Are Our Roads and Bridges Actually Crumbling? It Depends on Where You Live!

/in , , , , /by

During his State of the Union Address President Trump said:

As we rebuild our industries, it is also time to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure.

America is a nation of builders.  We built the Empire State Building in just 1 year — is it not a disgrace that it can now take 10 years just to get a permit approved for a simple road?

I am asking both parties to come together to give us the safe, fast, reliable, and modern infrastructure our economy needs and our people deserve.

Tonight, I am calling on the Congress to produce a bill that generates at least $1.5 trillion for the new infrastructure investment we need.

Every Federal dollar should be leveraged by partnering with State and local governments and, where appropriate, tapping into private sector investment — to permanently fix the infrastructure deficit.

Any bill must also streamline the permitting and approval process — getting it down to no more than two years, and perhaps even one.

Together, we can reclaim our building heritage.  We will build gleaming new roads, bridges, highways, railways, and waterways across our land.  And we will do it with American heart, American hands, and American grit. [Emphasis added]

According to data from Transportation.gov the “crumbling infrastructure” that President Trump referred to depends on where you live. The states in which over 70% of roads are in “poor/mediocre condition are Colorado (70%), Oklahoma (70%), Wisconsin (71%), Illinois (73%) and Connecticut (73%). The top two states with the highest percentage of “structurally deficient/functionally obsolete bridges are Massachusetts (52.5%) and Hawaii (43.9%). See the chart below for a state by state breakdown of the status of bridges and roads and the cost to repair them.

Why is infrastructure important?

In a Motor Trend magazine article titled “Tapping the Brakes: Autonomous-car Society is Still Decades Away” Mark Rechtin reports:

Pull out any issue of Popular Science from the past 50 years, and you’ll likely find a story predicting that we would be living in a world of self-driving cars any decade now. (You can add in recent long-form pieces by other national media that push that Jetsons-tinged future even harder.)

[ … ]

But the truth is we are still a long way from a fully self-driving society, for several very key reasons that have nothing to do with our ability to create the technology. Here is the cocktail party checklist of the interrelated barriers we face:

Infrastructure: Autonomous vehicles need roadways that are well-marked and in good shape. There are 4.12 million miles of road in America, according to the Federal Highway Administration, of which 2.68 million miles are paved. How bad are our roads? According to the FHA, 42.1 percent of Connecticut’s federal-aid highway miles are in “poor or mediocre condition.” Traffic-choked California is close behind, with 35.1 percent in terrible shape.

Read more.

Rechtin concludes, “The ability to create autonomous vehicles is not at issue. At issue is how to incorporate 21st century technology into a world that is still mired in the 20th. And that will take time.”

Why are our roads mired in the 20th century?

According to Transportation.gov:

The Highway Trust Fund is set to expire on July 31. Without action from Congress, federal funding for transportation will come to a screeching halt — and with it, so will traffic in many places. Over the last six years, Congress has passed 33 short-term measures rather than funding transportation for the long term. And our transportation system — our roads and bridges, especially — is in a dire state of disrepair because of it. The attached fact sheet shows us this.

Experts agree:  The only way to prepare our transportation system for the next generation is to stop this cycle of short-term measures and pass a long-term transportation bill. [Emphasis added]

So there you have it. Taxes are paid to Congress every-time you fill your tank but Congress can’t get its act together and pass a single year transportation bill let alone a long-term bill.

It’s the Congress stupid!

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump Releases Infrastructure Plan Focused on Deregulation and New Funding

Our Roads and Bridges Are Not Actually Crumbling

Hawaii Highways Rank 47th in Cost-Effectiveness

Road and Bridge Data by State
State Structurally Deficient / Functionally Obsolete Bridges* Annual Total Extra Vehicle Repairs / Operating Costs Due to Driving on Roads in Need of Fixing** Percentage of Roads in Poor / Mediocre Condition**
ALABAMA 3,608 of the 16,078 (22.4%) $530 million ($141 per motorist) 25%
ALASKA 290 of the 1,196 (24.2%) $181 million ($359 per motorist) 49%
ARIZONA 954 of the 7,862 (12.1%) $887 million ($205 per motorist) 52%
ARKANSAS 2,894 of the 12,748 (22.7%) $634 million ($308 per motorist) 39%
CALIFORNIA 6,953 of the 24,955 (27.9%) $13.892 billion ($586 per motorist) 68%
COLORADO 1,438 of the 8,612 (16.7%) $1.034 billion ($287 per motorist) 70%
CONNECTICUT 1,472 of the 4,218 (34.9%) $847 million ($294 per motorist) 73%
DELAWARE 177 of the 864 (20.5%) $168 million ($257 per motorist. 36%
FLORIDA 2,044 of the 12,070 (16.9%) $1.792 billion ($128 per motorist) 26%
GEORGIA 2,600 of the 14,769 (17.6%) $374 million ($60 per motorist) 19%
HAWAII 494 of the 1,125 (43.9%) $456 million ($515 per motorist) 49%
IDAHO 859 of the 4,232 (20.3%) $316 million ($305 per motorist) 45%
ILLINOIS 4,246 of the 26,621 (15.9%) $2.4 billion ($292 per motorist) 73%
INDIANA 4,168 of the 18,953 (22%) $1.249 billion ($225 per motorist) 17%
IOWA 6,271 of the 24,398 (25.7%) $756 million ($381 per motorist) 46%
KANSAS 4,465 of the 25,171 (17.7%) $646 million ($319 per motorist) 62%
KENTUCKY 4,436 of the 14,116 (31.4%) $543 million ($185 per motorist) 34%
LOUISIANA 3,790 of the 13,050 (29%) $1.2 billion ($408 per motorist) 62%
MAINE 791 of the 2,402 (32.9%) $246 million ($245 per motorist) 53%
MARYLAND 1,418 of the 5,291 (26.8%) $1.598 billion ($422 per motorist) 55%
MASSACHUSETTS 2,694 of the 5,136 (52.5%) $1.461 billion ($313 per motorist) 42%
MICHIGAN 3,018 of the 11,022 (27.4%) $2.534 billion ($357 per motorist) 38%
MINNESOTA 1,513 of the 13,137 (11.5%) $797 million ($250 per motorist) 52%
MISSISSIPPI 3,636 of the 17,044 (21.3%) $811 million ($419 per motorist) 51%
MISSOURI 6,633 of the 24,350 (27.2%) $1.6 billion ($380 per motorist) 31%
MONTANA 882 of the 5,126 (17.2%) $136 million ($184 per motorist) 52%
NEBRASKA 3,765 of the 15,370 (24.5%) $380 million ($282 per motorist) 59%
NEVADA 253 of the 1,853 (13.7%) $391 million ($233 per motorist) 20%
NEW HAMPSHIRE 790 of the 2,438 (32.4%) $267 million ($259 per motorist) 54%
NEW JERSEY 2,334 of the 6,566 (35.5%) $3.476 billion ($601 per motorist) 66%
NEW MEXICO 654 of the 3,935 (16.6%) $397 million ($291 per motorist) 44%
NEW YORK 6,775 of the 17,442 (38.8%) $4.551 billion ($403 per motorist) 60%
NORTH CAROLINA 5,534 of the 18,168 (30.5%) $1.555 billion ($241 per motorist) 45%
NORTH DAKOTA 966 of the 4,439 (21.8%) $112 million ($237 per motorist) 44%
OHIO 6,647 of the 27,015 (24.6%) $1.685 billion ($212 per motorist) 42%
OKLAHOMA 5,828 of the 22,912 (25.4%) $978 million ($425 per motorist) 70%
OREGON 1,754 of the 7,656 (22.9%) $495 million ($173 per motorist) 65%
PENNSYLVANIA 9,561 of the 22,660 (42.2%) $2.947 billion ($341 per motorist) 57%
RHODE ISLAND 433 of the 766 (56.5%) $350 million ($467 per motorist) 70%
SOUTH CAROLINA 1,920 of the 9,275 (20.7%) $811 million ($255 per motorist) 40%
SOUTH DAKOTA 1,459 of the 5,875 (24.8%) $194 million ($324 per motorist) 61%
TENNESSEE 3,802 of the 20,058 (19%) $809 million ($182 per motorist) 38%
TEXAS 9,998 of the 52,561 (19%) $5.27 billion ($343 per motorist) 38%
UTAH 437 of the 2,974 (14.7%) $332 million ($197 per motorist) 25%
VERMONT 903 of the 2,731 (33.1%) $230 million ($424 per motorist) 45%
VIRGINIA 3,588 of the 13,765 (26.1%) $1.344 billion ($254 per motorist) 47%
WASHINGTON 2,066 of the 7,902 (26.1%) $1.349 billion ($272 per motorist) 67%
WEST VIRGINIA 2,514 of the 7,125 (35.3%) $372 million ($273 per motorist) 47%
WISCONSIN 1,970 of the 14,088 (14%) $1.147 billion ($281 per motorist) 71%
WYOMING 723 of the 3,099 (23.3%) $96 million ($236 per motorist) 47%

*According to 2013 data from the Federal Highway Administration
**According to the American Society of Civil Engineers 2013 Report Card for America’s Infrastructure

Updated: Thursday, October 13, 2016

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image of a highway at dusk is courtesy of The Daily Signal. Photo: MarioGuti/Getty Images.

The Dawn of a New Budget

/in , , , /by

It was over almost as soon as it began, but this morning’s government shutdown still happened. While most Americans were counting Zzzs, congressional Republicans were counting votes. And, in a tense debate over the new budget, they didn’t have them. The midnight deadline came and went, with members doing everything they could to jumpstart the government before rush hour. The internal battle between defense hawks and fiscal conservatives lasted until dawn, when the House and Senate’s compromise finally passed in enough time to take a 5:00 a.m. trip to the White House for the president’s signature.

Although the agreement keeps the government running through March 23, neither side was thrilled with the $320 billion package. The deal is particularly significant because it sets the spending caps for military and nondefense spending over the next two years. Conservatives, most vocally the House Freedom Caucus, were frustrated by the GOP’s refusal to cut costs. “We support funding our troops but growing the size of government by 13 percent is not what the voters sent us here to do,” the group tweeted.

Leaders like Senator James Lankford (R-Okla.) struggled to come to grips with the steep costs. Like a lot of Republicans, he thought conservatives could do better.

“This budget deal shows the American people exactly how broken our budget and appropriations process is,” he said. “It does not address our runaway deficits and actually takes major steps backwards in the fight to reign in Washington’s overspending appetite. Our budget process has only worked correctly four times since 1974. We desperately need budget reform. I’m ashamed that we have passed five continuing resolutions since the end of last Fiscal Year in September. This is no way to govern.”

“While I strongly support the budgetary certainty and increased military funding that this bill provides, the long-term negative consequences of the bill are too many. The prevailing theme of debt ceiling negotiations is usually avoiding default, but lost in the conversation is how we got here in the first place, and how we can get out of the cycle of deficit spending.”

Good, solid conservatives voted both ways on the bill. Many of our friends probably found themselves on the opposite sides of the roll call for the first time in a long time. As difficult as the details were to swallow, President Trump and others did cheer the $165 billion bump for our troops, which finally ended the long, painful days of sequestration. “Without more Republicans in Congress,” he tweeted, “we were forced to increase spending on things we do not like or want in order to finally, after many years of depletion, take care of our Military. Sadly, we needed some Dem votes for passage. Must elect more Republicans in 2018 Election!”

As for other silver linings, FRC was pleased to see the religious liberty protections for FEMA disaster assistance included, as well as a big boost in sexual risk avoidance (abstinence) dollars ($75 million a year for two years), an extension of the funding for community health centers that don’t perform abortions, a repeal of the Independent Payment Advisory Board death panels, and major cuts to the Obamacare slush fund.

I would agree with President Trump with one caveat: we need to elect more conservative Republicans. We need leaders who are willing to go toe-to-toe with the liberals who have pushed America to the verge of fiscal and moral bankruptcy until we prevail.

Tony Perkins’ Washington Update is written with the aid of FRC senior writers.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Businesses, Bathrooms, and Bermuda

Fake News and Real Consequences

Conservatives Sound the Alarm on Budget Deal

The Senate’s Ugly Budget Deal Would Trample on the Success of Tax Reform

Eight Billion Reasons to Like Trump’s Agenda

/in , , , , /by

Anyone wondering what Donald Trump would do to fill the pro-life promises of his campaign didn’t have to wait long to find out! In his first weekday on the job, the new White House started turning the page on eight deadly years of the Obama administration. After two terms of shipping American dollars to overseas groups like International Planned Parenthood, this president wasted no time pulling the plug, flipping the script on the pro-life Mexico City policy that Obama suspended.In a policy dating back to every Republican administration since Ronald Reagan’s, Donald Trump continued the tradition of blocking even a single U.S. cent from going to foreign groups that perform or promote abortion in other countries. But the administration wasn’t done. To the cheers of pro-lifers, this White House took a giant leap forward from even Presidents Bush and Reagan. For the first time ever, the administration didn’t just bring $600 million in taxpayer funding under the authority of the pro-life rule, but $8.8 billion from the Departments of State, Health and Human Services, and Defense. That’s almost 15 times more money flowing through the abortion ban than President Bush’s policy!

Liberals were apoplectic. The U.S. is ending its global health outreach, they cried! People are going to die without America’s help. As usual, it was fake news. President Trump didn’t zero out international aid — he expanded it. For once, hurting, sick people don’t have to compete with the abortion lobby to get real care. Dollars that would have been spent propping up the culture of death are finally going to projects that improve lives – not take them. But don’t take our word for it. Take the State Department’s.

A year into the Left’s sky-is-falling predictions, this new approach to foreign aid is working. And well. In a report just released by Secretary Rex Tillerson’s agency, the Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance is having the desired effect. Not only is it helping to tear down the financial stronghold that groups like Planned Parenthood have on other nations, but it’s sending a message to the world that America recognizes that all human beings have inherent worth and dignity. If President Trump wanted to discourage international abortion, liberals say he has. A former member of USAID’s population fund, lamented the “huge, huge chilling effect” the White House’s policy is having on abortion activism. “I would say, yeah, unfortunately, it does work.”

If there’s one thing both sides can support, it’s that the Trump administration has managed all of this without any disruption to our aid — one of the Left’s biggest (and unfounded) complaints. Liberals were sure that organizations all around the world would end their partnership with the U.S. government if they had to abide by the new pro-life rules. Hardly. Out of the 733 groups that provide foreign aid, only four refused to comply – including (not so surprisingly) abortion giants Planned Parenthood and Marie Stopes International. So far, they’re the only ones more interested in destroying humans than helping the ones in need.

Meanwhile, if anyone’s opinion matters, isn’t it the people we’re trying to serve? After two terms of hitting other countries over the head with abortion propaganda, a lot of nations are relieved by the change. From the Philippians to Latin America, our neighbors have cheered the move. Carmel Nisha Pius Franco, director of a pro-life organization in India, pointed out:

“Indian women need life, dignity, education and empowerment, not abortion. We have been exploited through decades-long population control propaganda which has resulted in at least 300 million abortions (16 million abortions being performed in India in just one year) and dangerous sub-replacement fertility rate. Americans do not want their hands in the blood of innocent children killed in India. Yes, we need to deal with development issues, but not by killing our children. Thanks to President Trump for setting things right …”

The message from this White House is simple: promoting health means protecting life. And years from now, who knows how many children will be alive to prove us right?

Tony Perkins’ Washington Update is written with the aid of FRC senior writers.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Gayle Force Win: State Settles with Christian It Fired

At Prayer Breakfast, Trump Doesn’t Waffle

The Constitutional Amendment That Would Rein in Spending

/in , , , , /by

Some people have called for a balanced budget amendment to our Constitution as a means of reining in a big-spending Congress.

That’s a misguided vision, for the simple reason that in any real economic sense, as opposed to an accounting sense, the federal budget is always balanced.

The value of what we produced in 2017—our gross domestic product—totaled about $19 trillion. If the Congress spent $4 trillion of the $19 trillion that we produced, unless you believe in Santa Claus, you know that Congress must force us to spend $4 trillion less privately.

Taxing us is one way that Congress can do that. But federal revenue estimates for 2017 are about $3.5 trillion, leaving an accounting deficit of about $500 billion. So taxes are not enough to cover Congress’ spending.

Another way Congress can get us to spend less privately is to enter the bond market. It can borrow. Borrowing forces us to spend less privately, and it drives up interest rates and crowds out private investment.

Finally, the most dishonest way to get us to spend less is to inflate our currency. Higher prices for goods and services reduce our real spending.

The bottom line is the federal budget is always balanced in any real economic sense.

For those enamored of a balanced budget amendment, think about the following. Would we have greater personal liberty under a balanced federal budget with Congress spending $4 trillion and taxing us $4 trillion, or would we be freer under an unbalanced federal budget with Congress spending $2 trillion and taxing us $1 trillion?

I’d prefer the unbalanced budget.

The true measure of government’s impact on our lives is government spending, not government taxing.

Tax revenue is not our problem. The federal government has collected nearly 20 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product almost every year since 1960. Federal spending has exceeded 20 percent of the GDP for most of that period.

Because federal spending is the problem, that’s where our focus should be.

Cutting spending is politically challenging. Every spending constituency sees what it gets from government as vital, whether it be Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid recipients or farmers, poor people, educators, or the military.

It’s easy for members of Congress to say yes to these spending constituencies, because whether it’s Democrats or Republicans in control, they don’t face a hard-and-fast bottom line.

The nation needs a constitutional amendment that limits congressional spending to a fixed fraction, say 20 percent, of the GDP. It might stipulate that the limit could be exceeded only if the president declared a state of emergency and two-thirds of both houses of Congress voted to approve the spending.

By the way, the Founding Fathers would be horrified by today’s congressional spending. From 1787 to the 1920s, except in wartime, federal government spending never exceeded 4 percent of our GDP.

During the early 1980s, I was a member of the National Tax Limitation Committee. Our distinguished blue-ribbon drafting committee included its founder, Lew Uhler, plus notables such as Milton Friedman, James Buchanan, Paul McCracken, Bill Niskanen, Craig Stubblebine, Robert Bork, Aaron Wildavsky, Robert Nisbet, and Robert Carleson.

The Senate passed our proposed balanced budget/spending limitation amendment to the U.S. Constitution on Aug. 4, 1982, by a bipartisan vote of 69-31, surpassing the two-thirds requirement by two votes.

In the House of Representatives, the amendment was approved by a bipartisan majority (236-187), but it did not meet the two-thirds vote required by Article 5 of the Constitution.

The amendment can be found in Milton and Rose Friedman’s “Tyranny of the Status Quo” or the appendix of their “Free to Choose.”

During an interview about the proposed amendment, a reporter asked why I disagreed with the committee and called for a limit of 10 percent of GDP on federal spending. I told him that if 10 percent is good enough for the Baptist church, it ought to be good enough for Congress.

COMMENTARY BY

Portrait of Walter E. Williams

Walter E. Williams

Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University.

A Note for our Readers:

Trust in the mainstream media is at a historic low—and rightfully so given the behavior of many journalists in Washington, D.C.

Ever since Donald Trump was elected president, it is painfully clear that the mainstream media covers liberals glowingly and conservatives critically.

Now journalists spread false, negative rumors about President Trump before any evidence is even produced.

Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. That’s why The Daily Signal exists.

The Daily Signal’s mission is to give Americans the real, unvarnished truth about what is happening in Washington and what must be done to save our country.

Our dedicated team of more than 100 journalists and policy experts rely on the financial support of patriots like you.

Your donation helps us fight for access to our nation’s leaders and report the facts.

You deserve the truth about what’s going on in Washington.

Please make a gift to support The Daily Signal.

SUPPORT THE DAILY SIGNAL

FAIR: Refugee Resettlement Costs Taxpayers Billions — Welfare Biggest Chunk

/in , , , , , /by

I’m happy to see that more national immigration control groups are addressing the costly UN/US Refugee Admissions Program!  Where are you Heritage?

muslim-welfare chart

Graphic (using ORR data) is not FAIR’s or Breitbart’s, but is from a 2015 report by then Senator Sessions Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest.

John Binder writing at Breitbart tells the latest story here:

Over a five year period, American taxpayers are billed more than $8 billion for the resettlement of thousands of foreign refugees every year, a new study finds.

In research conducted by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), analysts concluded that annual refugee resettlement costs American taxpayers about $1.8 billion a year, and over five years, about $8.8 billion.

FAIR’s research found that of the $1.8 billion annual cost of resettling refugees in the U.S., about $867 million was spent on welfare.

Continue reading here.

And, go here, for FAIR’s report.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

President Trump creates new National Vetting Center for U.S. immigrant wannabes

Headline: 25 reasons to end Somali refugee resettlement now

Oklahoma Republican Senator Lankford to headline Leftwing World Relief press event today in DC

USCRI gets big federal grant to teach senior refugees English

McCain’s DACA Fix Is Likely Dead on Arrival

Trump’s ‘America First’ Economy by Stephen Browne

/in , , , , /by

“As President of the United States, I will always put America first, just like the leaders of other countries should put their country first also,” Trump declared at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

The numbers don’t lie, the Trump economy is the best America has had in years.

At the close of Trump’s first year in office the economy will likely have seen three percent growth for three successive quarters, which we haven’t seen for 13 years. The Dow hit 25,000 which we’ve never seen before. Wages and employment are rising, most significantly at the bottom end of the income distribution scale with most concentrated in the blue state heartland.

Moreover, the confidence of small businesses as measured by the National Federation of Independent Businesses, is the highest it’s been since they started doing the survey 45 years ago.

There has predictably been a lot of grumbling: “This is Obama’s policies finally kicking in!”

After eight years of assuring us that two percent growth is the new normal, he never achieved it.

“Almost a-quarter-million employees have been notified of plant closings and layoffs!”

That may be true – but so what?

Sorry, I know that sounds callous for those going through job loss – been there, done it; but the fact remains when the economy is expanding and employment increasing, layoffs in certain sectors means the economy is changing, not static. The slack will be taken up in new more dynamic sectors and Americans will do what we always have; move somewhere else, learn new skills, and get a new job.

So why has this happened and what does it mean? Because a great many of the ‘Wise and Wonderful’ on both the right and left predicted gloom, doom, and disaster.

In the past, when we’ve seen the economy improve with a new and more business-friendly administration, there has usually been a year’s lead time before Americans have seen improvement — but this has been immediate.

Some have proposed the first effects were largely psychological, and there is something to this. The Democrat Party is more than ever before dominated at the national level by hard leftists ferociously hostile towards free enterprise.

A change to an even tepidly pro-capitalist administration is like a shot of espresso to the economy.

And this change has been more than token. Trump promised to remove two business regulations for every one passed. At last count, 22 regulations have been removed for every single regulation imposed.

It’s not just that the regulatory burden on business is difficult and expensive, we could live with that – in fact, we have. It’s that it is so complex that it’s nearly impossible to understand.

Want to start a business or move yours into a new market? If you don’t have lots of lawyers and accountants on your payroll to navigate the regs – good luck! Complex regulations and tax laws favor “Big Business” over the little guys, and that’s how the big guys like it.

Nonetheless, “Regulation is stealth taxation,” Trump stated clearly in his Davos speech.

Trump’s 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act on top of massive deregulation will provide larger paychecks for American workers along with unanticipated company bonuses and pay raises that will boost the economy even more.

The White House highlighted these economic gains for American workers:

USA TODAY: Starbucks Boost Worker Pay, Gives Bonuses After Tax Cut
CNBC: 125,000 Disney Employees to Receive $1,000 Cash Bonus Due to Tax Reform
FT: Verizon To Give Most Employees Stock in Anticipation of Tax Savings
REUTERS: JP Morgan Rolls Out $20 Billion Investment Plan After Tax Gains
BLOOMBERG: Whirlpool Says It’s Adding Jobs After Trump Tariff Decision

During Trump’s first year, the Dow climbed 31 percent, according to CNBC, surpassed only by FDR, reporting that the “30-stock index has surged more than 31 percent since Trump’s inauguration.”

CNBC: The Dow’s 31% Gain During Trump’s First Year Is the Best Since FDR

“Donald Trump lifted the Dow Jones industrial average in his first year in office more than any other president since Franklin Roosevelt. The Dow has surged more than 31 percent since Trump’s inauguration on Jan. 20, 2017. That marks the index’s best performance during a president’s first year since Roosevelt. The Dow skyrocketed 96.5 percent during Roosevelt’s first year in office….Trump quickly moved to cut regulations enacted by previous administrations. He also successfully pushed to overhaul the U.S. tax code. That revamp included slashing the corporate tax rate to 21 percent from 35 percent.”

Right, after the 1929 Wall Street Crash followed by the Great Depression, there really wasn’t anywhere else for the stock market to go but up. Elected in 1932, becoming the 32nd President of the United States, FDR saw the Dow Jones Industrial Average rise during his first year in office from 1933 to 1934. In fact, it took the market 25 years to fully recover from the Wall Street Crash.
He served from 1933 to 1945.

And then there’s the hot button issue, climate change.

Whatever your opinion of climate change, the fact is the proposals for addressing it these days consist almost entirely of political theater. The least burdensome proposals cripple the economy and accomplish nothing. The most radical proposals amount to dismantling industrial civilization resulting in impoverishment and mass starvation.

If we are going to find alternatives to fossil fuels the only thing that can accomplish this is a rich and dynamic economy that can support the research, development, and large-scale implementation of new technologies.

That’s a job for businessmen and engineers, not bureaucrats.

Probably the biggest thing the Trump administration has done is to remove a lot of the uncertainty of doing business. A thriving economy can stand a lot of stupid regulation, if they are consistent from day-to-day.

What the economy can’t stand is the uncertainty of a business environment where regulations are imposed capriciously by a chief executive who overturns settled law to pick winners and losers, decides who has to obey, and who gets special exemptions.

And, I must say, I did not see this unshackled vibrant economy coming. Trump seemed like the archetypal crony Capitalist, leveraging political influence for his own advantage, even to the point of trying to use eminent domain for private projects.

It never occurred to me that a player skilled in that game could still realize it is horribly bad for the U.S. economy, and once in power act on that knowledge. As a businessman, Trump has learned the economic lessons taught by Eastern Europe in their transition from socialism to market economies. And if you’d told me, I wouldn’t have believed you. What a pleasant surprise!

“As President of the United States, I will always put America first, just like the leaders of other countries should put their country first also,” Trump declared at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

ABOUT STEPHEN BROWNE

Stephen Browne has been a sewage treatment plant worker, a truck driver, an English teacher and a journalist. In 1991 he received his MA in anthropology and set out for Eastern Europe, which was to become his home for the next 13 years. While teaching English and working with local dissidents abroad he began to write professionally about the tremendous changes happening after the collapse of the Soviet empire. In 1997, he was elected Honorary Member of the Yugoslav Movement for the Protection of Human Rights. In 1998, he co-founded the Liberty English Camps in Lithuania, which teach the principles of free markets and political liberty through English-language instruction, and eventually became the Language of Liberty Institute. He returned to the U.S. to study journalism on a graduate fellowship and pay some dues in rural newspapers in the Midwest. At present he lives in his native Midwest with his two children Jerzy Waszyngton and Judyta Ilona. Mr. Browne is also a contributor to SFPPR News & Analysis of the conservative-online-journalism center at the Washington-based Selous Foundation for Public Policy Research.

President Trump Decreased the Debt to GDP Ratio – First Time in More than 50 Years!

/in , , , , /by

Gateway Pundit in an article titled It’s Official=> President Trump Decreases the Debt to GDP Ratio in His First Year in Office – First Time in More than 50 Years!  Joe Hoft reports:

The higher a country’s debt to GDP ratio, the less healthy the country’s economy.  With the GDP numbers released yesterday, President Trump’s policies have officially decreased the Debt to GDP ratio by 1.2% in the President’s first year in office.

In contrast, President Obama increased the US Debt to GDP ratio his first year in office by 14.5%.  Obama increased the rate a total of 37% over his 8 years in office.

Since his inauguration President Trump has focused his efforts on the security of the country and on the prosperity of its economy. The results of his actions are taking shape.

The US GDP has increased each quarter in 2017 with the 4th Quarter GDP increasing to $19.739 trillion – the highest GDP for any country in world history.

Read more.

RELATED ARTICLES:

He’s A Genius: Trump Bumps Tariffs Up On Solar Panels – Look What China Just Did

Media Ignorance on Capitalism Hurts Low-Wage American Workers

Trump Tower Russian Lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya, Exposed in Swiss Corruption Case

 

The Clueless versus Trump the Bare Knuckled Fighter for the American People

/in , , , , , , /by

President Donald J. Trump will deliver his first State of the Union Address on January 30th, 2018 in accordance with Article II of the Constitution, which states that the President:

“[S]hall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.”

The Congress will assemble, less some who are boycotting the address, to listen to President Trump outline what he has accomplished and what he plans to accomplish in the coming year. The difference is that President Trump is in a bare knuckled fight with some in his own party and most, if not all, of the opposition parties (Democrats and Independents alike).

But President Trump is a fighter. Evan Sayet in a July 2017 column titled He Fights wrote:

My Leftist friends (as well as many ardent #NeverTrumpers) constantly ask me if I’m not bothered by Donald Trump’s lack of decorum.  They ask if I don’t think his tweets are “beneath the dignity of the office.”  Here’s my answer:

We Right-thinking people have tried dignity.  There could not have been a man of more quiet dignity than George W. Bush as he suffered the outrageous lies and politically motivated hatreds that undermined his presidency.  We tried statesmanship.  Could there be another human being on this earth who so desperately prized “collegiality” as John McCain?  We tried propriety – has there been a nicer human being ever than Mitt Romney?  And the results were always the same.

This is because, while we were playing by the rules of dignity, collegiality and propriety, the Left has been, for the past 60 years, engaged in a knife fight where the only rules are those of Saul Alinsky and the Chicago mob.

Read more.

Which is better? Being nice or getting things done?

Nike Quotes published this on its Twitter page, “This world is against me. It wouldn’t be fair otherwise.” This sounds like it could be the motto of President Trump.

But President Trump is doing what he promised to do during his Inaugural Address one year and ten days ago. During his Inaugural Address President Trump said:

Today’s ceremony, however, has very special meaning. Because today we are not merely transferring power from one Administration to another, or from one party to another – but we are transferring power from Washington, D.C. and giving it back to you, the American People.

For too long, a small group in our nation’s Capital has reaped the rewards of government while the people have borne the cost.

Washington flourished – but the people did not share in its wealth.

Politicians prospered – but the jobs left, and the factories closed.

The establishment protected itself, but not the citizens of our country.

Their victories have not been your victories; their triumphs have not been your triumphs; and while they celebrated in our nation’s Capital, there was little to celebrate for struggling families all across our land.

That all changes – starting right here, and right now, because this moment is your moment: it belongs to you.

It belongs to everyone gathered here today and everyone watching all across America.

This is your day. This is your celebration.

And this, the United States of America, is your country.

The politicians didn’t listen to President Trump and they are now paying a price for not hearing his words.

Bret Stephens in a column titled Clueless Versus Trump published in the New York Times on January 19th, 2018 notes:

Apple’s announcement on Wednesday that it will repatriate most of the estimated $274 billion that it holds in offshore earning is great news for the United States. Uncle Sam will gat a one-time $38 billion tax payment. The company promises to add 20,000 jobs to its U.S. work force, a 24 percent increase, and build a new campus. Another $5 billion will go toward a fund for advanced manufacturing in America.

C’mon. What’s with the long face?

In December this column warned that hysterical opposition to the Republican tax bill was a fool’s game for Democrats that could only help Donald Trump. Yes, there were things to dislike in the legislation, from both a liberal and a conservative perspective.

Bit it was not the moral and fiscal apocalypse its critics claimed.

Read more.

President Trump during his first State of the Union speech lay out how he has empowered the American people and taken power away from politicians and bureaucrats in Washington, D.C. This is why they fear him. He is systematically taking away their power to control the people. As he does this he strengthens the economy and has made America competitive globally. As former President Bill Clinton said, “It’s the economy stupid.” For far to many in Washington, D.C. its not about the economy but about growing the federal government’s power to tax, spend and regulate. This trend has trickled down to city, county and state governments like California.

President Trump will most likely talk about his immigration plan and his administration’s efforts to take people off of welfare and putting them back into the work force. For at one time there were two classes of Americans, the working class and all others. America was built on the ideal that work is the best and most effective cure for poverty. That remains so today. The more people working the better.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Behind Trump’s Davos triumph

Trump Administration Strikes a Blow Against Identity Politics

The 5 Key Points Trump Will Talk About in First State of the Union

GOP Lawmakers Split Over Trump’s Latest Immigration Plan

e Hear You: The Schumer Shutdown, ‘Dreamers,’ 2 Marches, and California’s Tax Grab

EDITORS NOTE: Here are excerpts from the Annual Message to the Congress on the State of the Union given on January 30, 1961 by President John F. Kennedy:

The present state of our economy is disturbing. We take office in the wake of seven months of recession, three and one-half years of slack, seven years of diminished economic growth, and nine years of falling farm income.

Business bankruptcies have reached their highest level since the Great Depression. Since 1951 farm income has been squeezed down by 25 percent. Save for a brief period in 1958, insured unemployment is at the highest peak in our history. Of some five and one-half million Americans who are without jobs, more than one million have been searching for work for more than four months. And during each month some 150,000 workers are exhausting their already meager jobless benefit rights.

[ … ]

In short, the American economy is in trouble. The most resourceful industrialized country on earth ranks among the last in the rate of economic growth. Since last spring our economic growth rate has actually receded. Business investment is in a decline. Profits have fallen below predicted levels. Construction is off. A million unsold automobiles are in inventory. Fewer people are working–and the average work week has shrunk well below 40 hours. Yet prices have continued to rise–so that now too many Americans have less to spend for items that cost more to buy.

[ … ]

We cannot afford to waste idle hours and empty plants while awaiting the end of the recession. We must show the world what a free economy can do–to reduce unemployment, to put unused capacity to work, to spur new productivity, and to foster higher economic growth within a range of sound fiscal policies and relative price stability.

[ … ]

Meanwhile this country has continued to bear more than its share of the West’s military and foreign aid obligations. Under existing policies, another deficit of $2 billion is predicted for 1961–and individuals in those countries whose dollar position once depended on these deficits for improvement now wonder aloud whether our gold reserves will remain sufficient to meet our own obligations.

[ … ]

But all these problems pale when placed beside those which confront us around the world. No man entering upon this office, regardless of his party, regardless of his previous service in Washington, could fail to be staggered upon learning–even in this brief 10 day period–the harsh enormity of the trials through which we must pass in the next four years. Each day the crises multiply. Each day their solution grows more difficult. Each day we draw nearer the hour of maximum danger, as weapons spread and hostile forces grow stronger. I feel I must inform the Congress that our analyses over the last ten days make it clear that–in each of the principal areas of crisis–the tide of events has been running out and time has not been our friend.

In Asia, the relentless pressures of the Chinese Communists menace the security of the entire area–from the borders of India and South Viet Nam to the jungles of Laos, struggling to protect its newly-won independence. We seek in Laos what we seek in all Asia, and, indeed, in all of the world-freedom for the people and independence for the government. And this Nation shall persevere in our pursuit of these objectives. In Africa, the Congo has been brutally torn by civil strife, political unrest and public disorder. We shall continue to support the heroic efforts of the United Nations to restore peace and order–efforts which are now endangered by mounting tensions, unsolved problems, and decreasing support from many member states.

In Latin America, Communist agents seeking to exploit that region’s peaceful revolution of hope have established a base on Cuba, only 90 miles from our shores. Our objection with Cuba is not over the people’s drive for a better life. Our objection is to their domination by foreign and domestic tyrannies. Cuban social and economic reform should be encouraged. Questions of economic and trade policy can always be negotiated. But Communist domination in this Hemisphere can never be negotiated.

Read the full speech.

Down The Rabbit Hole: The Occupation and Conquest of California

/in , , , , , , /by

Down the rabbit hole is a metaphor for an adventure into the unknown. California is certainly a metaphor for an adventure in the now known outcomes of extreme progressive policies implemented by the Democratic Party.

The Republic of California has become the poster child for how far down the rabbit hole a state can go.

California has recently been plagued by massive wildfires consuming 1,381,405 acres of land, a spreading flu epidemic, earthquakes with more expected and moral scandals of Biblical proportions. Fiscally, California is insolvent. Some are even calling for the establishment, under the California Constitution, for a New State of California (video). California State Representative Ian C. Calderon (D-Whittier) has introduced  AB-1884 which inserts new language into the Retail Food section of the California Health and Safety Code, prohibiting restaurants from providing plastic straws to its customers. According to Snopes.com, “[V]iolations of which are misdemeanors ‘punishable by a fine of not less than $25 or more than $1,000, or by imprisonment in the county jail for a term not exceeding 6 months, or by both.’”

What has happened to the once beautiful and prosperous State of California?

Perhaps the below video of a California citizen cycling through Santa Ana in Orange County, California can enlighten us all:

Another issue is San Diego, California’s Chicano Park. Chicano (in North America) is a person of Mexican origin or descent, especially a man or boy. Until the late 1970s, Los Angeles’s Pico-Union district was populated by Mexican immigrants, Chicanos , African Americans, and European Americans.

Some citizens of San Diego are calling Chicano Park a “Huge monument honoring Communism and La Raza ultra nationalism.”

Chicano Park Day – Anti-American, La Raza Celebration:

Chicano Park, Patriot Picnic II – ABC 10 News Report

Looking at the murals in Chicano Park tell the story:

Note the United Farm Workers Union (UFW with black eagle) logo. The UFW is pro-open borders, pro-amnesty and pro-Dreamers.

Note the images of Ernesto “Che” Guevara, Fidel Castro and other revolutionaries on the mural. The phrase “La Lucha Cintinua” translated means “The Fight Continues.”

The saying translated reads “our sacred land Aztec Chicano Park.” The Chicano in the mural is holding a map showing the entire South West portion of the United States as part of Mexico.

California continues to go deeper and deeper into the rabbit hole. It’s policies have become extremist and the government more costly and controlling. California is now asking that all companies in the state give 50% of their federal tax refund to the keep the state government running. When will Californians wake up and take back their state?

RELATED ARTICLES: 

California Bill Threatens Waiters With Jail for Providing Plastic Straws

We Hear You: The Schumer Shutdown, ‘Dreamers,’ 2 Marches, and California’s Tax Grab

Pico Rivera councilman and El Rancho High teacher Gregory Salcido caught on video degrading military

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image  titled “The Chicano Mural movement began in the southwest” by Amanda

High-Tax States Should Lower Their Taxes Instead of Trying to Evade Federal Taxes

/in , , , , , /by

High-tax states such as New York, California, and New Jersey are spending significant time and resources trying to concoct ways for their high-income residents to evade federal taxes.

This strategy is in direct response to the newly enacted Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which caps state and local tax deductions from federal income taxes at $10,000 per taxpayer. But legislators in high-tax states who wish to prevent the wealthy from fleeing to lower-tax states should lower the cost of local and state government instead of ducking federal taxes.

The $10,000 cap in the state and local deduction is irrelevant for most taxpayers.

For starters, 70 percent of taxpayers don’t itemize their deductions when filing their federal income taxes. These taxpayers benefit instead from the standard deduction.

Since the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act nearly doubles the standard deduction, The Heritage Foundation estimates that about 85 percent of taxpayers will not itemize deductions. And the state and local tax deduction is worth nothing to taxpayers who don’t itemize.

What’s more, the cap won’t limit many taxpayers’ state and local tax deductions because only about half of those who currently claim the deduction pay more than $10,000 in state and local taxes.

It’s primarily high-income taxpayers in high-tax states who will be affected most by the change in federal tax law. And that’s why lawmakers in those states are trying to find ways around the law.

Instead of trying to pass the buck of their big-government costs to federal taxpayers in lower-tax states, policymakers in high-tax states should just reduce their own state taxes.

As U.S. Rep. John J. Faso, R-N.Y., aptly said:

“The solution is to lower the cost of government in New York and make our state a place where businesses can create jobs so our people don’t have to flee.”

While a dollar in additional state and local tax deductions could save taxpayers as much as 37 cents in federal taxes (depending on their marginal tax rate), a dollar in state and local tax cuts would put 100 cents back into most taxpayers’ pockets.

Rather than address New York’s own high-tax problems, Gov. Andrew Cuomo, a Democrat, is proposing a new payroll tax on employers that would be deductible at the federal level.

But a new payroll tax on employers—one that would be in addition to existing income taxes—could hurt workers, businesses, and government revenues by discouraging companies from locating in New York. Such a tax would be extremely complicated and have disparate impacts on workers and businesses across the state, creating big boons for some and losses for others.

New York already has experienced the largest outmigration of residents of any state in recent years. State officials don’t need to exacerbate that with higher or more complex taxes.

Another idea being considered by states such as California and New Jersey is to circumvent the new cap on state and local tax deductions by setting up state-run charitable institutions to fund the government. Taxpayers who make donations to those institutions would receive a dollar-for-dollar reduction in their state tax bills.

But federal tax law specifies that donations providing a direct monetary benefit for the donor do not qualify as charitable deductions. It’s hard to contest the direct monetary benefit of a dollar-for-dollar reduction in state tax liability.

Rest assured, even if states such as New York and California manage to circumvent new federal limits on state and local tax deductions, the IRS will implement new rules to enforce the intent of the cap. Instead of reducing total taxes for residents, the result could be higher taxes because high-tax states may not fully abandon their newly generated “workaround” revenue sources.

Additional sources of tax revenues are the last thing residents in high-tax states need. Taxpayers who live in New York and who make between $75,000 and $100,000 already pay an average of $9,950 in state and local income taxes. And the average millionaire in New York pays $502,000 in state and local taxes.

These highly taxed residents don’t need their governments spending more time and resources trying to evade taxes or create new, hopefully deductible taxes. Instead, they need state policymakers to make their governments more efficient and accountable; to limit nonessential government services; and to cut out waste and redundancies.

If states reduce government costs to more reasonable levels, residents will have more money in their pockets and fewer will be affected by the new cap on state and local tax deductions.

And, as economic studies show, states with lower tax burdens have significantly better economic outlooks, including higher growth in incomes, employment, population, gross state product, and even state and local tax revenues.

It’s time for lawmakers in high-tax states to throw in the towel on their efforts to shift their high-tax burdens onto federal taxpayers in other states, and instead focus on reducing the taxes they charge their residents.

COMMENTARY BY

Portrait of Rachel Greszler

Rachel Greszler

Rachel Greszler is a senior policy analyst in economics and entitlements at The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis. Read her research.

A Note for our Readers:

Trust in the mainstream media is at a historic low—and rightfully so given the behavior of many journalists in Washington, D.C.

Ever since Donald Trump was elected president, it is painfully clear that the mainstream media covers liberals glowingly and conservatives critically.

Now journalists spread false, negative rumors about President Trump before any evidence is even produced.

Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. That’s why The Daily Signal exists.

The Daily Signal’s mission is to give Americans the real, unvarnished truth about what is happening in Washington and what must be done to save our country.

Our dedicated team of more than 100 journalists and policy experts rely on the financial support of patriots like you.

Your donation helps us fight for access to our nation’s leaders and report the facts.

You deserve the truth about what’s going on in Washington.

Please make a gift to support The Daily Signal.

SUPPORT THE DAILY SIGNAL

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, speaking in Harlem during the National Action Network’s Martin Luther King Jr. Day event Jan. 15, 2018. Gov. Cuomo is proposing a new payroll tax on employers rather than cutting the cost of government. (Photo: Eduardo Munoz/Reuters/Newscom)

The Schumer Shutdown has been Shutdown. Trump wins once again! When will anti-Trumpers ever learn?

/in , , , , , /by

On May 20th, 2016 then candidate Donald J. Trump at a rally said, “We gonna win so much you may even get tired of winning and you’ll say please, please Mr. president, It’s too much winning! We can’t take it anymore!”

This promise has become a political reality. President Donald J. Trump is winning for the American people. President Trump is keeping his inaugural address promise,

“What truly matters is not which party controls our government, but whether our government is controlled by the people. January 20th 2017, will be remembered as the day the people became the rulers of this nation again. The forgotten men and women of our country will be forgotten no longer. Everyone is listening to you now.”

The people are once again the rulers of this nation.

The government shutdown is the most recent example. The people took to their social media sites to voice their opinions of the federal government shutdown. The overwhelming response was don’t shut down the government to protect illegal aliens. That message, in just over 2 days, was heard by the swamp.

President Trump’s “We can’t take it anymore!” statement reminded me of the 1984 song  by Twisted Sister – We’re Not Gonna Take It:

RELATED ARTICLES: 

The Beginning of the End of the Progressive Democratic Party?

How Shutdown Under Trump Compares With Obama, Other Presidents

Democrats Change Their Tune on Government Shutdowns

Following End of Government Shutdown, Lawmakers Look to Continue Immigration Negotiations

RELATED VIDEO: White House Press Secretary Sarah ‘Huckabee’ Sanders answers questions the Government shutdown on January 22nd, 2018. Her answers are enlightening. Sanders makes it clear that President Trump is enforcing the laws passed by Congress and that by rescinding Obama’s DACA Executive Order he put the issue of immigration back where it should be, in the U.S. Congress. President Trump gave Congress six months to fix immigration laws. They have failed to do so.

#SchumerShutdown Clock Launched, tick, tock! [+Video]

/in , , , , , /by

The House Republican Conference has launched the website SchumerShutdown.com. The website has a clock that shows the days, hours, minutes and seconds since the Schumer shutdown. The website also uses the New York Democrat’s own words on the chaos caused by a government shutdown:

As we reported in our column Whose to blame for the Government Shutdown? It boils down to the number “3”!

Who is actually responsible for this vote that stopped funding for the government? Answer: Those U.S. Senators who voted NO!

According to the vote:

  • Senator John McCain (R-AZ) DID NOT VOTE due to illness.
  • Two Independents voted NO.
  • Five Republicans voted NO.
  • Forty-two Democrats voted NO.

If all the Republicans, including John McCain, and the two Independent Senators Bernie Sanders and Angus King voted YES, the bill would still have failed on a vote of 57 to 43. Therefore, to pass the procedural motion required 3 more Senate Democrats to vote YES.

Recall when Senator John McCain was the vote that killed the repeal of Obamacare and Democrats Celebrated his stance? Well, three Democrats killed the procedural motion which lead to the current government shutdown.

SchumerShutdown.com notes:

 Friday night, Democrats shut down the government over deadlines that don’t exist.  Their games could kick 9 million children off of their health insurance and hurt our troops.

Text SchumerShutdown to 50589 to stay up to date on Chuck Schumer’s crusade to shut down the government.

WHAT’S AT STAKE

CHILDREN’S HEALTH INSURANCE FUNDING

  • 9 million children will lose their health insurance
  • This denied access could cause potentially life threatening removal of treatment

MILITARY READINESS

  • More than 2 million members of our military will not be paid until the shutdown ends
  • 100,000 national guardsmen will be sent home from training
  • Pilot Training will be stopped, impacting readiness
  • Training will be canceled for tens of thousands of reservists
  • 50 percent of the civilian workforce will be furloughed – impacting contracting, medical, maintenance, and morale

The Government Shutdown Will Further Weaken Our Military

/in , , , , /by

Congress faced a number of bad options on Friday, when government funding expired for the third time this fiscal year.

But lawmakers picked the worst option of all for our military and national security: they decided to let the government shut down.

This decision will be incredibly damaging to our national security and to the men and women who work to keep us safe.

When Secretary of Defense James Mattis discussed on Friday the effects that a shutdown would have on the Department of Defense, he made multiple references to the stoic nature that is required of our warfighters when faced with trying times. All their stoicism will now be tested.

During a government shutdown, employees who are necessary for ensuring the safety of American lives and the protection of property are exempt, and have to continue working. This applies to all of our active-duty military personnel and, according to Mattis, close to half of the civilian employees at the Pentagon.

Everyone else is furloughed and stays home without pay, unless Congress specifically makes provisions for them to be paid. In 2013, Congress made such provisions. But so far, this is not the case in 2018.

It is up to the Pentagon’s senior leadership to determine who continues working and who gets furloughed. This takes time away from all the other critical challenges that the Department of Defense faces.

And decisions like these inevitably cause leadership problems, as furloughed employees wonder why their contributions are less valued than those who are not furloughed.

During a shutdown, most people who work to maintain our ships, airplanes, and tanks will be forced to stop their work, thus further delaying the upkeep that is necessary to return those platforms to action.

Acquisition programs will also be slowed or stopped, as the necessary officials will be absent. Training for reservists and the National Guard will also have to stop. This will undoubtedly add to the current readiness problems that already plague our armed forces.

These are men and women who chose to put on the uniform and risk their lives in defense of the country they believe in. In return, we, as a nation, have allowed their funds to dry up and have asked them to stoically show up to work without access to the resources they need.

All of this, despite the fact that Congress has already agreed on defense spending levels by wide margins.

Ironically, the congressional debate over funding took place on the same day that Mattis unveiled the new national defense strategy to the public. At multiple points, the strategy mentions the need for sustained, predictable, and increased investments in our nation’s armed forces to ensure that we are capable of meeting the challenges we face.

But when Congress decided to let defense funds lapse at the stroke of midnight of Jan. 19, it made sure that a sustained, predictable, and increased defense budget would be even harder to achieve.

Similarly, at the same time Mattis was outlining his vision for the future of our national defense, his deputy, Patrick Shanahan, issued guidance to the Pentagon on how to continue operations during a government shutdown.

Even though that guidance expressed hopeful words that Congress might be able to avoid a funding lapse, those hopes were dashed at midnight on Friday.

Congress has failed the American people and has been unable to fulfill its constitutional duty to provide for the common defense. This failure will be felt most acutely by our men and women in uniform.

It was an entirely avoidable situation, but instead of steering away from the cliff, 49 senators chose to drive right off of it.

COMMENTARY BY

Portrait of Frederico Bartels

Frederico Bartels

Frederico Bartels is a policy analyst for defense budgeting at The Heritage Foundation’s Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy. Twitter: .

A Note for our Readers:

Trust in the mainstream media is at a historic low—and rightfully so given the behavior of many journalists in Washington, D.C.

Ever since Donald Trump was elected president, it is painfully clear that the mainstream media covers liberals glowingly and conservatives critically.

Now journalists spread false, negative rumors about President Trump before any evidence is even produced.

Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. That’s why The Daily Signal exists.

The Daily Signal’s mission is to give Americans the real, unvarnished truth about what is happening in Washington and what must be done to save our country.

Our dedicated team of more than 100 journalists and policy experts rely on the financial support of patriots like you.

Your donation helps us fight for access to our nation’s leaders and report the facts.

You deserve the truth about what’s going on in Washington.

Please make a gift to support The Daily Signal.

SUPPORT THE DAILY SIGNAL

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of U.S. and NATO troops arrive at the site of a car bomb attack in Kabul, Afghanistan, Sept. 24, 2017. (Photo: Omar Sobhani/Reuters/Newscom)

Whose to blame for the Government Shutdown? It boils down to the number “3”!

/in , , , , /by

On Saturday, January 20th, 2018 at 7:44 p.m. EST House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) sent out a fundraising email titled “Paul Ryan just lied:” Rep. Pelosi wrote:

I just watched Paul Ryan blatantly lie on the House floor.

He blamed DEMOCRATS for this shutdown — and said we “refused to do our job.”

So who is right? Rep. Pelosi or Rep. Paul Ryan.

The House of Representatives passed a bill to fund the government on a continuing resolution. The bill was sent to the U.S. Senate for a vote. The U.S. Senate did not bring the bill up for a vote because a procedural motion failed to pass. Due to U.S. Senate rules the motion requires 60 votes to move the funding bill forward. The vote was 50 to 49 and the motion failed.

Who is actually responsible for this vote that stopped funding for the government? Answer: Those U.S. Senators who voted NO!

According to the vote:

  • Senator John McCain (R-AZ) DID NOT VOTE due to illness.
  • Two Independents voted NO.
  • Five Republicans voted NO.
  • Forty-two Democrats voted NO.

If all the Republicans, including John McCain, and the two Independent Senators Bernie Sanders and Angus King voted YES, the bill would still have failed on a vote of 57 to 43. Therefore, to pass the procedural motion required 3 more Senate Democrats to vote YES.

Recall when Senator John McCain was the vote that killed the repeal of Obamacare and Democrats Celebrated his stance? Well, three Democrats killed the procedural motion which lead to the current government shutdown.

Should Rep. Nancy Pelosi be pointing fingers?

It is now up to voters in those states to decide if a NO vote, and the resulting government shutdown, will become a NO vote at the polls for those U.S. Senators up for re-election in 2018 who voted NO!

For as former Speaker of the United States House of Representatives Tip O’Neill (D-MA) wrote, “All politics is local.”

ROLL CALL OF “NO” VOTES ON THE SENATE PROCEDURAL MOTION BY STATE:

Arizona
Sen. Jeff Flake, Republican: NO
Sen. John McCain, Republican: Did not vote
California
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Democrat: NO
Sen. Kamala Harris, Democrat: NO
Colorado
Sen. Michael Bennet, Democrat: NO
Connecticut
Sen. Richard Blumenthal, Democrat: NO
Sen. Christopher Murphy, Democrat: NO
Delaware
Sen. Thomas Carper, Democrat: NO
Sen. Chris Coons, Democrat: NO
Florida
Sen. Bill Nelson, Democrat: NO
Hawaii
Sen. Mazie Hirono, Democrat: NO
Sen. Brian Schatz, Democrat: NO
Illinois
Sen. Tammy Duckworth, Democrat: NO
Sen. Dick Durbin, Democrat: NO
Kentucky
Sen. Mitch McConnell, Republican: NO
Sen. Rand Paul, Republican: NO
Massachusetts
Sen. Edward Markey, Democrat: NO
Sen Elizabeth Warren, Democrat: NO
Maryland
Sen. Ben Cardin, Democrat: NO
Sen. Chris Van Hollen, Democrat: NO
Maine
Sen. Angus King, Independent: NO
Michigan
Sen. Gary Peters, Democrat: NO
Sen. Debby Stabenow, Democrat: NO
Minnesota
Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Democrat: NO
Sen. Tina Smith, Democrat: NO
Montana
Sen. Jon Tester, Democrat: NO
New Hampshire
Sen. Maggie Hassan, Democrat: NO
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, Democrat: NO
New Jersey
Sen. Cory Booker, Democrat: NO
Sen. Robert Menendez, Democrat: NO
New Mexico
Sen. Martin Heinrich, Democrat: NO
Sen. Tom Udall, Democrat: NO
Nevada
Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, Democrat: NO
New York
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, Democrat: NO
Sen. Chuck Schumer, Democrat: NO
Ohio
Sen. Sherrod Brown, Democrat: NO
Oregon
Sen. Jeff Merkley, Democrat: NO
Sen. Ron Wyden, Democrat: NO
Pennsylvania
Sen. Bob Casey, Democrat: NO
Rhode Island
Sen. Jack Reed, Democrat: NO
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat: NO
South Carolina
Sen. Lindsey Graham, Republican NO
Utah
Sen. Mike Lee, Republican: NO
Virginia
Sen. Tim Kaine, Democrat: NO
Sen. Mark Warner, Democrat: NO
Vermont
Sen. Patrick Leahy, Democrat: NO
Sen. Bernie Sanders, Independent: NO
Washington
Sen. Maria Cantwell, Democrat: NO
Sen. Patty Murray, Democrat: NO
Wisconsin
Sen. Tammy Baldwin, Democrat: NO

RELATED ARTICLES: 

White House: Dems Are ‘Obstructionist Losers’ For Forcing Shutdown.

How senators voted on the government shutdown – CNN

VIDEO: Border Wall Models Thwart U.S. Commandos In Tests

/in , , , , /by

Citizen James Munder posted the following video on his YouTube channel. The testing on the eight border wall prototypes included using 7th Special Forces Group soldiers to try to breach the walls.

It appears according to reports that the favored designs are those with steel beams that border agents can see through. Officials indicated that the best features from each prototype will be used in the final design after testing is completed.

Copyright © 2024 DrRichSwier.com LLC. A Florida Cooperation. All rights reserved. The DrRichSwier.com is a not-for-profit news forum for intelligent Conservative commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own. Republishing of columns on this website requires the permission of both the author and editor. For more information contact: drswier@gmail.com.