Widget Image
Follow PPD Social Media
Tuesday, February 4, 2025
HomeStandard Blog Whole Post (Page 336)

U.S. President Donald Trump at the first meeting of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity co-chaired by Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach (L) at the White House last week. (Photo: Reuters)

U.S. President Donald Trump at the first meeting of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity co-chaired by Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach (L) at the White House last week. (Photo: Reuters)

A federal judge on Monday authorized President Donald Trump’s voter fraud commission to resume collecting detailed voter roll data from the states.

U.S. District Court Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly in the District of Columbia denied a request by the Electronic Privacy Information Center to block the data collection. Kris Kobach, the election integrity commission’s vice chairman, called the ruling “a major victory for government accountability, transparency and the public’s right to know about the integrity of our elections processes.”

“The commission requested this publicly available data as part of its fact-gathering process, which is information that states regularly release to political candidates, political parties and the general public,” Mr. Kobach said, the Republican secretary of state in Kansas said. “We look forward to continuing to work with state election leaders to gather information and identify opportunities to improve election integrity.”

President Trump in May signed an executive order establishing the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity to look at fraudulent voter registration, dual state registration, illegal non-citizen registration, among other violations widely reported by People’s Pundit Daily (search voter fraud & election fraud).

The commission asked states last month to provide publicly available data including registered voters’ names, birth dates and partial Social Security numbers. Many refused and the Trump Administration later told them to hold off until a judge ruled on a lawsuit filed by the privacy group in Washington.

At least 17 states plus Washington, D.C., refused to provide any information.

“The only practical harm the plaintiff’s advisory board members would suffer … is that their already publicly available information would be rendered more easily accessible by virtue of its consolidation on the computer systems that would ultimately receive this information on behalf of the commission,” Judge Kollar-Kotelly wrote in her ruling.

A federal judge on Monday authorized President

Attorney General Jeff Sessions, with Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price, left, speaks about opioid addiction during a news conference, Thursday, July 13, 2017, at the Department of Justice in Washington. (Photo: AP)

Attorney General Jeff Sessions, with Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price, left, speaks about opioid addiction during a news conference, Thursday, July 13, 2017, at the Department of Justice in Washington. (Photo: AP)

Because America’s Founding Fathers properly wanted to protect citizens from government abuse, the Constitution has several provisions (presumption of innocence, ban on warrantless searches, right to jury trial, 5th Amendment protection against self-incrimination, and other due process legal protections) to protect our liberties.

So one can only imagine how Jefferson, Madison, Mason, et al, must be rolling in their graves as they contemplate the disgusting practice of civil asset forfeiture, which basically allows agents of the government in the modern era to steal property from people who have not been convicted of any crime. I’m not joking.

Even worse, government agencies are allowed to profit from this form of theft, creating a terrible incentive for abuse.

Like certain other bad government policies that trample our rights–i.e. money-laundering laws that require banks to snoop on law-abiding customers–civil asset forfeiture is largely a result of the government’s failed War on Drugs. In other words, a classic example of one bad policy leading to other bad policies.

Widespread condemnation of civil asset forfeiture led to a tiny step in the right direction by the Obama Administration. And there have been positive reforms at the state level.

However, the Trump Administration and Justice Department are now pushing in the wrong direction.

Writing for USA Today, Professor Glenn Reynolds correctly castigates the Attorney General for his actions.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions wants to steal from you. Oh, he doesn’t call it that. He calls it “civil forfeiture.” But what it is, is theft by law enforcement. Sessions should be ashamed. If I were president, he’d be fired. Under “civil forfeiture,” law enforcement can take property from people under the legal fiction that the property itself is guilty of a crime. …It was originally sold as a tool for going after the assets of drug kingpins, but nowadays it seems to be used against a lot of ordinary Americans who just have things that law enforcement wants. …Once in America, we had a presumption of innocence. But that was inconvenient to the powers that be. The problem is pretty widespread: In 2015, The Washington Post reported that law enforcement took more stuff from people than burglars did. …Sessions is doing exactly the wrong thing by doubling down on asset seizure. The message it sends is that the feds see the rest of us as prey, not as citizens. The attorney general should be ashamed to take that position.

David French of National Review is similarly disgusted.

…civil asset forfeiture. It’s a gigantic law-enforcement scam (in 2014 the government took more money from citizens than burglars stole from crime victims), and it’s a constitutional atrocity. It’s a constitutional atrocity that Donald Trump’s Department of Justice just expanded. Yesterday, Attorney General Jeff Sessions revived an abusive program that allows state authorities to seize property and then transfer the property to the federal government to implement the forfeiture process. Once the Feds obtain forfeiture, they then share the proceeds with the seizing state agency. This allows state law enforcement to explicitly circumvent state forfeiture restrictions and profit while doing so. …civil forfeiture allows the government to deprive citizens of their property even when it doesn’t even try to prove that the citizen committed a crime. …if the last 30 years of constitutional jurisprudence have taught us anything, it’s that we can’t count on courts to protect the Constitution when the War on Drugs is at issue. Forfeiture expanded dramatically as part of the War on Drugs, and the Supreme Court has proven that it will undermine even the First Amendment when constitutional rights clash with drug-enforcement priorities.

Erick Erickson adds his condemnation in the Resurgent.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions…has decided to expand a positively unconstitutional policy that should be ruthlessly fought in courts and legislatures around the country. Jeff Sessions wants to seize the property of Americans accused of crimes even if they are never found guilty by a jury. …According to the Department of Justice’s Inspector General, the Drug Enforcement Agency alone has seized more than $3 billion from people not charged with a crime. …What is appalling here is that many states are enacting prohibitions on civil asset forfeiture, but the Attorney General wants to allow state and local law enforcement to use federal asset forfeiture laws to continue seizing property. Local law enforcement will thereby be able to get around their own states’ laws, so long as they share the spoils of their ill gotten gains with the federal government. This turns the concept of federalism on its head.

In a column for Reason, Damon Root of Reason adds his two cents.

…civil asset forfeiture is not a “lawful tool.” It is an unconstitutional abuse of government power. The Fifth Amendment forbids the government from depriving any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. Civil asset forfeiture turns that venerable principle on its head, allowing government agents to take what they want without the bother of bringing charges, presenting clear and convincing evidence, and obtaining a conviction in a court of law. It is the antithesis of due process. …Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas…recently explained in a statement respecting the denial of certiorari in the case of Leonard v. Texas, not only has civil asset forfeiture “led to egregious and well-chronicled abuses” by law enforcement agencies around the country, but the practice is fundamentally incompatible with the Constitution.

Last but not least, the editors of National Review make several important points.

Like the Democrats’ crackpot plan to revoke the Second Amendment rights of U.S. citizens who have been neither charged with nor convicted of a crime simply for having been fingered as suspicious persons by some anonymous operative in Washington, seizing an American’s property because a police officer merely suspects that he might be a drug dealer or another species of miscreant does gross violence to the basic principle of due process. No doubt many of the men and women on the terrorism watch list are genuine bad guys, and no doubt many of those who have lost their property to asset forfeiture are peddling dope. But we are a nation of laws, which means a nation of procedural justice. If the DEA or the LAPD wants to punish a drug trafficker, then let them build a case, file charges, and see the affair through to a conviction. We have no objection to seizing the property of those convicted of drug smuggling — or of crimes related to terrorism, or many other kinds of offenses. We object, as all Americans should object, to handing out these punishments in the absence of a criminal conviction. …No American should be deprived of liberty or property without due process.

Amen.

For those of us who honor the Constitution, civil asset forfeiture is a stain on the nation.

Let’s close with an amusing take on the issue. Even though he’s referred to me as insane and irrational, I think Matthew Yglesias wins the prize for the most clever tweet.

The Founding Fathers must be rolling in

[brid video=”154054″ player=”2077″ title=”President Trump Gives a Statement on Healthcare”]

President Donald J. Trump on Monday not only unleashed a blistering critique of ObamaCare but also the politicians who passed it and promised to repeal it. President Trump’s remarks came as he and Vice President Mike Pence met with the “victims” of ObamaCare and their families, assuring them the Administration was committed to repealing and replacing the law.

Flanked by families, he drew on the stories underscoring Americans’ struggles under the law and called out Democrats for making one “meaningless promise” after another.

“For the past 7 years, ObamaCare has wreaked havoc on the lives of innocent hard-working Americans,” the president said. “Behind me today we have real American families who are suffering because 7 years ago a small group of politicians and special interest engineered a government takeover of health care.”

“Every pledge the Democrats made to pass that bill turned out to be a lie.”

The Washington politicians who made all those promises,” President Trump added, “want to ignore all the pain, all the suffering, and all the money–the tremendous amounts of money–that these lies have caused.”

U.S. President Donald J. Trump, left at podium, speaks as ObamaCare “victims” negatively affected by the law stand behind him, in the Blue Room of the White House in Washington, U.S., July 24, 2017. (Photo: White House)

Democratic lawmakers weren’t the only ones with a target on their back. He turned up the pressure on Senate Republicans to keep their 7-year campaign promise on the eve of the U.S. Senate’s key vote.

“For the last 7 years, Republicans have been united in standing up for ObamaCare’s victims. Remember repeal and replace, repeal and replace, they kept saying it over and over again. Every Republican running for office promised immediate relief from this disastrous law,” President Trump said. “We, as a party, must fulfill that solemn promise to the voters of this country to repeal and replace.”

U.S. President Donald Trump calls on Republican Senators to move forward and vote on a healthcare bill to replace the Affordable Care Act, as people negatively affected by the law stand behind him, in the Blue Room of the White House in Washington, U.S., July 24, 2017. (Photo: Reuters)

U.S. President Donald J. Trump calls on Republican Senators to move forward and vote on a healthcare bill to replace ObamaCare, the Affordable Care Act, as “victims” negatively affected by the law stand behind him, in the Blue Room of the White House in Washington, U.S., July 24, 2017. (Photo: Reuters)

Vice President Pence visited Capitol Hill Monday afternoon to meet with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kty., to discuss the vote this week. Republicans hold a slim 52-48 majority in the upper chamber. With Democrats united in opposition, Republicans can only afford to lose two of their own votes.

“But so far, Senate Republicans have not done their job in ending the Obamacare nightmare. They now have a chance however to hopefully — hopefully — fix what has been so badly broken for such a long time and that is through replacement of a horrible, disaster known as Obamacare,” President Trump added.

Liberal Republican Senators Susan Collins (Maine), Shelley Moore Capito (W.Va.) and Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) announced last week they would not support the effort, though 2 out of 3 of them (Capito and Murkowski) voted “Yes” on the exact same bill in 2015, when Republicans voted 52-47 to repeal ObamaCare because they knew it would be vetoed by Barack Obama.

Sen. Collins voted “No” in 2015.

Still, the plan is for the Senate to take a major procedural vote Tuesday afternoon to advance the bill to overhaul health care Tuesday.

“Tomorrow, the Senate will vote on whether to allow this urgently needed bill to come to the Senate floor for debate. The question for every senator, Democrat or Republican, is whether they will side with ObamaCare’s architects, which have been so destructive to our country, or with its forgotten victims,” President Trump said. “Any senator who votes against starting debate is telling America that you are fine with the ObamaCare nightmare.”

President Donald J. Trump not only unleashed

File: Outside Escape to Vape, a brick-and-mortar e-cigarette and e-liquid vapor store in Gainesville, Florida on June 30, 2017. (Photo: People's Pundit Daily/PPD)

File: Outside Escape to Vape, an e-cigarette and vapor supply store in Gainesville, Florida on June 30, 2017. (Photo: People’s Pundit Daily/PPD)

Republicans control the White House and the U.S. Congress, but Obama era regulations are threatening to derail small businesses in the emerging vapor industry. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) currently regulates e-cigarette products far more stringently than actual cigarettes.

It’s a government-sanctioned competitive advantage carved out just for big players in Big Tobacco. Absent action by Republican lawmakers, FDA regulations coming down the pipe will decimate the vapor industry, retroactively removing 99% of vaping products from the market.

By August 2018, a potentially life-saving alternative to smoking will effectively be regulated out of existence.

There were two bills introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives that would level the playing field regarding how the FDA is regulating Big Tobacco and the vapor industry.

The FDA Deeming Authority Clarification Act of 2017, introduced on February 16 and sponsored by Reps. Tom Cole, R-Ok., and Sanford Bishop, R-Ga., builds on the Cole-Bishop Amendment included in the House’s version of the Fiscal Year 2017 Agriculture Appropriations Bill. It would grandfather in existing electronic cigarettes so that they, just like Big Tobacco products, can stay on the market.

“This legislation preserves the FDA’s ability to regulate these products on part with cigarettes, grandfathers currently available products and then requires the FDA’s approval before any new product is introduced,” Rep. Cole said. “While there is disagreement about whether certain tobacco products should be regulated or not, there should be agreement that new regulations should apply to products moving forward, and not retroactively.”

The Cigarette Smoking Reduction and Electronic Vapor Alternatives Act of 2017 was introduced by Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., on April 27, 2017. It would establish safety standards for e-liquids and vaping devices, without taking a prohibitionist approach that eliminates current popular products.

However, many health groups are opposed to these bills, falsely claiming they will remove FDA oversight of electronic cigarettes. The Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids claims the bill introduced by Reps. Cole and Bishop bill would “exempt them from FDA review.”

The truth is neither bill exempts the vapor industry from FDA oversight.

The Hunter Bill requires e-liquid manufacturers to follow existing standards of the American E-liquid Manufacturers Standards Association (AEMSA) until permanent standards are created by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). It requires all vapor products to use serial or lot numbers and device manufacturers to follow strict standards regarding electronics and batteries used in mods.

“I started smoking when I was younger and quit. In Iraq and Afghanistan, as a U.S. Marine, I picked up the habit again. Vaping is what helped me to stop smoking and I know from the experiences of so many others that I’m not alone,” Rep. Hunter said. “It’s time that vaping is embraced and accepted for the benefits its offers—among them harm reduction.”

The bill prohibits advertising and marketing to minors and permits the FDA to inspect manufacturing facilities, as well as impose penalties on those not in compliance with rules.

But it also prevents states and municipalities from defining e-liquid vapors as tobacco products and/or place more stringent restrictions on them than the federal government. It further requires the FDA to rank nicotine products by comparative risk, and report them to Congress.

File: Mary Ewing, co-owner of Escape to Vape, an e-cigarette and vapor supply store located in Gainesville, Florida, discusses new mods with an employee on June 30, 2017. (Photo: People's Pundit Daily/PPD)

File: Mary Ewing, co-owner of Escape to Vape, an e-cigarette and vapor supply store located in Gainesville, Florida, discusses new mods with an employee on June 30, 2017. (Photo: People’s Pundit Daily/PPD)

These provisions are a threat to Big Tobacco and their friends in Congress, who have little concern for the impact FDA regulations will have on small business owners, their employees and customers.

“I’ll be out of business and many of our customers will go back to smoking,” Mary Ewing, the co-owner of Escape to Vape in Gainesville, Florida said when asked what would happen if the FDA regulations are allowed to take effect. “First, I would have to let my employees go and, eventually, we would have to close the store.”

The popular brick-and-mortar vape store unintentionally doubles as a modern-day social club, a community center for former smokers of all ages. The family-owned business even invites customers to join them for Thanksgiving dinner at the store. Visitors and customers to Escape to Vape will hear the older give life advice to the younger, and none of them intend to return to smoking cigarettes.

Mrs. Ewing supports the Hunter Bill, which along with the Cole-Bishop Bill, was also referred to members of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. The committee members referred the latter to the Subcommittee on Health on February 17 and the former on April 28, where they both still remain.

As with health care and tax reform, they appear to be stalled as Republicans struggle to evolve in the Trump era. At this point, Mrs. Ewing and other small business owners in the vapor industry will settle for action on either bill.

Contrary to mainstream media claims, vaping presents minimal exposure to carcinogens and has been shown to reduce carcinogenic and respiratory health risks.

A study conducted by a research team at the University of California, San Diego, touted by proponents of Big Tobacco, claimed “they (e-cigarettes) are no better than smoking regular cigarettes.”

But Dr. Jessica Wang-Rodriguez, a lead researcher in the study, admittedly “didn’t seek to mimic the actual dose of vapor that an e-cigarette user would get.” The doctor further admitted in the press release “that cells in the lab are not completely comparable to cells within a living person,” and that they specifically chose cell cultures for the experiment from “e-cig smokers that already have HNSCC (head and neck squamous cell carcinoma).”

“The cells lines that scientists work with have been ‘immortalized because of certain cell changes,’” Dr. Wang-Rodriguez conceded. “So it could be that e-cigarette vapor has different effects than those seen in the lab.”

No kidding.

On the other hand, the harmful affects of smoking are not debatable. The Royal College of Physicians reported in 2016 “the hazard to health arising from long-term vapour [sic] inhalation from the e-cigarettes available today is unlikely to exceed 5% of the harm from smoking tobacco.”

Cigarettes produce more than 10,000 chemicals, including more than 60 known human carcinogens. The economic cost of cigarette smoking is estimated to be more than $300 billion a year, including almost $170 billion in direct medical care and more than $156 billion in lost productivity.

They kill more than 400,000 Americans each year.

Republicans control the White House and U.S.

Homes are seen for sale in the northwest area of Portland, Oregon, in this file photo taken March 20, 2014. (Photo: Reuters)

Homes are seen for sale in the northwest area of Portland, Oregon, in this file photo taken March 20, 2014. (Photo: Reuters)

The National Association of Realtors (NAR) said Monday existing home sales fell in June to a lower-than-expected annualized rate of 5.520 million. However, the 1.8% decline in June from 5.62 million in May is still stronger than the previous year.

“Closings were down in most of the country last month because interested buyers are being tripped up by supply that remains stuck at a meager level and price growth that’s straining their budget,” Lawrence Yun, the chief economist at NAR said. “The demand for buying a home is as strong as it has been since before the Great Recession. Listings in the affordable price range continue to be scooped up rapidly, but the severe housing shortages inflicting many markets are keeping a large segment of would-be buyers on the sidelines.”

The NAR said existing home sales fell in every region except for the Midwest and, though it confirms the Pending Home Sales Index (PHSI), isn’t a terrible report.

“The good news is that sales are still running slightly above last year’s pace despite these persistent market challenges,” Mr. Yun also noted.

First-time buyers represented 32% of sales in June, a 33% decline both in May and from a year ago. NAR’s 2016 Profile of Home Buyers and Sellers – released in late 20164 – revealed that the annual share of first-time buyers was 35%.

“It’s shaping up to be another year of below average sales to first-time buyers despite a healthy economy that continues to create jobs,” said Yun. “Worsening supply and affordability conditions in many markets have unfortunately put a temporary hold on many aspiring buyers’ dreams of owning a home this year.”

Properties lasted 28 days on the market in June, which is up from 27 days in May but down from 34 days a year ago. Short sales remained on the market for the longest period at a median of 102 days in June. Foreclosures sold in 57 days and non-distressed homes were only on the market for 27 days. Fifty-four percent (54%) of homes sold in June were on the market for less than a month.

“Prospective buyers who postponed their home search this spring because of limited inventory may have better luck as the summer winds down,” said Realtor® President William E. Brown, of Alamo, Calif. “The pool of buyers this time of year typically begins to shrink as households with children have likely closed on a home before school starts. Inventory remains extremely tight, but patience may pay off in coming months for those looking to buy.”

The median existing-home price for all housing types in June was $263,800, or 6.5% higher than the $247,600 posted in June 2016. The median sales price in June was higher than May, making it the new high and the 64th straight month of year-over-year gains. That helps to explain the drop in market share for first-time buyers.

Total housing inventory at the end of June fell slightly 0.5% to 1.96 million existing homes available for sale. That’s 7.1% lower than a year ago when it was at 2.11 million. It has now fallen year-over-year for 25 consecutive months.

Unsold inventory is at a 4.3-month supply at the current sales pace, which is down from 4.6 months a year ago.

Existing home sales in the Northeast fell 2.6% to an annual rate of 760,000, but are still 1.3% above a year ago. The median price in the Northeast was $296,300, or 4.1% above June 2016.

In the Midwest, existing home sales gained 3.1% to an annual rate of 1.32 million in June, unchanged from June 2016). The median price in the Midwest was $213,000, up 7.7 percent from a year ago.

Existing home sales in the South fell 4.7% to an annual rate of 2.23 million, also unchanged from a year ago. The median price in the South was $231,300, or 6.2% higher than a year ago.

Existing home sales in the West slightly fell 0.8% to an annual rate of 1.21 million in June, but remain 2.5% higher than a year ago. The median price in the West was $378,100, or 7.4% above June 2016.

The National Association of Realtors (NAR) said

U.S. President Donald Trump and his senior advisor Jared Kushner arrive for a meeting with manufacturing CEOs at the White House in Washington, DC, U.S. February 23, 2017. (Photo: Reuters)

U.S. President Donald Trump and his senior advisor Jared Kushner arrive for a meeting with manufacturing CEOs at the White House in Washington, DC, U.S. February 23, 2017. (Photo: Reuters)

Jared Kushner, the son-in-law of and advisor to President Donald J. Trump, released a public statement Monday ahead of congressional testimony. He called the meeting with a Russia-linked attorney he attended with Donald Trump Jr. a “waste of our time” and denied collusion, which isn’t even a crime.

“I did not collude, nor know of anyone else in the campaign who colluded, with any foreign government,” Mr. Kushner’s statement reads in part. “I had no improper contacts. I have not relied on Russian funds to finance my business activities in the private sector. I have tried to be fully transparent with regard to the filing of my SF-86 form [security clearance], above and beyond what is required. Hopefully, this puts these matters to rest.”

STATEMENT OF JARED C. KUSHNER TO CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES July 24, 2017

[pdfviewer width=”740px” height=”849px” beta=”true/false”]https://www.peoplespunditdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Kushner-Statement.pdf[/pdfviewer]

Jared Kushner, the son-in-law of and advisor

Then-Republican presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul, a libertarian-leaning Republican from Texas, speaks to supporters as his son Sen. Rand Paul, Kty., also a libertarian-leaning Republican, applauds at his Iowa Caucus night rally in Ankeny, Iowa, January 3, 2012. (Photo: Reuters)

Then-Republican presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul, a libertarian-leaning Republican from Texas, speaks to supporters as his son Sen. Rand Paul, Kty., also a libertarian-leaning Republican, applauds at his Iowa Caucus night rally in Ankeny, Iowa, January 3, 2012. (Photo: Reuters)

I’m in Las Vegas for FreedomFest, which is sort of like summer camp for libertarians, small-government conservatives, and others who don’t like a bloated and intrusive state.

I’ll be talking about tax reform, the sharing economy, and strategies to constrain big government.

One of the features of this 10th-anniversary meeting of FreedomFest is that the world’s top-100 libertarians will be feted. You can see the entire list at NewsMax, but here’s the top 10. A very impressive collection.

You’ll notice that Cato’s founder and former president is in the Top 10, but he’s not the only representative from the organization.

The Cato Institute is justly recognized for being a principled and effective organization.

So it’s no surprise that several of us are listed in the Top 100.

I’m honored to be on the list, though I wonder if I’m there because I’m noisy rather than competent. That being said, given the expansion of government under both Bush and Obama, I guess nobody would be on the list if it was based on achievements. We obviously need to do a better job as a movement.

The Top 100 Libertarians were named at

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, center, talks with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, left, and President Donald Trump during a family photo with G7 leaders at the Ancient Greek Theater of Taormina during the G7 Summit, Friday, May 26, 2017, in Taormina, Italy. (Photo: AP)

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, center, talks with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, left, and President Donald Trump during a family photo with G7 leaders at the Ancient Greek Theater of Taormina during the G7 Summit, Friday, May 26, 2017, in Taormina, Italy. (Photo: AP)

I’m rather pessimistic about Italy. Simply stated, it’s economy is moribund. If you peruse the economic database at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), you’ll see that both inflation-adjusted gross domestic product (GDP) and inflation-adjusted private consumption expenditure have grown by an average of just slightly over one percent annually this century.

In some ways, the latter is a more accurate measure of actual quality of life.

And even though Italy’s population growth has been anemic, there are more people. And when you add a larger population to the equation, you get per-capita changes in output and living standards that are even less impressive.

But not everyone shares my dour outlook. I recently exchanged views with someone who said that Italy hasn’t increased the burden of government in recent years.

And that person is right. Sort of.

Here’s a chart showing Italy’s score from Economic Freedom of the World since the start of the 21st century. As you can see, it’s been remarkably stable.

But I have two reasons why I think policy stability is a recipe for economic decline.

First, you don’t win a race by standing still if others are moving forward. If you look closely at the above chart, you will see that Italy used to be ranked #36 in the world for economic freedom but it now ranks #69. In other words, Italy’s absolute level of economic freedom barely changed over the period, but its relative position declined significantly because other nations engaged in reforms and leapfrogged Italy in the rankings.

Second, Italy is in the middle of dramatic demographic changes that will have a huge impact on fiscal policy. People are living longer and having fewer children, but Italy’s welfare state was set up on the assumption that there would be lots of working-age taxpayers to finance old-age beneficiaries. In other words, policy stability will lead to fiscal crisis thanks to changes in the composition of the population. Think Greece, but on a bigger scale.

And when I refer to Greece on a bigger scale, I’m thinking another fiscal crisis.

Demond Lachman of the American Enterprise Institute is pessimistic about Italy and warns that high levels of red ink could cause a big mess.

We’ve got an Italian economy that is categorized by extremely high public debt. Their public debt level is now something like 132% of GDP, they’ve got a banking system that is bust, that banks have something like 18% of their loans non-performing, that is a huge amount, the economy is completely sclerotic, that the level of Italian GDP today is pretty much the same as it was some fifteen years ago. There’s been practically no growth, declining living standards… What also makes Italy very important from a global point of view is that we’re now not talking about a small country like Greece which doesn’t have that much systemic significance. We’re talking about the third largest country in the Eurozone. We’re talking about a country that has the world’s third largest sovereign bond market with something like two and a half trillion dollars of debt.

And don’t forget that these grim fiscal numbers probably mean even higher taxes on Italy’s young workers.

But those taxpayers aren’t captives. Cristina Odone, in a column for CapX, points out that young people are getting the short end of the stick.

Gerontocracy, stifling regulations and huge unemployment have hindered Italy’s prosperity for decades now. The country hailed for its economic miracle and famed for its creative and industrious entrepreneurs (at the helm, usually, of family-run businesses such as Gucci, Prada, and Ferrero) today comes second only to Greece (among EU countries) for the size of its national debt. …Italy’s unemployed youngsters, who constitute 40 per cent of under-24-year-olds, gnash their teeth at the unfairness of national life, where fossils control the levers of power while flouting their sinecures. A quarter of under-30-year-olds classify as NEETS, young people who are not in education, work or training. Contrast this with the UK, where only one in 10 under the age of 30 is in the same position. …Labour laws continue to blight young people’s prospects. …This sclerosis risks turning Italy into the sick man of Europe.

No wonder many young Italians are migrating to nations with more economic opportunity. AFP has a story on the dour outlook in Italy.

With the country struggling to kick an economic slump, some 40,000 Italians between 18 and 34 years old set out to seek greener pastures elsewhere in 2015, according to the Migrantes Foundation. “Just talking with people (in Italy) it’s clear going away might be the only solution,” said D’Elia, 26, who has spent the last five years in London, where he currently works as a barman, and intends to stay for now despite high living costs. …most of Italy’s youths are unwilling to return — and the country is seen as offering little to attract foreign graduates. …GDP is forecast to inch up just 1.3 percent this year. The jobless rate hovers at over 11 percent, well above the euro area average of 9.3 percent. Among 15 to 24-year olds it leaps to 37 percent, compared with a European average of 18.7 percent. …Sergio Mello, who set up a start-up in Hong Kong before moving to San Francisco, said Italy “does not offer a fertile environment to develop a competitive business”. …Mello says there are other problems: “The bureaucracy wastes a lot of time”, the red tape “drives you crazy”.

Unfortunately, rather than ease up on government burdens so that young people will have some hope for the future, some Italian politicians want new mandates, new spending, new taxes, and new restrictions.

I’ve previously written about new destructive tax policies that shrink the tax base. And I’ve written about wasteful new spending schemes, like a €500 “culture bonus.”

And now there’s something equally silly on the regulatory front being proposed by politicians. Here are excerpts from a report by Heat Street on the initiative.

Italy could soon become the first Western country to offer paid “menstrual leave” to female workers. …If passed, it would mandate that companies enforce a “menstrual leave” policy and offer three paid days off each month to working women who experience painful periods. …The Italian version of Marie Claire described it as “a standard-bearer of progress and social sustainability.” But the bill also has critics, including women who fear this sort of measure could backfire and end up stigmatizing them. Writing in Donna Moderna, another women’s magazine, Lorenza Pleuteri argued that if women were granted extra paid leave, employers would be even more reluctant to hire women, in a country where women already struggle to integrate the workforce. …Miriam Goi, a feminist writer, …fears that rather than breaking taboos about women’s menstrual cycle, the measure could end up perpetuating the idea that women are more emotional than men and require special treatment.

It’s unclear if this policy was actually enacted, but it’s a bad sign that it was even considered. Simply stated, making workers more expensive is not a good way to encourage more job creation. Even a columnist for the New York Timesacknowledged that feminist-driven economic policies backfire against women.

The bottom line is that Italy needs sweeping reductions in the burden of the public sector. Yet the nation’s politicians are more interested in expanding the size and scope of government. Perhaps now it’s easy to understand why I fear the country may have passed the tipping point. You can be in a downward spiral even if policy doesn’t change.

The inflation-adjusted gross domestic product (GDP) and

President Donald J. Trump, left, delivers his address before commissioning the USS Gerald R Ford, right, in Virginia on July 22, 2017.

President Donald J. Trump, left, delivers his address before commissioning the USS Gerald R Ford, right, in Virginia on July 22, 2017.

President Donald J. Trump officially commissioned the USS Gerald Ford, a state-of-the-art aircraft carrier named after the nation’s 38th president.

“American hands constructed a 100,000 ton message to the world–American might is second to none,” President Trump said. And we’re getting bigger, and better and stronger every single day of my administration.”

It’s the president’s second trip to the USS Gerald Ford and comes at the end of what the White House coined “Made in America Week.” Since Monday, the Trump Administration has highlighted products manufactured in the United States.

“The nation’s going to be very proud of USS Gerald R. Ford,” said Chief of Naval Operations Adm. John Richardson. “Welcome aboard 100,000 tons of Made in the USA.”

Docked at Naval Station Norfolk in Virginia, the USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) measures 1,092 feet in length and 256 feet in width, weighing a total 100,000 tons as the president noted.

NEWPORT NEWS (July 4, 2017) The Pre-Commissioning Unit Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) displays “up and over” flags in observance of Independence Day. Ford is making preparations for commissioning July 22. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Ryan Litzenberger/Released)

NEWPORT NEWS (July 4, 2017) The Pre-Commissioning Unit Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) displays “up and over” flags in observance of Independence Day. Ford is making preparations for commissioning July 22. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Ryan Litzenberger/Released)

“This ship is the deterrent that keeps us from having to fight in the first place,” President Trump said.

It hosts a crew of 4,539 servicemen. About 5,000 shipbuilders and tradesman worked on the project, which cost a total $12.9 billion.

“Wherever this vessel cuts through the horizon our allies will rest easy and our enemies will tremble with fear,” President Trump said. “To every worker from Newport News Shipbuilding and every craftsman who helped build this incredible fortress of the sea, today we solute you.”

Former President Gerald Ford rose to the rank of lieutenant commander in the Navy during World War II. He became president after Richard Nixon resigned during the Watergate scandal. Susan Ford Bales, the former president’s daughter, christened the vessel in 2013 and called on the crew to “bring her to life” in today’s ceremony.

WATCH COMMISSION BELOW

[brid video=”153593″ player=”2077″ title=”President Donald Trump Commissions USS Gerald R Ford”]

President Donald J. Trump officially commissioned the

Director of the Office of Management and Budget Mick Mulvaney (L) and Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin (R) flank U.S. President Donald Trump as he hosts a "strategic initiatives" lunch at the White House in Washington, U.S., February 22, 2017. (Photo: Reuters)

Director of the Office of Management and Budget Mick Mulvaney (L) and Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin (R) flank U.S. President Donald Trump as he hosts a “strategic initiatives” lunch at the White House in Washington, U.S., February 22, 2017. (Photo: Reuters)

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Mick Mulvaney unveiled MAGAnomics last week, the economic agenda of the Trump Administration. It’s the outline known as the “unified agenda” at each White House, but it basically the exact opposite policy adopted by the Obama Administration.

“So, what is MAGAnomics? It is tax reform. It is, what we’re calling the ‘regulatory accountability project’– regulatory accountability project,” Director Mulvaney said at the gathering with media on Thursday. “It’s longer, but it’s at least a little bit more descriptive than ‘unified agenda.'”

The director also said the Trump Administration wants to distance itself from the unified agendas of the past because, unlike their predecessors, they want “a way to bring to some accountability to regulations.”

It’s now the regulatory accountability project. President Trump signed an executive order almost immediately after taking office requiring the federal government to remove two regulations for every new one they propose to implement. Another order signed was meant to simplify and streamline the regulatory state.

“In the last six months here, the Obama administration put on over $6 billion in new regulatory burden. The last six months, just over $6 billion. We had zero,” he boasted. “In the first five months in their administration back in 2009, they had over $3 billion of new regs. We cleared the decks of $22 million of regs. So we actually went the other way.”

President Trump also signed 16 Congressional Review Acts (CRAs), which roll back regulatory burdens. Thus far, only 4 have gone through the agency process but this regulatory policy has led to the removal of 860 burdensome rules and regulations.

Regulations take a big toll on the economy and are thus a big part of MAGAnomics, but certainly not a centerpiece.

“Energy dominance is part of this. Welfare reform is part of this. Infrastructure is part of this. Our trade policies is part of this. Even the spending restraint that we tried to introduce in the budget is part of this,” Director Mulvaney explained. “All of those things are designed towards one common end, and that is 3% sustained economic growth in this country again.”

The U.S. economy under President Ronald Reagan averaged nearly 4% gross domestic product (GDP) and even surpassed 7%. The OMB director drew a parallel between the economic conditions before the Reagan Administration and the Trump Administration, citing what could be accurately described as an economic malaise.

“Thirty-five years ago, the situation the country was in had some similarities to where we were as we ended the Obama Administration,” he noted. “Things were kind of rough.We had stagflation, we had malaise, we had all these challenges that the country faced economically.”

Closely-watched economic indexes and gauges–including business and consumer confidence-optimism after the election of President Donald J. Trump either met or surpassed historic levels measured after the election President Reagan. But optimism has tempered slightly as Republicans in Congress struggle to move the president’s agenda forward.

“We’ve done it before. In fact, we’ve always done it,” Mr. Mulvaney added. “The last 10 years was the first time we have not been able to do it, I think, ever. We can do it again. We absolutely fully believe that.”

Under Barack Obama, GDP averaged less than 2% annually, 1.5% as of August 2016, the lowest for any U.S. president since World War II. The abysmal economic record was followed closely by President Harry S. Truman, who from 1946 to 1952 led the nation to only 1.7% growth.

The latest GDPNow model forecast (July 19) for real GDP growth in the second quarter of 2017–a seasonally adjusted annual rate forecast by the Atlanta Federal Reserve–stands at 2.5%. That’s up from the 2.4% forecast released on July 14.

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director

People's Pundit Daily
You have %%pigeonMeterAvailable%% free %%pigeonCopyPage%% remaining this month. Get unlimited access and support reader-funded, independent data journalism.

Start a 14-day free trial now. Pay later!

Start Trial