It’s easy to blame someone else

Kaley D, another one of my upstanding classmates, wrote an article this week about her views on the economy and how much she has learned in this US Government course. Her article is titled “Government Shut Down”, located in her Blogspot Kaley D's Take on Government.

While I agree with a lot of what she writes, such as our country’s dependency on oil, climbing gas prices and our economy reaching near rock bottom, I must evaluate some of her views in the government’s control in many aspects of our lives.

In her article, she mentions how President Obama made a lot of promises while campaigning and his shortcomings that dragged our country to a recession and a near government shut down. It is imperative to emphasize that when a presidential candidate is campaigning, he/she has to address all important issues and communicate what his/her actions would be to revert the problem. The people, who get carried away with the promises, and are politically unsophisticated, should know that no man/woman alone can make these changes. We live in a democratic country, and not in a Dictatorship or Totalitarian regime. The people should know there is a process for the proposed changes and that a lot of politics goes on to pass a bill in our bi-partisan structure.

The government near shut down did not happen because the politicians could not agree on a budget. All of them agree the government needs to cut expenditures, and what’s superfluous spending. The near shut down happened because one of the parties decided to have a power trip with the numbers of seats they have in the House and make a political statement by holding the government hostage, and threatening the livelihood of the people (like she mentions about federal employee furlough) if they did not get their wishes of cutting fund for Planned Parenthood, and the repeal of the Obama Health Care Bill.

Regarding Kayley’s statement that the talk of the town is now money, it’s always been about money. While the government needs to cut some of its costs, it passes out a lot of money in entitlement programs, like Welfare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, School Lunches, WIC, etc… supposed to help the needy and disadvantaged. The recipients of these programs, though, a lot of times are not needy or disadvantaged and take a lot of advantage of the loopholes, or even settle their lifestyles to stay eligible to receive payments.

As citizens, it is important to be able to point out and speak up about our government deficiencies, but we cannot forget that the people have some responsibility making this country work as well.

Birther Movement: a ludicrous distraction

The Birther Movement, a movement that started with a group of Obama haters and Hillary Clinton supporters in the presidential campaign of 2008, who could not believe that a black candidate could democratically win the elections and started conspiracy theories about his natural citizenship.

The Birther Movement has managed to stay alive since the early days of Obama’s candidacy and has changed their conspiracy theories ever so slightly as Obama released first his short version of his birth certificate, document normally given out by officials in Hawaii. However, that was not enough; the group started questioning if the long version of the birth certificate could be provided, insinuating the short version was a forgery. They also question whether Obama might have dual citizenship, since his father is a British citizen born in Kenya.

The US Constitution, Article II, Section 1 provides that “No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President…”

Even though the group was born as a leftist movement, it has picked up a lot of interest from the Republicans in recent weeks now that the run for next year presidential elections is starting to pick up. Donald Trump, the Real Estate tycoon, who has been insinuating his presidential intentions, took credit the President’s decision to release the long version of his birth certificate, just this week.

But what if the Birthers are right and Obama is not a natural born citizen of this country? What good would it do at this point? Do we impeach him? Recall him? If his presidency is invalid, then how do we go back and erase all the decisions he’s made in the past 3 years? And if he indeed is not a natural born citizen, then we have a lot more problems to worry about, like how come this is not verified before he became a presidential candidate.

Whatever the outcome of this is, the Birther Movement seems to be a big distraction from the greater picture, conveniently picking up strength with the support of Obama’s potential adversaries in next year’s presidential election.

Hopefully, the American People are smart enough to see through this and realize there is a bigger picture, and how much needs to be done to bring this country back on its feet, and how petty and silly the argument of Obama’s citizenship is in the great scheme of things. It is not like we have anything more important to focus on, like recovering from this recession, making sure we have enough money to retire, immigration, housing, etc...

Certainly, the ones associating themselves with the Movement will bring more harm than good to their bids, no matter how great there are at tooting their own horns!

This is no game!

One of my respected classmates, William Berry, wrote a blog titled "Who's controlling this monopoly? Certainly not the banks!", on April 1st, from his Blogspot named “The never Ending Blog” and it struck me as a very interesting point of view. He talks about the infamous $700 billion bailout approved by President Bush in his last months of presidency in 2008, and it compares the banks bailout to the game of Monopoly.

The crisis of 2008, led by the bubble in the housing market, has been a tough one to get through and it won't be easily forgotten, as it is certainly printed in many History books. Because of the banks' greed for profit, the housing market was inflated with subprime mortgages, loans made for financially under qualified people, with lower level of education; the target was the people who couldn't really understand the outrageous terms of their contracts and who saw an opportunity to own their American Dream.

 These terms, which usually included fixed interest for the first 3 or 5 years of mortgage payments and a readjustment to a variable monthly rate thereafter, was a recipe for disaster. And it came crashing down rather quickly. When these mortgage payments became too high to manage because of the variable interest rate, many homes entered the process of foreclosure. Foreclosures gave banks a huge inventory and overhead. Lending came to a halt. The credit and housing markets slowed down, causing the whole economy to slow down and enter a recession.

A recession meant lack of confidence from investors, and Wall Street suffered. The dollar devalued towards the Euro, Gold and Petroleum. Companies had to use more dollars to keep up their output, while cutting its costs. Cutting costs meant lay-offs. Lay-offs meant less consumers to buy products... you get the idea.

Everyone agreed that the credit market needed intervention, and many proposals were brought up. The bailout seemed to be the fastest way to plug the hole at the time. Even though it wasn't perfect, it was a quick band aid. All other plans were more intricate to implement and would take years for market mechanisms to respond.

William, the author of the article in question, brings up a good point, in essence, that it is not fair that the government used taxpayer money to fund the greed of high risk investment companies. However, one cannot compare one the biggest recessions, nearing depression, to a game of Monopoly.

If the greedy companies like banks failed, thousands of people would lose their homes, jobs and investments. Recovery of these assets, for the common people, would be a slow, painful and costly process; through the judicial system or FDIC claims. So, the Monopoly idea of simply letting the loser get out of the game is just irresponsible in real life, as we, or someone we know could be one of the people affected by their exodus. Imagine if my bank failed and I could not withdraw or reclaim my money for weeks to pay my mortgage or my bills, or my car. Without my car, or money to put gas in it, while I waited for my FDIC claim, I can't go to work, so I would probably be fired. What then?

The bailout was a quick and efficient way to keep things going at the time, but it can still fail, too. Because of it, the national debt shot up the roof, which puts our nation in a very sensitive position worldwide. The only thing that can be done now is to cut down our expenditures (macro and micro), reform income tax laws to be able to generate more revenue, and stay put for a few years until the market corrects itself. This seems to be our Government’s priority in the past few weeks, so I guess we'll be playing this game a little longer.

Creative accounting is not illegal, but it should be!

Bank of America, GE, Citibank, Boeing, Wells Fargo and ExxonMobil, all multimillion dollar companies, continue to report record profits quarter over quarter, but did not owe a dime in income taxes for the year of 2010. Because of tax breaks, loopholes and great accountants, they were able to claim losses and tax credits in the US, while claiming their profits in lower tax countries.   “Nothing illegal, just creative accounting” says Immelt, GE’s CFO.  Achieving this level of mastery of near tax evasion is no easy feat.  Albert Einstein once remarked "The hardest thing in the world to understand is the income tax."

The tax code has evolved and become bigger and more complicated throughout the years.  If you put all the 70,000 pages on the ground, you would be on a 13 mile journey.  In 1952, Joseph Nunan was convicted of income tax evasion (when the code was only 20,000 pages long).  His previous job was IRS Commissioner.  Need I say more?

It is not just a campaign slogan that we need income tax reform, we really need it to come soon.  Every day, budget crises make headlines and the federal government has been in jeopardy of shutting down, which would be a blow to America’s confidence and cause the economy slip into another recession.

Of course the government must be mindful and control its spending, but it is not fair for the people at a micro level that the bigger companies get away with millions, if not billions of dollars due in taxes.  In recent years, tax revenue declined due to the recession and expenditures have been on the rise because of stimulus plans, bailouts, etc.

The Obama Administration extended the Bush era tax break for two more years last year, for all income groups.  Hopefully the administration will be using this time to reform these tax breaks and loopholes and be able to rake in taxes from these companies’ profits.  It is estimated the cuts will add $900 billion to the national debt during these two years.

During the Reagan era, it was said that when the government gives tax breaks, they pay for themselves in the long run, because it stimulates the economy, bringing economic growth and more revenue. But if you cut taxes and not spending, you end up in deficit. Conservative economists,  however, tend to say that the tax breaks do not pay for themselves in the long run, that they bring huge deficits, and where there is a tax break, someone else is paying for it elsewhere. Guess who is footing the bill of the multimillion dollar companies tax breaks?

Eleven days left.  All the income I have made so far this year, is going towards the taxes I will owe the government next year.  According to the Tax Foundation, Tax Freedom Day falls on April 12 this year.  Bank of America, GE, Citibank, Boeing, Wells Fargo and ExxonMobil have likely been enjoying the fruit of their labor since the New Year. Must be nice!

Illegal IS Illegal

Immigration Reform seems to be getting pretty relevant at State levels recently, whereas the Federal Government, the institution that is supposed to enforce the laws passed by its own Legislative Body seems to be asleep on the wheel. It seems like a family where the children are asking for their parents’ attention but all they get is a slap on the wrist for having tried to talk.

In the column, “The right way to mend immigration”, by Charles E. Schumer and Lindsey O. Graham from the washingtonpost.com, they not only state how Americans overwhelmingly oppose illegal immigration and favor legal immigration, as well as provide solutions to key points of the issue (such as ways to citizenship, back taxes, high tech social security cards and simpler immigrant employment regulations) and urge the public to join them in a bipartisan effort to enact these reforms.

It would be hypocritical to simply exclude immigration from a country that was born in diversity. Many agree, though, that illegal immigration in the US has gotten out of control. The federal laws have not been updated in decades as anxiety brews in the States which keep trying to pass assertive laws and causing confusion among the population of illegal immigrants that struggle with the uncertainty of deportation if they get caught.

It is not clear how many undocumented immigrants currently reside in the US. Reports vary from 11 million to 35 million. Somehow, they survive; they find jobs, shop for clothes, go to restaurants or even own such restaurants. It’s not to say that it’s a lavish life, but they manage.

In the face of the recession we’re facing and fiscal issues that threaten both the Federal and States budgets, we must rethink economically where a lot of money is spent. Teachers are being laid off, classes are going to be more crowded, so how come someone who is not here legally is eligible to enroll in our public schools, or even take part in reduced lunch price programs? The cost of health insurance is skyrocketing; most Americans would not be able to afford it if it wasn’t for their work providing them coverage. Still, many undocumented immigrants use our emergency rooms and clinics for free, since there is no way for these institutions to enforce their bills after they were cared for.

Again, it is not about immigration, but illegal immigration and its impact (burden) on society. That is exactly what the column I referenced talks about and offers a very comprehensive solution for the hot topics; a way to find the equilibrium, the compromise everyone needs and deserves.

Obama instructs DOJ to back off DOMA defense

Call it Marriage, Civil Union, whatever pleases you. From the time the Constitution was written up to now, our laws have changed to reflect the evolution of our society. The NYTimes.com editorial, Mr. Obama moves against Bias, on Feb. 23, gives the author’s perspective on our President’s instruction to the Department of Justice to stop defending the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

DOMA  was  enacted in 1996, by President Clinton, when the state of Hawaii threatened to legalize same-sex marriage, an act that made Congress come together to vote against it. Our Constitution, however, provides that that “powers not granted to the federal government nor prohibited to the states by the Constitution are reserved to the states or the people” (10^th amendment). With that in mind, eight states in our Union recognize same-sex marriages. Also, there is an equal protection of the law amendment (14^th amendment), which is self explanatory and goes strictly against the now arguable section 3 of DOMA.

The issue is that if there are eight states that recognize same-sex marriages, might the people who entered into these marriages be discriminated against by the Federal Government?

The effects of repealing this law go beyond just the institution of marriage. It would give same-sex couples the same rights as any heterosexual couples, such as being able to file taxes together, adopt children, requesting legal immigration status to partners, inheritances, medical decisions, etc…

The administration shifted its position because of two recently filed lawsuits. Its defense requires a “high scrutiny test” by the courts, which has become untenable. The conclusion of these cases rests in the hands of the judges, but at least our government is doing the right thing, taking steps to stop defending unconstitutional laws.

In the midst of the controversial subject of same-sex marriage and its underlying issues, this editorial takes a stand with our President, calling the current law deplorable and blatantly discriminatory. And it does not hurt that its vehicle is the reputable NY Times, which targets literate, well-educated people, interested in politics and current affairs.

In a true democracy, the citizens have rights and duties and rights is the keyword here. We have evolved throughout time, we have voiced our opinions and desires, and we expressed our views to our elected politicians so they can fight for our interests. We achieved the right to vote for women and black people, we desegregated our society, interracial marriages are legal… there are numerous examples of similar instances where our laws finally caught up with society changes. This issue is no different. Watch history as it happens!

Arizona counter-sues the federal government over border security

Whether you’re for it or against it, everyone has an opinion about Immigration. In 2010, the Governor of Arizona passed a controversial state law that would give every Arizona law enforcement the power to ask any citizen their immigration status and help deport illegals, a power vested solely in our Federal Government.   

When this law was signed, the Department of Justice sued, arguing that AZ had no authority to pass such law and won a temporary injunction the day before the law was to take effect. Now, the ball is on Arizona’s side of the court, and they are counter-suing the federal government, pointing out their shortfalls in implementing and sustaining border control.

This ping-pong of law suits is unprecedented regarding Immigration Laws.  It is really worth trying to keep up with it from political, constitutional, legal and civil rights points of view. This issue will create a legal precedent that can potentially affect, if not you, someone you personally know. Who’s gonna win this rally?