No Labels' "Nightmare on Main Street"

For many decades, I’ve said that, as an actuary, I have no need for horror movies because reading annual OASDI actuarial reports (Social Security and Medicare financial status) is incredibly scary.

Former Senator Henry Bellmon (R-OK) and former Rep. Robert Giaimo (D-CT) created the Committee for a Responsible Budget in 1981.  It has a Fix the Debt campaign.

Seymour Durst created a US Debt Clock in NYC in 1989.  The wonderful US Debt Clock website (created in 2006) shows much other data including USA total debt ($107 trillion, including personal debt) and state debt.  I’ve always felt it understates the problem because it ignores our underfunded entitlements.  If you assume Social Security and Medicare will continue forever “as is”, we’re $95 trillion in the hole ($886,000 per USA taxpayer), not $39 trillion.

Heroes like Paul Tsongas spotlighted our economic problems (he founded the Concord Coalition in 1992), but most voters and most other politicians have continually ignored the voices of reason.

Bill Clinton gets credit for “balancing the budget”, but if you reflected the increase in underfunded Social Security and Medicare liabilities, we were still falling farther behind.

In 2008, Pete Peterson created Peter G. Peterson Foundation which has banged the drum loudly regarding our unsustainable direction.

The same year, we elected a president (Barack Obama) who promised to address the issue.  In 2010, he appointed Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson to co-chair the bipartisan National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform.  Their WONDERFUL December 2010 report gave me hope.  I loved some of the proposals and hated others, but it was necessary to support the full, well-balanced package to avert catastrophe.  Sadly, President Obama abandoned the effort.

In my 2021 blog (10 Obvious(?) Lessons from the Pandemic), the first point was “To be able to spend lots of money in such emergencies, we need surpluses in other years.”  Alas, our politicians have continued to overspend dramatically.

No Labels just published a description of what could happen: Nightmare on Main Street, which I have attached.  An 884-word synopsis was published here.  Our unsustainable path will lead to disaster.   Your comments are welcome!

President Trump's second term

Although a never-Trumper, I credit him for good things he does (e.g., Trump did some good things as president, 8Jul23).  I continue to do so (ask me for detailed comments if you'd like).

Sending Venezuelans to El Salvador is NOT a question of appropriate/inappropriate deportation.  The Trump administration sent those people to a high-security prison.  It is like sending them to Siberia, indefinitely or permanently, without due process.  This is much worse than deportation!

(Even people willing to sacrifice other people’s rights should be concerned about the terms of the deal.  How are we paying to this?  But more fundamentally, what if your child had been sent off?)

Trump is also intimidating attorneys and law firms.  So far, he has pursued Paul Weiss; Perkins Coie; and Jenner & Block because he disagrees with things they have done.  He has suspended security clearances for their lawyers, restricted their access to government buildings and officials, and barred them from federal contracting work.  He took action against two attorneys at Covington & Burling for having represented his opponents.  Such intimidation discourages attorneys from defending clients on causes Trump might not like.  It causes clients to shy away from the law firms to avoid Trump's enmity.  He has also reportedly directed DOJ to recommend similar actions against firms representing immigrants or that sued the government in the past 8 years.  This is a clear parallel to Nazi Germany (https://www.fedbar.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/legalcomm-sept13-pdf-1.pdf). 

He says dissenting judges should be impeached.

Consider the following: First, he imprisoned Venezuelans in El Salvador; I did nothing because I figured most of those people deserved it.  Then, he intimidated attorneys; I did nothing because they weren't my attorney.  Then, he intimidated judges; I did nothing because they weren't judging my case.  He has also started intimidating the press, but I'm doing nothing (not sure why).  When he comes after you or your loved ones, who will be left to protect you/them?  You likely recognize that I'm re-phrasing Martin Niemoller’s famous quote.

A good companion quote is from Rabbi Hillel: “If not you, who?  If not now, when?”

Relative to the phone call that permitted the reporter to join, I don’t believe people should necessarily be fired after making a mistake.  That person may be less likely to make that mistake in the future than a replacement employee.  However, firing people for blatantly lying to Congress is appropriate!

I have written that Separation of Powers has been the most critical factor in the success of the USA.  It is under threat:

1. Congress fails to do its job.  Citizens must push Congress to do its job and reward those politicians who do their job well.
2. Both parties undermine the judiciary to promote their party’s interests over the country’s interests.  President Trump seems to be trying to overwhelm the judiciary with a blizzard of challenges to existing laws.
3. Trump claims broad powers.  Though he is partly making changes that reduce executive power, concentration of power is scary.  He does things he aptly criticized Biden for doing.

Internationally, President Trump has abandoned the USA’s traditional values-based world leadership.  I acknowledge that we often failed in that regard, but President Trump’s “might makes right” approach seems to be hurtling us toward George Orwell’s 1984, in which 3 super-powers carve up the world.  In addition to bullying and ridicule and outright denial (e.g., discussion of detailed war plans is not classified information), Trump’s negotiation style includes frequently changing positions to keep others off-balance (e.g., tariffs are variously about trade balances, jobs, security, fentanyl, etc.)  Unpredictability can be effective (I believe it would have kept Putin from invading Ukraine), but it often secures short-term gains at the expense of long-term results.

President Trump’s inconsistency makes it harder to discern his end game.  That is probably his intended result.  Freedom is fragile; it is much easier to lose freedom than to regain freedom.

A huge problem for the world is that the USA has not had a president who tried to unite us since Bill Clinton.  Both parties believe: The large “middle” is too lethargic, busy, or distracted to get involved in politics.  The people on the other extreme can’t be persuaded, so the way to maximize power is to energize their “base” by taking extreme positions and lying about their opponents to make them look like ogres. 

Democrats don’t recognize that their excesses and lies led to Trump’s re-election.  Trump supporters should be upset that his lies, excesses and communication needlessly alienate many people, which will undermine Trump’s supporters’ goals in the long-term.  (I’m working with No Labels to help educate the “middle” and to encourage them to push Congress to do its job and to reward politicians who put the country’s needs ahead of partisan politics.  Such politicians have a lower re-election rate because their parties punish them for being principled.)

Today’s complex world makes government greatly more difficult than in 1787.  While it makes sense for Congress to rely on the Executive’s staff to flush out details, the Executive’s plans must then be voted on by Congress.

I don't know how to attach my spreadsheet, but you could ask me for a copy.

My comments on the "Review of Actions" spreadsheet are organized alphabetically under the following topic areas: Budget, Culture, Education, Executive Orders, Foreign Policy, Government, Judiciary, Nat'l Security, Pardons, Self-Aggrandizement, and Staff.

My ideas are not fully formed, and I am very open to your comments.  I can update this spreadsheet in the future.  Currently it addresses 65 topics, so you'll likely want to be choosy about what you read.  On the right side of the spreadsheet are columns noting repeated characteristics.  For example:      

·        I noted 4 areas where his efforts would reduce Presidential power in the future.

·        I noted 17 comments where he is exceeding his authority in my opinion.  I'm confident that many liberal readers would wonder why I did not check that column more often.

·        I noted 29 issues in which he has unnecessarily alienated people.  This is a huge weakness of his.  Even people who agree with his actions should be very concerned that he is ginning up tremendous opposition and is positioning himself to clamp down on rights.

·        Of course, I noted a lot of areas in which he was rude, a bully or vindictive.

Some readers who support Trump may think I'm allowing my anti-Trump bias to affect my interpretations.  To them, I would say:

1)     Note how often I indicate positives about Trump’s positions or actions.

2)     A person's character is important.  Trump's track record has to inspire distrust.    

 

Messages to Politicians

When reviewing my communications, remember that my goal is to have an impact.  That can influence how I phrase things.  It is important to support politicians who show courage as well as criticize those who don't.

Senators' URL protocol is www.Senator'sFamilyname.senate.com.   From there, it is generally easy to send a message.

House URL protocol is https://FamilyName.house.gov/contact/

If you have supported them in the past, it is critical to include that in any critical message; otherwise, they'll brush your message off.  I have deleted such comments in my messages below. 

Sometimes they won't accept email out of their district.  In that case you can call them.  In one case, I had to lie by saying I was in their district.  Otherwise, I couldn't leave a (thankful) message.  I apologized and admitted I am not a constituent in the message I left.

Sometimes, organizations send me emails to comment to politicians on a topic.  I always customize them, but they are not always reported herein.

2026-06-16: I wrote to Senators Moran and Marshall that we are leery of an agreement with Iran that does not accomplish our goals of ending their ambition for nuclear weapons.

2026 in May: I've forwarded some messages from Razom (which I modified) about Ukraine.

~2026-04-14: I used a Concord Coalition email to comment about our debt.

2026-03-28: To Senator Moran

We disagree with Joel Mathis' criticism of your statements re: the Iran War  However, we  wish  you would support Ukraine more strongly.  You've primarily provided lip service, which does not deter Russia.  We also wish  you would oppose President Trump where appropriate.  People criticizing your cowardice appear to have a point.

2026-03-21:

To Sharice Davids: "Democrats could have refused to fund the government because the Trump administration is acting unconstitutionally, undermining separation of powers.  Democrats could have demanded that Adelita Grijalva be seated in the House (which Republicans are blocking to avoid release of the Epstein files), that President Trump get Congressional approval for military action in the Caribbean, etc.  

Instead, Democrats shut down the government because they don’t like a law that was legally passed.  That’s a terrible reason to shut down the government.  If you disagree about a law that passed, you close the government???  Consider the national and international ramifications.  If it is appropriate to shut down the government because you don't like a law that passed, our government could be shut down permanently. "

So, it may not come as much a surprise that I have supported the Democratic shutdown over ICE.  Defunding an executive branch to press for the discontinuation of unconstitutional behavior is appropriate.

However, the Trump administration has now signaled acceptance of most of the Democratic demands in several ways: Tom Homan replacing Greg Borvino, MarkWayne Mullin nominated to replace the now-fired Kristi Noem, Mullin's testimony as to the direction in which he intends to take teh agency, compromise negotiation stances by Republicans, and press reports of moderation throughout the administration.

The Democrats should now declare victory and end the shutdown of DHS.  The current risks due to the war with Iran underscore the wisdom of ending the shutdown now.

2026-03-19:

To Sharice Davids: I've been an environmentalist all my life, but those issues are moot if we continue to allow expansion of nuclear weapons, the most existential threat ever.  Bribing North Korea and Iran to delay nuclear weapons encourages them and other countries to continue to do so, to get more bribes.  I'm also a never-Trumper, but we must fund this war.  Iran’s regime is determined to have nuclear weapons.  Therefore, this is a war for regime change, but for a very different reason than the ones in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Air power led to regime change in Libya (with a small amount of special ops).  Congress should reassert its control, but not by refusing to fund this war.

To Jerry Moran and Roger Marshall:

Although we are big fans of photo voter ID, we oppose the SAVE Act.  Voter rules are determined by the state, not the federal government.  Furthermore, the filibuster is critical to protect.  If you remove the filibuster to pass the SAVE Act, we will suffer continuously in the future, including possible reversible of photo ID and approval of ballot harvesting..

2026-02-15:  To Roger Marshall, Jerry Moran and Sharice Davids

The ACLU says:

“The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has proposed two major rules that would devastate access to health care for transgender people – and we have to act now to let them know: stop interfering with our healthcare! 

The first proposal would prohibit the use of federal Medicaid dollars to provide coverage of gender affirming health care for people under 18. The second would go even further, banning hospitals from participating in Medicaid and Medicare at all if they offer this care – even if that care is paid for privately. Ultimately, it would force hospitals to stop offering gender affirming care to young people altogether – effectively shutting down most of this care for youth across the country.”

The ACLU urges me to oppose both rules, but I strongly support the first one.

I do agree with the ACLU on the second one.

Gender is “assigned” at birth only for a very small number of babies who unfortunately have ambiguous genitalia.  They should be allowed to transition their gender if they so choose.  I have no strong feeling as to whether government health care programs cover the cost of their change.

However, for the vast majority of babies, gender is scientific and objective (not “assigned”) and gender-disaffirming care (a more accurate term) should be discouraged.  If they, their parents and two independent doctors agree to gender-disaffirming services after a suitable waiting period, I recognize their right to do what they want.  But why should I pay for it?

If medical providers serve their clients’ interests in gender-disaffirming services, they would not be paid by the government but should not be punished.

 2026-01-30: To Senators Marshall and Moran

I’ve been vocal that Joe Biden was the worst President ever

But your legacy will be collaborating with a President who is needlessly:

• Undermining our critical separation of powers
• Damaging our crucial international alliances.

2026-01-14: UNICEF urged me to support $150M for UNICEF.  I modified the first and last paragraphs to indicate that I'm not fully cognizant, to cite past funding, including for "other" resources.  My communication to Senators Marshall and Moran and Congresswoman Davids was:

As your constituent, I ask you to consider supporting the FY26 NSRP/SFOPS conferenced bill.  According to the internet, in 2024, the USA gave $137M for core services, $114M for other (regular) resources, and $867M for other (emergency) resources.  In 2025, it allocated $142KK (presumably for core services), but rescinded that and ended up giving $93M (presumably for core services).  The $150M they are asking for is apparently for core services.  I don't know how the "other" resources would be impacted, so I don't feel that I have full knowledge on this topic.

America’s longstanding, bipartisan support for UNICEF creates hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue for American businesses and suppliers who power UNICEF’s work to save children’s lives and promote global stability. It also keeps America safe and strong by providing opportunities for children at risk of terrorist recruitment efforts, helping to stem migration and preventing the spread of dangerous diseases to American shores. 

o  UNICEF Supports America’s Economy: Investing in UNICEF strengthens our national security and creates jobs right here at home. In 2024, UNICEF invested $770 million in American businesses across 37 states to procure life-saving medicine, ready-to-use therapeutic food and humanitarian supplies – creating thousands of jobs. UNICEF partners with industry leading, blue-chip American businesses, which helps bolster our economy, promote American values and deliver lifesaving aid to children. 

o  UNICEF Improves American Safety and Security: Today, 1 in 6 children live amid conflict and insecurity, and the world is logging record-high levels of population displacement and migration. These trends increase children’s vulnerability to violent extremism and recruitment by terrorists or other armed groups. By protecting vulnerable children and expanding their educational opportunities, UNICEF helps promote self-sufficiency and reduce the sway of terrorist recruiters. Conflict also frequently limits children's access to nutrition and safe water and forces families to flee their homes. Expanding access to basic resources creates stability and alleviates the factors that drive migration. 

o  UNICEF Prevents Dangerous Diseases from Reaching America: In 2023, UNICEF responded to health emergencies in nearly 100 countries, addressing disease outbreaks at their source to prevent dangerous diseases like Ebola, cholera and malaria from reaching American shores. In humanitarian emergencies, UNICEF is also responsible for ensuring access to safe water and sanitation. This helps prevent the spread of water-borne diseases in the countries impacted by the emergencies and across borders.

UNICEF was founded in 1946 to support children in the wake of WWII. For decades, bipartisan support from Congress has enabled UNICEF to achieve remarkable results – including halving the number of children who die before their fifth birthday. Results like these – and America’s leadership in achieving them – cannot continue without support from the federal government.  

I urge you to consider supporting the FY26 NSRP/SFOPS conferenced bill, which includes UNICEF, to support our economy, keep Americans secure and healthy and save children’s lives.

Please let me know what you decide and why you made that decision.

Sincerely,

Claude Thau

5311 West 124th Court, Overland Park, KS, USA

2026-01-07: In response to a poll by Sharice Davids, I wrote:

I keep telling you my priorities include reducing our $95 trillion deficit ($38 trillion plus an additional $57 trillion if Social Security and Medicare continue unchanged) and supporting Ukraine.  When you talk about supporting our kids in K-12, do you strongly support public charter schools?  I've also often asked you to particular in No Labels and work across the aisle with reasonable Republicans.  My comments seem to fall on deaf ears as you have not updated the above list of concerns to choose among.  It would be nice to allow us to explain in what ways we approve or disapprove of what President Trump is doing in Venezuela.

2026-01-06:

To Senator Moran:

Why do we  need a Senate if Senators simply relinquish their responsibilities to the President?  How can you stomach President Trump's treatment of Ukraine and Greenland?

To Senator Marshall:

Title: Why do we  need a Senate if Senators simply relinquish their responsibilities to the President?

Body: How can you stomach President Trump's kowtowing to Vladimir Putin and aggressive attitude toward Greenland?

To Sharice Davids:

We need Congress to exercise its responsibilities instead of delegating so much power to the President.  Please develop your relationships with Republicans in the House and Senate who are willing to work toward bipartisan solutions, such as Brian Fitzpatrick, Jennifer Kiggans, Rob Bresnahan, Dusty Johnson, and Max Miller in the House and Susan Collins and Bill Cassidy in the Senate. 

2025-11-22:

I followed up on contacting Senator Moran through Razom, by sending this message:

Dear Senator Moran, you present yourself as supportive of Ukraine.  Now is the time to prove it.  President Trump's proposal would be a terrible result for Ukraine and would encourage Putin, China, North Korea, and other aggressors.  Today's  world and our descendants need you to stand up forcefully now.

I sent the following to Roger Marshall:

President Trump's proposal would be a terrible result for Ukraine and would encourage Putin, China, North Korea, and other aggressors.  It is harmful for today's  world population and future generations.  As a supporter of President Trump, you are positioned to have positive impact by standing up forcefully for Ukraine now.  

I sent the following to Sharice Davids:

President Trump's proposal would be a terrible result for Ukraine and would encourage Putin, China, North Korea, and other aggressors.  Today's world population and future generations need you and your peers to stand up forcefully now.

President Trump's proposal would be a terrible result for Ukraine and would encourage Putin, China, North Korea, and other aggressors.  Today's  world and our descendants need you to stand up forcefully for Ukraine now.

2025-11-18:

Dear Rep. Davids,

As you know, I’m the volunteer lead for No Labels in your district.  No Labels is a national movement of citizens who believe in commonsense bipartisanship.  I've invited you to two of their meetings in Washington, DC and I keep more than 100 voters in your district up-to-date on No Labels activities.

32 of your peers wrote a letter to Senate leaders Thune and Schumer, asking that House Democrats and Republicans be included in developing December's promised health care reform proposal, hoping that bicameral, bipartisan discussion will achieve Senate passage and immediate House concurrence.

In addition, you may remember that I am a retired actuary and a long-term care insurance expert.  I have offered you my insights into the important characteristics of a strong health care system, an earlier version of which was published in Ingram’s Magazine in 2009.

Although I don’t pretend to know all the answers, I am disappointed that you haven’t shown any interest in hearing my thoughts about healthcare, have ignored invitations to the "No Labels" meeting in Washington, and did not sign this letter.

Please advise why you did not sign the letter signed by your following associates in the House: Josh Gottheimer (NJ-5), Jen Kiggans (VA-2), Juan Ciscomani (AZ-6), and Adam Gray (CA-13), is also signed by Maggie Goodlander (NH-2), Jeff Van Drew (NJ-2), Susie Lee (NV-3), Don Bacon (NE-2), Ed Case (HI-1), Mike Lawler (NY-17), Greg Landsman (OH-1), Jeff Hurd (CO-3), Darren Soto (FL-9), Rob Bresnahan, Jr. (PA-8), Tom Barrett (MI-7), Debbie Dingell (MI-6), Tom Kean, Jr. (NJ-7), Jimmy Panetta (CA-19), Ryan Mackenzie (PA-7), Henry Cuellar (TX-28), Monica De La Cruz (TX-15), George Whitesides (CA-27), Maria Elvira Salazar (FL-27), Vicente Gonzalez (TX-34), Donald Davis (NC-1), Scott Peters (CA-50), Jared Moskowitz (FL-23), Josh Riley (NY-19), Laura Gillen (NY-4), Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (WA-03), Carlos Gimenez (FL-28), and Emilia Sykes (OH-13).

Thanks in advance for your response.

2025-09-07: I wrote as follows to all three of them.

I'm a retired actuary.  Recently, a college classmate asked me for ideas to reduce the cost of health care.  I just responded with an 8-page list of ideas.  I did not get into public vs. private; my comments are mostly relevant under any type of health care system.  I'm pretty sure that my paper includes ideas that would be new and interesting to you.  Would you like me to email a copy of the paper to you electronically?  If so, to which email address?  Thank you.  I am already subscribed to your newsletter.

2025-08-22: President Trump continues to fiddle while Ukraine burns.  It is SO TERRIBLY LONG OVERDUE to put pressure on Putin.  Trump should have done that privately by day one in office.  He could probably have ended the war had he done so.  

2025-08-20 (sent to Moran, Marshall, Davids): As a constituent and the local lead volunteer for No Labels in KS's 2nd and 3rd Congressional districts, I invite you to participate in No Labels' next Public Bicameral Meeting in the Capitol Visitor’s Center on Thursday, September 11 at 8:30 AM.

31 of your peers attended our first such meeting in June and thousands of citizens watched it.  Each one mentioned topics for potential co-operation, and it still ended within the allotted hour.

The most-mentioned potential area for bipartisan progress was permitting reform, so this second Bicameral event will focus on that topic.

Our country, and the world, desperately needs leaders who can find common-sense solutions. I'd be delighted to report to my 300-person No Labels following about your participation in this public meeting.  Thank you!

2025-07-25 message to Senator Jerry Moran and Rep. Sharice Davids.  I've determined that it is generally a waste of time to communicate with Senator Dr. Roger Marshall.

I believe the Federal government has too much power.  Issues such as education should be moved to the states. 

I also think President Biden’s energy strategy was foolish.  Discouraging production here in favor of production in Venezuela, Russia and the Middle East where techniques are less climate-friendly, while costing us jobs and income and forcing our allies and Third World countries to rely on our enemies.  The demands regarding electric cars were excessive, particularly when we don’t really know that electric cars are better for the environment than hybrids.

But many, if not most, environmental issues, by their nature, should be at the federal level.

1. I don’t think the EPA should reverse the finding that greenhouse gases are a threat to human health.
2. Lax exemptions from pollution safeguards don’t make sense.

And we need an “all of the above” approach to energy.  Incentives for renewable energy should continue, even if mandates should end.

2025-07-05 to Senator's Moran and Marshall and to Rep. Davids

Please restore sending defensive weapons to Ukraine.  Ukraine is fighting for freedom against aggression.  Their effort protects our freedom and freedom of other allies.  It protects our interest in the minerals deal they signed with us.  If Ukraine falls, Putin, Xi and other dictators will be emboldened and we, and the world, will face more future wars than if we help Ukraine defend itself.  President Trump can end this war by decisively threatening Putin (privately, so Putin can save face).

2025-06-08:  I think this is my ~12th communication this year to each of them.

To Senator Moran:

Ukraine attacks planes, the weapons of war.  Putin attacks civilians.  You repeatedly say you support Ukraine.  Supporting Ukraine IS supporting the USA.  We need you to exert your leadership capabilities NOW.  Not just on Ukraine, but for separation of powers!  This is not the time to tippy-toe with President Trump on all issues.  Pick out major ones that violate your principles and oppose them strongly.  President Trump is the RINO.  We, and many friends, will be forced to vote Democratic if Republicans in the Senate abandon their responsibility.

I subsequently sent him a second message, thanking him for co-sponsoring S. 1241, subject of my 5/28 message.  He is one of two senators to sign on since 5/22.  Nuts!  His office did not respond to me and I failed to check the list before sending my earlier message.

To Senator Marshall:

Separation of Powers

It is hard to believe that your values call for 100% support for President Trump.  Separation of powers is critical!  Pick out major issues where President Trump’s actions violate your principles and oppose them.  As such a strong supporter of President Trump, you have more influence with him and more responsibility to attempt to use that influence positively.  We, and many friends, will be forced to vote Democratic if Republicans in the Senate abandon their responsibility.  Thank you.

To Representative Sharice Davids:

We have not heard back relative to our 5/25 email about this 6/26 meeting, so we are trying again.  Will you attend?  Why or why not?  Thanks!

You are invited to a public bipartisan Congressional meeting at the Capitol Visitors Center on June 26th at 8:30 a.m.  Some of your constituents will watch via Zoom live or recorded.

We believe it is critical to encourage politicians to reach across the aisle for respectful dialogue to enable us to solve problems.  Our divisive political system is catastrophic for our country and for the world, which relies upon a stable, successful USA.

That’s why Claude is the local KS 2^nd and 3^rd districts lead volunteer for No Labels, which has organized this event.

We think the topic of the session will be “permitting legislation”.  You can register by contacting Margaret White at margaret@nolabels.org.

My ‘No Labels’ distribution list consists of ~300, 1/3 of whom are in the KS 3^rd district.

2025-06-05:  message to both Senators (Moran and Marshall)

Here are our three strongest disagreements with President Trump’s “big beautiful” budget bill:

1. It would limit contempt of court enforcement unless plaintiffs posted a security bond at the outset of the case. This would undermine the separation of powers which is critical to our success.

2. The Educational Choice for Children Act would allow 100% tax credit for some scholarship donations. If appreciated assets are donated, the donor avoids capital gains, effectively cashing out the investment for full value in tax credits. I have some smaller problems with this as well. What we should be doing is encouraging public charter schools.

3. Raising the $10K SALT cap to $40K would significantly reverse one of the best aspects of the 2017 tax law.
Note: Items 2 and 3 would benefit our family as we have 3 grandchildren in private K-12 schools and one of our children is a high-earner in NY. So, our opposition is clearly principled.

2025-05-28: You might want to let Senators Moran and Marshall know how you feel about them not co-sponsoring S.1241, which currently has 81 Senate sponsors.  Only 19 senators have not co-sponsored.

• S. 1241 would impose a 500 percent tariff on imported goods from countries that buy Russian oil, gas, uranium and other products if Russian refuses to engage in "good faith negotiations for a lasting peace with Urkaine."
• S. 1241would also impose sanctions on specific Russian people and institutions and entities owned by Russia; prohibit transfers, listings or trading in Russian investments; prohibit energy exports to Russia; etc.

 We sent this message to Senator Moran:

Earlier this year, you told us that you support Ukraine.  S. 1241 has 81 Senate sponsors.  Why are you not a co-sponsor?

 We sent this message to Senator Marshall:

Title: Yes, only Trump can end the war in Ukraine

Text: We agree with President Trump that only he can stop the Ukrainian war.  He must threaten Putin strongly privately.   A public threat would be ineffective because it would back Putin into a corner, embarrassing him.  But a private threat would allow Putin to "save face".  As one of President Trump's strongest supporters, you are well-positioned to deliver this message.  We see that you are one of only 19 senators who has not co-sponsored S. 1241.  We STRONGLY support S. 1241, yet would be comfortable with you not supporting it, IF you leverage that non-support to get Trump's ear to advise him to threaten Putin strongly privately.

2025-05-25: We invited Senators Moran and Marshall and Rep. Davids to attend the 6/26 NL meeting at the Capitol.  After I responded that Marshall would not have a meaningful speaking opportunity, his staff responded that he had another commitment.  The others had not responded as of June 8.

2025-05-09: To Senators Moran and Marshall and Rep. Sharice Davids

I'd like to send you a 5-page paper I've written about how the Federal and state governments can save money on Medicaid long-term care, while improving service.  I'm a retired actuary and insurance executive.  Please contact me to advise me how to send this paper to you.  Thank you! 

2025-04-25: To Senators Moran and Marshall:

President Trump could have ended the Ukrainian war quickly by privately telling Putin "Biden forced Zelensky to fight with one arm tied behind his back until recently.  If you don't agree to stop this war, I'll release all restraints on Zelensky and arm him strongly."  Can't the Senate do anything about President Trump negotiating against USA interests?

2025-04-24: To Sharice Davids: I heard only the end of your discussion with Rep. Cleaver and Steve Kraske, but your closing comment was tremendously better than his.

 President Trump won because the Democrats were on the wrong (extreme) side of many issues in the eyes of Independents and moderates of both parties.  However, President Trump’s approach to dealing with issues is unacceptable.

 Blindly saying “We’re right and they’re wrong” is political suicide.  Democrats can be successful if they listen, engage responsibly and move more to the middle.

2025-04-21: I contacted Senators Moran and Marshall and Congressperson Davids writing that we must support Ukraine.

2025-03-26: to Senator Moran (slightly different 1st paragraph for Senator Marshall)

Senator Moran, you have character.  You do NOT want your legacy to have been supporting the following.  Thanks for starting to speak up.  We need you to do more, leading your fellow Republicans to demonstrate patriotism and character. 

Sending Venezuelans to El Salvador is NOT a question of appropriate/inappropriate deportation.  The Trump administration sent those people to a high-security prison.  It is like sending them to Siberia, indefinitely or permanently, without due process.  This is much worse than deportation!

(Even people willing to sacrifice these people’s rights should be concerned about the terms of the deal.  How are we paying to this?  But more fundamentally, what if your child had been sent off?)

Trump is also intimidating attorneys and law firms.  Such intimidation discourages attorneys from defending clients on causes Trump might not like.  It causes clients to shy away from the law firms to avoid Trump's enmity.  He has also reportedly directed DOJ to recommend similar actions against firms representing immigrants or that sued the government in the past 8 years.  This is a clear parallel to Nazi Germany (https://www.fedbar.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/legalcomm-sept13-pdf-1.pdf). 

He says dissenting judges should be impeached.

Consider the following: First, he imprisoned Venezuelans in El Salvador; I did nothing because I figured most of those people deserved it.  Then, he intimidated attorneys; I did nothing because they weren't my attorney.  Then, he intimidated judges; I did nothing because they weren't judging my case.  He has also started intimidating the press, but I'm doing nothing (not sure why).  When he comes after you or your loved ones, who will be left to protect you/them?  You likely recognize that I'm re-phrasing Martin Niemoller’s famous quote.

A good companion quote is from Rabbi Hillel: “If not you, who?  If not now, when?”

Relative to the phone call that permitted the reporter to join, I don’t believe people should necessarily be fired after making a mistake.  That person may be less likely to make that mistake in the future than a replacement employee.  However, firing people for blatantly lying to Congress is appropriate!

2025-03-16: on Jared Golden's Facebook page

Heard about this from No Labels! Thanks! Last week, I spoke at a conference in Philadelphia. Met some people from Maine and emphasized to each of them how fortunate Maine (and the whole country) is to have you!

2025-03-16: To Senator Moran (note: maybe he was responding to comments from me and others)

Thank you for distancing yourself recently from President Trump, for example related to veterans, Ukraine and Haskell.  Please keep it up and accelerate as necessary.  My wife and I have voted for you several times and are concerned that Congress must retain its purpose.  Separation of Powers has been the key to our country's success!

2025-03-04: To Senators Moran and Marshall

Worse than Afghanistan or Munich: You are COMPLICIT

Afghanistan and Czechoslovakia could not defend themselves without foreign troops.  Afghanistan was a civil war, whereas Russia invaded Ukraine.  Munich bought time for Britain to asrm and organize to counter Hitler whereas Trump is siding with the aggressor.  Biden weakly under-supported Ukraine, setting Trump up for a victory.  He could have threatened Putin and negotiated a more favorable treaty.  Your cowardice in not opposing Trump when appropriate is a stain you’ll not only have to live with the rest of your life, it will also end up being your legacy.

2025-02-27: In response to a survey from Sharice Davids, I commented: "Very interesting.  You offer 16 priorities for Congress but do not include balancing the budget (my #1 budget priority; you do offer reducing government waste); allowing inner-city students to get a decent education (my #2 with my favorite approach being public charter schools), immigration or national security.

Miss Davids highlighted the following options in her cover message:

• Cutting the Medicaid health care program.
• Repealing tax cuts that lower people’s health premiums.
• Gutting emergency nutrition assistance for families.

The full list was:

1.        Creating jobs and growing our economy.

2.        Addressing rising costs in our economy.

3.        Protecting Medicare and Social Security.

4.        Improving health care and lowering the cost of prescription drugs and premiums.

5.        Protecting reproductive rights.

6.        Supporting public safety and addressing crime.

7.        Protecting our democracy and the voting rights of all eligible voters.

8.        Ending partisan bickering in Congress.

9.        Preventing gun violence.

10.   Securing our borders and immigration.

11.   Supporting our kids in K-12 and higher education.

12.   Protecting our environment and tackling climate change.

13.   Investing in transportation and infrastructure.

14.   Helping local small businesses in Kansas.

15.   Eliminating government corruption and ensuring stronger ethics rules.                                           Cutting wasteful government spending.

20 2025-02-26: 

Senator Moran responded to my 2/21 message (below).  My message to him today explains how he responded to my 2/21 message:

I sent you an email expressing disappointment because you have not had the courage to rebut President Trump's recent lies about Ukraine.  Your fellow Republican senators Rounds, Kennedy, Cramer, Tillis and Thune showed such courage.  In response, you sent me an undated copy of a July 27, 2023 article you wrote with Mike Pompeo.  I was already aware of that article appropriately supportive of Ukraine.  Your response underscores that you were willing to tell the truth about Ukraine when it was politically expedient to do so but are unwilling to do so today.   It also seems unusual to send out an article with no indication of the date that it was written.  Were you hoping that I'd think it was current?  I've voted for you consistently and I've respected you.  I don't think your current cowardice and misleading response reflect your character.   I hope that you can dig deep and find the courage to represent our nation's principles.  Please don't abandon your responsibilities when we most need you to fulfill them.

2025-02-21:

I applauded the following Republican Senators: Mike Rounds (SD), Thom Tillis (NC), John Kennedy (LA), John Thune (SD), Kevin Cramer (ND) and Republican Representatives Don Bacon (NE) and Brian FitzPatrick (PA) or speaking the truth about Ukraine.  I wrote "Thanks for defending United States integrity as regards Ukraine.  FYI, I'm a 'No Labels' guy; we greatly appreciate independence and integrity."

I wrote to my senators (Marshall and Moran): Why don’t you have the integrity of Senators Mike Rounds (SD), Thom Tillis (NC), John Kennedy (LA), John Thune (SD), Kevin Cramer (ND) and Representative Don Bacon (NE) to speak the truth about Ukraine and defend the honor of the United States?

2025-02-17:  Danielle Sassoon is the US Attorney who resigned rather than end her case against Mayor Eric Adams.  I could not find a LinkedIn account for her, so I went to her Facebook page today and “liked” several entries. 

I also sent the following message to my two Republican Senators (Jerry Moran and Roger Marshall):

               Is President Trump intent on making President Biden look strong???

If President Trump ends the Russia vs. Ukraine war on terms favorable to Russia, he will damage his legacy and make President Biden look strong.

2025-02-12: To Congresswoman Sharice Davids

Oops!  I lost it, but, in response to her survey, I told her that:

1) I'd love to see Congress resolve the debt (as she seemed to be suggesting) but Congress has refused to do so.  We have few patriotic politicians as our politicians value their political career more than our nation's (or the world's) needs.

2) It is terrible that we force children to attend terrible inner-city schools.  We know that public charter schools are much better, but the teachers' unions fight them tooth-and-nail because the teachers' unions (like politicians) treat their power as a higher priority than the kids' education.

3) Although I've been an environmentalist for at least six decades, I consider nuclear war to be our most existential threat.  Our nation's strategy in that regard has been terrible, inadvertently encouraging the spread of nuclear weapons.

2025-01-25:

To Senator Jerry Moran

President Trump has pushed for some good ideas, but they MUST be done properly as separation of powers is critical to our country's success.  I noted with interest that you confirmed  Pete Hegseth's nomination.  I wasn't sure you would endorse him.  When he does well (as I hope he will), I'll point out to people that you put your political reputation on the line for him.

To Senator Roger Marshall:

President Trump has pushed for some good ideas, but they MUST be done properly as separation of powers is critical to our country's success.  

I noted with interest that you confirmed Pete Hegseth's nomination.  If he does well (as I hope he will), I'll point out to people that you put your political reputation on the line for him.; he wouldn't have made it without your vote.  Of course, credit/blame goes both ways.

 2024-12-26, I encouraged readers to contact their politicians as follows: 

We communicated as follows recently to our Senators, both of whom are Republican:

Support Ukraine

We hope that Presidents Trump and Biden agreed that Biden would increase pressure on Russia so Trump could come in and tell Putin "You'll get even more pressure, if you don't negotiate favorably."  Trump's tough stand against Hamas is working and he should do the same against Russia in Ukraine.  His strong stance in Ukraine will undermine Russian advances in Africa and deter Iran and China.  He does not want to start his second term  showing international weakness like Biden did in Afghanistan.

Earlier we wrote:

We have your back if you choose to oppose some of President Trump's nominations.  Our primary concern is Tulsi Gabbard.  We don't object to her being in the government, but she is not a good candidate for Director of National Intelligence.

For our Democratic Congresswoman we wrote:

Support Ukraine

We hope that Presidents Biden and Trump agreed that President Biden would increase pressure on Russia so Trump could come in and tell Putin "You'll get even more pressure, if you don't negotiate favorably."  Trump's tough stand against Hamas is working and he should do the same against Russia in Ukraine.  His strong stance in Ukraine will undermine Russian advances in Africa and deter Iran and China.  He does not want to start his second term showing international weakness. 

On 8Dec24, I encouraged people to contact their politicians about nominations and deportations as follows:

Here's a message you can send to senators, modified to fit your preferences. 

I voted for you and want to let you know that I have your back if you choose not to vote for some of President Trump’s nominees.  My biggest concern is Tulsi Gabbard.  She is a bright, passionate person who can contribute in the government, but Director of National Intelligence isn’t a good place for her.  Secondly, although I support stronger border security and some deportations, the focus should be on those who have broken laws or have entered during the Biden administration.  Thank you!

My (and candidates') views on the 2024 Presidential Election

Regardless of your political preferences, I encourage you to get involved in the 2024 elections.  At a minimum, discuss the issues and candidates with people.  I’ll address “Trump” voters and then “Biden” voters.  Please excuse me dropping titles such as “President” and “ex-President”; simply using last names makes it easier for readers.  Many links herein go to my past blogs.  The many charts from The Economist and some others do not display below.  You can find most at The Economist  (opens in a new window so you can tab back and forth) or you can ask me to send you a word document with all the charts.

Trump Voters: In my blogs (Trump did some good things as president; Why people vote for Trump (2020)) and discussion of issues below, I acknowledge some good things happened during Trump’s presidency.  However, I think Nikki Haley is more likely to accomplish your future goals for the following reasons:

	Trump	Haley
Electability	May beat Biden, but there is a good chance Biden would beat him again, particularly as Biden is likely to continue to throw money at voters and to institute bad policy for short term political gains.	Very likely to beat Biden, as she appeals to a broad segment of voters and unlike Trump/Biden is young and non-divisive.
Coattails	Trump has had limited and decreasing success in electoral coattails.	More likely to have positive coattails, which is important to success in office.
Likely success 2024-28
Personality	Wants revenge; seeds chaos; alienates.  (see Donald Trump’s profile).    Hasn’t changed and won’t change, witness his tirade that he’d investigate Haley.	As an immigrant's child, she learned how to develop relationships and succeed in the USA.  She has developed coalitions in South Carolina, at the UN and in her campaign.
Reliability	Unreliable on anything; all about himself; no loyalty to people or ideas. Does it bother you that dozens of his former staff & allies say he should not be president?  Many more beyond the list, such as Mike Pompeo and Paul Ryan.	Consistent; has track record.
Ability to get support	Stimulates, motivates and ridicules opposition.	Builds support; people will be leery of criticizing 1st woman president as they were leery of criticizing 1st Black president.
Coat tails	Will face hostile Congress	Coattails will make Congress more supportive
Status	Lame duck	Cooperation encouraged by likelihood of 8 years
Longer term success
Potential 2nd term	Can’t have a third term	Good chance for 8 years
Post-presidency	Trump will continue to be all about him.  What good would he contribute post-Presidency?	After 8 years, she’d be 60 and could have a lot of on-going impact as UN Ambassador; congressperson; foundations; etc.

 

In sum, I can understand that you feel motivated to vote for Trump, but if you step back and look at things carefully, is Trump or Haley more likely to move this country in the direction you would like?

Biden voters: Obviously, I can understand your fear of Trump.  (See my following blogs: Risks To Which Trump Exposed Us, Donald Trump’s profile, The January 6^th Hearings, Why I’m voting for Biden (2020), Impeachment of Donald Trump, Trump, close your Twitter account).  I, like you, voted for Biden in 2020.  As you’ll see if you read my commentary below, I have been disappointed in Biden’s performance.  Most Biden voters disagree with me, and that certainly is your prerogative.  However, the polls between Biden and Trump have been shifting more in favor of Trump, albeit close.  I heard a presentation by noted pollster/prognosticator Frank Luntz recently.  Barring an “October surprise” (which could go either way), he anticipates that the trend will move further toward Trump’s favor because Biden’s age is likely to become an increasing issue and because Biden is beset with foreign and national issues that Luntz does not expect to get better.  (I don’t entirely buy in to Luntz’s argument, but it certainly is a risk that Biden supporters need to consider.)

You might want to consider two alternatives to Biden:

1)     You could support Haley.  If Haley beats Trump, your worst nightmare is gone.

2)     Depending on how signals continue, at some point you might want to support a Unity ticket that “No Labels” is stimulating.  Originally, a number of Democrats told me that they feared that such a ticket would siphon more votes from Biden than from Trump, thereby causing Trump to win the election.  Lately, I’ve started hearing that the Unity ticket may be a godsend because it might be more likely than Biden to beat Trump.  Recently, I read an OpEd which expressed the hope that a Unity ticket would be a savior by drawing more votes from Trump than from Biden, thereby allowing Biden to win the election.

The Issues

I’ve included a lot of links below.  In general, you can find the candidates statements on the issues at: Biden, Haley, and Trump.

Bringing us together is my #1 issue.  We haven’t had such a president since Bill Clinton.  I don’t think anyone believes that Trump would bring us together.  Biden has clearly not brought us together.  If you want to bring people together, you treat your former opponent with respect.  I’ve never seen a president deal with his predecessor with such one-sided disdain as has Biden.  I understand that many Biden supporters consider that to be appropriate, but it does not bring us together.  Consider:

·        Biden refused to acknowledge that, under Trump’s administration, the COVID vaccine was developed in record time, a huge boost to our recovery during the Biden administration.

·        Biden continued Trump policies (e.g., tariffs) without crediting Trump.

Biden and the Democrats say they support democracy, but neither political party supports democracy.  That’s a big problem and spurs my support for ’No Labels’ and various election reforms.

Biden has appointed and nominated extremists to government positions.  In my blog, I commented on only one of the extreme candidates he has put forward: Nusrat Choudhury should not be confirmed as a federal judge.  (As Wikipedia documents, she was confirmed by a very narrow partisan vote.)

To lead us effectively and bring us together, we need a leader with integrity and character.  I’ve never felt that Trump has either characteristic (we found a 1988 family video in that regard) and I imagine that both Trump and Biden voters understand why I dislike Trump (you can see the above blogs). 

I used to think that Biden had those characteristics, but I no longer do.  “Power corrupts” seems clearly to have befallen Biden.  In this analysis, I point out Biden’s consistency in blaming other people for his mistakes.  Voting Laws and Voter Suppression exposes shameful behavior by Biden.  Although I still don’t think he benefited meaningfully from Hunter Biden’s trafficking in the Biden family name, Biden has clearly mishandled the situation.  Not only did he fail to thwart Hunter’s activities, he seems to have aided Hunter.  Even if he was not involved in generating the false claim that Hunter’s laptop was part of a Russian disinformation campaign, he did nothing to counter what he knew to be a false claim.  There are other examples.

On the other hand, ‘No Labels’ is all about bringing us together.  Nikki Haley grew up as the only Indian family in her neighborhood, learning how to get along with people who were originally hostile to her.

Foreign policy.  It seemed that it would be easy to improve upon Trump’s foreign policy, but Biden’s has been much worse.  Yet, ironically, in the next 4 years, Trump’s foreign policy may be worse than Biden’s.

Trump’s foreign policy involved speaking disgustingly favorably about our enemies, being unduly influenced if they catered to his ego, offending our allies and creating counter-productive tariff walls.  Nonetheless, as I observed at the time, he acted more stronger against Russia than did Obama and he embraced Israel, producing real progress with the Abraham Accords.  He pressured NATO members to increase defense spending.

Biden’s departure from Afghanistan was horrendous, and he falsely pointed fingers at his staff, the Afghanis and Trump, rather than admit his failures.  His Afghanistan fiasco is one of the many ways he  encouraged Putin to attack Ukraine. I continue to believe that Putin would not have attacked Ukraine in 2020 if Trump had been re-elected.

For way too long, Biden refused strong support for Ukraine.  How crazy is it to tell a country that they can defend themselves only by destroying their land, without attacking their enemy?  Biden allowed Russia to dig in and establish their defenses, then, in characteristic Biden fashion, he blamed Ukraine for having difficulty ousting an entrenched enemy.

Trump proposes to abandon Ukraine.  Ironically, having been so disappointed by Biden’s approach to Ukraine, I now must favor him over Trump on this issue.  As John Bolton wrote (WSJ, 2024-02-01, p.A19) “President Biden’s aid to Ukraine has been piecemeal and nonstrategic, but it is almost inevitable that a second-term Trump policy on Ukraine would favor Moscow.”

John Bolton (WSJ, 2024-02-01, p.A19) wrote, among other comments that demonstrate that Trump is unfit “He invariably equated good personal relations with foreign leaders to good relations between countries.”  I think Bolton was holding back.  It would be more accurate to say “He invariably equated SUPERFICIAL good personal relations with foreign leaders to good relations between countries.”  In fact, all a person has to do is to speak positively toward Trump.

Robert Gates (Secretary of Defense under both Bush and Obana) wrote “I think he [Biden] has been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades.”  At the time, Gates lauded Biden’s character and integrity.  I thought the same at the time, but as president, Biden has shown a great lack of character and integrity.

Ironically, Biden is being criticized by his handling of the Hamas-Israel conflict.  I think he has done a good job in a very difficult situation in which our ally, Israel has made a serious mistake.  It is important to understand, however, that the fundamental Palestinian problem is that one side has continually rejected peace as a solution.  (I stopped supporting Biden when he chose not to veto a UN resolutions that failed to include a release of the hostages and when he demanded that Israel put the safety of Gazan citizens above all else.  Clearly, you can't wage war if your enemies' civilians lives are your #1 priority, particularly when your opponent uses human shields.) 

Earlier, I felt Biden was too negative toward Israel.  His interference relative to Israel’s internal Supreme Court issue exposed the lack of character and integrity he has displayed in office.  The Israeli Supreme Court has an unreasonable amount of power, much stronger than the US Supreme Court.  Yet, Biden somehow argues that the Israeli Supreme Court’s power should not be restrained, while he supports reducing the power of the US Supreme Court.  The consistency in his argument is not principle.  It is that the Israeli Supreme Court is currently leftist while the US Supreme Court is rightist.  Biden supports the left at the expense of principle.

No Labels says (rather vaguely) “It’s in America’s interest to work with our allies to advance our mutual interests”.

Nikki Haley has been strongly supportive of Ukraine, Taiwan and Israel.

 

Environment:  Overall, Biden’s environmental record is superior to Trump’s.  Many environmental issues need federal management. 

Nonetheless, I disagree with Biden on some process and policy issues.  I fault both Republican and Democratic presidents for absorbing power through presidential executive orders and, the Democrats for administrative law-making.  Separation of Powers is very important to me.  I also don’t like it when the federal government picks “winners”, preferring incentives that encourage citizens and businesses to invest in improving the environment.  The cost of the Inflation Reduction Act (is that a misnomer?) will be greatly inflated by the administration’s regulatory rules.  The Chevron Doctrine  encourages the Executive branch to usurp the responsibilities of both Congress and the Supreme Court.

Energy policy: Although Trump was not as supportive of renewable energy as I would like, renewables did advance during his tenure (as shown several pages below).  Prior to entering office, Biden said his position was “No ability for the oil industry to continue to drill.  Period.”  He also said “no new fracking” and “no new oil and gas permits on public land”.  While in office, he said “we're going to be shutting [coal] plants down all across America”.  While he emphasized that he would be combative toward coal, oil, and gas, I think we need time to migrate to renewable energy and should value traditional sources of power in the interim.

After putting the industry on notice that he wanted to put them out of business, Biden, as always, blamed those sources for energy shortages.  He turned to Venezuela, Iran and Saudi Arabia to boost production.  What sense does this make?

1.      Attacking fuel sources makes our energy supply less stable, hurts our economy and costs jobs.

2.      He made concessions to Venezuela and Iran, helping terrible regimes.

3.      He made our allies dependent on our enemies for energy.

4.      He increased worldwide pollution significantly because those foreign sources develop energy in much less environmental fashion than we do.

I strongly support developing renewable energy, albeit in a more balanced fashion.

Liquid Natural Gas (LNG).  As noted above, Obama embraced LNG exports for geopolitical reasons.  He also thought that exported LNG was more environmentally friendly than local coal.  

Trump, of course, embraced LNG exports, approving permits on average in 7 weeks. 

Biden averaged 11 months to approve until, in January 2024, he halted approvals to reconsider whether to allow them.  This article gives the anti-LNG-export argument, that it is dirtier than local coal (because of methane emissions and shipping emissions), will raise natural gas prices for US residents (by diverting natural gas to LNG rather than increasing natural gas production) and will replace renewables (countries that invest in LNG facilities won’t want to convert to renewables).

My main take-away is that we make major decisions based on unreliable studies, as this article argues regarding studies under Obama and Trump.  Sadly, the current studies also might be wrong.  Biden’s decision to review makes sense but the activists won’t accept any conclusion other than no new approvals.  It is troubling to me that they liken this campaign to the Keystone XL Pipeline which was a colossal example of Federal perfidy.

Opponents suggest that, if we don’t export LNG, countries will develop more renewable resources.  Did they consider that countries may build the facilities anyway, to receive LNG from Russia (which had record LNG exports in December), Iran and Qatar, our biggest LNG competitors?

Electric cars: I have had alternative fuel vehicles for more than 30 years, since successfully pushing Transamerica for its first company car that could operate on methanol.  But I am concerned that our heavy-handed pressure to move to electric cars is driven more by an effort to claim environmental leadership than by sound policy.  It is not clear that we have properly evaluated the relative advantages and disadvantages of hybrids vs. all-electric cars.  The reliance of electric vehicles on rare earth minerals brings a lot of environmental, economic and security concerns.

No Labels supports an “all of the above” energy policy and developing domestic and friendly sources of rare earth minerals so we can build clean energy industries.

Haley acknowledges that climate change is real and caused by humans.  She has supported a broad energy proposal (including nuclear and offshore drilling in South Carolina) but has expressed concern that green energy subsidies were misdirected and that 2035 electric car mandates are unwise due to the rare earth minerals and the impact of the heavy weight of electric cars on our roads.

Education is critical to our future in general and to improve standard of living for our lower-income families.  (I am more concerned about improving their standard of living than about narrowing the range of incomes in the USA, although I strongly support graduated income taxes.)  As explained at education, I have many ideas regarding how we can improve education in the United States.

We talk a lot about systemic racism and white privilege in the USA.  Although I agree those exist, I generally think they are exaggerated.  However, where systemic racism seems most blatant and to have the most aggregate harm is in our public school system.  We’ve known for more than 30 years that public charter are effective, but the teachers’ unions fight them tooth-and-nail because the teachers’ unions don’t like being embarrassed that non-union schools have better results and because the teachers’ unions want to hoard power.  The Democrats (Obama somewhat less so) and Biden, in particular, are wedded to the teachers’ unions rather than to education.  Biden says he is not a fan of charter schools because they take away the options available and money for public schools.  He ignores that charter schools are often public schools and that they use less money per pupil than other public schools.

No Labels position is “No child should be forced to go to a failing school.”  No Labels supports a goal of opening 10,000 public charter schools in the next 10 years.

Nikki Haley has often spoken out in favor of charter schools and improved education for less-affluent and rural children.  She also has favored more local and parental control of schools and more vocational training.

Immigration is clearly a major issue.  My Immigration blog expresses my opinions on immigration.  Trump did too much deportation.  Separating children and parents at the border was also wrong.  Unfortunately, Biden signaled that he favored open borders helping to stimulate a flood.  Now he is seeking Congressional support to “empower” him to take action.  How often has he, as president, felt a need for Congressional support.  By seeking Congressional support, he is trying to convey the impression that his mishandling of the border crisis was not his fault.  I don’t disagree that Congress has failed to do its job, but that does not explain Biden’s poor handling of immigration.  At various times, each party has wanted to kill any possible immigration agreements because they wanted immigration to be a political campaign issue. Shame on them!

No Labels position is: secure the border; attract hardworking taxpayers; protect the Dreamers.

Nikki Haley was an immigrant child; she knows what it is like.  She is compassionate and respectful of illegal as well as legal immigrants but feels that we need to protect our borders and should consider merit in selecting among potential immigrants.  She would defund sanctuary cities.

The economy.  For several reasons, I tend not to vote based on the current economy.  The economy runs on broad cycles where actions have intermediate-term or long-term impact.  As a result, the “current” economy often reflects the actions of previous presidents as much or more than the actions of the current president.  Furthermore, the economy often reflects factors independent of the government.  For example, some factors that boosted the stock market during Obama’s presidency were:

·        Fracking, which he actively opposed (but he then embraced resultant LNG exports after Russia invaded Ukraine, exports which would not have been possible had he succeeded in blocking fracking).

·        Drones, which he felt should be restricted until regulations were created.  According to this site,  Congress passed a law in 2012, which allowed the FAA to approve limited commercial operations and individual private pilots on a case-by-case basis.  Operators had to be licensed to fly full-sized aircraft and have a Class 2 Medical certificate, which oddly are stiffer than the standards to fly a private airplane.  It required full integration into our National Airspace System by 2015.  According to a 2023 GAO report, drones can provide “significant social and economic benefits”, but such integration had not yet occurred.

·        3-D printing, which was accomplished by private industry.

According to the WSJ, the USA economy grew 2.5% in 2023.  Of note, fossil-fuel producing states led the ways (ND, 5.9%; TX, 5.7%; WY, 5.4%; OK, 5.3%; AK, 5.3%, WV, 4.7%; NM, 4.1%).  On the other hand: WI, 0.2%; NY, 0.7%; OH, 1.2%; IL, 1.3%; INI, 1.4%; MI and NJ, 1.5%.  Once again, it seems that the President is being credited with economic growth that he is fighting.

The following chart suggests that the election of a Democrat or Republican has made little difference in stock market growth during the 10 year period starting with the beginning of the election year.

 

I vote based on what I think is best for the country, not what is best for me.

The biggest issue for me relative to the economy is the national deficit.  See 10 Lessons from the Pandemic.  Sadly, our political system discourages Federal politicians from addressing the deficit and we’ve exacerbated the situation by pushing more and more issues to the federal level.

Tariff and trade deals are another important issue relative to both foreign policy and economics.  While I agree that our national security requires the protection of some industries (an issue that was overlooked prior to Trump), Trump’s approach to these issues has been harmful.  His claim that he is an expert negotiator has been disproven by his presidential record.

For all the criticism that Biden has heaped on Trump, he has maintained the tariffs, which make the whole world’s economy less efficient.  One adverse result is that USA consumers pay higher prices.  Ironically, Biden says that we should help create jobs in other countries so their citizens will be less likely to want to emigrate to the USA for economic reasons.  Tariffs and less cooperative trade agreements have the opposite effect.

Tariffs have also damaged our relationships with our allies.

The Economist printed a series of charts (which do not display below) to show how various economic indicators have fared under Trump and Biden.  Proper interpretation of such charts requires an intimate knowledge of how various factors impact the economy and what actions were taken.  While I don’t feel fully capable in these regards, readers are likely to find my comments, which differ in some respects from The Economist, to be interesting.

When looking at Trump’s record, it is important to look at his first three years, recognizing that the COVID pandemic created an extremely unusual situation which required deviations from his normal approach.  (My blog, 10 Lessons from the Pandemic, supports the responsive spending in the Trump administration, but not the continued deficits under the Biden administration.).

---

image: the economist

The inflation rate was stable during Trump’s term, dipping slightly until it dropped precipitously during COVID (which should be ignored, in my opinion).  The two stimulus packages under Trump were necessary to combat the COVID pandemic’s economic impact.  Of course, we need to save money in good years, to be able to overspend under such circumstances.  However, Biden irresponsibly chose to rachet over-spending to an even higher level.  His response to many issues is to buy votes by taking actions that will cost the Federal government a lot of money which it does not have.

---

image: the economist

Below, please find a Statista chart showing the CPI and real earnings during the Biden years:

Wages grew consistently under Trump before COVID, and real wages were increasing even more.  Furthermore, the lower-income classes saw a higher percentage of wage growth, which had not been seen in a long time.  The spike during COVID should be ignored.

According to https://www.americanactionforum.org/insight/wage-growth-past-six-years/, the growth in real earnings averaged 0.8% between 2012 and 2017.  Clearly, Trump had a favorable impact.

Under Biden, average gross earnings have fallen, largely because of the distortion caused by the COVID numbers (lower income people lost more jobs, causing average earnings to rise misleadingly).  Average earnings under Biden is now clearly a bit shy of the Trump trendline.  Of itself, this drop is not substantial.  But when coupled with increased inflation, real wages are clearly not doing as well under Biden as they were under Trump.  With supply line difficulties mostly resolved, government practices seem to be the cause.

image: the economist

To extend the above chart to include years before Trump, I found the following chart from the St. Louis Federal Bank.

Thus, the percentage employed tumbled early in the Obama years, but then started to rebound.

Under Trump, the rate of growth increased as his policies spurred employment, getting back to the 2008 level before the pandemic.  I give credit to Biden for doing well also, although I think Biden is benefiting from changes that Trump instituted.

I applaud The Economist for using this metric.  In the USA press, I’m accustomed to seeing the ratio of the number employed divided by the sum of the number employed plus those looking for work.  That statistic understates unemployment when people are discouraged and stop looking for jobs and it undervalues action that causes more people to look for jobs.

---

image: the economist

As per my discussion above, 2020 should be ignored.  In the remaining six-year period, Trump had the three lowest deficits and Biden had the three highest deficits. Furthermore, Biden’s actions have made increasing future deficits extremely likely.  I believe Trump did significantly better in this key area.  Eventually, our debt burdened is going to come crashing down on future generations, and the lower economic classes and middle class are likely to be hurt most.  Our deficits are unconscionable.  As I’ve noted, we need surpluses in good years to be able to afford deficits required by pandemics, wars, or other extraordinarily difficult times.  I don’t believe we can have a balanced budget every year, but in most years, we should save for bad times.

If you look back to Obama’s years in office, you see huge deficits early, steadily dropping to a bit below Trump’s first year.  However, that history also indicates how careful you have to be when analyzing such numbers.  The following factors contributed to the high early-year Obama deficits and to the lower deficits thereafter:

1)     The bank “bail-out” under the TARP program accounted for half the 2009 deficit (per www.usgovernmentspending.com).  Calling those transactions a “bail out” was bogus.  The Federal government invested $426 billion and eventually recovered $442 billion (per wikipedia.org).  TARP was done under Bush, yet Obama looked good when the recoveries came in during his administration.

2)     Obama decided to put the wars into the budget.  I applauded that, thinking he was doing it to increase economic accountability.  I hoped he would subsequently put entitlements into the budget as well.  Sadly, I learned that he put the Iraq war into the budget solely to make his administration look good relative to managing the deficit.  He intended to reduce war efforts and wanted to take credit for it.  Had he planned to increase the war effort, he would have kept the war out of the budget.

However, neither Trump nor Biden wants to address the entitlement problems that are facing the country.  Both No Labels and Nikki Haley have the political courage to address the issue. 

Relative to deficits in general, No Labels says “Congress must vote on a debt reduction plan from an independent bipartisan commission.”  I was a fan of the Bowles-Simpson 2010 plan because it had both aspects I cheered and aspects I grieved over, and was balanced and would have succeeded.  The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities* reports that about half of the expense savings but none of the revenue enhancements have occurred anyway.  The left-leaning CBPP does not favor adopting Bowles-Simpson’s suggestion (relative to social security for example).  The more supportive and centrist Brookings Institution* published a list of 10 lessons from the effort.  “the balance” also concludes that it would have worked.

* www.allsides.com/media-bias/ has ratings of L L C R R.  CBPP has the more left rating, whereas Brookings Institution has a rating of C.  It does not show a rating for “the balance”.

Haley’s opinions on the economy can be found here.

 

---

image: the economist

As I mentioned earlier, stock market performance reflects much more than the current president.  The Lincoln Financial Group chart I showed earlier indicates that collectively over 10-year periods starting at the beginning of presidential election years, it has not mattered whether the Republicans or Democrats won the election.  However, that does not mean that specific presidents have not had beneficial impacts.

The stock market has done surprisingly well under Biden.  However, recent highs are largely attributable to the information technology industry; other sectors collectively are only ~5% higher than in January 2021.  The Biden administration has been blocking technology mergers, so it seems that tech stocks have done well despite Biden, not because of him.

I think stock prices are inflated because we presume companies will continue far into the future (company life expectancy is dropping significantly because of the pace of change) and discount those very speculative earnings with a discount rate that is too low.

The Economist chart looks favorable for both Trump and Biden but is not determinative.

---

image: the economist

Homicide rates in each of Trump’s first three years were below homicide rates in each of Biden’s first 3 years.  The Democrats have been soft on crime in general.  I believe in criminal justice reform including: replacing bail with electronic monitoring in most cases; helping inmates turn their lives around; helping released inmates be able to get a job; etc.  I also agree with increasing the availability of mental health support to reduce the need for police to handle such situations.

However, I do NOT believe in ignoring crime, nor do I believe in refusing to prosecute crime.

Biden may not be responsible for this poor comparison to Trump, but his party bears responsibility and he has done too little to push back against the progressive wing of his party.

No Labels supports barring the purchase of guns until age 21 and universal background checks.  It also believes in more and better community policing and in prosecuting crimes and taking steps to avoid recidivism.

Haley believes in supporting police, prosecuting criminals and investing to reduce recidivism.

---

image: the economist

Despite the criticism of environmentalists, renewable energy grew under Trump.  However, it clearly has done better under Biden.  Furthermore, Trump pulled us out of the Paris Accord; if he is the preeminent negotiator that he claims to be, why couldn’t he have made it better, instead of pulling out?  This issue clearly favors Biden.

However, I think Biden has done poorly, as explained above, because I take a broader view of energy policy and how it impacts our economy, worldwide pollution, climate change and geopolitics.  Furthermore, why not review the possibilities of nuclear power as well as LNG?  I am concerned about nuclear waste long-term storage, but the French seem to be very successful with nuclear power and it is good for the climate.

I think more attention needs to be paid to the possibility that hybrids are a better (or perhaps fairly close) alternative to electric vehicles.

As noted above, No Labels supports renewables with a focus on securing reliable access to adequate rare earth minerals.

Haley wants to promote environmental innovation rather than rush to sell current electric vehicles with their rare earth mineral reliance on China and the Congo and their heavy weight which could be a problem for our roads.

---

image: the economist

This chart shows a 40% increase in three years under Trump, and production now is only 1.5% higher than it was under Trump.  Clearly if Trump had been re-elected, the growth rate would have been much higher.   The key question, of course, is what is the preferred level of oil production?  I’d rather that oil be produced in the USA than in Russia, Iran or Venezuela.

---

image: the economist

See my earlier comments about immigration.  I did not like the way Trump hunted illegal aliens who had led a clean life in the USA, had worked and paid taxes.  Criticisms of Biden’s record compared to Trump ignore that aspect. 

However, Biden’s rhetoric stimulated a significantly worse immigration crisis.  “Catch and release” with trials scheduled years into the future is a disaster.  Biden has continued some of Trump’s immigration policies. Shame on them!

---

image: the economist

Both Trump and Biden rate low in approval.  In today’s world, it is hard to get a good approval rating.  Nonetheless, an inspirational leader who works to bring us together is critical and would get much higher ratings.