does me no good. I don’t care what they have to say anymore. The spewing of lies and general vitriol is no longer necessary as we now hold the keys to the kingdom. I will turn my full attention to the machinations of our new government where, as I have in the past, stayed abreast in order to assure that they too, do not get full of themselves. Yes, bye-bye leftist media. Go ahead and shout into the wind. I choose to be blissfully ignorant of your rants.

A Case for Tariffs

publius911Leave a comment

9/27/24

Tariffs are as old as countries. Every nation has used them to some extent. In some cases, it was punitive to countries selling products they either sold at less than cost or subsidized. In others, it was to protect a domestic industry deemed important to the country. Think, businesses that employ large numbers of workers. The tariffs that seem to find a way to stay in place through both party’s administrations are those that are imposed for “national security” reasons.

Tariffs are being labeled as inflationary because they pass along the cost (tariff) to the consumer. Of course, the collected tariff goes to the state. But wait a minute! What if tariffs are coupled with tax policies that offset the additional cost of the increased prices?

If more goods are produced domestically, even at higher costs (labor primarily), those workers are earning income, paying taxes and contributing to the overall economy. When coupled with tax policies that reward domestic production, the net effect can actually be growth in both per capita income and revenue for the state. Such was the case during Trump’s first term.

When the issue involves a national security item, it is incumbent that we take every action to perform the single most important duty of the federal government, secure our nation. It requires sourcing materials, establishing redundancy and assuring adequate production capabilities. Think WWll mobilization. Determining national security items can be daunting but at the basest level, must include raw materials for materiel and armaments and manufacturing capabilities to produce them.

The final case for protectionist policies like tariffs is we have the most desirable market in the world. Every entrepreneur would love to have access to our  market. Yet, other countries restrict our access to their markets. For example, China was given entre to the world economy through membership in the World Trade Organization in 2001. The thinking was that under then leader Xiao Ping, businesses would have unfettered access to the billions of Chinese consumers. Comparative advantage would find equilibrium where goods and services would flow to the country positioned to offer the best value. That held while Ping was opening up the China market but now under XI, we find how one-sided the trade has become.

Many countries, including some of our allies, have market practices that are similar to those of China while we remain a bountiful basket for them. The use of tariffs, helps to even the playing field and, importantly, when coupled with other fiscal practices, can lead to greater prosperity for our country. It is high time for the USA to treat its market place like the jewel it is and only allow for fair traders to have access. If tariffs are required to get their attention, so be it.