Columnist.
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently shot down the latest effort by the Justice Department to compel Microsoft to hand over the data of a foreigner stored overseas. Amazingly, the government asserted that a U.S. search warrant should carry jurisdiction over the data of an Irish citizen being stored on a server in Ireland simply because it is owned by Microsoft, an American corporation.
Libertarians and conservatives are skeptical of the government's ability to do anything well. But there's one thing the government excels at producing: debt. Granted, this isn't a good thing, but we must nevertheless recognize the government's skill at it. And just when you think it can't outdo itself, our government surprises you with an extra production of debt and deficit, just like that.
Now that Republicans are on the cusp of controlling the White House — fortifying their control of both chambers of Congress — you might think they wouldn't be so quick to surrender to the principles of the Left. Yet that appears to be exactly what some Republicans are considering on a pair of important tax issues.
If most lawmakers had their way, there would be fewer rules to restrain them from growing spending and the national debt. Case in point: the 2015 suspension of the debt limit — the maximum amount of money the government may borrow — as part of a deal to increase spending above the previously agreed-upon spending caps.
With the beginning of a new year comes the hope for change. There is so much we could wish for — peace, the end of poverty or social tensions, and fulfillment for all. The thing is that the best way to get many of these goals is through a tired but so true refrain: Create economic growth. It seems obvious to many of us, yet it's so important to get right that it bears repeating over and over again.
The incoming administration can get started on these reforms.
The new year is a time to make resolutions to improve your life over the next 12 months. This time around, there's a new boss in the White House and the Republicans have control of Congress. So though I usually don't feel I can realistically add big sweeping changes to my list — a tactic often likelier to yield failure and frustration than success — I am going to dream a little and call for boldness on top of no-brainer reforms.
In his 1986 memoirs, "The Triumph of Politics," David Stockman wrote: "The politicians were wrecking American capitalism. They were turning democratic government into a lavish giveaway auction. They were saddling workers and entrepreneurs with punitive taxation and demoralizing and wasteful regulation." For the four years he served as President Ronald Reagan's budget director, Stockman fought for his vision of sustained economic growth and social progress through sound money, lower tax rates and curtailment of federal spending, welfare and subsidies to private interests.
After months of negotiations and political maneuvering, Boeing finally sealed a $17 billion deal with Iran. The cash will buy 80 aircraft to replace some of the 400 outdated state-owned Iran Air planes. The sale to the Iranian carrier is a direct result of a nuclear accord that removed sanctions on Tehran.
Republicans running for president haven't done very well with minority voters, and although President-elect Donald Trump fared slightly better this year than Mitt Romney did in 2012, the numbers still show that the GOP has a long way to go to make inroads with black and Hispanic voters. According to the Pew Research Center, Trump received only 8 percent of the black vote and 28 percent of the Hispanic vote. With demographic trends projecting that the share of non-Hispanic whites will continue to drop, it would be wise for the incoming Trump administration to pursue sound policies that have the additional benefit of helping minorities.
Economic research shows that the corporate tax is harmful to workers' wages and overall economic growth. If left to their own devices, politicians still wouldn't be likely to reduce or eliminate the destructive tax. They only act when tax competition — whereby taxpayers shop around for favorable tax environments — forces their hand.
Many on the left have taken Donald Trump's surprise victory poorly, responding with considerable hand-wringing and emotional outbursts. Instead of simply focusing on the many evils that they anticipate will take place under President Trump, they would do well to look in the mirror and recognize that there would be far less cause for concern had they not spent the past eight years cheering on the expansion of executive power under President Barack Obama.
For only the second time since the early 1950s, a Republican president will wield power with Republicans in control of both houses of Congress. With that incredible power, small-government advocates can't help but hope that this change will bring about good policies and much less government than under President Barack Obama. Maybe.
As this column was first being drafted, voters all across the United States were streaming to the polls to deliver their collective verdict on what has arguably been the most bizarre presidential campaign in modern U.S. history. According to their favorability — or, should we say, unfavorability — ratings, the choice between the major-party candidates couldn't have been more unpalatable.
Auditioning for the title of panderer in chief during this election cycle are two potential masters. On one side, you have Hillary Clinton constantly offering "free" stuff, such as college tuition. On the other side, you have Donald Trump promising to protect Michigan's cars, Idaho's potatoes, Harley-Davidson in Wisconsin, Caterpillar in Illinois and corn-based ethanol in Iowa. But nothing beats Trump's contention that there is a "war on the American farmer" requiring his help to end. The truth is that if there's a war on anyone, it's on taxpayers and individual freedom.
Social Security is the largest single program in the federal budget. The retirement and disability program will cost about $950 billion this year, which is about 23 percent of the entire federal budget. Along with Medicare and Medicaid, these "entitlement" programs are already the main drivers of federal spending. Unless reined in, Social Security and its counterparts will eventually explode the federal budget. Unfortunately, few in Congress — and neither of the major-party presidential candidates — have any interest in acknowledging, let alone confronting, the problem with Social Security's insolvency.
Have you noticed that for a few months, President Barack Obama has stopped bragging about how the federal budget deficit is shrinking? That's because it's not. For the first time since 2009, the deficit has gone up rather than down. The Congressional Budget Office recently released its budget review for September 2016. It shows that in fiscal 2016, which ended Sept. 30, the deficit grew by $149 billion, from $439 billion to $588 billion. It now stands at 3.2 percent of gross domestic product, up from 2.5 percent last year. It's also the first increase in the deficit as a share of GDP since 2009.
As residents all along the Southeastern coast start to put their lives back together after a devastating visit by Hurricane Matthew, these communities will face unique challenges. Not surprisingly, the calls for billions of dollars in federal government aid are already coming out loud and clear. In states affected by storms, government is often thought of as the only answer to reconstruction. However, research on the aftermath of natural disasters reveals that more often than not, local residents are better-suited to efficiently address these challenges than government on the local, state and federal levels.
Congress recently passed another short-term continuing resolution to avoid a government shutdown and fund the government until Dec. 9. It was a small victory for those of us who fight against cronyism, as the cronies failed to use the bill as a way to restore the full lending authority of the Export-Import Bank, whose charter expired for a short time last year. Sadly, it is opening the way for the mother of all crony legislation: an omnibus bill during the lame-duck session. Congress will once again have to consider a massive and unaccountable 2017 spending bill during that postelection twilight period when outgoing politicians are able to push through legislation before the new president and new Congress take power.
Elon Musk delivered a much-anticipated speech Tuesday at the 67th International Astronautical Congress in Guadalajara, Mexico, where he laid out his vision for colonizing Mars. There's no doubt that taming our celestial neighbor would be a testament to human innovation and determination. Today, however, it might be more impressive if Musk could provide a vision for how his companies can succeed here on Earth first, especially without heavy reliance on taxpayer support. SpaceX, founded by Musk in 2002, has never hid its ambition to one day enable people to live on other planets. In the meantime, the company has relied on income from the more mundane business of launching payloads into space with its Falcon 9 rockets. Earlier this year, SpaceX won an $82.7 million Air Force contract by promising to save taxpayers millions of dollars. (The bid was 40 percent less than what the government had estimated the mission would cost.) Cost savings are great, but only if they materialize. It's too soon to tell, but as of now, the probability isn't zero that SpaceX's super-cheap launch cost will be illusory, especially if its rockets — and their expensive cargoes — keep blowing up.
