FUNDING THE WALL

[Published on Newsmax]

The solution to America’s Border Wall is hiding in plain sight.

Instead of fighting what may be a losing battle with Congress, President Trump should trigger a well-established, legal, and proven good management practice of “reallocating unused federal funds” to build America’s Border Wall.

All it will take to complete the next phase of the Border Wall is the stroke of President Trump’s pen and a push of a button from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

The simple solution is mining “unobligated balances” throughout the Executive Branch.

Every year funds are allocated for federal projects and programs based on estimates. Congress adds money when those estimates fall short, even if caused by waste and fraud. Funds sit idle when spending is less than expected.

Families face this situation all the time. You take cash to buy fast food and have change left over. That change ends up in a coin jar. A family member eventually takes the coin jar to a bank or Coinstar to turn pennies, dimes, nickels, and quarters into easier spent dollars.

Presidents, since Lyndon Johnson, have funded their priorities mining these unobligated balances through the mechanism of a “budget sweep”. The President authorizes the Director of OMB to request Executive Branch Departments and Agencies to return unobligated and unexpended funds back to the Treasury.

Johnson funded his Great Society and the Vietnam War with the billions in “loose change” lying around Executive Branch Agencies. Nixon funded the Vietnam War. Carter funded expanding domestic programs. Reagan brought down the Soviet Empire. The Bushes fought their Iraq wars. Clinton juggled funds to stay within Republican Congressional budget limits.

Then something changed. During his eight years in office, President Obama allowed $914.8 billion in unexpended, unobligated, funds to pile-up across the federal government. He never did a budget sweep. This number continues to climb under President Trump, who has also not authorized a budget sweep.

Unexpended, unobligated funds are dutifully reported under “Assets and Balance Sheets” of the federal budget released each year by the Office of Management and Budget. These funds are documented, in detail, in every Department and Agency budget under the accounting code “1941”. For the current fiscal year, there is over $150 billion in “1941” unexpended, unobligated balances in the Defense Department alone.

An additional $1.028 trillion remains unexpended among general accounts, and $461 billion remains unspent in trust funds. While these funds are technically obligated, the fact that they languish for years raises questions about their use, management, and relevance.

There is, therefore, a total of $2.651 trillion in existing Executive Branch funds potentially available for immediate reallocation.

In June 2012, to his eternal credit, former Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn issued a blistering report, “Money for Nothing” that exposed these funds for the first time. Unfortunately, not even conservative media covered it.

Senator Coburn documented this in his “Money for Nothing” report:

“In total, the federal government is projected to end fiscal 2012 with more than $2 trillion in unexpended funds that will be carried over to next year, according to the White House Office of Management and Budget. While more than two-thirds of this amount is obligated for specific purposes, $687 billion remains unobligated, meaning it is essentially money for nothing."

The existence, processes, and uses of unexpended, unobligated funds were reported by the few conservatives among Trump’s Transition Team, to no avail. OMB officials were given detailed 1941 account spread sheets, as were several Cabinet Secretaries and their staffs. Nothing happened.

Trump must take control of the Border Wall project with processes and funds that already exist and are in plain sight.

AMERICA'S SURVIVAL

[Published in NEWSMAX]

There is far more at stake in the November Mid-Term elections than whether or not Trump will be impeached, or America’s political center of gravity shifts leftward.

Voters will determine the survival of our federal republic.

America now has over five hundred jurisdictions, including states and municipalities, with sanctuary policies.

These policies are designed to protect illegal aliens from the consequences of the laws they violate. They bar local officials from enforcing federal law and cooperating with federal law enforcement agencies.

Democrats are the ones initiating, approving, and implementing sanctuary laws. They invoke the 10^th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which limits federal jurisdiction and forms the basis of America’s federal system of government.

Democrats have a long history of hypocrisy with federalism. They ignore it when it furthers their goal of expanding federal regulation and control. They embrace it when they wish to either enslave humans in the 19^th Century, suppress minority rights in the 20^th Century, or eliminate the rule of law and national sovereignty in the 21^st Century.

America’s federal system intentionally created tension between local and national authority, but also outlined the parameters of this contention. On March 1, 1781, just seven months before the British surrender at Yorktown, the Articles of Confederation went into effect. The Articles established a very weak and fragmented national government. Its flaws became immediately apparent. Alexander Hamilton explained in the Federalist Paper15:

“Each State, yielding to the persuasive voice of immediate interest or convenience, has successively withdrawn its support, till the frail and tottering edifice seems ready to fall upon our heads, and to crush us beneath its ruins.”

This impending disunion led to the Constitutional Convention in 1787. The U.S. Constitution remains the most brilliant and important document in human history. It outlines a timeless framework for addressing competing interests in the public sphere. It is a universal “rules of engagement” that has served America well, and guides freedom loving societies throughout the world. It balances the powers of states and the national government to establish, enforce, and administer law.

James Madison outlined this confluence in the Federalist Paper 39:

“The proposed Constitution, therefore, is, in strictness, neither a national nor a federal Constitution, but a composition of both. In its foundation it is federal, not national; in the sources from which the ordinary powers of the government are drawn, it is partly federal and partly national; in the operation of these powers, it is national, not federal; in the extent of them, again, it is federal, not national...”

Five hundred local and state governments declaring sanctuary status for illegal aliens fundamentally threatens 229 years of legal precedents and could end federalism. Nullification strikes at the very heart of America’s civic culture and national unity.

In 1850, Democrats ignored Federalism by passing the Fugitive Slave Act. It declared that the Federal Government must enforce slavery, and the rights of slave owners, even in states and jurisdictions that had abolished it. Nicknamed the “Bloodhound Law”, it empowered teams of slave catchers to invade “Free” states. It added to growing sectional tensions.

In 1860, Free states rebelled against these intrusive federal laws by electing Republican Abraham Lincoln. Democrats in Slave states immediately nullified the election by invoking “state rights”, voting succession, and causing the Civil War.

After their defeat, Southern Democrats tried to reverse their defeat by demanding an end to reconstruction. Compromises that resolved the 1876 disputed election ended the era of African-American emancipation and empowerment in the South. Once again, Democrats invoked “states rights” as they methodically suppressed “freedmen”.

Starting with President Woodrow Wilson, Democrats choose to ignore “states rights” and federalism during their massive expansion of government regulation and activism. Republicans on the U.S. Supreme Court maintained the federal balance by striking down many of these federal intrusions.

In 1939, sufficient retirements and deaths allowed President Franklin Roosevelt to reshape the court and establish nearly eighty years of a center-left court.

In 1957, Republican President Dwight Eisenhower, sent federal troops into Little Rock, Arkansas to enforce racial integration in its public schools. Southern Democrats rallied around “states rights” to nullify federal Civil Rights laws and court rulings.

Now, Democrats are embracing nullification of immigration laws to protect illegal aliens over security concerns and the integrity of U.S. sovereignty.

The 2018 Mid-Term elections will be the opportunity for voters to end this threat to America’s federal system by removing state and local officials who are trampling the U.S. Constitution. They can also embolden Republicans in Congress to end federal funding of these rogue regimes. The alternative is a national crisis not seen since the American Civil War or even since the collapse of the Articles of Confederation.

[Scot Faulkner advises global organizations and universities on healthcare reform and innovation. He served as the Chief Administrative Officer of the U.S. House of Representatives. He also served on the White House Staff, and as an Executive Branch Appointee.]

TRUMPING IMMIGRATION

https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6247901002205261824/

Also published on Newsmax.    #TRUMPING

President Trump is aligning immigration policy to our national wellbeing.  His approach is comprehensive and consistent.  It is a welcome change and not a moment too soon.

Immigration is a privilege not a right. 

A nation has every right and reason to make sure those who enter are who they say they are and those who want to stay are beneficial not burdensome.  It is amazing that these fundamental sovereignty issues are debated.

A border wall with Mexico is a necessary requirement for protecting national sovereignty and blocking future illegal immigration along America’ southern border.  Hopefully, Israel will be consulted on design as their walls are the most successful of the modern era.  National Park lands along the border could effectively use razor sharp sisal and other natural barriers to mitigate visual impacts.  Instilling a culture of proactive excellence among border and customs enforcement professionals is another critical element to assure our safety.

Eliminating sanctuary cities and reinstituting the rule of law is necessary for public safety.  Punishing companies who hire illegals must show that laws matter.  President Trump’s strong stand on enforcing immigration laws has already had an effect.  Intercepts of illegal immigrants along the Mexican border plummeted 40.5% from January to February.

Trump’s temporary ban on issuing visas to people from failed states is prudent and legal.  The six targeted countries continue to be chaotic war zones where viable public records are nonexistent.  Bribes and terrorist agendas creating fake identities are a border control nightmare.  Better to pause and plan, with appropriate documented waivers, until integrity is established

Trump aligning U.S. policy with established and proven policies in effect in other countries is a strategic step in the right direction.  Many nations use economic benefit as the guiding principle of their immigration policy.  Australia and New Zealand have always filtered for needed skills and education.  Australia issues visas to skilled workers based upon a points-based system, with points allocated for certain levels of education.  Visas are often sponsored by individual Australian States, according to their specific skill needs. Australian businesses also sponsor visas for highly sought after skilled workers.  Australia and New Zealand have never been assailed for racism or nativism.

In the 19^th Century, America needed people to populate its ever expanding territories.  The federal government gave transcontinental railways vast land grants to incentivize laying rails to link the continent.  The Northern Pacific and Great Northern railroads launched major advertising campaign throughout Scandinavia to attract settlers to turn their land grants into vibrant farming communities that, in turn, used the railroad to ship goods.

In 1882, U.S. policy turned away from economic development and went down the slippery slope of nationality based immigration.  Initially, California workers wanted to block Chinese immigrants to stabilize wages.  Other laws followed, which established national quotas instead of skill-based immigration.  This shift came to grief in the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965.  Liberals, led by Senators Ted Kennedy and Phil Hart, filled the legislation with diversity goals and codifying the concept of “anchor babies”, where a child of illegal immigrants born on U.S. soil establishes entitlement for family members to move to America. 

President Bush supported the Immigration Act of 1990 (IMMACT90), which established flexible immigration caps and made permanent the admission of "diversity immigrants" from "underrepresented" countries. The cumulative result opened the floodgates to burdensome instead of beneficial immigrants.  Immigration policy completely changed from economic wellbeing and security to a liberal social engineering effort.

The 1965 and 1990 laws completely wrecked U.S. immigration policy.  I encountered this bizarre new regulatory world, twice.  In the 1980s, I had to personally appeal to Attorney General Ed Meese to allow the former CEO of KLM and his wife to retire in Florida.  It was amazing that U.S. immigration officials had rejected a wealthy corporate executive because there were too many Dutch immigrants.  In 2006, I had to appeal to the Bush White House to allow a Swiss Doctor, and his Nurse Practitioner wife, to join their parents in America and work for a Washington area hospital.  These happened at the same time poverty stricken immigrants from Third World countries were being welcomed on a daily basis.

Liberals, and even some Republicans, have spent decades creating damaging and surreal U.S. immigration policies.  These policies threaten national security, burden government services, and deprive America of people who can substantively contribute to the national economy. 

Thankfully, during his February 28, 2017 speech to Congress President Trump embraced a “merit based” immigration policy to benefit America’s economic revitalization.  Trump’s subsequent Executive Orders and initiatives are putting our national interest in the right place, in the right ways.