Step 5: Give Me Your Weak

I am not a descendant of Native Americans; as is the case with 95% of all citizens of the U.S.. However, studies have shown that the majority of the population of Central and South America are descendants of aboriginal populations. Thus, in genealogical terms, U.S. citizens are, by and large, foreigners. And so called illegal aliens from South America are anything but.

Perspective is the natural enemy of hypocrisy. 

Part of the perspective we need to bring to the immigration debate is what many have labeled the ‘Gumball’ debate. Made popular nearly 10 years ago (well before the current crisis began) this video and subsequent ones by Roy Beck, have postulated the reason for our immigration problem is congress and a hypothetical ‘limit’ that they can place on legal immigration that would solve the crisis.

While Beck’s solutions were not an answer – his numbers were spot on. As a matter of fact – immigration rates since the video first aired have actually been higher than he projected.

The other perspective is that 10 years ago people like Beck (as offered in his video) viewed Mexico as one of the greatest immigration threats. That was false.

Due to improvements in the standard of living in Mexico (due mostly to NAFTA’s elimination of tariffs and trade restrictions – circa 1993)[1], a very small number of the current immigrant population is coming from Mexico.  As a matter of fact, the latest US census indicated that the growth in Mexican immigrant population in the U.S. (both new immigrants and their offspring) from 1990 to 2017 declined by nearly half a million individuals[2]. Yes. That's not a misprint. More people of Mexican descent left the U.S. than entered.

However immigration from South America, Central America and the Middle East has skyrocketed. These perspectives show us – in no uncertain terms – how to fix the immigration woes in the U.S.  

I am not a champion of Roy Beck’s political solution scenarios (like ending DACA).   But one thing he mentions time and again is that the ultimate solution will be to invest in the stability and prosperity of what is unceremoniously called the ‘Third World’.  We need to address the economic and social strife in these countries – because if we do not, we are practically speaking, just asking the downtrodden to escape to the U.S.

By backing dictators and turning a blind eye to American business interests that siphon billions each year from these small economies, we exacerbate the problems. We are causing our own ‘crisis’. Since 1990 asylum seekers, mostly from latin America are "Coming to America" in droves.

An observation often attributed to Albert Einstein, “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.” – can be applied liberally to this problem.

Several times over we have seen how economic and social engagement changes the course of history.  From the Soviet Union and Glasnost, to NAFTA, economic and social engagement by the richest nation in the world can have tremendous impact.

In the example of Mexico, even with their continued social problems with gangs, drug cartels and official corruption, they have ceased becoming an immigration threat; due primarily to leveling the economic playing field.

With the billions in foreign aid and American business investment that this country can bring to bear - it's unconscionable that any country in the America's is not a healthy democracy.

Our invasion of Iraq brought about ISIS and a flood of refugees that persists today. Our support of dictators in Central and South America cause thousands to flee each year. 

Will we never learn? 

JWB

Sources:

[1]NAFTA, Overview and dates of signatures and ratification, Economic facts, Office of US Trade Representative

[2]2017 Immigration stats (incl Mexican decline) Center for Immigration Studies.

Step 4: Global Warning

Recently there have been new warnings from scientists that global warming is accelerating faster than predicted. Thus the title here - it's not a misspelling. It's a Global Warning. Many of the previous predictions were thought to be extreme by many right wing pundits. However, studies show air quality is falling faster and sea levels rising faster than even the most aggressive predictions 40 years ago.

On the political left we hear a constant chorus of how humanity is ‘destroying the planet’.  And many environmentalists agree citing a rapid decrease in numerous animal species. 

Geologists agree that there have been at least five extinction events on this plant since life arose. One of which had eerily similar CO² emissions prior to complete collapse. 

It’s my opinion, such as it is, that the planet cannot be ‘destroyed’ by an extinction event. Five extinction events and the planet survived just fine. Once the offending catastrophe past, the planet, in time, restored itself. So it’s my position that we are simply destroying ourselves – the earth will go on in spite of us.

Humans are, by and large, destroyers. Ignorant and self-serving, humanity is fairly guaranteed to create another extinction event.  We are REALLY that stupid as a species.

So rather than going crazy trying to figure out how to stop the inevitable, maybe we should be studying how to survive it. If a small percentage of humanity can survive, we may have a chance at a do-over.

I’m old enough to remember the cold war hysteria of the 1950’s when it seemed ‘everyone’ was building a bomb shelter – or knew someone who was. This approach will not work for the next extinction event. It may last a thousand years. 

I see two possible scenarios to surviving a global extinction event. Both sound like science fiction and neither is guaranteed.

• Build large underground cities to survive for several thousand years; or
  

• Establish large colonies on the moon and Mars.

I see you smiling. No, I’m not naive enough to think we have the ability or will to do either. 

While I do believe we have a 90% chance of triggering a mass extinction… that last 10% may be worth a look. It’s improperly called “The Green New Deal” (GND) [1] and it is viewed by the creators of this extinction event (conservatives) as a socialist takeover of America. In reality, it’s ecological provisions are far too little – and possibly - far too late.

The ecological tenets and objectives of the GND, if applied only to the U.S., would not stop the destruction of the ecosystem that has already begun.  While, it may slow it a bit, the GND ecological objectives would need to be applied globally for the human race to have any chance at redemption.

One of the GND biggest problems is that, rather than a single piece of legislation, it is more or less a framework of liberal ideals.  It includes ecological adaptation, universal health care, minimum wages, social security reform, education reform, etc.  It’s 'boil the ocean' approach gets very negative reviews from conservatives and moderates alike. 

We must break out the idealism from the GND and make it purely The Green Deal.  We must first focus on eliminating pollution and greenhouse gas emissions as much as technologically feasible. Like today.

The GND does not have any details on how all of these idealistic changes are to be accomplished. We need real environmental policy that puts humanity before ideology or economy.  We can no longer think only of profits and opportunity. We need to think in terms of survival.

JWB
-------------------------------

[1] (2019) Green New Deal - Draft Legislation;  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_New_Deal 

Step 3: Taxing Caesar

In ancient Rome taxation was different for Roman Citizens than it was for everyone else. “Citizenship” was just another word for elite supporters of the state. Citizenship was conferred upon people by generals or emperors.  A person was a natural citizen only if both birth parents were citizens at the time they were born.  People paid taxes (or ‘tributes’) and Citizens ruled the people. Of course Caesar and his Citizens paid little or no tax themselves. They were charged with how the taxes would be spent.

I apologize if this sounds eerily familiar, America.

Taxation in our country today is a political patchwork not a financial system. Ripe with exclusions, exceptions, deferments, credits and deductions, American tax law is as unfair and lopsided as the Roman system of old.

The fix however is a political nightmare. While a ‘flat tax’ seems the most fair and reasonable approach, the current tax laws employ literally, millions. Tax lawyers, estate planners, tax preparers, financial planners, corporate controllers and the entirety of the IRS – to name only a few – make their living off of tax management and leveraging tax shelters.  The impact of a level, fair and simple tax code would be a major blow to the economy and would be fought by the most powerful lobbies in Washington. 

But corporations and taxpayers are not the only stakeholders in the current mess. Lawmakers in congress use taxes as a carrot and stick for most all funding proposals. From gas taxes to cigarettes – taxes are used to leverage, reward and punish.  Income tax ‘rate tables’ and deductions are part and parcel of these carrot and stick laws. Not to mention tax deferments and investment credits for corporations.

Many say a flat tax simply will not work. Why? Because a truly flat personal income tax would have no deductions, exceptions or credits.  No deducting your mortgage interest, your student loans, your dependents.  Nothing, period.

Of course they are totally wrong. All Americans have been paying a flat tax for over 80 years. Every employed person – and every company they work for - has paid FICA (Federal Insurance Contributions Act – AKA Social Security) taxes. FICA is a totally flat tax (currently 6.2% for each employee and employer) with no deductions or exemptions at all. Not for employees or employers. It’s capped however. Just as with Rome, ‘Citizens’ that make over $130K a year stop paying FICA when they hit the cap. The rest of us pay our whole lives.

What makes FICA so great is that it is not tied to PROFIT only INCOME.  The company you work for pays 6.2% too – no matter if they are a Fortune 100 company – or they exist in bankruptcy.

Not too many people know that the FICA tax system resulted in a HUGE windfall for the government over the years. Even when the salary cap for contributions was low (started out in 1937 as 1% on the first $3K of income) the Social Security fund gained billions over time.  

Of course our lawmakers could not stand to see that much money just lying around – so they passed laws that allowed the government to ‘borrow’ from the fund at extremely low interest rates. They all but drained it in a few years. Now they have to pay back enough each year to keep it as solvent as it would have been if they left it alone. Another statistic that not too many people know about is that 27% of the National Debt, or $6 Trillion dollars, is owed to Social Security and federal pension funds (in contrast, China owns $1.3 Trillion in US debt).

But I digress….

Back to a flat tax.  If we were to use the current model of FICA taxation we could, in theory, eliminate all graduated, tiered and profit based taxes – while saving American taxpayers billions. It’s possible we could actually pay down the national debt at the same time. A flat personal income tax of 20% on gross income - with no cap or deductions – would easily replace the current level of federal revenue from personal income taxes and FICA combined.

Corporate taxes are a different story. The basic issue with FICA is that it is based on the number of U.S. based employees and their salary. And that, along with the natural tendency to avoid taxes, has meant a drain of low wage jobs from U.S. companies and foreign companies doing business in the U.S.. Eliminating the FICA contributions of corporations could be hugely popular on wall street and main street. 

Companies are used to ‘baking in’ the FICA taxes as part of the cost of doing business. Such costs determine the prices companies set for goods and services in order to make a profit.  If we eliminate FICA – based on US employees – and replaced it with a flat business tax of say 15% of Revenue (not income/profit). No caps, no credits or deductions for losses, etc. Then every company would have a solid measurement of the tax burden regardless of where they do business or where their employees reside.  They can bake it into the cost of doing business at the outset.  Not only does it replace a company’s FICA burden, it removes the uncertainty and cost involved with tax management.

In both cases – personal income and corporate revenue – hiding income from the government would need to come with huge penalties.  We need to make the tax rates so low, and the penalties so high, that the only prudent way to go is to pay your fair share. 

In summary, a political taxation system is hard to change when the solution rests with politicians.  But we have an advantage in this country. It’s called a vote.  If we put enough people in congress that have the will to change the tax law then We The People will get it done.

JWB

Step2: Teaching America

Recently I pulled up the ‘Top 20’ list of rated education systems in the world[1]. The United States was 20^th!  The bottom of the list! It used to be near the top.

I was also struck with how many Asian countries are still in the top 10 (South Korea is #3, Hong Kong #10 Japan #2,…). As I recall, as many as 50 years ago, the top 10 countries in education were riddled with Asian countries. They still are. Ever wonder how they sustained their quality systems while the U.S. is in such decline?

While in the Marines I spent a tour in Japan. The Japanese people I met showed a unique reverence for teachers. Teachers were held in great esteem.  If a teacher told a parent they needed to help a child in a facet of their education – that trumped even the requirement of their job.  If a Japanese man told his boss that a teacher said he should spend less time at work – the boss had no choice but to honor that request.  Parents were actually given homework to go over with their child.

Teachers in Japan also had lifelong relationships with many students. They were responsible, by and large, for keeping the teaching profession ripe with new talent and insuring academic relevance in a changing world. A high regard for the teaching profession is a prevalent social concept in most all of Asia.

Research on the top 10 countries (which includes Finland at #1, Russia#5 and Israel#8) shows that teacher pay is not the primary driver to improving education, it is social enablement. Giving teachers a voice in how the education system is run and how it is funded is a primary success factor. And there is much less focus on standardized tests; more on ‘doing whatever it takes’ to keep students engaged and advancing.

While teacher pay is not as big a contributing factor as I imagined, I found the cost to train a teacher and the amount of public funds spent on education (schools, books, electronics, etc.) contribute much more than salary.

In many other countries teaching degrees (usually requiring a Masters level post-graduate degree) can be obtained far cheaper than in the U.S..  While the U.S. has a liberal student loan program, the costs applied to these loans are some of the highest in the world.

A staggering 70% of U.S. graduates have student loans. I know many eminently qualified college graduates that simply cannot afford to be teachers. Then there is the Gender Penalty: Student debt and daycare costs stifle single parents who want to teach.

In the U.S. there is a Teacher Student Debt forgiveness program currently (2019) on the books; but it’s a joke:

“If you teach full-time for five complete and consecutive academic years in certain elementary and secondary schools and educational service agencies that serve low-income families, and meet other qualifications, you may be eligible for forgiveness of up to a combined total of $17,500 on certain federal student loans.”[2]

First of all, few, if any, qualified college graduates can go five years – at entry level teacher salaries – and afford even reduced payments.  Second, the legalese in this program means the government guarantees nothing. For instance, $1 is ‘up to’ $17,500.  Lastly, the average student loan debt for graduates with teaching (Masters) degrees or credentials approaches $50,000.[3]

So – Lots of information on the problem and what other countries do; how do we turn the U.S. back into a leader in education again? We certainly have the intellect and technology; but the will is weak.

My study found the most successful education systems have less than 20 students per teacher/classroom. Some (like Finland) have less than 15. The U.S. has near 30, but used to have much smaller classes. I remember. I was in them. 

We need more teachers and more public school spending; not just higher property taxes. Where local taxes are the deciding factor – only the richest communities will have adequate funding.

My Solution:

Every state needs to contribute a percentage of its domestic product to a national public education fund.  Most U.S. States have a GDP equal to that of entire countries (click Map). 

States can continue with local taxes to pay into the fund, but local taxes will no longer go directly to local schools. All public schools in the U.S. will get all they ask for (within reason) from the national fund. The federal government will contribute matching funds up to a percentage limit set by congress.

A true national public education “System” is not just an education template of standardized tests, vouchers and marginal funding – it’s a nationally funded program that is run BY THE TEACHERS themselves.  They determine where the money is spent and on what.  Each state could have a board of education that actually has the power to appropriate and allocate from the federal fund.

Education degrees have the Lowest return on investment of all degree programs. We need to give FREE education for all teaching degrees, nationwide. No mumbo-jumbo legalese bullshit federal program to maybe pay part of something someday. 

There will always be those that try to game the system. If someone graduates with a federally funded teaching degree but they never teach – or they are not good enough teachers to continue (e.g. voted out by their peers) – then they could be subject to a lifelong income tax (like an educational garnishment) that helps pay for the education of successful teachers.

These ideas may not be the most original or even the most possible. But I think a key will be to create more teachers and give them more power fiscally and socially.

There ARE solutions out there.  We just need the will to implement them.

JWB

---

[1] WorldTop20.org (2019), Final Rankings of 201 nation’s education systems, best 20 educated countries for 2018, https://worldtop20.org/worldbesteducationsystem; https://www.edsys.in/best-education-system-in-the-world/

[2] ED.Gov (2019), The Official BLOG of the U.S. Department of Education, https://blog.ed.gov/2019/04/student-loan-forgiveness-and-other-ways-the-government-can-help-you-repay-your-loans-3/

[3] Education Next (2019), The Tangled World of Teacher Debt, https://www.educationnext.org/tangled-world-of-teacher-debt-rules-uncertain-benefits-federal-student-loan-subsidies/

Step1: Terms & Conditions

Is partisan divide just a necessary curse of a two party democratic system, or is it a condition brought about by our own ignorance? Something We The People can correct? If so, what methods are at our disposal to combat petty congressional self-serving partisan gridlock?

Before any problem can be solved it must first be defined. 

We all have a good appreciation of the time and effort that goes into running a campaign for public office. It can take years of experience then getting endorsements, planning, fund raising, speaking and advertising; bringing in hundreds of volunteers and vetting dozens of paid staff to write, direct and produce the ‘product’ which is you. A federal congressional campaign can be the culmination of a life’s work in itself. 

Then you win!

Your constituents think the campaign is over. You are now their standard bearer. Their voice! You can concentrate on the interests and well being of those that voted for you. Live up to all those promises.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

From the day a freshman congressman or senator enters Washington they are hemmed in on all sides by the partisan machine. Do what you’re told and you will remain. Break ranks and you will never win another election. Rather than the campaign being over – it simply shape shifts. Political direction is governed by party leadership, lobbyists and those that contribute to campaigns. Favors are due. An agenda and a process are already in place. You are expected to fall into line – or else none of your ideas or legislation will ever see the light of day.

And, oh by the way, you have to start thinking about the next election. Members of the House of Representatives serve only two years. The Senate serves six. A congressman can barely let their campaign manager go on vacation.

Here then we find one of the root causes of our partisan problem. It stems from the nearly continuous campaigning of our elected officials.  Whether a two or six year term, local, state or federal, it takes well over a year of preparation and financial positioning for an incumbent to run a campaign to keep their office. It takes sponsorship too: In the form of continued party endorsements, funding and favors. It’s almost like a student loan. You may never be free from it. You have to keep borrowing.

Members of both houses must keep an eye on the politics of their decisions rather than their merit. They must be a staunch member of the ‘Club’ (AKA caucus). They find themselves pledging far more to Washington than to their constituents.

We need term limits. Long ones. One and done limits. Limits that incite independence not penalize it.

If we had a process whereby, once elected (to either the House or Senate), an official was entitled to a single eight year term of service - then could not run for the same office again for another eight years - the 'campaign' would be over on the day they were elected. By ridding ourselves of incumbency we greatly minimize obligations to the political process that promotes, and the special interests that fund, campaigns.

There would be of course fine print, such as:

• A career politician could run for another office in successive terms (e.g. a Congressman could run for the Senate; a Senator for President; Governor, etc.). We would not want to impede the political momentum of a successful public servant.
• One quarter of each the House and Senate would be elected every two years. At any one time 75% of both houses would be veterans with 2 years or more experience. This is a more substantial benefit than many realize. It also insures 25% of the membership is always fresh blood. New thinking.
• In each two year election cycle any standing member may be recalled if a petition acquires enough support. Once a recall petition is on the ballot, a majority of voters would need to vote yea. The member in question would be recalled and removed from the legislative process until a replacement could be elected (no lame ducks in the recall process).

If you doubt the need for one-and-done fixed term limits, consider this case in point: In 2019 during a high profile vote in the U.S. Senate, twelve republican senators voted with all democrats to block the president's misuse of the Federal Emergency Declaration process. Only those republican senators up for reelection the next year voted otherwise. A blatant demonstration that their jobs were more important than America, it's constitution, or it's people.

I do not want to pick on Republicans here. There are many similar events involving Democrats in congress. It just happens to be the latest example of the infection of democracy called 'incumbency'.  

Getting politicians to change a political system requires new blood. Those that are in office today, by and large, will not be on board. They visualize decades of power in front of them.  No, it will take We The People and our votes to make such a drastic change happen. 

We need to ignite a populist movement to put all elected officials behind the "Eight Ball". Eight years and done. The will of the people has to be relentless. But it can be done.

JWB