The Foundation

“Would it not be better to simplify the system of taxation rather than to spread it over such a variety of subjects and pass through so many new hands.” –Thomas Jefferson

Government & Politics

Tinkering With the Payroll Tax

Congress finally reached an agreement Thursday to extend the payroll tax “holiday” for the rest of 2012 and will likely vote on it today. The tax cut, due to expire at the end of February, was a gimmick conceived in late 2010 and sold as an economic stimulus. Yet the extra $80 a month for someone earning $50,000 a year hasn’t helped the economy much. In fact, economic growth slowed in 2011 compared to 2010. At least neither party can be accused of raising taxes on the middle class in an election year.

Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT), chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, congratulated Congress on a job well done, saying that maintaing the two percentage-point reduction in the payroll tax for the rest of the year is “good for the country. It’s very good for the country.” Actually, not really. As already mentioned, it had no significantly positive effect on the economy. Perhaps more important, it will take $100 billion out of the so-called “trust fund” for Social Security this year, thereby adding to the national debt.

That’s not to say Social Security’s “trust fund” wasn’t already an accounting farce. The money taken from today’s workers finances today’s retirees because politicians have been raiding the “trust fund” for years – all that’s left are Treasury IOUs. Social Security ran a deficit of approximately $45 billion last year, and even the IOUs will run out within the next generation.

As for the deal, it includes once again extending the “doc fix” for Medicare – preventing 27 percent cuts to reimbursement rates – as well as unemployment benefits. Republicans saw the Democrats’ election-year trap and caved on their insistence that the $100 billion the government would otherwise have collected in payroll taxes be offset by other budget cuts. They could do little more than retreat, lest they face disingenuous accusations that they don’t care about the poor and middle class.

The argument they should have made is two-fold: First, a couple of questions: Will January 2013 be a good time to raise taxes on workers after a two-year holiday? Given the stagnant Obama economy, and the massive tax hikes scheduled in his outrageous budget, we doubt it. And do Republicans think Democrats won’t blame them no matter when it happens? Adam Jentleson, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), certainly gave the game away during negotiations: “Democrats will continue working to extend this middle class tax cut, and Republicans will rightfully get blamed if Americans see their taxes go up on March 1.” Insert “January 1, 2013” and you have a future talking point.

Second, practically since its creation, Democrats have accused Republicans of trying to destroy Social Security. Rather than point out the farce, Republicans have adopted Democrat talking points. They should highlight the Democrats’ plan to make Social Security into an ever-growing entitlement, regardless of what one pays – or doesn’t pay – into it. Republicans should argue for Social Security reform to go along with this cut, along the lines that Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) proposed. So forgive us if we’ve found a tax cut that doesn’t excite.

Quote of the Week

“Our party firmly believes in the safety net. We reject the idea of the safety net becoming a hammock. … What Republicans have long understood is that poor communities are best served when they’re empowered to care for themselves. The more they come to rely on government checks, the less they learn to rely on their own ability and ingenuity. For this reason, the Republican value of minimizing government dependence is particularly beneficial to the poorest among us. Conversely, the Democratic appetite for ever-increasing redistributionary handouts is in fact the most insidious form of slavery remaining in the world today, and it does not promote economic freedom.” –Rep. Allen West (R-FL)

The ‘Alpha Jackass’ Budget Plan

Barack Obama may be proud of his socialist “Winning the Future” budget, but in Senate testimony this week, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said his boss’s budget is unsustainable: “Even if Congress were to enact this budget, we would still be left with – in the outer decades as millions of Americans retire – what are still unsustainable commitments in Medicare and Medicaid.” In 2011, Geithner had similar observations: “With the president’s plan, even if Congress were to enact it, and even if Congress were to hold to it, we would still be left with a very large interest burden and unsustainable obligations over time.” Apparently, somebody in the Obama administration understands that Obama’s debt bomb will collapse the economy.

Asked about Obama’s broken pledge to “cut the deficit in half,” his spokesman Jay Carney insisted, “It was a promise based on what we knew about the economy at the time. The economy turns out to have been far worse and in far greater distress … than we knew at the time. The catastrophe was far worse than we knew.”

For leftists, history never includes what they said yesterday. For the rest of us, we know better. In 2008, Obama claimed, “I think everybody knows now that we are in the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.” After three years of his presidency, he’s right. Maybe Carney just meant it was even worse than that.

Obama claims his budget includes $4 trillion in deficit reduction over 10 years. The problem is, the cuts are either completely phony – such as not spending money in Iraq or Afghanistan – or nothing more than reductions in growth, and nearly half of the “saved” $4 trillion comes in the form of tax hikes.

Indeed, Obama views tax cuts as government spending. Of the Bush tax rates that have been in effect for 10 years now, he said, “Right now, we’re scheduled to spend more than $1 trillion more on what was intended to be a temporary tax cut for the wealthiest two percent of Americans. We’ve already spent about that much. Now we’re expected to spend another $1 trillion.”

As you may recall, on July 3, 2008 – the day before Independence Day – Obama lectured the nation on “patriotic responsibility,” saying, “The problem is that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt … so that we now have over $9 trillion dollars of debt that we are going to have to pay back. [That’s] $30,000 for every man, woman and child. That’s irresponsible. It’s unpatriotic.”

In three years under Obama, make that $15 trillion in debt. That’s more than $50,000 for every man, woman and child. “That’s irresponsible. It’s unpatriotic.”

The BIG Lie

The day before Obama released his budget blather, White House Chief of Staff Jack Lew was challenged twice on the Sunday morning political roundtables about the fact that Senate Democrats haven’t passed a budget in almost three years. He responded, twice, “You can’t pass a budget in the Senate of the United States without 60 votes and you can’t get 60 votes without bipartisan support,” implying that Republican partisanship is to blame.

Memo to Jack: Senate rules require a simple majority of 51 votes to pass a budget, and for the last three years, Democrats have held a Senate majority.

Memo to Sunday morning interlocutors of Obama administration mouthpieces: Do your homework, and call these guys out on their lies.

New & Notable Legislation

House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) postponed a vote on the American Energy and Infrastructure Jobs Act this week due to a lack of support among conservative Republicans. H.R. 7, euphemistically labeled as a transportation bill, is a $262 billion scandal that’s more reminiscent of an Obama stimulus package than an actual highway bill. It contains elements meant to expand domestic energy production, and aims to use revenues collected from such projects to help pay for highway projects that cannot be covered by funds raised from the federal gas tax alone.

Republicans also adopted a popular Democrat accounting gimmick by removing mass transit funding from the Highway Trust Fund to make it appear that the fund won’t go bankrupt. Profligate spending is expected from Democrats, but Republicans should know better, particularly since this same behavior cost them dearly in 2006 and 2008. Thankfully, common sense prevailed and a number of conservative Republicans withdrew support for the measure when it came to the floor for a vote. Democrats were unlikely to go for it anyway since it contains provisions to ramp up domestic oil and gas drilling, something they have consistently opposed for years. Republicans aren’t going to win public support by acting like Democrats. Instead, they should stick to the principles that helped them reclaim the House in 2010 – otherwise, that may be the last electoral success they see for a long while.

News From the Swamp: Contraception Deception

Backed into a corner by the outrage over his mandate that religious organizations provide contraception coverage, Barack Obama last Friday came out with a “compromise” that’s anything but. In short, religious groups won’t have to cover contraceptives, but insurance companies will, a scheme that doesn’t pass the “Economics 101” entrance exam. Obama’s Chief of Staff Jack Lew stated, “We have set our policy. … No institution, nonprofit institution, that has religious principles that would be violated, has to pay for or directly offer these services, but women have access to the kinds of care they’re entitled to. We think that’s the right approach.” In other words, it’s their way or … their way. Not that we’re surprised. Such a non-compromise is what we anticipated last week.

Of course, the problems with Obama’s “offer” are many. Not only does it showcase a willful ignorance of the market – after all, shifting the requirement to insurance companies means that insurance companies will charge for it, somehow, and individuals with religious convictions still will be required to pay. The administration’s “you should thank us for what you get” tone also shows just how much they believe themselves to be the bestowers of liberties.

In reality, the heart of this issue is not contraception but fundamental liberty: the liberty that says the government can’t tell you what to buy for someone else; the liberty that says your faith is not subject to government approval; the liberty that says your rights come from God and not from government. Liberty is protected in our nation’s Declaration of Independence and Constitution, whereas any supposed right to contraception (which, by the way, no one is telling anyone they can’t have) is not. And it’s Liberty that’s at stake. As blogger Doug Powers notes, “[T]he administration doesn’t have the authority to do any of this in the first place, which is why it’s important [to] reject the entire premise and not validate the effort by accepting any ‘revised compromise.’”

From the Left: The ‘Truth Team’

Reminiscent of George Orwell’s “Ministry of Truth,” the Obama campaign has launched a “truth team” to fire up the president’s base and share his re-election message with undecided voters. The so-called “truth team,” which is supported by the National Education Association and the Service Employees International Union, among others, kicked off in several swing states this week with a three-pronged approach, each with their own website. Attack Watch will defend the president against “false” attacks, which seem to be any statements that criticize Obama in any way. Keeping GOP Honest will in turn make false statements about the Republican agenda and record. Keeping His Word will have the toughest job of all, as it seeks to find good things to say about Obama’s abysmal record. This is the second attempt by the Obama campaign to launch such an effort this election cycle. Upon last fall’s launch, Attack Watch was mocked widely by conservatives and even some in the Leftmedia. No word yet on the color of the uniform shirts for these goons.

From the ‘Non Compos Mentis’ File: The Voting Dead

A recent study by the Pew Center on the States contained an interesting statistic: 1.8 million deceased voters are still on the rolls. Surprisingly, that’s less than the entire population of Chicago, but the sheer number of these and other errant registrations indicates trouble with the voter registration system. The study suggests the incorporation of new technology and online registration, pointing out that the U.S. spends 12 times more per voter than Canada does on maintaining their voter lists. Moreover, 93 percent of eligible Canadian citizens are registered to vote compared to 76 percent here. Our “antiquated, paper-based systems are plagued with errors and inefficiencies,” noted David Becker, director of Pew’s Election Initiatives.

Pew also notes that some of the problem comes when registration forms completed off-site, such as locations compliant with “motor voter” laws or forms done as part of a registration drive (think ACORN) are manually entered into the system by election workers, making them more prone to errors and fraud. They also make it difficult to catch the nearly 2.7 million voters who are registered in more than one state.

Ironically, military personnel seem to have the most difficulty with registration because they move frequently. Yet in an age when millions are on the move every year, the effort must be made to assure an election system that allows only those who are supposed to vote to exercise the right.

On the Campaign Trail: Romney Wins Maine

Mitt Romney claimed two political victories last week, winning the Maine caucus Saturday with 39 percent of the vote (Ron Paul placed second with 36 percent), and, perhaps more significantly, he also won the straw poll at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) Saturday, beating Rick Santorum 38 percent to 31 percent. There are claims that Romney’s CPAC win may have been tainted by his campaign’s attempt to flood the poll with supporters. Whether or not this is true, Romney now finds himself running neck and neck with, and in some cases even behind, Santorum, who is surging in popularity after his three-state sweep last week. He even leads in Romney’s home state of Michigan. Conservatives seem to be coalescing around Santorum, though there’s no way to predict how long that may last considering how topsy turvy the contest has been to this point.

Around the Nation: The Michigan Budget Solution

If the Obama administration wants to find a cure for the nation’s fiscal ills – and we’re not under the illusion that they actually do – they need look no further than the turnaround in the state of Michigan. The Great Lake State had become an economic basket case under the Democrat leadership of two-term former Governor Jennifer Granholm, with unemployment topping 14 percent and crumbling infrastructure. This year, however, the state has a $457 million surplus, thanks in large part to policies enacted by Republican Governor Rick Snyder, a former accountant, former venture capitalist and former CEO.

Under his direction, the state government replaced its business tax with a corporate tax, which has set the stage for a much needed economic rebound. Additionally, public workers’ lavish pensions were taxed, the Earned Income Tax Credit for the working poor was reduced, and other tax exemptions and deductions were reduced. Democrats are already hungry to tap into the surplus to restore cuts that were made, but Snyder plans to hold the line so that this year’s extra revenue can grow into a long-term trend instead of just being a brief shining moment amid Michigan’s epic fiscal woes.

Chicago Corruption

We are shocked – shocked – to report that, according to a new study by the University of Illinois (Chicago), Obamaland logged more public corruption convictions than any federal jurisdiction in the nation, and the state of Illinois ranks third in the nation. UIC Political Science professor, Dick Simpson, said, “For a long time – going back at least to the Al Capone era – Chicago and Illinois have been known for high levels of public corruption. But now we have the statistics that confirm their dishonorable and notorious reputations. … The two worst crime zones in Illinois are the Governor’s Mansion in Springfield and the City Council Chambers in Chicago.”

Economy

CBO on Unemployment and Obama Says Recovery Still Years Away

The bipartisan Congressional Budget Office reports that January unemployment figures, as touted by Obama, don’t reflect the real unemployment stats. The CBO notes, “The rate of unemployment … has exceeded 8 percent … making the past three years the longest stretch of high unemployment in this country since the Great Depression.” If those who are unemployed and have given up on searching for a job were included in the stats, “the unemployment rate in January 2012 would have been about 15 percent.” Additionally, the CBO report notes, “The share of unemployed people looking for work for more than six months – referred to as the long-term unemployed – topped 40 percent in December 2009 for the first time since 1948,” when such data was first recorded.

As for those struggling to find work, one unemployed carpenter wrote to the president lamenting the economy. The Maine resident was probably startled to see the president’s response a few months later. Barack Obama’s October letter only came to light, though, after it was sold to an autograph dealer. The reason? The carpenter needed the cash in order to pay for repairs to his truck. In the letter, Obama admitted that it would take “another year or two to fully dig our way out of this hole.” Leaving aside the illogical remark about digging out of a hole, the admission counters a number of glowing economic reports that Obama is campaigning on, including a lower unemployment rate.

The autograph dealer who purchased the letter also stated that he would give half the profit to any company that gave the recipient a full-time job. Unfortunately, a single job won’t reverse an economy badly damaged after the poor economic choices Obama made in the first place. It will take another president’s signature to undo the damage.

Income Redistribution: Entangled in the Safety Net

When most of us think of government handouts, the first things that come to mind are welfare and food stamps. Yet there are other entitlement programs on which people have grown to depend. Take unemployment benefits, for example. Those benefits are technically insurance, paid by individual states from payroll taxes, but they have grown from a temporary fix between jobs to a more or less permanent way of life. The federal government has assumed the “duty” to cover the costs. Then there is the earned income tax credit (EITC), dubbed by the Left as a “reverse tax” when it was passed by a Democrat Congress in 1975. Under the EITC, those below certain income levels pay no federal income tax. Instead, they receive a “credit,” a transfer payment from producers and business owners who do pay taxes. Often the amount is larger than refunds received by full-time employees.

If you add up the millions of Americans who already receive Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid benefits with the growing group that receives unemployment compensation and food stamps, then factor in the working poor who receive the EITC, housing subsidies and all the other goodies, suddenly there’s an enormous bloc of voters who now depend upon the government for at least part of their subsistence. Statists rely upon that dependency and have spent the last 75 years increasing it because they believe those people receiving government money will vote for them on Election Day. Eventually, however, this system will collapse as is now happening in Greece, Italy, Spain, et al.

Meanwhile, The New York Times is casting as hypocrites those in the Tea Party who rail against the excess of government yet receive benefits. There is an element of truth there, but those conservatives also share the concern that succeeding generations won’t be able to bear the financial load any longer and many are working to stop it. If hypocrisy exists, it’s thanks to the masterful construct of the entitlement state.

Crony Capitalism for Green Tech, but No Money for School Kids

Not only did Barack Obama break his campaign pledge to avoid hiring lobbyists in his administration, but also members of his administration hauled in some serious federal cash for green-tech companies. The Washington Post reports that, overall, “$3.9 billion in federal grants and financing flowed to 21 companies backed by firms with connections to five Obama administration staffers and advisers.” The White House claims awards were based on merit and not political connections, and that no staffers or advisers with such ties made any funding decisions related to these companies. However, the Post notes that “e-mails released in a congressional probe of Obama’s clean-tech program show that staff and advisers with links to venture firms informally advocated for some of those companies.” Readers might recognize the names of some of the companies in question: Ener1 and Solyndra, for example. Both are now bankrupt, and White House aides face possible House subpoenas over Solyndra.

Speaking of federal green energy boondoggles, a new University of Tennessee report reveals Obama’s ridiculous (and mostly bankrupt) electric car initiative could cause more environmental harm than gas powered cars. Why? Because more dirty coal must be burned to generate the requisite electricity to power the vehicles. The study was conducted in China, where there are more than 100 million electrically powered scooters and cars. Some 75 percent of electricity in China is generated by coal, while half of the electrical power in the United States is generated in coal-burning power plants.

Ironically, Obama is also such a poor salesman that he can’t even unload his Government Motors Chevy Volt with a $7,500 taxpayer subsidy. Now he’s proposing to raise the subsidy to $10,000. Why he just doesn’t replicate his abortion/contraceptives diktat is unclear. Maybe if a concerned group of American citizens explained to him that their religious beliefs forbid them from driving government-subsidized electric cars, he would order up free Volts for everyone.

On a related note, our Columbia- and Harvard-educated president is unable to scrape together the $13 million needed to fund the extremely successful and popular Washington, DC, educational vouchers program out of his $3.8 trillion budget. Obviously, our union-beholden president doesn’t want to throw an escape lifeline to minority parents who want their children to have a better educational opportunity than the one currently available within DC’s miserable union-run public schools.

Security

Department of Military Readiness: Obama Cuts Military

Arriving with Barack Obama’s proposed federal budget are further details of his continuing desire to dismantle America’s military. Even though his budget projects tax hikes and more than a trillion dollars in additional debt, the Pentagon faces an actual decrease of nearly $32 billion. We previously detailed that this would greatly reduce the size of the Army and Marine Corps, as well as cut back on shipbuilding and other needed weapons systems. We now know that not only would the Pentagon have to slash 67,100 soldiers from the Army and 15,200 from the Marine Corps, but, for the first time since the aftermath of the Cold War, many of those cuts would have to come from active forces.

Perhaps even more disturbing are the deep reductions that Obama is weighing for U.S. nuclear forces, possibly to numbers not seen since the 1950s. According to government officials, while no final decision has been made, Obama is considering three options for total numbers: 1,000 to 1,100; 700 to 800; or, incredibly, just 300 to 400 weapons. This is an unconscionable idea at a time when Russia, China, Iran and others are developing and/or strengthening their nuclear capabilities. Thankfully, congressional Republicans vow to block Obama, rightly calling his plans “reckless lunacy.”

Yet mere lunacy doesn’t adequately describe Obama’s latest plan, which budgets $800 million in economic aid for countries swept by the “Arab Spring.” During a time of crushing national debt, Obama wants to send American tax dollars to governments headed by the likes of the jihadist Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, which this week threatened to “modify” (i.e., cancel) the Camp David treaty with Israel if U.S. dollars don’t keep flowing to Egypt. How’s that “Arab Spring” working out for everyone?

On a final note, the U.S. and Afghan governments have begun talks with the Taliban, because, as Afghan President Hamid Karzai said, most Taliban are “definitely” interested in peace. Yeah, but only on their terms.

Warfront With Jihadistan: Iran Attacks Israel’s Diplomats

The war of words between Iran and Israel has heated up in recent weeks, and now it appears the two nations are in a covert kinetic war. Two attacks on Monday, one in India and one in Georgia, seriously injured one Israeli, while Thai authorities believe Iran was behind an unsuccessful bombing attack on Tuesday in Bangkok. One of the Bangkok assailants mistakenly blew himself up with one of his own bombs, and Iranian identification was found on what was left of his body. The attacks all follow the latest assassination of an Iranian nuclear scientist on Jan. 11, of which Israel is the widely suspected author. The attack in India was carried out by a motorcyclist, who threw a magnetic bomb onto an Israeli diplomatic car – the same attack method used on Jan. 11 in Tehran, and a strong signal of Iranian retaliation.

In other news, Iran has reported itself ready to discuss its nuclear program with the International Atomic Energy Agency, according to an Iranian letter recently obtained by CNN. This, of course, is straight out of the Proliferation Handbook, Chapter 5: Stall for Time. Iran has used this ploy so many times we have lost count, and we hope for once the IAEA and UN Security Council don’t fall for it. With U.S. and EU sanctions mounting, now is not the time to let Iran off the hook by wasting two months in talks that will lead nowhere.

Undi-Bomber Sentenced to Life

Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab attempted to take down a domestic flight on Christmas Day 2009 with explosives in his underwear. Call him the “undi-bomber,” if you will. He failed only because the detonator didn’t work as intended, causing his underwear to catch fire but little else. On Thursday, the 25-year-old Nigerian was sentenced to four life terms plus 60 years in prison, though he remained defiant in court, randomly shouting “Allahu Akbar,” or “god is great.” Abdulmutallab received training and direction from radical cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, who was from Yemen but spent several years in Virginia. Al-Awlaki was killed by a U.S. drone strike in Yemen last September.

Culture

Second Amendment: No Right to Bear Arms?

Conservatives have long been suspicious – rightly so – of Barack Obama’s commitment to upholding the Second Amendment. Conversely, we know good and well that he’s committed to undermining it. See Fast & Furious, for example, or his judicial nominees. In fact, the latter is the problem here. U.S. Judge Sue Myerscough, an Obama appointee in Illinois, recently ruled on a suit brought by the Second Amendment Foundation against Illinois’s continued ban on carrying firearms in the state. (Illinois is the only state in the union with a blanket ban.) In ruling against the Second Amendment Foundation, Myerscough wrote, “[Although the] plaintiffs argue that the Second Amendment protects a general right to carry guns that includes a right to carry operable guns in public … [the] Supreme Court has not recognized a right to bear firearms outside the home.”

The Second Amendment reads, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” [emphasis added]. As Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story, an appointee of James Madison, wrote in his 1833 “Commentaries on the Constitution,” “The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.” Apparently, Myerscough and the president don’t think much of Liberty. But we already knew that.

Village Academic Curriculum: Home-Lunch Security

“A preschooler at West Hoke Elementary School ate three chicken nuggets for lunch Jan. 30 because a state employee told her the lunch her mother packed was not nutritious,” reports the Carolina Journal. “The girl’s turkey and cheese sandwich, banana, potato chips, and apple juice did not meet U.S. Department of Agriculture guidelines, according to the interpretation of the agent who was inspecting all lunch boxes in her More at Four classroom that day.”

This is not a piece of satire but the true story of an overzealous “agent” of the Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Child Development and Early Childhood Education, doing his patriotic duty to save our kids from subpar lunches. On the surface this story may seem mundane, even borderline comical, but it’s actually a serious and disturbing indicator of what’s occurring at every level of government. In fact, the above scenario could be applied to numerous other aspects of our lives, including health care. The government tells us that we don’t know how to live the right way, make the right decisions, or properly raise our children. They then substitute their judgment for our own, and make us pay for it.

Also true to form, the bureaucrat was not only intrusive, but incompetent. When the girl’s mother and grandmother challenged the “ruling,” a spokesperson for DHHS admitted that the lunch “should not have been a problem.” DHHS also released a statement that it is “looking into the specifics of this case.” Our tax dollars at work.

A Study in Contrasts

U.S. flags in New Jersey will be lowered to half-staff on Saturday to honor the day of Whitney Houston’s funeral. Houston was once a wonderfully talented singer, but became a drug addict and met an early end possibly because of it. New Jersey Republican Gov. Chris Christie defended the decision as honoring not a role model but a “daughter of New Jersey.”

Military families are not pleased, however, saying that lowering the flag to half mast should be reserved for American heroes, those who gave their lives for our nation. Heroes such as Navy SEAL Lt. Michael Murphy.

In other New Jersey news, the state assembly passed a bill legalizing same-sex marriage, though Gov. Christie has promised to veto it.

And Last…

U.S. Customs and Border Protection, a division of the Department of Homeland Security, made an important announcement this week touting their efforts to secure the border. “U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) seized thousands of hair dryers recently that were determined to constitute a ‘substantial product hazard’ under U.S. law, for failing to have adequate immersion protection. The potentially dangerous hair dryers were identified through a nationwide targeting operation by the CBP Import Safety Commercial Targeting and Analysis Center (CTAC).” Wait, “immersion protection”? You mean we’re not supposed to use hairdryers while we’re in the bathtub? Perhaps the larger question is whether CBP will now begin deporting illegal hairdryers. If you see something, say something.

Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!
Nate Jackson for The Patriot Post Editorial Team