Blog 16

U.S. Involvement in Money Laundering

With the recent flare up in drug cartel activity south of the border, many United States leaders are looking for more efficient ways in which to stop the violence.  American and Mexican officials are often short of money and resources to track these cartels that hold a reign of terror over the citizens of Mexico poorest regions, most infamous of which is Ciudad Juarez.  Intimidation and bulling leaves regular people helpless and police officers dead or corrupt.  However, as with the large-scale crime of the 1950s mob, these cartels are looking for convenient ways in which to hide their profits are relocate money to other regions of the country and Latin America.  They use inconspicuous business like solons and day care centers to funnel large amounts of cash to and fro. 

While American officials, and even former President Bush and current President Obama have pledged American support and supplies to combat these cartels, there are nor enough resources to track money laundering.  Often these illicit activities appear legal.  According the Wall Street Journal, in 2008 over 1, 600 people were killed due to cartel violence in Ciudad Juarez alone.  Numbers double that are estimated for 2009.  I propose that the American officials spend less of their resources on building a vast Great Wall-like fence and garner their resources toward tracking the money, the lifeblood of the gory cartels.  By following the money trail, officials, Mexican and American, will be able to find guilty parties on all levels of involvement, because the money is with the drugs at all levels of production and consumption. 

Although the United States is still suffering severely from the Panic of 2008, investing in anti- cartel operations, will preserve the countries national security and our borders more effectively than any fence could.  The tactics President Calderón has used so far, most of which are similar to the American tactics used in Iraq, have led to sever retaliation against the law enforcement sector.  So, by stealthy tracking money, the security and well being of the everyday citizens will be increasingly safer.  

Blog 15

Limit Earmark Spending

The congress members, while working on bills in committee have often found an easy route to garnering money and jobs to their home district. Earmarks, also called home-state projects are amendments added to a particular bill by congress members that sends money to specific projects.  Usually these projects benefit the member’s home district, by providing money and jobs.  However, many congress members use these earmarks to reward campaign contributors and supporters.  Democrats and Republicans alike have tried to cut back on the number of earmarks in the spending bills, bills that deal with “transportation, justice, foreign, labor, health, education and veterans programs” (New York Times). 

However, there is over $4 billion dollars worth of earmarks in the recent spending bill that was just passed by the Senate.  Republican senators were reluctant to pass the recent spending bill; however, there was a measure passed that closed debate on this bill because the Health Care Bill is taking precedent. Senator John McCain has been the most vocal critic of earmarks in the Senate, he proposed an amendment in March of this year, which would get rid of the earmarks on an important Senate spending bill.  He was defeat in a 63 to 32 vote.

Earmarks bypass the important government agencies which are supposes to allocate the money appropriated to them by Congress.  As experts in their given spheres, these agencies should decide where the money should go.  Congress members use earmarks as tools to get reelected, they go back to their constituents and brag about all the wonderful, job-bringing projects that I have brought back to the District X.  Federal money should be misappropriated in this way.  These congress members who have enough power to create large earmarks are stealing money from the government agencies that know where the money actually needs to go.  

Blog 14

Same Sex Marriage

This week, something extraordinary happened, the 2.2 million people of Houston, Texas, elected an openly gay mayor, Ms. Annise Parker.  Although on her campaign she refused to highlight her sexual orientation and instead focused on experience in city finances, her election has excited gay and lesbian right’s activists around the world.  There have been several elected majors in the United States, Providence, Portland and Cambridge Mass.  Although Ms. Parker attempted to play down her sexual orientation, her opponent, Gene Locke, another Democrat ran tried to smear her candidacy by funding mailings publicizing her “same-sex agenda.”  This election opens the gateway for many other gays and lesbians running for high office.

Across the country, the debate over same sex marriage has flared up as several states including California have voted to ban same sex marriage, whilst other stares, Maine, New Jersey and Massachusetts have legalized same sex marriage.  In the early history of the issue the Supreme Court of the United States allowed states to choose how to deal with this issue, as is there right, provided by the tenth amendment, which gives the states, “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States,” (Amendment X).  Therefore, each state had dealt with the issue through referendums and initiatives, or through the state legislature.

I propose people opposed to same sex marriage focus less on other people’s action and more on themselves.  No one wants a supposedly righteous group regulating the behavior of another group.  People should stop trying to legislate morals and recognize the times we live in and the diversity of our population.  No two people are going to think exactly the same; instead each individual has had a dynamic life experience that has shaped who they are today.  Government and those forces at work within it, as well as the religiously conservative, should not focus on the criminalizing gays and lesbians.  The so-called preservation of the definition of marriage argument is a misguided and disguised attempt at regulating people’s behavior.  

Blog 13

Clarify the Honest Services Fraud

On Tuesday December 8, the Supreme Court will hear two separate cases related to the Honest Services Law, originally of 1988.  This law requires private company owners and managers and public officials to, “act in the best interests of their constituents or employers” (NewYorkTimes).  The law was originally designed to protect the consumer or constituents “intangible” right to honest services.  It is extremely unclear as to what these “honest services” are and to what extent of violation they pose. The most extreme example being an individual working for a company who decides to spend time during the work day looking on the internet at new flat screen TVs for sale.  The company is paying for this man’s work, not for him to look on the Internet, technically, the company is being cheated out of honest services.  However, for the obvious reasons, this law is only applied to high-ranking CEOs and public officials.  The most famous of these cases was against the former Enron executive Jeffrey Skilling.

Mr. Skilling was just one of the few convicted of honest services fraud that has attempted to overturn his conviction.  The two cases being heard by the Supreme Court this Tuesday involve Conrad Black, ex- executive from Hollinger International, and Bruce Weyhrauch an ex- Alaskan State Legislature. Mr. Black is not arguing that he did not defraud the company Hollinger International but that he did not contemplate economic harm.  Weyhrauch is arguing that the honest service law violates the principles of federalism.  Mr. Skilling’s case will not be heard until later on.  Mr. Skilling challenges his conviction on the grounds that the honest services law is “unconstitutionally vague”.

Critics say the honest services law has been used when prosecutors cannot get enough evidence to convict a guilty person of any other major crimes, it becomes the back up charge.  The true flaw with the honest services law is the vague nature of the conviction. However, the only way to clear up this unclear law is not to expand the definitions or influence but to expand the regulatory powers whose jobs were to watch these officials in the first place.  The powers of the regulatory mechanisms are too weak to deal with the broad scope of corruption that taints both the public and private sectors.  

BLOG 12

Let The Afghans Try

With President Obama scheduled to announce his Afghanistan strategy tomorrow at a United States Military Academy at West Point.  There have been many different viewpoints from many different experts on the level of American involvement in this unstable country.  With opinions ranging from those of Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, who requested an additional 40,000 troops to that of Karl W. Eikenberry, who opposes troop increases.  Mr. Eikenberry opposes these increases because he fears the Afghan government will be too reliant on American forces in the country.  With a wide range of opinions, it is no wonder President Obama is still strategizing the war plan.  Many of Obama’s supporters and critics take caution because they fear Obama will make the same mistakes in the Afghan war that President Lyndon B. Johnson made during his Vietnam strategy. 

I agree more along the side of the argument against substantial troop increases.  Afghanistan has, for thousands of years, proved impenetrable to outside forces (from Genghis Khan to the Soviet Union), often proving the collapse of these invaders.  Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee Carl Levin proposes an increase of security training for the Afghan forces to ensure Afghan control.  This is a key step in reducing Afghan dependence on the United States, in addition to guaranteeing the stability of the Afghan government, which in turn will hinder any Taliban insurgency from thriving in the rural countryside of Afghanistan. 

Because the Afghan Government is so weak and corrupt, and President Karzai.’s power so feeble, the United States is funneling many billions of dollars into a war against guerilla insurgents that will become useless when the troops do withdraw.              Unless the our government wishes to have a never ending presence in Afghanistan, we will eventually have to hand back control to the Afghans. 

However much the many experts in this field disagree, there is one common element in the key to success in Afghanistan, there needs to be more control given back to the Afghans, this involves training more Afghan led security forces, maybe even more NATO and UN involvement.  Another valid point brought up by David R. Obey of the House Appropriations Committee, there needs to be an additional source of revenue to fund the war.  To empower the Afghans and to protect our own people, steps that are often unpopular will have to be taken to ensure the survival of the Afghan government so our troops can come home. 

Blog 11

Increase Entitlement Programs

It is quite a shame, as pointed out by an under secretary of agriculture, that in a country as wealthy and productive as ours, that many people still go hungry.  A recent analysis of food stamp usage, formally known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, showed skyrocketing rates across the country, with as many as 36 million people using this program, and swelling by roughly 20,000 people a day.  There has also been a significant rise in the number of children receiving this federal aid.  Food stamp usage in many counties across the country has more than doubled in the last two years.  This drastic rise in food stamp usage throughout the country further illustrates the country’s dire need for more entitlement programs in these hard economic times.

While I myself am not a full-fledged taxpayer, I will definitely support much need rise in public assistance, to the nation’s poorest, provided of course, there are regulations on those who benefit.  As a product of an upper middle class family, I have never had to deal with a lack of any of life’s necessities.  In light of the recent health care debate there has been a spotlight on health related entitlement programs such as medicare and medicade, but other important programs such as the Aid to Families with Dependent Children Program, have been eliminated, even the funding food the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) has been slashed drastically, despite rising need in this recession.  Now, the SNAP program is one of the few remaining entitlement programs remaining to help feed a population with an unemployment rate reaching 10 percent.  With the number of people receiving this aid increasing by 20,000 a day, the program will be hard pressed to find the resources to support such an ambitious program

I propose a rise in entitlement programs aimed at temporary relief, a New Deal-esque type of approach.  These programs should target those who really need the assistance to make ends meet and supplement dwindling savings.  Even staunch conservative  counties have begun to reexamine the stigma attached to food stamp usage, I think it is time for the legislatures to do the same.  There is a need that needs to be met, and it is about time a politician approached the subject. 

Blog 10

Now That Health Cares Moving…

With the passing of the House of Representatives version of the expansive health care overhaul bill, the focus of many members of Congress will now turn to President Obama’s next item of agenda, energy bills.  This piece of legislation has already passed through the House and is now aimed for the Senate. As I blogged about in an earlier rant, the “cap and trade” emissions policy allows all businesses are given a cap on their greenhouse gas emissions.   Then can then trade their allotted emission consumption with other companies if they reduce their own. 

With the Copenhagen climate change summit fast approaching, Obama still has relatively little to show for his commitment to reducing greenhouse gases.  As John Kerry of Massachusetts points out, the cap and trade system, by cutting out inefficiencies in energy production, transportation, and consumption will actually be more cost effective for the consumer.  That fact that Mr. Kerry is working on this piece of legislation with Lindsey Graham, a republican, and Joseph Lieberman, an independent, point to the possibility of a bipartisan bill.

While Mr. Obama ventures to China in a few days, specifically to reconnoiter the two countries’ energy consumptions levels, he will not be proposing a tangible climate change policy, but will instead be focusing on another important aspect controlling carbon emissions, alternative energy.  Obama plans to talk about electric cars.  In additions to alternative energy abroad, Obama recently announces a $3.4 billion investment in modernizing the nation’s power grid, an effective way of saving money and developing alternative energy solutions.