The Incoming Republican Congress Should Terminate Douglas Elmendorf and the Congressional Budget Office

The Congressional Budget and reconciliation Act of 1974 created the Congressional Budget Office to provide objective, non-partisan analysis of proposed legislation. In essence, its job is to “score” legislation. The Director of the CBO serves a four year term and can be reappointed. The CBO is a Congressional agency rather than in the Executive Branch. The Director is therefore appointed by the Speaker of the House and the President Pro Tem of the Senate. Doug Elmendorf is the current CBO Director. His term is up. A debate is underway in Washington and within the Republican Party whether to reappoint Mr. Elmendorf and perhaps even abolish the CBO. The answer should be easy. The Congressional Budget Office is a failed experiment. Part of the failure is inherent in its charge from Congress. First, it is to score legislation on a ten year basis from the date of enactment, which creates many opportunities to game the scoring. Second, it must score legislation on a static rather than dynamic analysis. By way of explanation, static scoring assumes changes in taxes will have no effect on behavior, a clearly unreasonable assumption. A proposed tax increase of $25 billion in capital gains will result, as proven time after time, in a decrease in revenues as investors adjust their financial planning. Conversely a cut in the capital gains tax rate results in an increase of tax revenues. Dynamic scoring accounts for real life responses to taxes and regulations. Third, the CBO adopts Keynesian economics as a cornerstone of the benefits of government spending. Thus, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in 2010 that “for every dollar a person receives in food stamps, $1.79 is put back into the economy.” The $1.79 comes from the CBO. Speaker Pelosi followed in December 2011 by stating that extending unemployment benefits would add “600,000 jobs to our economy.” By that reasoning we should become an economic colossus with 100% unemployment. The more unemployment we have, the more jobs unemployment compensation would create. Policy reasons justify unemployment compensation, but Keynesian multipliers are not a valid one. Fourth, the CBO uses baseline budgeting, which assumes a percentage increase annually in the baseline. Attempts by Republicans to cut the growth rate results in political, demagogic cries the Republicans are “cutting” whatever, such as food lunches. The fifth reason is that the CBO is not an objective, non-partisan agency, which brings us to ObamaCare. One of Professor Jonathon’s offensive statements is that “The Bill was written in a tortured way to make sure the CBO did not score the mandate as taxes. If the CBO scored the mandate as taxes, the Bill dies. So it’s written to do that.” That was a disingenuous statement in more ways than one. The reality is that the CBO worked hand in glove with Congress to massage the Bill so that it would show a positive cash benefit to the economy. The CBO advised the Congressional drafters on how to manipulate the numbers. Professor Gruber has become persona non gratis, indeed a nonentity, within the Democratic Party and the Obama Administration. Professor Gruber met in the White House on July 20, 2009 with President Obama, Doug Elmendorf of the CBO, and administrative officials. Professor Gruber described the critical meeting as follows: “ So we had a meeting in the Oval Office with several experts, including myself, on what can we do to get credible savings on cost control that the Congressional Budget Office would recognize and score as savings in the law.” Remember the ten year scoring requirement? ObamaCare was structured such that the tax increases would go into effect in 2010, but the coverage would not occur until January 1, 2014. Thus, ten years of revenues would be front loaded, but only 6 years of expenditures would be scored. Thus, the CBO could report with a straight face that ObamaCare would reduce the deficit by $180 billion by 2019. We also learn that the CBO’s calculations essentially followed Professor Gruber’s econometrics model to score the Act. Garbage in, Garbage out! The CBO reported in February 2014 that ObamaCare would result in the loss of 2 million jobs by 2018, 2.3 million by 2021, and 2.5 million by 2024. The CBO reported later this year that the original estimated cost of $940 billion has now doubled to $1.76 trillion. The CBO admitted ObamaCare will add $131 billion to the deficit over ten years rather than cutting it. Doug Elmendorf and the Congressional Budget Office were complicit in foisting ObamaCare on the American people. They should join the Democratic Senators and Representatives out of office because of ObamaCare before they do more damage.

Bill Cosby: We Hardly Knew Thee - Why Bill Cosby Doesn't Get the Presumption of Innocence

Why Bill Cosby Doesn’t get the Presumption of Innocence The simple answer is that this presumption may exist in a court of law, but not in the court of public opinion. A Los Angeles jury may have acquitted O.J. of the double murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman, but the American people convicted him. We knew he did it, as did a Santa Monica civil jury, which subsequently held him liable for the wrongful death of the two. I liked the public persona of Bill Cosby: the comedy albums out of the late 1960’s, I SPY which pioneered a lead African America in a TV show, and the Cosby Show, featuring an African American cast. America loved Bill Cosby the comedian; we loved Fat Albert and the Jello commercials. He was a benefactor of Black colleges. Bill Cosby was a pioneer. He paved the way for the African Americans comedians and actors today. We liked Bill Cosby at one of his concerts at the Orange County Fair two summers ago. We now know that Bill Cosby was a façade, hiding the dark side of the private Cosby. The public persona was but a mask for the private persona. I like Bill Cosby when he advocated a frequently unpopular position in the African American community advising them to start at home in improving themselves and advancing in America. I will not be able to quote that Bill Cosby in the future. Many a star, many a celebrity, many an athlete, many a politician is a lothario. They may be single or married, but America will generally not care as long as it’s consensual and they don’t do something stupid in public. Big Cosby is different, partially because our image of him has been shattered, but mostly because his acts involved drugging and forcing himself on women. The sex was not consensual. Woman after woman has emerged out of the Hollywood shadows to expose a pig and serial rapist, going back to the 1960’s. That should not have occurred. Rumors repeatedly flew through the Hollywood community. His peccadillos were well known. However, the producers, directors, networks, and media did not want to “out” him. He was too popular and financially remunerative. Skilled lawyers would always represent him as long as he could pay them. O.J. was essentially broke after his L.A. criminal trial. Hollywood believes in redemption for the legally and morally charged as long as the public does not turn on them. The Cos was emboldened because he got away with it. No one wanted to listen to the victims. Even a prosecutor, who believed Cosby was guilty, did not feel he had enough evidence to go to trial. You don’t attack an icon unless you think you can win. The NFL and college football also looked the other way at players involved with sexual and domestic abuse until this past year. The fans want wins, not jail time. Bill Cosby is like a Greek Tragedy. First the Gods built him up, literally from his bootstraps in the Projects, and now in his twilight years throwing him back down. The American people have spoken. Even his concerts are being cancelled now. The lesson is that it was the new social media, which brought him down. Social media is not bound by the traditional constrains.

The Dianne Feinstein Frank Church CYA CIA Report

The Senate Democrats created The United States Senate Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations With Respect to Intelligence Operations (The Church Committee), chaired by Senator Frank Church (D. Id). It issued 14 reports in 1975 and 1976. The Church Committee damned the CIA, portraying the CIA as a rogue elephant operating outside the government. Richard Welch, the CIA Station Chief in Athens was one of several “outed” in the report. He was assassinated shortly thereafter The CIA was shattered and demoralized. The damage continued in President Carter’s Administration. He severely cut the human intelligence (humint) efforts of the CIA, appointing Admiral Stansfield Turner as Director of the CIA with emphasis on technical intelligence (techint) and signals intelligence (sigint). No more eyes and ears on the ground. CIA Director Turner orchestrated the Halloween Massacre, laying off 820 operational positions. Even fewer eyes and ears on the ground. The CIA was demoralized and understaffed for decades. The Senate Intelligence Committee issued Tuesday its long delayed 525 page, redacted Executive Summary on the CIA’s enhanced interrogation practices after 9/11. It criticized the practices as more brutal and less effective than the CIA led the President and the public to believe. The Agency allegedly misinformed the President, Congress, the Justice Department and the public. The Feinstein Democrats in the Senate almost four decades after the Church Committee again characterized the CIA as a Rouge Agency. It castigated the CIA. It slammed the water boarding, ice baths, death threats, and sleep deprivation techniques. The prisoners were sometimes kept in closed boxes, chained to the walls. The word “torture” permeates the report. Senator Feinstein called the CIA’s enhanced intelligence program as “A stain on our values and in out history.” The report was issued under the imprimatur of the Senate Intelligence Committee, but it is more in the nature of an opening statement or brief by a prosecutor. Fatal flaws exist with the report. First, the Democratic staff committee acted without Republican input. The Republican Senators on the Committee recognized five years ago that the committee staff had no intention of preparing an objective study, but rather a hatchet piece. Second, the staff did not interview the CIA officials or personnel involved with the enhanced interrogation program. They could have shed a light on many aspects of the investigation, especially the success of the intensive interrogation. The staffers acted like armchair quarterbacks with no understanding f how intelligence gathering works. The Report purports to conclude that no effective evidence was obtained through enhanced interrogation. Instead, the meaningful information was obtained from detainees prior to their being subjected to enhanced intelligence. Vice President Chaney succinctly summed up the Report: “The Report’s full of crap.” The Report ignores the background of the CIA’s actions. About 3,000 Americans died on 9/11 when four commercial airliners were transformed into flying bombs. Several Americans jumped out of the burning Twin Towers to a certain death rather than be consumed by flames. Washington was fearful of a second wave of attacks. An anthrax attack occurred around the same time. Limited intelligence indicated the terrorists were attempting to acquire a nuclear bomb from Pakistan. President Bush led the way in directing the CIA to do whatever was necessary to safeguard America. Congress was kept fully informed, at least on 30 occasions, of the details of the CIA’s plans. Several Democrats apparently asked the CIA more than once if the CIA needed even greater authority. Several key Democrats are now claiming ignorance in an exercise of selective memory. The Report is an attempt to cover their gluteus maximi. A famous hypo over the past two decades is of terrorists secreting the “Bomb” in an American city, often New York City. One of the terrorists is captured. The simple question is if torture should be used to determine the location of the Bomb in time to defuse it before it explodes. A common answer in my class prior to 9/11 is that torture would be inappropriate. The overwhelming view after 9/11 is to do whatever is necessary.

Getting a Clear Picture on Beijing's Smog

Beijing has a smog problem. The city knows it. The government knows it. The world knows it. 189 days in 2013 experienced heavy air pollution whereas only 176 days registered good air quality. A severe pollution episode last February with a smog blanket resulted in a scientist saying Beijing was “living through a nuclear winter. The pm2.5 level was 505. The air pollution was interfering with photosynthesis. A standard measurement of smog levels is the pm2.5 scale, which measures particulate matter of 2.5 micrometers or less. 25 and below is considered healthy. Above 300 is dangerous to health. The United Sates Embassy in Beijing records the pm2.5 levels hourly. An app for Beijing’s air quality is available. It currently is 107 at 9:22 Pacific time. It had been above 400 earlier. The government knows it must solve the problem, but it is not confined to Beijing. Smog is pervasive throughout China. 16 of the world’s most polluted cities are in China. I was in Beijing last week. I experienced the smog. I thought in arriving in Beijing that the Beijing smog was a combination of industry and the automobile. I was wrong; it’s much more complicated than that. Yes, Beijing has a problem with its coal based industry and steel mills. In this respect Beijing is analogous to Pittsburgh of a century ago and the infamous 1948 Donora Smog with 20 dead and over 7,000 ill 30 miles from Pittsburgh. The Chinese Academy of Sciences published a study a year ago, reporting the sources of Beijing’s smog. Secondary aerosols (sulfates and nitrates) were responsible for 26%, followed by industrial pollution with 25% and coal burning with 18%. Coal produces 70% of China’s electricity from over 2,300 plants with a new plant coming on line every 10 days. Globalization resulted in in heavy industry leaving the United Sates, often to China. It seems the United States may also have exported pollution to China. 39.2% of the smog comes from outside the province. especially Hebei and Tianjin Provinces. Hebei has a concentration of polluting heavy industry, especially steel. The rapid industrialization of China, as it had earlier in the United States and Europe, is leaving a trail of air, water, and toxic pollution in its wake. China’s industries externalize their pollution by dumping it on the public. Beijing’s smog is partially imported pollution, just as poor air quality from Los Angeles and Orange County, California blows through a gap in the mountains to Riverside and San Bernardino Counties. Pollution does not respect artificial political boundaries. The imported pollution complicates the smog control problem. Soil dust accounts for up to 15% of Beijing’s pollution. The city has historically been plagued by major sandstorms. The Chinese Academy of Sciences Study reported that waste burning and cars only accounted for 4% of the smog. However, a different study by the Beijing Environmental Protection Monitoring Center reported auto exhausts accounted for 31.8% of emissions within the city. The once omnipresent bicycle has been replaced by the ubiquitous car. Indeed, bikers and pedestrians get no respect from Beijing drivers. China now has 240 million vehicles on the road. 17.9 new vehicles were sold in 2013. The American auto industry has a great year when 16 million vehicles are sold. The government exercised Herculean efforts to clear the air before the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) November 7-12. Heavy industry was shut down within 124 miles of the Capitol and auto driving was restricted. Residents referred to the resulting clean air as “APEC Blue.” China has experienced two decades of rapid economic growth coupled with little pollution control. The country plans to remove 6 million old cars from the road this year. It shut 103 heavy industry facilities last year. It’s not enough. Air pollution controls, at least as strong as throughout the United States, for automobiles and plants must be imposed.

Did Rolling Stone Pull a Duke Lacrosse on the University of Virginia

Accusations of rape must be taken seriously. They are not to be brushed off, disregarded, or ignored. Yet, not every allegation of sexual assault can be proven, at least legally. A growing awareness in America is the problem of sexual assaults on campus, especially when alcohol is involved. Thus, when Rolling Stone Magazine ran a featured article, “A Rape on Campus,” by Sabrina Rubin Erdely on November 19, 2014, detailing the sordid attacks on Jackie, a University of Virginia coed two years earlier, it was believed. It fit the narrative of drunken fraternity brothers coupled with a culture of willfully ignoring campus rape and apparent university indifference. Animal House in the 21st Century! The well-written article is compelling, graphic, and sickening. The description of the University’s reactions to claims of sexual assault is as compelling as the attacks themselves. When asked why the crimes weren’t reported, the response was “No one wants to send their daughter to the rape school.” Phi Kappa Psi voluntarily suspended itself, followed by the University suspending all fraternity and sorority life until next semester. The University is reassessing its policies and asked for a special counsel to be appointed. The board of Visitors, the governing body, convened a special meeting. Over 1,000 alumni wrote critical letters to the university. The Phi Kappa Psi house was vandalized. The Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges sent the University of Virginia a letter demanding assurances that the school is in compliance with student safety standards. It is a powerful narrative. So was the narrative 8 years ago of the Duke Lacrosse team. An exotic dancer alleged she was raped by three players at a party on March 13, 2006. The tale went viral. 88 Duke professors ran an ad in the student newspaper in protest of the players’ actions. The lacrosse coach was fired and the team suspended for the season. Michael Nifond, the District Attorney, vigorously prosecuted the three accused players, eventhough the innocence of one player was clearcut. Reade Seligman was clearly photographed at an ATM machine several miles away at the precise time of the alleged assaults. DA Nifong was so eager to convict that he withheld exculpatory evidence from the defense. The complainant’s case slowly fell apart. Even her companion denied anything occurred. The national rush to judgment was a mistake. It was a costly mistake for Duke. Reports are that it might have cost Duke as much as $80 million in settlements and attorneys fees and costs. The Duke Lacrosse Team narrative was believed because it fit an existing narrative. So too with the Rolling Stone article. A sexual assault may have occurred with the victim’s memory playing games with her. It happens. But it did not happen as depicted in Rolling Stone. Jackie has told differing stories to supporters and the media. She said she had met the initial acquaintance when they were both lifeguards at an aquatic camp. He was a brother in Phi Kappa Psi, where the assaults allegedly occurred. She identified him a short time ago to friends. He is not in fact a Phi Kappa Psi brother. He denies ever having met her. Nor did the fraternity apparently have any members working at the Aquatic Club at the time. She claimed in the article that the assaults occurred on September 28, 2012. The fraternity had no parties scheduled around that time and says no brother fits the description of her initial attacker. The writer did not contact the seven (earlier) five attackers out of respect for Jackie who did not want them contacted. She explained: “I am convinced it could not be done any other way or any better. I am not interested in diverting the conversation away from the point of the article itself.” That’s now what’s happening. The violation of basic rules of investigative reporting is drawing attention away from the narrative. Rolling Stone’s first response to criticism was denial: “Through our extensive reporting and fact-checking, we found Jackie to be entirely credible and courageous, and we are proud to have given her disturbing story the attention it deserves.” The editor changed his position yesterday: “In the face of new information, there now appears to be discrepancies in Jackie’s account, and we have come to the conclusion that our trust in her was misplaced. University of Virginia President Teresa Sullivan promises the University will conduct a through investigation of the incident and of the school’s response activities. Sabrina’s article got the desired impact in the short run.

Conservatives Are Aghast at the New York City Non-Indictment in the Eric Garner Homicide

The contrasting reactions to the grand juries non-indictments in the Ferguson and Eric Garner deaths are illuminating. Conservatives supported the Ferguson decision not to indict Officer Darren Wilson. Civil libertarians protested. Both riots and peaceful demonstrations followed. “Hands up; Don’t shoot” became the rallying cry. Conservatives supported the decision. The overwhelming weight of the evidence showed the Officer had the right to self-defense as Michael Brown unwisely attacked him in his car, and that the deceased was not shot in the back. Eric Garner’s death was different. The cry became “I can’t breathe.” Peaceful demonstrations followed throughout the country. Conservative pundits, including those of FoxNews, are outraged by the Grand Jury’s decision. The video in the legal phrase “Res Ipsa Loquiter” speaks for itself. Even former President George W. Bush found the decision to not indict “hard to understand.” Congressman Peter King (R. NY) had a contrary position. He said on FoxNews' Megyn Kelly show that since Eric Garner could say "He couldn't breathe," that showed he could breathe. Unlike Congressman King, I understand what Eric Garner was saying. I can literally say as an asthmatic to a doctor that I can't breathe when the asthma is so severe that it is as though I cannot breathe. A 6’3” 350 lb. African American was gang tackled and apparently chokeholded for selling Loosie cigarettes, that it, single cigarettes, for $.75 each on the street. He was crying out “I can’t breathe.” He was left alone in extremis for a time while paramedics stood by. Capital punishment for a $.75 cigarette seems cruel and unusual punishment. Eric Garner resisted arrest in the sense that his arms were flailing and he refused to cooperate with the horde of officers surrounding him. The Officer testified before the Grand Jury that he did not use a chokehold proscribed by the NFPD, but a wrestling move he was taught in the Police Academy and which is legal under New York State law. The video looks like a chokehold. New York City Mayor De Baslio said: ”This is now a national moment of grief, a national moment of pain, and searching for a solution …. We’re not just dealing with a problem in 2014, we’re not dealing with decades years of racism leading up to it, or a decade of racism – we are dealing with centuries that have brought us to this day.” Eloquent, but wrong – a misdirection and feint over the underlying problem, which is of the day – nor the centuries , but New York’s rapacious cigarette tax, the consequences of which proved tragic with Eric Garner. Mayor De Blasio told the police weeks earlier to enforce the cigarette tax and go after the street sellers, such as Eric Garner. The City and State needed the revenue. New York State imposes a tax of $4.35/pack of 20 cigarettes. New York City adds another $1.50 to the tax, yielding a tax of $5.85/carton, or 29.25 cents per cigarette. Packs retail for $13 - $17, with cartons selling for $130 and up. In short, the government is making more off a pack of cigarettes in New York City than the tobacco companies. The cigarette tax raises money, when it’s collected, but over 60% of the cigarettes sold in New York are bootlegged into the state. The tax is so regressive that the poor can spend 22% of their disposable income on cigarettes. Truckloads of cigarettes are bought in Virginia with a tax of $.30/carton and then enter the New York blackmarket, often selling on the streets of New York as “Loosies” for 75 cents each. Eric Garner was the final link in the distribution chain. He had 2 ½ packs of Newports on him when the confrontation with the police occurred. He died because of a modern tax policy. No one should be confronted by the police over a single cigarette. We have not yet been told if he was selling taxed or untaxed cigarettes. There is no justice in his death, but the settlement with his family will chew up much of the City’s cigarette tax revenue.

Justice for Ferguson is Not Revenge or Vengeance

Justice is not revenge. Justice is not vengeance. Justice is not looting. Justice is not arson. Justice is not rioting. Justice is not Ferguson after the Grand Jury decision. Justice is not looting, vandalizing, or destroying 60 businesses in the Ferguson area. Justice is not shutting down the 44, 110 or 580. Justice is not shutting down BART. Justice is not shutting down shopping centers, yelling “If we don’t get no justice, they don’t get no profits.” Yet, that is what a few are using Ferguson as an excuse to do – all because of a false narrative. The narrative was laid out by Dorian Johnson, Michael Brown’s companion, that a white police officer shot Michael Brown in the back while his hands were raised, thus giving rise to the chant “Hand’s up; Don’t shoot.” The story fits the historic narrative of police harassing, beating, and even killing African Americans, especially young males. Michael Brown became a symbol. Not this time though. Dorian has an outstanding warrant and Michael a rap sheet. The two were partners in crime earlier that day in robbing a convenience store of cigarillos, caught on video. The death of Michael Wilson is a tragedy. Michael Brown should not have been killed. Darren Wilson should not have had to shoot him. Michael Brown should not have openly carried the stolen cigarillos in public. Nor should he have attacked Officer Wilson in his car and grabbed for the Officer’s gun. We cannot know what Michael Brown was thinking, but we know his actions. Eyewitnesses and autopsy reports tell the tale. The Grand Jury of 9 whites and 3 African Americans took 97 days, listening to 70 hours of testimony and 60 witnesses before reaching their decision to not indict Officer Wilson. Dorian Johnson lied. The narrative is false. The agitators, building on the legacy of African American distrust of the police, are not letting the facts get in the way of a good narrative. Justice is not claiming that Ferguson is to this generation what Selma was to an earlier generation – but that’s just the Reverend Al Sharpton. Justice is bringing to the bar of justice those who committed criminal acts in Ferguson. Let us note though that the number of perpetrators in almost every post – Grand Jury incident is low, usually less than 200. The vast majority, 99.9999%, are not rioting, looting, or torching. They are respecting the rule of law. Justice is the product of the rule of law, a process by which the American legal system resolves a dispute following the rules of law in an orderly and peaceful manner before an impartial judge and judge. The American public understands that Michael Brown is not a proper symbol of the Civil Rights Movement. The Reverend Al Sharpton said that Ferguson is to this generation what Selma was to an earlier generation. That’s Al Sharpton being Al Sharpton. It is not America. And it’s not Selma. The tragedy of Ferguson is two fold. The first is the death of Michael Brown. The second is reigniting the issue of race in America while setting back the progress we’ve made in recent decades. Legitimate grievances, of which there are many, will be consumed by the incendiary fires of Ferguson.