Saturday, June 13, 2020

Could Lincoln's 10% Plan Work for Trump

In my upcoming book, "Conveyance," some of the darker nooks and crannies of Abraham Lincoln's presidency are recounted. Most Americans would find them difficult, if not impossible to believe!

Conveyance is a Reconstruction offering largely covering a time period between May 10th, 1865 and Halloween, 1866. The war had barely concluded. The painful memories were still fresh on the countries mind. The setting is Louisiana, where Abraham Lincoln had established his now infamous "10% plan."

Lincoln never wavered from his resolve that there were sufficient loyalists in all departing Southern states to justify representation. He sought to bring them back to the table; resuming their place in the American family.

Lincoln believed that if a mere 10% of the populations of those seceding states might swear a loyalty oath to the United States of America, they should seat their state's representatives in the House and Senate, without prejudice. His was a plan that was not embraced by the more extreme members of his party.

Contemporary application of Lincoln's plan could actually be rationalized!

A case can be made that America is currently experiencing a "cold civil war." We are unquestionably more divided than at any time since 1861! The question becomes, "where is the tipping point?" In 1861, it was Fort Sumter.

Unlike 1861, the divide is not sectional. It is ideological. Also missing is that overriding moral issue of slavery. The sides are decisively drawn: "Faith based National Populism" versus "Secular Global Socialism."

In 2016 Donald Trump connected with a segment of the American population, National Review described as the "disaffecteds." Hillary Clinton was less complimentary in her labeling them as "a basket of deplorables." Unfortunately for her, they voted.

These "deplorables" represent 20% of the nation's population. According to NR, "23% are non-white, 90% have no party affiliation and their average household income hovers around $30,000 per year.

Joe Biden's embrace of open borders, T.P.P.,NAFTA and his globalist agenda directly threatens their previously meager yet rapidly improving livelihoods. Trump is credited with their recent gains.

Immigration clearly falls under Federal jurisdiction, per the 10th amendment. For a state to declare itself as "sanctuary" in defiance to federal immigration laws, puts them technically in "defacto secession." Currently California, Colorado, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey,New Mexico, Oregon,and Vermont are in defacto secession.

The President could invoke Lincoln's 10% plan in those eight states declaring themselves "sanctuaries." He would invite those loyal to the United States of America to establish a loyalist government within their state. If 10% came forth, they would proceed with business as usual, casting the 2020 Presidential electors and seating their states Congressmen and Senators.

No doubt such an overture would cause a stir in those states, as well as the nation. But it would be months before opposition would become adequately situated to stop the momentum. Any lower court injunction efforts would likely be ignored.

Donald Trump would enter his first 100 days in 2021 with a Senate super majority and control in the House. This would allow him to pass strict voter I.D. laws, the key to saving our Democracy. When the populace loses faith in the integrity in our electoral system, it's over. Sadly, we are there!

Trump would also implement a merit based immigration system, similar to Canada's. He would define birthright citizenship and set boundaries for chain migration. With the help of his Senate super majority, he would pass legislation making English the nation's official language.

Immigration applicants would be required to pass a fourth grade English proficiency examination as a prerequisite for green card. This is the current standard in Australia and New Zealand. This measure effectively accelerates assimilation, as those nations have proven.

During his presidency, Abraham Lincoln closed over three hundred newspapers, subsequently interning dozens of Editors and Correspondents. In many cases, Habius Corpus was suspended. Then, as would be now, there were howls and protests nationally.

Lincoln justified his action in phrasing, "We will shoot a simple soldier boy for desertion. Yet must we allow an agitator to incite riots and unrest?"

These measures were considered "draconian" then, as they would be now. Yet Lincoln knew that anything less would have ended in the break-up of the nation.

Critics acclaimed that Lincoln severely "trampled upon" the constitution. Defenders counter in asserting that he did so to save the constitution, and with it, the nation.

It's highly probable that Donald J. Trump has been studying and assessing Lincoln, as of late.

Sunday, January 19, 2020

How Trump Walks Away with the 2020 Election

"Any job requiring use of all or part of an Americans' social security number will be precluded from offshore outsourcing."

Granted, I think the President will easily win re-election. Still, if we are talking about a "knockout," this ploy would likely do it.

Do you recall when former House Speaker, John Boehner asked,"where are the jobs?" His question came on the heels of a favorable stock market report. It was called the "jobless recovery."

Where the speaker fell short was the telltale answer. "The jobs have been sent overseas. There, the price of labor is more affordable."

I shudder when I think about the Trans Pacific Partnership(T.P.P.)" Lauded by Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and Joe Biden, as the key to arresting Chinese growth in the far east, little was mentioned regarding the resulting lost jobs in America. Especially in the automotive industry.

Anyone who has dealt with A. T. & T. or J.P. Morgan Chase can attest to the slowness and cumbersomeness equated with dealing with their offshore help! Sadly,most of the Fortune 500 companies have opted for this marginally inefficient, yet cheap source of labor. Customers are told, "that's the way that it is."

Yet, if legislation were passed, precluding this practice, who would win? These companies would promise massive rate increase. But, how massive? And if these jobs were restricted to American soil, where would you place them? Who would be the recipients? Don't we already a labor shortage in the United States?

Fow now, yes. But, with increasing use of automation, that shortage may be short lived.

Without question, these large companies will protest vehemently! They will remind the country that we live in a global society and it is important to do as New York Times Columnist, Thomas Friedman reminded in his book, The World is Flat:"Level the global playing field; because Americans have supposedly lived much better than the rest of the world."

Like Donald Trump or not, one thing can be concluded. The President is an "Americanist." Those opposing his agenda are generally globalists.

Most Americans are understandably angry with their jobs being shipped away. Not only are they jobs that could have gone to an American, but their foreign counterparts are often slow and vague with limited English skills.

Who would want these jobs?

Call center jobs would be ideal for three groups. (a) Older workers, (b) students and (c) part-time spouses.

There are many parents who are available for M-F 9-3 jobs. That's thirty hours; technically full time. If they are paid even eight or nine dollars per hour, it's a regular paycheck. Students are always available to work off-times such as six to midnight or weekends. As far as older workers, between 62 and 66, a 40 hour per week job, paying eight dollars an hour is gold! Because, it won't compromise their social security entitlement. And, they gain access to the companies group health insurance plans.

Where would you place these jobs?

There are inexpensive states with higher unemployment numbers than the national average who would gratefully accept them.

We are not talking exclusively call center jobs! I recall visiting several Chase Banks during the last decade. You would see empty offices and empty cubicles. A large number of 36k per year Universal Banker jobs had been shipped abroad! Because, a Universal Banker in the far east goes for 5k per year! Where a manager might cost 75-80k per year in the U.S., the cost runs 15-20k in India or the Philippines!

Ever wonder why dealing with credit repositories is so difficult? For starters, they are housed in South America, the Philippines and India. When calling, you are first sent thought the "seven layers of automation." Then, assuming that you're still on the line, you'll be speaking to an offshore representative; with all of your personal information at their fingertips!

It's positively scary!

Identity theft continues to be the fastest growing crime in America. This fact alone should support preclusion of any offshore outsourcing that requires use of all or part of an Americans social security number.

The positioning statement would be cut and dry! "Those not supporting this initiative are unAmerican, unpatriotic and unfit for leadership."

In other words, "go to hell globalists! In effect you are nothing short of traitors to your country!"

When seen in this light, it becomes increasingly easy to identify the "snakes in the woodpile!"

No doubt the President would make enemies with such a proposal! But when has that stopped him?

He has spoken repeatedly of a "rigged system." Here again, it is manifested.