I doubt I’m the only one in the nine counties, who remembers when voters were hyper motivated to write letters or fax their members of Congress about health care,  wars, civil rights or to join demonstrations or sit-ins or wave campaign signs. 

In the 21st Century we text, join chat rooms or at times grab a gun and vest and march off to protect or protest brunch drag shows or library readings.  This Halloween, a man firebombed a Tulsa doughnut shop because it had hosted a drag event.  I admit, over the years I’ve enjoyed and laughed at drag performances. However, straight male adults are not the issue. It’s the T” in LGBTQ,  i.e. transgender and the kids.  

In the last quarter of the 20th Century, the US population began to accept L & Gs as normal friends and colleagues or just regular people.  Federal and state laws were passed prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation; some more recently, added transgender.  A movement emerged later, led by gay parents and others, who wanted their children to gain a broader understanding of human sexuality. Thus, was launched family-welcoming drag shows and book readings in schools and libraries, aimed at exploring sexual diversity.    

And then circa 2015, sex and children became politicized in different ways: most prominently by school boards who began banning exposure, by younger students, to sexual subjects in class rooms,  as well as books addressing them. At the same time, the popularity of drag performances by restaurants and other commercial venues became widespread, profitable attractions.  However, before the recent midterm elections, higher volume rhetoric against drag shows and readings with children in the audience , sharpened. 

Senator Marco Rubio said these events “indoctrinate children;” and Governor DeSantis pronounced them part of a “disturbing trend”. The president of the Family Research Council accused the people who organized a drag reading at a Montana zoo, of “…targeting our children and grooming them (to decide to become LGBTQ).  

Several states are considering legislation to prevent transgender people from participating in pubic shows, regardless of the nature of the performance. Other states are focusing on laws to prevent drag shows or in Texas to stop minors from attending drag performances.  The Texas draft text defining drag is quite comprehensive:  “…any show in which a performer exhibits a gender identity that is different than the performer’s gender assigned at birth, using clothing, makeup or other physical markers. 

I’m told, whether it’s true or not, that President Nixon introduced abortion as a campaign issue, during his reelection bid. In retrospect, I wish he had stuck to law and order and civil rights and violence in politics, following the assassinations of Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy. 

My grandchildren consider me hopelessly antique, but that’s OK. I felt the same way about mine, but  just didn’t tell them. 

In December 2022, I wish our politicians argued and railed about national and state issues related to substantive, problem-solving and legislation aimed at serving the commonweal.  However, my grandchildren are doubtlessly correct, I am terminally oriented to the past. 

Transvestic Fetishism refers to drag performances or readings.  

Tom Timberman is an Army vet, lawyer, former senior Foreign Service officer, adjunct professor at GWU, and economic development team leader or foreign government advisor in war zones. He is the author of four books, lectures locally and at US and European universities. He and his wife are 24 year residents of Kent County.

The current turbulent social, political and moral environment in which our representative democracy exists,  threatens, I believe, the resilience of our Constitutional democratic principles and institutions of governance. The extreme seriousness of the threats arises from: (1) the gradual acceptance by mainstream Americans of violence as a political tool, (2) the easy access to private armed militias and (3) the ubiquitous presence of social media and customized apps. The latter enable plans to be made, actions coordinated and operations to proceed in real time with instant communications involving hundreds of people in real time. 

The violent January 6, 2021 insurrection and assault on the US Capitol revealed clearly that America’s long tradition of democratic elections, followed by peaceful transfers of power, can no longer be assumed. Two of the largest armed militias, Oath Keepers and Proud Boys, actively engaged in the attacks. Stewart Rhodes, founder of the Oath Keepers, was just convicted in Federal Court of Seditious Conspiracy. 

Why the US Capitol? Because on January 6, 2021, members of both Houses of Congress were assembled in the House Chamber, led by the President of the Senate (US Vice President), to take the ceremonial final step in the election of a US president: the acceptance of the certified state votes of the Electoral College.  However, a group of senators and House members used a perverse interpretation of the enabling legislation (1887 Electoral Count Act), to challenge some of the certified state tallies. Their likely purpose was to overturn or delay the confirmation of America’s new president. 

The partisan mob broke into the Capitol building around 1PM on January 6th and then forced their way into the House Chamber. Minutes before, the Capitol Police and Secret Service, had led the  members of Congress to protected locations. Once the Capitol was secured, hours later, the Congressional deliberations resumed circa 8PM and early on January 7, the electoral votes were accepted and Joe Biden became the 46th President of the United States. 

To prevent a future misuse of the legislation, a draft amendment to the 1887 Act will be introduced and voted on by Congress, in December 2022.  

Deeply unsettling as well, were the 2 years of false claims in courts and elsewhere, that the 2020 Presidential Election was a fraud.  It is estimated that as many as 18 million Americans believe and support these lie-based assertions. This extended mass citizen effort to reverse a presidential election is unprecedented in American history. It  reflects a sad fact:  past generations of Americans’ ingrained acceptance of and participation in, our Constitutional democracy, is no longer predictable. 

And violence has become part of today’s deeply divided political reality. 

Does Something need to be Done? 

In my opinion, Yes. 

Anyone who has built or remodeled a house, knows that many licenses and inspections are required. And if there’s a problem with the work or the licensing, there’s a state commission or the courts to appeal to for redress. 

However, political parties and their successful national candidates are elected to powerful positions, from which they determine the future of 330+  million Americans. But, unlike roof repairs, this  immensely important process and its participants are essentially unregulated. There are no comparable (to roof repair) standards of competence or performance and no means easily available to voters, to appeal violations, even if there were any regulations..  

There is one exception: candidates and their campaign committees must submit to election boards at the state or national level, multiple reports of money’s received, from whom (with addresses) and how spent. However, corporations and unions (SCOTUS 2010: Citizens United vs FEC) can contribute, possibly anonymously, unlimited amounts to PACs and political parties. 

The following are suggestions based on vulnerabilities identified over many decades, particularly the last ten years.  Some may be politically impossible, but they are offered for consideration and comment. 

• • Vote Count Act – Congress during their December 2022 session passes the amendments to the 1887 Vote Count Act.
  • Federal Election Commission – The Federal Election Commission is substantially strengthened and given an expanded mandate. Current commission has six members, 3 Democrats and 3 Republicans, a prescription for dysfunction.  The Commission in recent years has been tied or absent a quorum frequently.
    
  • Technology and Security – 
  • The Federal Government should provide the same safe computers, software, and election security to all the states and territories for all general elections.
  • Note: Art I, Section 4 of the Constitution: (1) The times, places and manner of holding elections for senators and representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations, except as to the places of choosing senators.

• Presidential/Vice Presidential Elections

• • • The popular election for the president/Vice President should be take place separately from the general election for members of Congress and for state and local positions. The selection of the most powerful  executive in the US Government and his/her understudy, are far too important to be included in the  confusion, even chaos and inefficiencies of the much larger general election. It should have customized procedures and reinforced protections. 
    • Note: The Constitution sets out no description of the process or timing for the popular election of the president and vice president. It does provide detailed guidance for the Electoral College.  

Tom Timberman is an Army vet, lawyer, former senior Foreign Service officer, adjunct professor at GWU, and economic development team leader or foreign government advisor in war zones. He is the author of four books, lectures locally and at US and European universities. He and his wife are 24 year residents of Kent County.

.  

“We may also suspect that they (majority opinion) suspected that emergency powers would tend to kindle emergencies.” Supreme Court Justice Jackson  (Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer 1952)  decided President Truman did NOT have the power to take over US steel companies.

Few Americans outside a gaggle of scholars, Constitutional law savants and national security buffs could possibly be familiar with the easy availability US presidents have to broad “dictatorial” powers. They have been drawn on by chief executives throughout US history, usually sparingly, but sometimes not. Last year’s January 6, 2021 insurrection and assault on the US Capitol generated, for different reasons, considerable attention to them.    

Wanting to learn the reality and extent of these powers, I did some research. What I found was startling. The President can do virtually anything, if s/he words it right. In past years,  Presidential applications of these authorities have at times, seriously, even severely affected the lives of numerous Americans. And appeared to others then, to contradict citizens’  traditional beliefs in their Constitutional and statutory rights and privileges. 

In general, Americans and our political leaders have successfully relied on the probity and moral judgment of our Chief Executives to avoid misusing these literally extraordinary, latent powers. There have been a few exceptions. 

However, we’re now in a somewhat distorted political environment featuring personal vitriol and at times, brutality. it seems prudent to understand the nature of these very potent presidential action-options when an increasing number of  Americans believe violence is acceptable to correct even false assertions of political wrongdoing. These conditions, unless countered, could worsen and lead a president to draw on these powers. 

Martial Law

What does it actually mean?  Simply put, it refers to those times when an American region, state or municipality or the entire country (only once, during Civil War), is placed under the control of military forces. Both the President and Congress have the authority to impose martial law, because both can assert control over national guard units. And in the case of the President, over Federal Forces as commander-in- chief. There are some constraints (Posse Comitatus Act -1878), but Congress has given considerable latitude to the White House. Governors, within their state borders, can also declare martial law.

In the United States, martial law has been imposed infrequently over 2 plus Centuries (68 times) usually in times of war, public unrest/conflict/violence or in cases of natural disasters. Some examples: New Orleans during War of 1812,  the Great Chicago Fire (1871), the San Francisco Earthquake (1906), the Omaha Race Riot (1919) and the  West Coast Waterfront Strike  (1934) and after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor (1941). 

And more recently, to enforce Federal school integration laws in Little Rock ,Arkansas (1957) and to counter violence in the Cambridge, MD. racial riots (1963).

Habeas Corpus and the 5th Amendment 

Conceptually, the declaration of martial law is tied to the suspension of the Constitutional right of Habeas Corpus (Art. 1, Sec. 9) , guaranteeing US citizens, a hearing and trial upon lawful arrest. Section 9 states this right “…will not be suspended unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it.” 

The most egregious example of misuse, occurred in 1942 when President Roosevelt issued executive order #9066 suspending 120,000 Japanese-Americans protection under Habeas Corpus and the 5th Amendment.  The latter holds  that: “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process.”  The last Japanese Americans were released from US internment camps in March, 1946. 

Some commentators also include President G.W. Bush’s introduction of a torture program after the 9/11 attacks,  in this category of excessive use of these powers.. 

Emergency Presidential Authorities

During the late 18th, 19th and the early 20th Centuries, Congress passed laws giving the president (Executive Branch) considerable flexibility of action when confronting military, economic and labor crises. Prime among them, is the 1807 Insurrection Act that allows the president to deploy Federal troops either upon the request of a state governor or legislature, to stop an insurrection within their borders. Or if s/he believes it is impractical to use normal courses of action, Federal forces may be used to suppress: “insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination or conspiracy that impedes the course of justice.” Last Century, these legislated powers became more operationally formalized with the passage of the National Emergencies Act, requiring the president to declare a state of National Emergency before drawing on them. Once invoked, chief executives over many years seldom terminated them. One example, President Truman’s use of the National Emergencies Act (1950) – Korean War -was still in force, and was used during the Vietnam War. 

These Emergency Powers address more than the military and can include agricultural exports and the validity of public contracts. Curiously, there is no requirement that the powers used, be related to the rationale behind the Declaration of a National Emergency. And there are other laws that allow the Executive Branch to take extraordinary action under certain conditions, without a declaration of emergency.  It’s complicated.

Cyberspace, the Communications Act of 1924 and Twitter

In 1942, Congress amended the Communications Act to give the president the authority to close or take control of “any facility or station for wire communications”, upon his proclamation “that there exists a state or threat of war involving the United States.” Finding a “threat of war” in 2022, is not a problem.

If Elon Musk proceeds to liberate Twitter from any constraints and President Biden or his successors decide as President Trump did, that the “…search engines were RIGGED to serve up negative articles about him”, maybe Musk or other big internet companies should  become concerned about a possible application of Emergency Powers, including a 21st Century reinterpretation of the Communications Act.  

On November 8, 2022 the Midterm Elections will take place across the United States and determine the composition of the Congress, the occupants of various governors’ mansions, state legislatures and multiple local offices. 

For weeks, media commentators and multiple social media platforms have been reminding Americans of the increasing levels of politically related violence and last year’s January 6 insurrection. Many candidates have been asked:i “will you accept the results of the election, if you lose?” The absence of a loud YES from many has led to speculation that accusations of Voter Fraud will surface again as they did in 2020, and lead to similar instances of  mob violence.  

And then on October 28th, the husband of Speaker of the House,Nancy Pelosi, was viciously attacked in their San Francisco home by a hammer-wielding man yelling “Where’s Nancy?”

None of the foregoing has anything to do with the presidency or the incumbent’s special powers. True, but the current political atmosphere is infected with hatred, anger and a growing fear or  anticipation that more violence will erupt following November 8th.  Absent, some “deus ex machina”, it is unlikely all popular political attitudes will substantially moderate before the 2024 Presidential Election. 

And who knows how a new president will view these dormant extraordinary powers after January 20, 2025? 

Tom Timberman is an Army vet, lawyer, former senior Foreign Service officer, adjunct professor at GWU, and economic development team leader or foreign government advisor in war zones. He is the author of four books, lectures locally and at US and European universities. He and his wife are 24 year residents of Kent County.

Recent media attention has focused on China’s military actions and threats against Taiwan and its general bellicosity towards both Taiwan and the US. Some Western and all Chinese commentary blame Speaker Pelosi’s brief trip to Taipei as the provocation and also a violation of the “One China Policy”. Beijing also believes that the West’s continuing refusal to recognize Beijing’s right to recover Taiwan (considers it a lost  province), fully justifies its rhetoric and military actions. But War?

Xi’s likely near term motivations: (1) remind the globe the PRC is a super power, (2) distract unhappy Chinese from the increasing economic and Covid lock-down problems as well as from (3) the tighter control Xi is slowly exerting over them and their lives. Younger Chinese now project a  growing militant nationalism as Xi absorbed Hong Kong and militarily pushes China’s claims on Taiwan.  His mantra  “America is declining, China is rising” continues to feed these feelings.  

Xi is applying to Taiwan, a strategy similar to Putin’s against Ukraine: face it with an overwhelming military force, calculating Kiev/Taipei will be cowed into submission. It didn’t work for Moscow and I doubt it will succeed for Beijing. The question becomes: will Xi decide to invade Taiwan as Putin did Ukraine?

The Hong Kong Precedent:

In 1997 the UK transferred sovereignty over Hong Kong to the PRC, ending 156 years of its colonial status. Great Britain had conquered Hong Kong in 1841 during its Opium Wars with China.  However, the 1997 agreement also contained Beijing’s acceptance of a 50 year transition period, during which Hong Kong’s government would be democratic and would follow a rule of law protecting individual rights. This arrangement was labeled “One China, Two Systems”.   

However, Xi’s patience did not extend to 2047 when the 50 year two systems approach would have naturally ended.  Thus, starting in 1919 he forcefully put down Hong Kong residents’ frequent large,  demonstrations protesting Beijing’s attempt to impose a draconian national security law. In August 2022, Beijing directly, totally controls the former colony, over which it received sovereignty in 1997.  

Xi unilaterally abrogated the 1997 agreement with London, generating loud objections from the West and Taiwan.  As a consequence, Hong Kong’s long standing role as Asia’s financial hub, is ending.    .

How Legitimate is Beijing’s Claim to Taiwan? 

Taiwan’s legal situation is quite different from Hong Kong’s because Chinese sovereignty over Hong Kong was not in question after 1997.  However, China ceded its Taiwan sovereignty to Japan in 1895. 

In 1945, Japan surrendered to the US and its Allies, ending WWII, but the documentation left the issue of  who “owned” Taiwan, unaddressed. At the time, American Forces occupied the island. Later, the Truman Administration invited its wartime ally, Chiang kai-shek, then the Chinese leader, to administer Taiwan, but unaccompanied by a legal transfer of Taiwan sovereignty to China. 

The PRC holds that it was implicitly made, which would have required the US to have claimed sovereignty over Taiwan when Japan surrendered, which it never did. 

If China wasn’t a credible military threat to Taiwan, Ukraine and Russia would continue to monopolize international news. However, most of the 23 million Taiwanese, are strongly opposed to and willing to defend against, becoming citizens of Communist China.

The following historic chronology traces the 500 year sequence of shifting sovereignty over Taiwan.  My opinion only, but China has a very circumstantial, but not a convincing legal case, to support its assertion that Taiwan is rightfully part of China.  

Taiwan: Chronology

• 13th to early 17th Century:

• • • Taiwan “discovered” by Portugal (called it Formosa), 
    • Colonized by Dutch, lesser extent, by Spanish.
    • 1683, China’s Qing Dynasty conquered/absorbed Taiwan’s Southern region into its empire.. 
    • Various Chinese dynasties ruled it until 1895.  

• 19th & 20th Centuries

• • • China lost first Sino-Japanese War and ceded Taiwan to Japan.
    • Japan ruled Taiwan until 1945 when it lost WWII to US and Allies. 
    • Washington asked WWII Ally, China (then under Chaing kai shek) to administer Taiwan.
    • 1949 Chiang lost Chinese civil war to Mao and  Communists, moved government and contents of national museum to Taiwan. 
    • Until 1979, US dealt with Chiang and his Kuomintang Government, not Mao and his successors as the legitimate diplomatic representatives of China internationally.    
    • 1972, President Nixon first US President to visit Communist Peoples’ Republic of China (PRC).
    • 1979, US established full diplomatic relations with PRC and recognized its sovereignty over China, but no mention of Taiwan.  
    • 1980s democratic reforms in Taiwan.
    • 1995 first democratically elected President of Taiwan.

• 21st Century

In 2022, Taiwan’s economy is thriving and features a major global microchip manufacturing sector. It has a large, well educated middle class and a functioning democracy equipped with police and national security forces.  An observer might sensibly ask why Taiwan doesn’t just declare its independence.  The answer: it might drive Xi to actually invade the island, and lead to a wider Pacific war.  This is a fear shared in Taipei, Washington, Tokyo, Canberra and Seoul 

Will the PRC attack Taiwan?

Unlikely in the near term, i.e. 1- 2 years, despite the fact the PRC in 2022 bears no resemblance to the country Nixon visited 50 years ago and appears competent to do so.  It has a number of billionaires, a large, well educated middle class and a nuclear armed military. It’s GDP is second only to America’s and it is an industrial power house with a huge export market.  But, it has problems.

Economic Issues:

The looser domestic grip Xi’s immediate predecessors allowed, which welcomed foreign investment and international businesses, is chilling in the wake of Beijing’s support for the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Moreover, his efforts to control multinationals combined with his expansionist actions in the South China Sea and military threats to Taiwan, have created an unpredictable economic/commercial environment.  The result: a number of foreign firms are moving their production facilities and jobs out of China.  

Pandemic:

The Pandemic has killed millions of people and substantially disrupted global trade and economies. China’s zero Covid policy has exacerbated the pain in China through massive lock-downs of large cities, citizens restricted to their homes, fences erected around apartment complexes and closure of factories, banks and other businesses.   Xi’s Zero Tolerance Covid policy clearly evidences his objective of creating a highly concentrated, strong man rule.  

Conclusion:

To repeat, I do not believe Xi will invade Taiwan unless something unexpected occurs, e.g. a referendum is held and Taiwan declares its independence or North Korea sends missiles into Seoul,Tokyo or Guam and the US retaliates or a major political or economic or natural disaster occurs in the US, absorbing Washington’s attention.  

The reasons are the following: (1) The US and the West have not shrugged their shoulders at China’s militant moves as they did when Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014, possibly emboldening Putin; (2) the Chinese military has never fought a full scale war, whereas the US is seriously battle hardened and very experienced; (3) the Chinese people have a lot to lose now if the PRC goes to war. Xi does not enjoy an unassailable power position comparable to Mao’s or Stalin’s. Thus, he cannot be totally confident the public won’t challenge him should body bags and huge economic demands to support a war, arrive. Such an eventuality could encourage another competing power clique to replace or remove him and (4) Xi doesn’t appear to be irrationally obsessed with recreating some earlier, larger Chinese empire.  

Tom Timberman is an Army vet, lawyer, former senior Foreign Service officer, adjunct professor at GWU, and economic development team leader or foreign government advisor in war zones. He is the author of four books, lectures locally and at US and European universities. He and his wife are 24 year residents of Kent County.

Kent County isn’t the only Eastern Shore county with a declining, aging population.  But, it’s Maryland’s smallest, with 19,198 and a median age approaching 50 (2020 Census) and it’s where my wife Judy and I live. 

Thus, when I began to write about the death and destruction Russia has forced on Ukraine and watched the number of Ukrainians fleeing their homes rise over 5 million, I thought of Kent County’s demographics  However, I know there are other Eastern Shore communities that might be interested in sponsoring these innocent victims for resettlement in our nine counties so am sharing my research.

Brief General Description of Average Ukrainian Refugees: 

They are younger (27-40), many are mothers with 1-2 children, are educated (14-15 years the norm), highly literate (national rate 99%), speak English, very responsible, self-reliant, and are highly motivated to work hard to support/raise their families. And they are tough and resilient, as we know.. 

Documentation:

The US Government has responded very positively to the the plight of these millions of desperate people and will allow an initial 100,000 to enter the United States based on the “parole authority” of the Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS), for an an initial period of 2 years. The entry document is called an I-134. 

DHS has begun to introduce a program called U4U that will manage the entry of the 100,000 parolees. Over the next month or two, it will create interactive websites on-line. The other, traditional visa options are also available, but are much more time-consuming. To participate in U4U, the Ukrainian must have lived in Ukraine on 2/11/22. 

As soon as the Ukrainians are settled in the United States, they may apply for a work permit, but the approval takes on average 7 months to be granted. 

U4U Program Details:

No Federal funding supports U4U, but a number of 501 C3 organizations became operational to  help transition the Afghan refugees or asylum beneficiaries, into the United States. They are now working with the Ukrainians as well and have recruited large numbers of volunteers. 

The U4U program is entirely dependent on “sponsors” (individuals, companies, foundations, churches, etc.)  It is the sponsor, not the refugee, who initiates the process using application form I-134. I’m working with one of the major sponsorship support organizations. 

There is a large Ukrainian diaspora in America, mostly in major cities, e.g  Washington, D.C., NYC, Chicago and Indianapolis. They are actively sponsoring relatives, friends, friends of friends, business associates or suppliers, colleagues etc. At the moment, the diaspora sponsor activities are centered in Frankfurt, KY.  

Those with these direct connections have been in touch with each other since the Russians began to surround Ukraine in 2021 and then exploded after the  2/24/22 Russian invasion.  However, there are many without these relationships. 

DHS’ cost estimate that prospective sponsors must accept and demonstrate capacity to provide, is $13,140 per person, per year.  However, the Department is in the early stages of  setting up its operation, so it is likely this figure will change as it is broken down more specifically, i.e. per child, per teen, per adult male, female and adjusted to geographic location.  

Personal Experience:

I’m working with friends at the State and Homeland Security Departments and large, long-established organizations that have been working in the crisis resettlement arena for years. A tentative target for Kent resettlement, depending on sponsors, is 5- 10 Ukrainian families or 30-50 people  We’ve decided that the best sponsor is one who can offer employment, housing and 6 months of financial support. This argues for a sponsor group, private sector employers, humanitarian organizations, several churches or family clusters..

Tom Timberman is an Army vet, lawyer, former senior Foreign Service officer, adjunct professor at GWU, and economic development team leader or foreign government advisor in war zones. He is the author of four books, lectures locally and at US and European universities. He and his wife are 24 year residents of Kent County.

First Some Statistics:

The US Bureau of Economic Analysis released final data on the economy’s 2021 performance; from October to December, GDP grew at an impressive rate of 6.9%. For the total 12 months, the increase was a very respectable 5.7%.  The GDP projection for 2022 is 3.9% . 

Six million jobs were added during 2021 including 473,000 in the manufacturing sector. And extending, the period to end-March 2022 the total rose to 8 million. America’s overall economic growth and jobs-added, outpaced any other wealthy country in the G-7.  

Current Reality Check:

OK, but with record inflation rates, particularly in gas prices (East Coast average $4.28, West Coast $5.75), it doesn’t feel like a great economy, despite the stats. Why?

There are a number of reasons and the Federal Reserve has intervened recently to force inflation down by increasing the interest rates banks and their clients pay for loans. 

1. US Wages have increased 5.5% which contributes to higher service delivery &  production costs. The end-March Personal Consumption Expenditures Index noted a 6.6% cost hike for an average consumer’s purchases.

2. Pandemic Related Supply Chain Issues, e.g. China Lock-downs, factory closures, worker absences in other centers of export production and difficulty obtaining manufacturing or assembly input items.  And Russia’s invasion of Ukraine (Breadbasket of Europe) has severely limited agricultural, fertilizer and vegetable oils production and export. Exacerbating the above, is the unprecedented increase in prices charged by the ten largest international shipping companies.  Their 2019 profit level was $23 Billion, but in 2022 it is projected to be circa $300 Billion.

3. International Limits on Oil Production has led to the widespread gas pump shock, referred to above. Much increased gas prices are also contributing significantly to current inflation levels linked to shipping and delivery.  What happened?

• • During pandemic, oil producing countries reduced production an average of 10%, when global demand dropped. They’ve welcomed the record profits as demand has risen and are refusing to increase production or doing so very slowly. For example, Shell Oil (largest European provider) just announced its first 2022 quarter profit, a record breaking $9.1 Billion.

  • The USG asked Saudi Arabia and its partners in the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) to match increasing demand with increased production levels. The answer was no because, they said, it’s the Western sanctions on Russia that are responsible for the crisis.   

Economic Philosophies Impact Policies:

No surprise. However, it’s interesting that various commentators describe President Biden’s economic approach as similar to President Lincoln’s. The Republican Lincoln believed workers, not employers, were the engines of long term economic growth. The wealthy Southern Democrats of the day objected saying strengthening property rights of the rich should be the priority. They claimed to know best where in the US economy to invest to increase their fortunes, thus expanding them and the economy at the same time.    

The Federal Government should, in Biden’s view, nurture, protect and train/educate workers at younger ages, because given access to resources and a much improved public infrastructure, they would work hardest to grow the economy across all sectors. The post-WWII US economic policies were based on the belief that the government should manage the economy to benefit everyone, not just the rich. 

In the 1980s, President Reagan introduced a reinterpreted Austrian Economic School policy (fierce free marketers, anti-government economic intervention). His Administration reduced taxes largely for the top 10% of income earners & large corporations, to ignite private capital investment in more efficient production of consumer goods at lower prices. President Trump did much the same and cut more Federal regulations. 

American economists’ continuing concern since the 1970s  is the widening  income gap between the top 5-10% and everyone else. The former are increasing their wealth much faster than the middle (size shrinking) and lower earners (size growing). In 2018 The median  range of middle income Americans was $58, 100 – 86,600  and upper from $126,100 – 207,400.  The immigrant (South Africa) American Elon Musk’s personal fortune is estimated at $266 Billion making him the richest man in the world.   

Tom Timberman is an Army vet, lawyer, former senior Foreign Service officer, adjunct professor at GWU, and economic development team leader or foreign government advisor in war zones. He is the author of four books, lectures locally and at US and European universities. He and his wife are 24 year residents of Kent County.