The Old "New Deal" Redux

Franklin D. Roosevelt became President as the Great Depression was already in full swing. He had a plan however and nothing was going to keep him from implementing his New Deal with American society. People wrote letters decrying their circumstances with the expectation that he and his administration would elevate the country and bring it out of the financial morass it was mired in. He believed that his New Deal was the only solution. Many people were simply trying to survive and either couldn't or didn't have the available time it takes to express their opinions. It was the Depression after all and people were consumed with living from day to day. Today's current technology, the advance of private computing, the connectivity and availability of the Internet into a majority of households, has lent itself to providing a more robust forum of supporting and opposing views for a vast majority of people. FDR also used modern technology to his advantage as well and in that arena, during that time, he held all the cards. His preferred delivery method for communicating to the masses was the radio.

While FDR had really struggled to complete his education, he was certainly a person with the ability to speak to peoples' hearts and minds. It was this natural talent for public speaking that overcame his own shortcomings since he had no business acumen, nor had he been able to graduate from law school. His mastery of public speaking produced in many Americans a guarded believability of his intentions. Many regular folk listened to his promises with rapt attention during his Fireside Chats and were uplifted simply by his choice of words and inflections of tone and pitch. To his complete advantage, radio was one-way communication. Having this technical advantage allowed him to promote his "New Deal" directly to the people. To further his "New Deal" agenda, he instituted a group of professors from Columbia University that he called "The Brains Trust". This group was comprised of academic people who had proven their loyalty to his agenda, much like the group of "czars" that are currently advising President Obama. FDR needed these people to express his rhetoric into persuasive language that average Americans would then accept at face value and even support. These intellectual ideas, although completely hypothetical, were touted as fact. Roosevelt held firm to the belief, ignorant though it was, that to attain economic stability and social equality, only the intervention of the federal government into the private sector would succeed. Roosevelt believed it so firmly, he set out to prove it over the course of his four Presidential terms. Even though after two terms his own Treasury Secretary, Henry Morgantheau - who was also a close confidant - testified to the Ways and Means Committee in 1939 that "We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work", Roosevelt forged ahead. Decades later, upon reviewing the history of his actions in simple cause and effect rationality, his agenda failed to accomplish its goal of creating a more "just society".

The premise of FDR's "New Deal" was to provide relief for the needy, economic recovery, and financial reform. These are certainly erstwhile endeavors and they are no different at all from the progressive rhetoric Americans are hearing again today from modern Progressive politicians of both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. During those harsh, depressive times in the 1930s, there were many people who were truly in need; the economy had tanked, financial institutions had engaged in nefarious business practices and many people were completely destitute. Progressives jumped at the opportunity to correct what they believed were errors in the Constitution. As Roosevelt implemented his "New Deal", Americans garnered hope for the future. However, his policy did very little, if anything, to truly help Americans across the country. Much of the federal assistance was closely tied to states, districts, and cities that fully supported FDR and the progressive, "government knows best" Democratic Party. Far too many American tax dollars were distributed through his use of "patronage", thereby he was able to silence most of the real and valid opposition against his social engineering experiment. Times were hard, this cannot be denied, however many Americans at that time were also simply unaware of how one-sided the distribution of federal assistance truly was. Historical review of monetary distribution of funds reveals that most of the federal aid went directly to those areas that fully supported FDR and the Democratic Party.

The New Deal was full of snappy catch-phrases and laudable arguments that spoke directly to the emotions of many Americans. This same tactic has been and is being used once again on the American public. The recent Democratic Presidential campaign utilized our modern-day equivalent of radio; the Internet. It worked quite well for them, just as the radio worked for FDR and his New Deal. Progressives, just like FDR, fully believe that the federal government is entitled, not limited, and has the rights beyond the Constitution that enables the government to legislate in all areas of job creation, education, the economy and now ultimately, health-care. However, this is completely contradictory to the simple but profound wording of our U.S. Constitution and dismisses the Bill of Rights. These two founding documents of the United States were drafted and written in direct response to the insidious pervasiveness of a non-representative government mandating to each individual what types of taxes they must pay, to which religion was sanctioned by the government, to how justice would be derived and to whom would govern the Colonies through appointments rather than votes. These very real issues have now risen again only they have now come from within our United States branches of government and not from a monarchical government reigning from across an ocean.

The Internet, for now, is neutral, as was the radio when it was the new method of communicating with the multitudes. The World Wide Web was utilized to its fullest potential in our most recent Presidential election. It worked and worked well. Now, however, those who are principled in the fundamentals of freedom are the very people who have taken to the Internet, the radio, the newspapers and to their neighbors to have their voice be heard, not ignored. FDR was able to ignore dissent by silencing his critics in ways that simply cannot be accomplished in our now modern times. Today, many politicians ignore, dismiss and even vilify those Americans who believe in these personal fundamental rights. They do so at the peril of losing their political positions because the "Sleeping Giant" is now fully awake. For those who are still dreaming of a government-mandated Utopian society, be forewarned; life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are fundamental rights, not civil rights and Americans can recognize the differences. Americans do not want a New Deal Redux!

Intolerable Acts 2008-2009

The Coercive/Intolerable Acts - Then and Now

Prior to the American Revolution, Britain's Parliament enacted sweeping legislation that was intended to not only restore order and function to the Massachusetts colony after the Boston Tea Party, but to also reinforce Britain's jurisdiction and rule of law over the rebellious American colonies. English governance believed that these acts, although criticized by some, would dampen the defiance of the colonies. The actions of these British laws caused the Port of Boston to be closed until payment was rendered to the East India Trading Company. This act was designed to compensate this shipping company for the tea they lost when the Bostonians threw it into the Harbor. The Quartering Act required regular folks to house and feed British soldiers whenever and where-ever the soldiers desired, even by force. The Administration of Justice Act allowed British who were governing or enforcing the law in the Colonies, to be given a change of venue if they were accused of crimes by the colonists (i.e., the regular folks). The Massachusetts Act further enraged the colonists by declaring that government officials would be appointed, rather than elected, by either the governor or by the King. All four of these acts were expected to bring the colonists into submission to the total rule of Great Britain. No longer was England going to leave the riches America had to offer to those who lived there, the colonists, nor were they going to allow the colonists to behave as if the Crown didn't exist. These acts, often called the Intolerable Acts, were the final blow to the colonists and thus, the First Continental Congress was formed and eventually led to the American Revolution. The result of the American Revolution was freedom from taxation without representation, the freedom to govern themselves and liberty for all.

Intolerable Acts 2008-2010

In November 2008, the US Congress passed the following legislation Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 commonly referred to as TARP:

"An Act To provide authority for the Federal Government to purchase and insure certain types of troubled assets for the purposes of providing stability to and preventing disruption in the economy and financial system and protecting taxpayers, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide incentives for energy production and conservation, to extend certain expiring provisions, to provide individual income tax relief, and for other purposes."

This act is commonly referred to as the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act 2008 and was passed under the Bush Administration. This act led to further implementation of funding into a program designed to slow or halt foreclosures of mortgages. This additional funding is called TARP or Troubled Asset Relief Program.
Citizens were told by their elected officials that this Stimulus Act would ensure that financial institutions that were "too big to fail" would be able to secure their "troubled assets" with a government loan from the US Treasury and that credit would once again begin to flow. Within this act, additional legislation allowed for tax credits for energy and energy improvement. The energy referred to in this division of the TARP act applies only to renewable energy and electric hybrid vehicles. This act basically provides to some consumers an incentive to purchase these types of vehicles, while other consumers receive no benefits from this part of the legislation. This same act also allowed for approximately 20 million middle-class families to be kept from being hit by the Alternative Minimum Tax, a secondary tax code implemented in 1970. The AMT was originally passed in order to tax persons of such higher-income in the 1960's that under the regular tax code they were able to avoid paying any taxes. The secondary program called TARP allowed the US Treasury to purchase troubled or toxic assets (generally defined as any asset that has lost enough monetary value as to be deemed unrecoverable by any accounting principle - i.e., worthless), these assets being held in mortgage loans by banks and other financial institutions, in an effort to prevent these institutions from experiencing huge losses on their balance sheets. Once the trading of these toxic assets begins again, the Treasury expects that profits will be realized not only by these institutions and banks, but also the federal government itself.
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 2009

This legislation is too vast to break down into a simple statement as to its full purpose. Its expected intention was to flood the economy with money for shovel-ready projects, extend unemployment benefits, reduce COBRA payments for the unemployed, create or save millions of jobs, provide tax credits to name a few of the anticipated and expected results of this legislation. Total funding for this particular bill when enacted was set at 787 billion dollars which has now been calculated to actually cost approx. 80 billion dollars more than original estimates for a total of 860 billion dollars. At the end of fiscal year 2009, approx. 20% of the total amount has been used. Additional claims of success include statements that anywhere from “thousands of jobs created or saved” and “1.5 million jobs created or saved” were made as recently as mid-January 2010. The TARP program is included within this legislative act as well as within the original stimulus act of 2008. This stimulus act provided the federal government with the funds to be able to purchase General Motors as well as Chrysler in order to prevent those manufacturers from losing more money in bankruptcy court. Close to 60 billion dollars was used for this effort with hopes that the 60% stake the federal government now holds in GM will be sold when GM regains profitability.

Cash for Clunkers Bill

This additional stimulus program was intended for car owners to receive 3500 - 4500 in credit towards the purchase of more fuel-efficient vehicles. The 1 billion dollar program was so successful that it was extended and more money was infused for a total cost of 3 billion dollars. The funds for this program were pulled from the Stimulus 2009 legislation. This bill specifically allowed those car-owners who could afford to purchase new automobiles the ability to trade in and purchase these vehicles far below asking price. Those left out of the bill were the first time buyers of these more fuel-efficient vehicles as well as those whose vehicles did not meet the requirements set forth by this legislation to qualify for the credit. In addition, the vehicles that were traded in under this bill could not be recycled for any use in repairing the vehicles still left on the road due to the lack of qualifying under this bill but must be destroyed.
Within the time span of one year, from November 2008 to November 2009, the federal government authorized the use of over 800 billion dollars to fund legislation that was expected to turn the American economy around by increasing employment rolls and creating the financial environment whereby the banks and financial institutions will begin lending again not only to small business, but across the board to perspective home-buyers, small-business owners and entrepreneurs.

Aren't these modern legislative Acts just as intolerable and coercive as those that brought about the revolution that freed us from British rule? Do we no longer live and learn from our mistakes or has history become so irrelevant that we now dismiss it at having no bearing on current events?

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America" was written in direct response to those intolerable and coercive acts the government that was once in power over the colonies and the federal government as the entity it is needs to be reminded that the power belongs to The People.