Category: 2020 Election

2020 Election, Antitrust & Trade Regulation, Domestic Policy, Immigration, International Trade, Politics

An American Nationalist Voting Index – The Square Deal

Bob Claude |

This is part of a series examining the issues in the presidential election. To see other articles in the series, click on the “2020 Elections” link on the Home page

Score

Biden -.5   Trump +2

Roosevelt’s commitment to the working man was born of two incidents of violence in his life that challenged his fundamentally conservative impulses. The first was the assassination of President William McKinley by an anarchist, which led to Roosevelt’s succession to the presidency. The anarchists were the Antifa/Islamic terrorists of their time and arose out of the economic inequality and discontent that were byproducts of the Industrial Revolution. The second was his service with the Rough Riders in the Spanish-American war.  TR saw bravery in both poor cowboys and privileged Northeastern elite in the charge up San Juan Hill and believed their government owed them a “square deal” for that bravery, which he defined as follows:

But when I say am for the square deal, I mean not merely that I stand for fair play under the present rules of the game, but that I stand for having those rules changed so as to work for a more substantial equality of opportunity and of reward for equally good service.

At the same time, he expected the average worker to respond by contributing to his family, community and country, not simply demanding a handout from the government.

In today’s economy, we need to change the rules on economic concentration, trade and immigration to give American workers a real chance to achieve the American Dream of stable and independent financial security. Biden and Trump have verifiable records with successes and failures on these issues.  

Antitrust Law

The abuses of Big Tech have revived interest in antitrust policy and exposed its deficiencies in today’s world economy.  The problem lies in the fact we are still trying to regulate these 21st century monopolies using 19th century laws.  We learned in the 2008 financial crisis that allowing companies to become “too big to fail” created a new form of monopoly rents by allowing elites to privatize profits while socializing their risk of loss.  Meanwhile, Big Tech was finding new ways to leverage customer data to monopolize the Internet advertising and product sales market.  

The Trump Administration’s challenge to the ATT-Time Warner merger attempted to build a case against bigness itself by attacking vertical mergers.  Unfortunately, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the merger on the grounds it created useful efficiencies, which completely misses the point. They also recently filed a lawsuit against Google over their use of their monopoly power over Internet searches to raise advertising prices. However, Trump failed to pursue modernization of the antitrust laws themselves. Despite this failure, these two innovative suits earn Trump a + .5.

The Obama Administration also had an active antitrust docket and challenged several mergers with limited success.  The losses in both the Obama and Trump Administrations emphasize the need for a modernization of the rules. The Democratic House just released a comprehensive report on Big Tech’s abuses of their market power that could serve as a start for a re-tooling of the statutes. All of this suggests Biden should be given a +.5 on the issue  as well.

Trade

Protecting America and its workers from unfair international trade practices has been an area where the Trump Administration has shined.  They understand the importance of a strong manufacturing sector and have not subjugated American policy to the slow and sometimes hostile mechanisms of the World Trade Organization.  Alan Tonelson of RealityChek has pointed out that the tariffs against China and others have not prevented the manufacturing sector form succeeding during the pandemic without a loss of jobs (see his post from October 19). At the same time, the administration preserved the strategically important partnership between the US, Canada, & Mexico by concluding the U.S.- Mexico-Canada Agreement. Trump deserves a +1 for these achievements.

Biden’s record and positions are almost the polar opposite. He wants to return to the multilateral approach, ignoring America’s unique great power interest in preserving its internal economic strength.  However, he has also said he would relax the Chinese tariffs gradually and only upon concessions from the Chinese. Biden says he would prioritize developing an international coalition to challenge Chinese state capitalism as well.  The latter positions reduce his negative score to a -.5. 

Immigration

Trump’s’ actions to restrict illegal immigration have been divisive, haphazard and often poorly justified on ethnic nationalist grounds. However, they have changed the dynamic and started to limit the use of immigrant workers to compete with Americans (see my post “Immigration – The New Slavery).  However, Trump failed to seize the opportunity to pass comprehensive immigration legislation when he had a Republican Congress.  Because of this failure, he deserves only a +.5 on the issue.

Biden and the Democrats have understandably concentrated on the necessity of legalizing immigrants that have been here for years. They then oppose any real future controls on immigration and would expand the number of HIVB-style visas, thus allowing big companies to use foreign workers to continue to pay substandard wages.    As a result, they deserve a -.5 on this issue.  

Conclusion  

Many other changes in the rules of the game are necessary to give American workers the economic opportunities they deserve.  Mere income redistribution is not enough.   Americans simply want their government to give them a fair chance to compete and contribute; in short, the square deal that TR believed in and for which he fought.

2020 Election, Domestic Policy, Environment, Politics

An American Nationalist Voting Index – Conservation and the Environment

Bob Claude |
Theodore Roosevelt and John Muir in Yosemite

Conservation means development as much as it does protection. I ask nothing of the nation except that it so behave as the farmer behaves with reference to his own children. The farmer is a good farmer who, having enabled the land to support himself and to provide for the education of his children, leaves it to them a little better than he found it himself. I believe the same thing of a nation.

Theodore Roosevelt, The New Nationalism, August 31, 1910

Score

Biden +.5 Trump -.5

The two men pictured above represented different conservation philosophies reminiscent of today’s environmental movement. Unlike Roosevelt, John Muir believed that conservation and development could not be reconciled.  Despite Muir’s famous overnight camping trip with TR in Yosemite Park, he voted for William Howard Taft in the 1912 election.  Muir eventually went on to found the Sierra Club.

The contrasting philosophies of TR and Muir are reflected in the environmental approaches of Biden and Trump. However, in the end, their policy differences largely even out.

Climate Change

The differences here could not be more stark.  Trump’s denial of climate science would have met with nothing but scorn from Roosevelt, but Biden’s elevation of the Paris Accord to totemic status despite its wholly voluntary nature would also have met with his disapproval (see my post “Theodore Roosevelt and Climate Change”). This earns Trump a -.5 while Biden receives a +.5.

Environmental Regulation

The Trump Administration embarked on a campaign to spur economic growth by rolling back environmental regulation, especially regarding climate change.  In the process, they threw out a lot of long-standing rules that provided important protections. For example, there was no need to relax auto emissions standards that were not affecting car sales but reduced our gasoline consumption. The withdrawal of rules limiting toxic air emissions from major industrial polluters will expose hundreds to mercury and other known hazardous air pollutants. These unnecessary rule changes mean the Administration deserve a -.5

Biden would restore both the necessary rules, but pursue its climate agenda through more rule-makings similar to those of the high-handed and elitist Obama EPA.  This would likely be a net drag on the economy and so earns Biden  a- .5 as well.

Parks and Public Lands

Here in Montana and the West, we have a love-hate relationship with our parks and public lands. We love the spectacle and the solitude of the wilderness but resent the arbitrary limits on agriculture and other uses imposed from Washington.  For example, the Wilderness Act of 1964 allowed the federal government to temporarily designate thousands of acres off limits to even some recreational use for decades.  The Trump Administration decided it was time to finalize those designations and begin to release some of the land for other uses.  This caused a huge controversy and became an issue in the campaign. Biden has established a goal of designating 30% of US land as wilderness, which would potentially end this review.

Trump has generally been a friend of the parks system, vetoing an attempt by his Interior Secretary to raise the entrance fees to national parks to $70. He also signed the Great American Outdoors Act, which dedicated $2 billion per year to rebuilding park infrastructure (see this post for more). However, he also has reduced the size of some new national monuments previously established by President Obama.

Both Trump and Biden earn +.5 scores on this issue.

Conclusion

Conservation was dear to Theodore Roosevelt’s heart precisely because he loved America and the beauty of its land.  A true American nationalist would seek to protect that beauty for both the present and future. Trump’s denial of climate change hurts his standing on the subject, while Biden’s commitments to the Muir wing of the environmental movement suggests a potential radicalism on environmental regulation and public lands that would stifle development.  Instead, the next administration should adopt the practice of Roosevelt’s farmer and seek to responsibly reconcile the many competing uses.

2020 Election, Domestic Policy, Government, Politics

An American Nationalist Voting Index – A Strong America

Bob Claude |

This is part of a series examining the issues in the presidential election. To see other articles in the series, click on the “2020 Elections” link above.

Score

Biden -1.5 Trump -1

The aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt is an impressive tool of American power, as is the rest of our armed forces.  However, a nation’s strength springs more from its internal stability than its military power. Without a strong American economy and people, the big stick would be an empty husk.  We would look strong on the outside, but would not have the full range of soft, social and economic power necessary to withstand a sustained challenge.  The issues affecting our strength to do so are diverse and worrisome.

Defense

The Trump Administration has increased defense spending almost every year and has proposed a significant increase in naval capacity.  The Pentagon has also begun pivoting strategy away from anti- terrorism to the great power threats of Russia and China.  Trump also recognized the importance of space exploration and development through supporting NASA and establishing the Space Force. However, the execution of this strategy is still foggy, and the swamp of defense procurement has yet to be addressed. Thus, Trump receives a +.5.

Biden has concentrated on measures to improve service members housing and benefits, which is certainly important.  Otherwise, he and other Democrats have talked about modernizing the force by retiring weapons systems and spending less. Modernization is necessary, but their murky statements on the subject cannot support anything other than a zero rating.

Infrastructure

Trump won the 2016 election on the three I’s – infrastructure, immigration, and international relations. While he made measurable progress in advancing the nationalist agenda on the last two, he has miserably failed to accomplish anything on the first.  It is true that the administration has relaxed some environmental rules that slowed down projects. However, this is not enough to repair our crumbling roads, bridges and ports.  He deserves a zero for this failure.

Biden has a relatively specific plan for an infrastructure program, though it features green projects as much as traditional transportation projects. Moreover, Democrats have made assurances that all projects would be subject to strict environmental review and thus dilatory litigation. Nevertheless, his plan earns him a +.5 for its detail. 

Reducing the Budget Deficit and a Strong Dollar

The use of the American dollar as the world’s reserve currency is one of our greatest sources of international power.  It helps protect us from inflation and makes American economic sanctions more effective, thus reducing the need for military action. To maintain this power, our national debt and budget deficit must remain under control so we don’t flood the world with dollar-denominated bonds.

This power is threatened by our increasing national debt, which has exceeded our annual gross domestic product since 2013.  The World Bank calculated that a debt level above 77% retards economic growth The Trump tax cuts increased the deficit and the rate of growth of the debt. Meanwhile, Biden has proposed billions of dollars of new programs with only a modest tax increase to pay for them. Both candidates are courting a Greek-style financial crisis from which America might never recover and each deserves a -1 for this fiscal profligacy.

Decoupling from China

Our dangerous dependence on China for vital materials was laid bare during the early days of the novel coronavirus pandemic when we discovered that the manufacturing of masks, ventilators and other vital health materials had largely been outsourced to the Chinese.  Much of the rare earth minerals necessary for solar panels and defense production also comes from China. President Trump’s tariffs began the process of shoring up our manufacturing sector and so rate a +.5.  In contrast, much of this unhealthy dependence developed under the Obama Administration and Biden has belittled the economic threat from China.  This justifies a -.5 score for him. 

Political Violence

As serious as the above issues are, they are dwarfed by the increasing threat of political violence on the left and right. A recent poll showed almost 33% of Democrats and Republicans believe that violence would be justified if their candidate lost the election.  The very legitimacy of our democracy is in the balance.

 Unfortunately, both candidates stoked these violent trends in the past.   President Trump has shamefully encouraged white nationalist groups and the QAnon conspiracy movement but acted forcefully against left-wing rioters in Portland and elsewhere. However, his express statements encouraging white nationalist groups requires a -1 score.

On the other hand, Biden was part of an Obama Administration that tacitly encouraged a ragtag group of Native Americans and radical environmentalists to block construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline even after the courts rejected all of their objections.  This toleration of lawlessness to achieve their policy goals on climate change encouraged the growth of Antifa and violent urban protests.  Biden has since criticized the current violence.  However, we need a President who unequivocally rejects political violence of all kinds and Biden’s equivocations deserves a -.5.

Conclusion

America can be strong only if it’s people are strong. The development of strength requires sacrifice and commitment, yet neither candidate is truly committed to that goal.  If we cannot find the will to build and maintain our true sources of national strength, the nation that produced Theodore Roosevelt will disappear into history, perhaps with democracy itself.