Congratulations Barack Obama–A Post Election Risk Assessment

Yesterday, Barack Obama was re-elected President of the United States.  To those of you who supported the President, it is my hope that your faith in your cause will be realized in ways that speak to the higher aspirations you believed in.
For me, it is disappointing that this man was re-elected using the most negative and shameful tactics I have witnessed in my lifetime. To those few Obama supporters who supported him with reason and argument, you have my respect.  For the vast, vast majority of you, who used bumper sticker slogans and character assassination, I am deeply disappointed, have lost a little respect, and say to you flatly, you did not serve this country well or with dignity.  I am so tired of hearing the four horseman of the Democratic apocalypse (i.e. Republicans are either 1) Bigoted, 2) Racist, 3) Uncaring or 4) stupid).  These four fundamental characteristics form the foundation of nearly every Democratic attack.  Go back across this campaign and you will see how each has been used either alone or in combination to paint a demonic picture of Mitt Romney in particular and Republicans in general.  This character assassination may have won you the election, but you have lost the respect of thinking people in America.
I fear for our country in a way like never before in my lifetime.  This re-affirmation of this President has put this country at serious risk that will fundamentally change this country and how we see ourselves in ways no election before.

Barack Obama and the Risk of Disaster from this Election

There are several risk areas that I see.  These areas in and of themselves are neither good nor bad, they simply carry with them significant risk of a very undesirable outcomes.  So, here are my predictions for the next four years and beyond that, if realized, will lead to irrevocable steps that will transform this country from a land of opportunity to one of increasing government servitude and European Style Socialism.

Health Care

Mr. Obama has achieved the most sweeping health care reforms since the passage of Medicare and Medicaid in 1965. The reform law takes a big step toward universal health coverage, a final piece in the social contract.  With his re-election, there will be no stopping this flawed entitlement.  It carries a great risk that there will be a drive to bring about universal health care coverage administered by the federal government.  I predict it is only a matter of time as independent health care companies and insurance providers are squeezed and more and more people migrate to a government option. At some point, health care providers will become employees of government and the destruction of our economy and health care system will be complete.  This will lead to rationing of services and delays in testing/treatment.
Beyond the impact on care will be the impact on the relationship between health care workers and government officials. I predict that as this huge segment of the economy transforms to a government run entity, there will be a rise of health care service unions modeled after teacher’s unions.  With such an enormous part of our economy dependent on the Federal Government for their livelihood and with a corruptible health care worker service union, we will see the funneling of public dollars going for those candidates that promise the most benefits to health care workers.  This is likely to become the greatest source of corruption this country has ever known.
Further, there will be a spillover effect for all service employee unions and ultimately all unions.  The union movement will be strengthened overall and, as a result, taxpayers and consumers will likely suffer.

The Economy

Mr. Obama prevented another Great Depression. The economy was cratering when he took office in January 2009. By that June it was growing, and it has been ever since (although at a rate that disappoints).  If President Obama is able to implement his economic agenda by hiring more teachers, firefighters, police officers, it is likely that there will be some short term burst to the economy as those workers spend their dollars.  However, it is likely that small businesses and entrepreneurs, that have generally formed the backbone of classic economic recovery will continue to be under-represented in the recovery.  Because of this, we will get reduction in jobless claims but a lower overall economic growth that is likely to stay below 3%.
The president will continue to push infrastructure projects that will again provide economic impact in those local areas of the country where the infrastructure occurs.  However, there is significant risk that these projects will be done inefficiently and with an eye toward making the participating construction companies more dependent on government officials for their livelihood.  Again, this direct funding by the public sector to these private sector companies means that there will be enormous risk of graft and corruption.  It has the potential of furthering an incestuous relationship between the companies that are recipients of the contracts and the elected officials who direct the funding.  When this happens, “public” officials become even more insulated from the electorate.  Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. 

 

The Federal Debt

 

Currently we are over $16 Trillion in debt at the federal level.  It is predictable that by the end of this year, we will break through the $17 Trillion barrier.  Of all the risks of this election, this one is the most predictable and has the potential to wreak havoc in ways that are both significant and devastating.  Here the risk is multifold.  The interest on the debt is non-negotiable and represents billions of dollars that is essentially unavailable for spending on anything else.  If interest rates rise, the bite of this would squeeze other programs in ways that limit our options.
The President’s plan is to propose spending cuts with a caveat that for every $2.50 in cuts, there will be a $1.00 increase in taxes.  If this pathway is achieved, then we may see some modest attenuation of the federal debt.  However, one must ask, “At what cost”.  Every dollar that is taken out of the private sector that is used to pay down the debt is a dollar that is unavailable to create economic growth.  One of the proposals that the President makes is to treat Capital gains taxes like ordinary income.  This would raise the effective rate of those taxes from 15% to something around or north of 30%.  What this would do is to create a powerful drag on investments and make the ROI analysis riskier.  This would have a detrimental effect on capital formation and would seriously hamper potential growth from small businesses and entrepreneurs.  So here again, we see small businesses and entrepreneurs impacted leading to less participation in the economy than in previous recoveries.
The other scenario is to inflate our way out of debt.  I predict that this maybe the more likely scenario as budget compromise may prove challenging with the continued divide of Congress.  By purposely generating dollars through the fed, it ultimately would lead to inflation.  This inflation from a federal debt perspective would be good as it would shrink the size of the debt relative to the economy.  However, again one must ask “At what cost”. 
Inflation is a terrible beast that consumes and devastates all, but particularly those on fixed incomes.  In addition it stifles investors because why would I want to lend money to anyone when my future earnings are being paid back in dollars that are worth less?
Make no mistake, because of this election, we will pay for this debt either with an economy that is slower growing than it otherwise would be or through inflation that would be incredibly destructive (or both).
 

Foreign Affairs

Mr. Obama and his administration have been resolute in attacking Al Qaeda’s leadership, including the killing of Osama bin Laden. He has ended the war in Iraq.
I believe that we have yet to fully realize the consequences of the administrations policies.  The Benghazi attack and attendant follow up reveals a deeply flawed internal communication structure, but worse calls into question the integrity of what is being revealed to the American people.  The current approach toward the middle east and the rest of the world will put our nation at risk in ways that we can not imagine at the present time.  The proposed cuts to the military also puts our national security at risk.
There will be significant risk of an attack on this country that could make 9/11 small by comparison.

 

The Supreme Court

The future of the nation’s highest court hung in the balance in this election.  The President will make at least one appointment to the bench, possibly two.  These appointments could institutionalize several key trends in this country.  There will be key cases that will run the full spectrum of social issues.  Our society will accelerate its drive toward non-traditional lifestyles.
Perhaps the biggest threat will come in the form of stifling free speech.  Free speech is at risk of being reduced through decisions that will impact how much money can be spent in elections.  This will limit our citizens from being able to hear all sides of an issue, not just the popular side.
Another risk will be that in the name of protecting groups from “hate speech”, the justices will likely codify and sanction attacks on most if not all institutions that espouse traditional values.  The attacks on organizations such as the Boy Scouts will likely extend and expand until anyone who espouses traditional values will be ostracized as “hate-mongering”.

Civil Rights

There is a significant risk that under the guise of extending civil rights, there will be an accelerated drive toward an amoral society.  An “anything goes” mentality and the self indulgent will triumph over the self-less.  We will be at risk of having government take a bigger and bigger role in defining acceptable behavior.  Further, our non-government institutions will either wither away and starve due to lack of funding or support or they will be fully co-opted by the government.
By 2016, we will be well on our way to a society in which the federal government will be more dominant, more of our citizens will be at the mercy of that government for their livelihood and we will be less a society in which an individual can truly succeed without the assistance of someone in the government.  This creates an environment in which corruption becomes likely and a despot become possible.  

A Dark Future?

Perhaps.  I do not say that all of these things will happen, only that we are at risk that they will happen.  Will we survive?  I suppose we will, but this country will likely be a very different one than the one I grew up in, more like France or Argentina and less like the land of opportunity we have known.  There is a significant risk to the “American Dream”.  Like Castro’s Cuba, where paradise is just around the corner and that paradise would be realized except for those terrible Americans who are holding back the people, your government will preside over a deteriorating US Economy while your Democratic leadership will tell you that prosperity is just around the corner if we can just get rid of those bigoted, racist, miserly and stupid Republicans.  If you want a preview of that, look no further than the one party rule of Washington, DC or California.
I usually end this by offering the hopeful “Let Freedom Ring”, but I am afraid that bell may have been rung for the last time, so I will simply signoff with….

End

Romney and the Social Issues

Recently one of my Facebook friends made the following observation about the election.  She said, “Why are conservative bigoted white men wasting so much time and energy fighting homosexuality? It may take years, decades, who knows...but the LGBT community will eventually win the fight. They'll be able to marry, have rights with respect to their significant others, to be open without ridicule, etc. So why is the whole planet wasting SO much time dealing with this issue? Isn't it exhausting?”

So who are these conservative white men that she is referring to?  I consider myself a conservative who also happens to be white and male and here is where I am at on this issue.  If the citizens of a state, either through their elected officials or through direct referendum choose to expand the definition of marriage and confer these rights on same sex couples, I will respect the law and its citizens.  I feel that my position is shared by many thoughtful conservatives who like Bill Bennett, former secretary of education under Reagan who said on a Daily Show with John Stewart, “John, why do you keep harping on the gay rights agenda? you won! Its over.  Time to move on.”  This was in response to a brow beating that Stewart was giving Bennett on the subject even though it was neither brought up by Bennett nor did it have anything to do with the book Mr. Bennett was there to promote.

Most Conservatives/Republicans can identify with Bill Bennett.  The Gay/Lesbian agenda is a train that has left the station.  It is rolling and not worth fighting over, there are bigger issues to deal with.  For the most part, we simply want to avoid the question and avoid the inevitable beatings.  Its not as if we think that expanding the definition of marriage in this manner is a good idea (we don’t), we simply are resigned to the inevitable expansion/adoption of this right in our communities and have made a decision, it is not worth fighting for.

Not one major Republican leader actively promotes any policy that would suggest that they would interfere with a State’s right to determine its own laws when it comes to most social issues including the marriage issue.  Mitt Romney is a big state’s right guy and this issue would be way, way down on his agenda of items requiring action.  My evidence for this?  In neither of the two debates was the issue brought up.  I have not heard any major policy speech by either Romney or Ryan address this issue from a policy perspective.

Here is what I do hear from Mitt Romney: First, the economy is suffering, GDP has been growing more slowly for the last two years, jobs are down, people are suffering because they cannot find decent work at decent wages.  Secondly, our federal debt is over $16 trillion dollars.  Over the past 3 1/2 years the current administration has added to the debt by over $1 trillion annually.  Finally, we have an administration who is not leveling with the American people about our foreign policy as evidenced by the nearly two week time frame in which the situation in Benghazi was blamed on a you tube video by various administration officials including our Ambassador to the UN, when overwhelming evidence pointed to this being a terrorist attack.  Why would the administration mislead the American public on this issue for such a long period of time, even when their own investigators were saying otherwise?  Why would our State Department deny requests for additional security made by the Ambassador’s staff?

When I consider the issue of whether Frank can get married to Matt or Lisa can get married to Susie in the light of these three fundamental issues that lie at the core of what a federal government should be doing, the gay agenda does not hold a candle.  And I like Bill Bennett (and other thoughtful conservatives) are begging “ENOUGH ALREADY, YOU HAVE WON THE DEBATE ON THE ISSUE” lets move on to more important topics such as:

• Economic Growth and Job Creation
• Balancing the Federal Budget and returning our country to fiscal sanity
• Operating with a realistic and honest foreign policy that respects our allies, condemns acts of terror, pursues foreign policies that are designed to keep this country and its citizens safe.

These are the critical issues.

There is no credible evidence that a Romney/Ryan administration would focus on much if anything beyond these three critical issues (with perhaps the exception of education).  Yes I know social values are one topic of 27 issues addressed on his website, but I would argue that there is nothing in his speeches nor his advocates talking points that suggest that this would be anything besides a low priority issue.  According to his own website, his top issues are: 5 Point Plan, jobs for Economic Growth, Foreign Policy, Smaller, Simpler, Smarter Government, Taxes.  So the Social Issues don’t make it into the top 5 and is relegated to three paragraphs as one of 27 overall issues.  The threat to the GLBT community is way, way, way overblown.

So your concern for the Gay Lesbian agenda is Straw Man.  Meant to point to something that fires up peoples concerns but at the end of the day has little meaningful substance.  Stop with the straw man already, YOU WON!!!!  Let’s focus on the most important issues, jobs and the economy, creating a plan to get the budget under control and a foreign policy that avoids the murder of Ambassadors and keeps American’s safe.

What say you?

Is it a truly Affordable Health Care?

I am continuing to ask others what is important in this election.  Recently I have been getting the Affordable Care Act as a main issue and reason to vote for Obama.  One gentleman noted that without Health Care Reform, he would not have insurance.

I responded with a personal dilemma that I hope helps put this into perspective and as a Senior I am wondering if I am not alone on this.

I want to share with you something that is being impacted by the upcoming election that affects me personally.  I am asking all of you who support Obama, especially those of you who consider the Affordable Care Act to be the main reason for supporting Obama to reflect on my situation and help me to understand why I should vote for Obama.

Many of you know that I have a form of cancer called indolent, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.  This requires aggressive treatment from time to time and I am looking at a possible bone marrow transplant over the next several months.  While I am not certain what the overall cost will be, I am certain it will be well in excess of $100,000. 

We have been blessed with a good job that has allowed me to purchase decent insurance at a rate that has been fairly affordable.  One way we have tried to manage our health care expenses and to more directly be responsible for our health care costs is that I chose a higher deductible (about;$7,000) and opted for a health savings account (HSA).  We have funded this HSA with the difference between the deductible and our anticipated out of pocket expenses.

Because of Obama's So Called Affordable Health Care plan, beginning in 2013, I will only be able to set aside $2,500 annually into my HSA.  This means that I will be "on the hook" without tax assistance for the difference between my deductible and $2,500.

This leaves me with a dilemma.  My choices would be keep the high deductible, take the 2,500 into the HSA account and pay out of pocket the nearly $5,000 of the difference between my deductable and the HSA without consideration against my after tax income.  This means that at my current tax bracket, I must earn $6,100 in order to have a net of $5,000 for my deductible.

My other option is pay nearly double my monthly premiums in order to get my deductible down to close to $2,500.  In either case, the so called Affordable Care Act makes my health care less affordable.

So when Obama tells you that he is not raising taxes on the middle class, I submit my situation as evidence piece number one that he is being less than honest on this matter.  I am confident that this is not the only situation in which this legislation has not fully represented the costs, especially to seniors who often need the most health care.

So you tell me, how is the Affordable Care Act helping me and why is it in my best interest to re-elect the President?  I'll be listening.