US Senate Calls Out Iran and US about Agreement

Secretary of State Kerry has expressed outrage over the recent open letter from 47 US Senators to Iran regarding the lack of standing of an "executive agreement" that Kerry and President Obama are trying to negotiate with Iran. 

A few Simple Facts:

• The stated purpose of the agreement is to contain and limit Iran's capacity to construct a nuclear weapon.
• Iran has been a major antagonist to the US and its allies in the Middle East and throughout the world. (Leaders of Iran have called for "death to America". Iran recently has been known as a source of many American deaths in Iraq and also discovered to be in direct support of Osama Bin Laden.)
• Iran has been processing nuclear fuel for years. Iraq has amassed significant nuclear processing equipment. Many believe that the only purpose of this capacity is to create many nuclear weapons. Iran has rejected proposals for being supplied nuclear fuel by other countries for domestic energy production (i.e. power plants)
• President Obama has not disclosed many details about the agreement. He has stated that he does not intend to ask the Senate to ratify a possible agreement. The constitution is clear that "a treaty" must be ratified by the Senate to be binding on the US beyond the term of the current President (less that two years).

Here is the Simple Truth

Iran has a long record of attempts to undermine US interests in the world. Many report Iran as a major supporter of terrorist activities throughout the world. They have proven over and over to be untruthful and unreliable as a foreign state. These negotiations have went on for years and been extended several times.

As with most major treaties, the Senate is called on to ratify treaties. If is not a treaty, then a negotiated agreement has little lasting effect as defined in the US Constitution.

If Iran is not restrained in constructing nuclear weapons, it is an "existential threat" to the US and its allies. The President has acknowledged as much. Yet, an "executive agreement" is meaningless without Senate ratification. The "Simple Truth" is that if "advice and consent" and ratification of the Senate was sought, the effect would be:

i.) build political support for negotiated agreements,
ii.) improve the terms of the agreement,
iii.) increase negotiating leverage with Iran, and,
iv.) the result being a meaningful and long standing agreement.

Otherwise the executive agreement is meaningless and the protests from supporters of the President are SPECIOUS!

Fiscal Cliff = Fiscal Fiction

There is so much misinformation being given to the American People. Listening to the political leaders and talking heads has obscured many important facts about the "fiscal cliff". Here are several of the important ones.

1. We have to raises taxes on the top two percent because we can't afford those tax rates - according to White House.

Our ANNUAL federal deficit is nearly $1,000 billion ($1 trillion). The tax increases on the top two percent earners (> $250,000) will at most yield $80 billion annually. That leaves annual deficits of $920 billion.

2. Social Security does not affect the deficit.

It actually does. While the accounting records for many federal expenditures are segregated, Congress has long ago treated spending as a unified budget. Social Security does have a separate tax to fund, but, those tax dollars will be inadequate in a few years. Then, the rest of the Federal budget will have to source these payments. There is a lot of confusion on this issue to obscure how big the problem is. In effect, the federal government for years has used/spent surplus revenues collected into the Social Security fund accounts.

3. The President campaigned on raising taxes on the top 2%. He should get his way and Congress should pass legislation to raise taxes as he campaigned on.

It is true that he campaigned on increasing taxes. He also campaigned on many other things. It is also true that he likely believes that Congress should concede to his wishes.

However, the President did not run on amending the constitution to eliminate Congress' role in passing tax laws. The one truth about election results in 2012 is that the balance of power remained the same after the election and most of the same people and influences are still in place. That means that Congress and the White House both have a significant say in the outcome of tax policy. Our constitution was not changed by the election.

Brookings Podcast: Energy Independence

Brookings Institute on Fracking and Energy Independence

Energy Independence - Come on is it really a problem?

Many don't understand the energy picture in the US and don't challenge their leaders about energy policy. Here is why it matters:

1 - We spend huge amounts of our income and wealth on energy. It is something we have to buy to live in our world. Energy gets us to work and to home. It is used to bring us the goods we consume (i.e. food, clothes), it "empowers our workplace", it provides comfort in our shelters. Think about how much you spend on utility bills, gas or alternative transportation, and how much energy cost is built into everything we use in our lives.

2 - Energy cost and availability is unpredictable. This is significant risk to our standard of living and day to day creature comforts. Imagine how our lives would change if suddenly we had less electricity, car gas or natural gas to heat our homes. If there were significant shortages, imagine how costs would increase and how that would impact our ability to buy a new car or take our family to dinner.

The truth is that our country has done a good job in protecting our access to energy at a reasonable cost. In fact, in many cases, our energy costs are less than other western countries in the world. But, have we contained or minimized the risks of changing energy supplies or costs? The answer is no.


3 - The reason it is important that is least discussed is the impact of exporting so much US wealth and income overseas. The simple facts are that we import about half of the daily use of oil. That means that we send to others the cost of half of the crude oil we use. If we use simple math, we import about ten million barrels of oil every day. That 3,650 million barrels of oil every year. At $100 per barrel that is almost $400 billion per year in income and wealth. (For the accountants out there, those numbers can be tinkered with up and down, but the general simple fact is valid.)


Why should you care if we export $400 billion every year for oil?

Two reasons. First, the money we spend overseas goes to people that don't like Americans and the US. They fund terrorists, support our enemies and work against the American people. Think about Iran, Russia, Venezuela and even our "friends"  in Saudi Arabia.

These are not easy issues. Saudi Arabia is both a friend and not. While Saudi Arabia supports our interests in many ways, they also work against our interests. There are plenty of cases where their citizens have financially supported our enemies. The export of American dollars and wealth does gain us some influence but also strengthens our enemies.

The second reason that we should care about exporting our income and wealth  for energy is that we no longer have what we spend with someone else. The simple truth is that when we send our income and wealth to someone else, we don't have it anymore. If we buy oil or natural gas from an American company or individual, it remains in our country to buy other goods and services. How much better would our standard of living, how many more jobs would we have, and how much more tax revenues would there be if more income and wealth were kept in the US.

A real world example of this is occurring in North Dakota as you read this. Jobs are being created, construction is occurring, and taxes are being paid from the exploration and production of energy products. These jobs are not in Iran or Saudi Arabia.

What would you like to see our country do with another $400 billion every year? 

How do we become more energy independent? There are simple facts and simple truths. See a future post.

What is Simple about Facts and Truth?

More is simple than you realize. Many important issues facing our country are really quite simple when you simply want to make America great. If you decide to check in here over the next few months, you will have a chance to learn how simple the facts and truth are. The reason I write on these topics is to offer readers and my fellow Americans a chance to gain an insight on facts and truth on issues affecting America.

America is exceptional and if you don't agree then you will find little of value here. Exceptional does not mean that we should rub other countries nose in it. It does not mean that America should be condescending or demanding. Simply put - we should not be apologetic about our exceptional-ism. Be proud of what we are and what we stand for. The world is a better place when we respect all views and peoples.

In coming posts, I will offer several types of information for your consideration. 1) I will try to inform about important issues facing the country and the coming elections. Key issues for our country are education, economic growth, energy independence, terrorism, federalism, federal spending - debt and deficits and voter empowerment.  2) I will focus on information in the media that I think helps frame these issues. 3) I will encourage you to be informed, to vote and to demonstrate that this country exists to serve the interests of its people, not the other way around.

One last think you can expect. The educators, politicians and the media have failed in informing the public to make wise choices in self governance. Examples and criticism will be free flowing on this topic so that any reader can call out their favorite educator, politician or media outlet. 


I welcome your comments and disagreements. However, I will not tolerate rudeness or comments that are clear attempts to mislead readers. No demagoguery here. For the record, I don't like labels as they oversimplify important ideas and people. But, if you must, I tend to think like a conservative and libertarian and vote Republican most of the time.

Lets get to the simple facts and simple truth.

Illinois is a Fiscal Train Wreck

When Illinois voters consider their choices in the next several weeks, it is important that they decide whether to hold incumbants accountable for their financial responsibility.

Just a few days ago, the Civic Federation of Chicago disclosed that the delayed funding of the state's pension obligations will cost taxpayers $12 billion vs the $3.5 billion that was not funded in the fiscal 2011 budget (source COGFA). Earlier in September, the Civic Federation was quoted on the NPR website:
 
"The financial condition of the state of Illinois is a fiscal train wreck," says Laurence Msall, president of the Civic Federation, a Chicago-based nonpartisan, not-for-profit group[ http://www.civicfed.org/ ] that analyzes and researches state and local government budgets.
 
He says Illinois' fiscal problems are not simply the result of a bad economy.

"The state's train wreck is caused by inaction and dereliction of duty in Springfield; the failure to provide a balanced budget," Msall says, adding that Illinois' last two governors and the Democratic-controlled state Legislature haven't cut spending to match declining revenues. In fact, he says, they keep spending more.

Illinois By the Numbers; Chicago Tribune

An Opinion Piece today in the Chicago Tribune provides insight into where Illinois stands relative to other states. Several important ideas from the analysis assembled by the Tribune:

• One of the worst states for job creation and business confidence
• The WORST state for funding its employees pension obligations
• The state with the most units of government
• Not effective in providing public education
• 29th in the US out of 50 in voter turnout
• 29% of the state budget (3rd in US) spent on Medicaid (health care for the poor) which provides health services/benefits to 1 in 5 people in IL.

Most Important Election Ever

From this point forward, this blog will be focused on giving friends and followers information that leads to the conclusion that voters should "Vote Em All Out". My orientation comes from living in Central Illinois and seeing the negative turn of events in our country. From where I sit, Obama was a "bait and switch" candidate. He lead the country to believe that he would be post-politics, consensus builder, post racial and new age world leader. In fact, he is simply a socialist.

And, he has too many enablers in Congress. Not all members of Congress are socialists. Some are. But the democratic leadership and majority support too many of his policies. These policies are either socialistic, or are designed to reduce freedoms, or to nationalize the US economy. Enough is enough. The worst of these are:

• ObamaCare
• Tax and Trade (tax)
• FinReg

And Illinois is not better. Illinois is behind 5-6 months in paying its bills. Its pension obligations can never be met without taxing the state into oblivion. And if a state could be bankrupt, Illinois would be.

It is time to Vote Em All Out ("VEAO"). We would be better of with a whole new group of elected leaders in the Federal government and in Illinois. While these posts, won't duck local issues, the focus will be on national and state issues.

Critics might point out that we would be giving up either experienced leaders or effective leaders. That may be. But, the benefits of reminding all elected leaders that they can be held accountable is worth the cost. In general, a whole new group, can't be worse. In calling for VEAO, this blog does not suggest that every voter should vote out every leader. It does mean hold them all accountable.

In future posts, this blog will be a depository of what is wrong with the federal government and Illinois government and issues that voters should consider when deciding who to vote for. In many cases, the blog will link readers to articles and analysis from around the country. The focus will also be on races where readers of this blog can influence with their vote. That will mean the IL Congressional 17th District. The IL governor, the IL US Senate race, and, IL legislative races for central Illinois.

This blog will also suggest the most important issues to consider in the upcoming election and policies on those issues to measure candidates against.

ObamaCare will Fail

As I write this, many in Washington are predicting a successful vote this week in the House of Representatives. And while this may occur, nearly all democrats know that no legislation can get passed by either house without a "fix-it" bill that no one has seen and no one knows the costs of.

Am I making an amazing, and possibly wrong, prediction on the votes in Congress on health care reform? No. I am saying that even if legislation passes called "health care reform" ("ObamaCare"), it will in fact fail.

1. First, the "ObamaCare" legislation could not get passed in any conventional way. So far, we have a bill passed in by the Senate and one passed by the House that are significantly different. Neither House of Congress is willing to pass the other's bill. Even the President said he want's fixes to both. The only way "ObamaCare" gets through Congress is with political bribes, chicanery and trampling of rules that have existed for decades. Everyone agrees that this bill will have substantial affects on the health care sector of the economy. Everyone also agrees the financial impact of the proposed legislation is far reaching. The Simple Truth is that any bill that has such pervasive impacts on Americans and the US economy should not pass as a result of such trickery. And it could not pass without it.
2. Even if the legislation passes, it will result in years of litigation on multiple fronts. From issues of basic constitutionality (forced coverage) to inequal treatment of groups and states. We will never know the impact of this "ObamaCare reform" as it will be in flux for years if not decades in the courts. This too is failure.
3. Third, even if this legislation passes, it will not accomplish the goals that have been stated by its strongest advocates. It is equally likely to leave us with the same or more uninsured Americans. It is more likely to result in increased health insurance premiums and costs. And, it is likely to blow a huge hole in the side of the financial ship of America.

The Simple Truth is that this is the worst legislation ever. It deserves to fail. And if it passes... it will still fail.

The Simple Truth is that America WANTS health care reform. This legislation is not it.

CBO - "Show Me the Money"?

The new Democrat device to obscure the abysmal ObamaCare from Americans is a false premise about concerns with CBO analysis. They are insisting that Republicans are rejecting CBO analysis because they just don't like the result.

The largest problem with CBO numbers are inherent in any CBO analysis and the context of that analysis. Even the CBO would acknowledge these limitations. This problem is related to the untested assumptions and the long-term nature of the projections. They are particularly important here because the huge size of the health care sector (1/7th of the US economy) and the very long term nature of the alleged impacts.

As one commenter said about the CBO analysis of Obamacare:

"They don't pass the smell test."

Key business decision analysis rarely places reliance on projections that extend more than 5-10 years. The analytical problems include:

• The projected deficit reductions are over long periods of times and rely on many unreliable assumptions on impacts.
• The CBO estimates do not include all the provisions because the "fix bill" has not been described or analyzed. In fact, no one has even seen the fix bill or know the interaction of its provisions against the Senate Bill whatever may be included in it.
• The projected impacts presume a few years of costs in the 10 year horizon, and full 10 year taxes. Therefore analytical apples and oranges.
• The projections simply mush together service cuts (Medicare - HMO programs), tax increases (different in each bill) and alleged cost curve impacts.
• The stated deficit reduction in the first 10 years presume cuts, taxes and savings, while not comparing those to the entire health care bill for the full 10 years or the increased costs over the 10 years, both to the economy, and to the federal government.
• Many of the alleged cost curve savings make many presumptions about the impact while ignoring the small effect and limited basis for the assumption. Many of the cost curve changes are quite modest changes.
• Not discussed in the CBO savings are the full impact of the costs in insurance premiums. There is reasonable concern that insurance costs could increase substantially due to the incentive for adverse selection due to the modest penalty for choosing to be uninsured versus the benefit of "must carry".
• A very important limitation of the CBO analysis is that it seems to hide a new entitlement program that is all cost. Rarely do we discuss the specific and likely underestimated costs of the federal government subsidies of health insurance for those "in need". This cost is likely to be higher for many reasons and will not be offset by hopeful assumptions.
• The CBO analysis does not compare the costs/savings against other alternatives that might be more effective with much less analystical risk and much less cost. Any analysis has uncertainty.

The snuck out the $200 billion medicare doctor fix of the health bill and are running it through the jobs bill... so much for CBO integrity.