Back at the turn of the century, as Chair of the Missouri Advisory Council On Alcohol and Drug Abuse, I appeared before committees working-up the state’s mental health budget.  The legislature maintained this great fiction that they controlled state operations down to one percent of every state employee’s time.  Using their power, a committee – thence the whole legislature – might slash a line item from 12.45 FTEs [Full Time Equivalent employees] down to 10.75 FTEs.

Of course, that mythical level of oversight never happened.  Still, it made the elected Representatives and Senators think they accomplished something.

And, even in these Republican times, the Missouri Legislature holds hearings and goes over the thick budget books for state departments in intricate detail.  Even expending just a trifle of money ($10,000 or $25,000 in a $30 billion budget) leads to debate, negotiations and tremendous angst.

Not this week.

The same legislature which traditionally sweats nickels gave accidental Governor Mike Parson unprecedented authorization to seek and spend over $6 billion without further or meaningful oversight.

Also, the Missouri legislature, by law, must pass a balanced budget for the new state fiscal year in early May.  Nope.

The latest plan has the governor calling a special session – probably in mid to late June – to pass a kinda budget.  Instead of detailed hearings and intricate review, the House and Senate will listen to a quick overview from bureaucrats and pull-out the rubber stamp.

Meanwhile, in Washington, Congress gave the Federal Reserve Board broad power to act in virtual secrecy. Politico reports:

The new law would absolve the board of the requirement to keep minutes to  closed-door meetings as it deliberates on how to set up the $450 billion loan program. That would severely limit the amount of information potentially available to the public on what influenced the board’s decision-making. The board would only have to keep a record of its votes, though they wouldn’t have to be made public during the coronavirus crisis.

Remember, the Federal Reserve already acts deep in the shadows.  How they “find” trillions of dollars to prop-up the economy on short notice is pretty much a head scratcher. Yes, they do, after all, print money.  Still, it would be a nice to believe that somehow people elected by their neighbors get to review and question how our economy is manipulated.  Not this year. The current president sees the Fed as just another loyal serfdom obligated to respond to his whim,.

Donald Trump, alas, ignores rules—and truth—every day.  Note how when he signed the latest stimulus bill, he refused to abide by its oversight provisions.  And, his new hobby is firing federal Inspector Generals, even the ones he appointed.

Donald, like Mike here in Missouri, prefers to rule by decree. “I know what’s best for you” ought to be on both their business cards. Dictate, don’t negotiate. If it works for Vladimir Putin or Recep Erdağon it ought to work for Trump and Parson.

Too bad it is working.

For decades, historians have charted the move towards an imperial presidency in this country. Yet it continues. And, Missouri governors of both parties have yanked more power to their office—the disposal of Eric Greitens being the rare exception to that trend.

My fear?  When COVID 19 heads to the history books, the extra control seized by government executives “during the emergency” won’t go away. Kind of like today’s Federal Assembly in Russia.  What began almost 30 years ago as a true parliament has reverted to the old Supreme Soviet, existing to say yes to the tyrant’s whims (including changing the law so the tyrant can rule as long as he wants).

Remember, Republicans elected to Washington and Jefferson City voluntarily ceded much of their power.  Will their successors ever get that power back?  Probably not

The post Are we witnessing the end of representative government? appeared first on Occasional Planet.

In a fitting move on the 150^th anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation, President Obama has taken major step forward in the fight against human trafficking, a shameful practice that he calls “modern slavery.” According to the ACLU:

President Obama signed an executive order that would give better protections to vulnerable workers at U.S. military and diplomatic missions who are employed by government contractors.

The order…lays out new requirements for U.S. government contractors and their subcontractors operating overseas to prevent human trafficking and forced labor. It prohibits contractors and subcontractors from charging recruitment fees and requires prime contractors to take responsibility for ensuring that their subcontractors are not engaging in trafficking or forced labor. It also mandates the creation of new guidance and training for contract officers responsible for enforcing the new anti-trafficking provisions.

Some U.S. government contractors providing services to the military have a shameful history of trafficking and forced labor. Thousands of men and women have been victimized. Most come from low-wage countries such as Nepal, India and the Philippines.

Recruited from impoverished villages, they are charged exorbitant recruitment fees, often lied to about what country they will be taken to and how much they will be paid. Many are left with no choice but to live and work in unacceptable and unsafe conditions serving as security personnel, cooks, janitors, cleaners and construction workers on U.S. military bases and embassies in Afghanistan and Iraq

The Atlantic  reports that under the new order, companies working for the U.S. government will have to comply with a series of basic conduct requirements, which include:

…prohibitions against using misleading ads about the nature, location, and payment of the work offered; charging employment fees; and destroying, confiscating, or otherwise denying access to identification documents. It also requires contractors to pay return transportation costs for employees traveling to take expatriate jobs, provide housing where appropriate, and to make themselves available to inspectors. And it prohibits contractors from engaging in “procurement of commercial sex acts, or the use of forced labor in the performance of the contract or subcontract.”

The executive order furthers the intent behind the Trafficking Victims Protection Act, which expired in 2011., and it has much in common with a bi-partisan bill making its way through Congress.

Many politicians and human-rights advocacy organizations have praised President Obama’s action—even some Republicans. One of them is Republican rising star U.S. Senator Marco Rubio.

Unfortunately, in today’s highly-charged, anything-Obama-does-is-bad political world, some Republicans are calling President Obama’s humanitarian action a politicization of the issue.

My two coins: People who object to a Presidential effort to end one of the 21^st Century’s worst human-rights abuses need to crawl back into the caves they came out of.

The post Obama signs anti-human-trafficking executive order appeared first on Occasional Planet.

In a recent Huffington Post article, Dan Froomkin urges President Obama to pursue a progressive agenda despite the recent takeover of the House by Republicans. How can he do this? He can start using his regulatory authority, his executive powers, and his prerogatives as commander in chief in ways that bypass obstructive Republicans. But the question is: Will he choose to do so?

Froomkin suggests the following ways President Obama can use his power as President to help ordinary Americans:

Do a real audit on the banks and pursue criminal charges

The President has power under the Dodd-Frank Act to give relief to people with underwater mortgages. Regulators could conduct real audits of the big banks exposing the fiction that toxic mortgage paper is worth 100 cents on the dollar. Many banks would be found insolvent, allowing the regulators to dissolve them under new rules, or, force them to write-down mortgage principals and increase lending to small businesses.

President Obama could pursue criminal charges and show he is on the side of the American people. By using criminal prosecutions, he could curb the financial sectors desire to return to the practices that caused the financial meltdown.

Write progressive regulations for the Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act.

Because Dodd-Frank left so many things to the regulators, much of the bill has yet to be written. Through insisting on tough regulations, President Obama could stand up to the powerful corporate interests who are lobbying for a weak implementation of the law. If he was willing to be publicly tough on Wall Street, he would let the American people know he is committed to protecting them.

Address climate change and Immigration

Even though Republicans have taken over the House, President Obama could unilaterally make progress in both areas. Because the Supreme Court has given the EPA the authority to regulate carbon emissions, he could impose a cap and trade system by executive authority or go part way, by focusing on regulations for utilities. Also, he could use the threat of EPA action to help get an energy bill through Congress.

On immigration, the president could reverse deportations of undocumented immigrants that have actually increased under his administration. He could create new rules so that if you were paying taxes, or in school, you wouldn’t be deported, and define a clear path to legalization.

Take on campaign finance through better regulation

The Supreme Court’s January decision in Citizens United allows for nonprofit groups to spend unlimited amounts of anonymous money on campaign ads. President Obama can’t overturn that ruling, but he could clamp down on the abuse of nonprofit rules that fueled the midterm explosion of secret money. According to the rules, 501(c)4s and 501(C)6s must spend their money exclusively on “charitable, educational, or recreational purposes. Karl Rove’s non-profit American Crossroads GPS, that funneled millions into the midterm elections, ignored the clear intent of the law. If the IRS were to classify these organizations properly, donors could be held liable for a gift tax, and have to disclose who they are.

Enforce existing health and safety laws

The main thing President Obama could do is to enforce existing laws having to do with health and safety hazards. He could initiate aggressive civil and criminal prosecutions in areas like mine safety, meat inspection, FDA review, workplace safety monitoring, imported food, Clean Water Act violations and dirty coal-fired power plants. And of course he could bring the full weight of the law to bear against BP.

Withdraw from Afghanistan, stop enforcement of DADT, get tough on China

President Obama could reinvigorate the Israeli-Palestinian peace process by bringing in new, creative ideas. As for Afghanistan, he could admit it could be his Vietnam and reduce and refocus his mission.

President Obama has the power, as commander in chief, to unilaterally stop the military’s “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” ban on openly gay soldiers. Only Congress or the courts can actually overturn the law, but Obama could halt the discharges and suspend enforcement.

He could affect job creation by insisting on stricter enforcement of trade accords and could demand that exporting countries including China adjust their currencies and economies. Drawing a line with China and letting the dollar drop could put millions of Americans back to work.

Enforce existing labor laws and pressure businesses to hire

President Obama could take a stand for decent wages for workers by enforcing existing labor laws that prohibit phony classifications of workers as temps or contract hires, and establishing new rules for government contracting to reward good labor practices and punish scofflaws.

Next he could set up meetings with major business and financial leaders, and goad them into taking some of the mounds of money they are sitting on and spend it or invest it in ways that would create jobs. The president has a bully pulpit and he should use it on behalf of the people of this country.

Hire independent, main street friendly cabinet members

Froomkin suggests that President Obama clean house by getting rid of Wall Street friendly Tim Geithner and Larry Summers (who is leaving) and bringing in independent voices who will aggressively enforce the law against corporate wrongdoers and deal with the very serious problems the country’s facing.

The post Will President Obama use executive powers to help ordinary Americans? appeared first on Occasional Planet.