The Future Party

You Say Class, I Say Caste

Dave Davis Commentary, Policy, The Future Party, Uncategorized

When prominent people take the extreme step of abandoning their longtime political party to support the other party’s standard-bearer, it’s generally for irreconcilable policy differences. They usually write a lengthy explanation of why they now agree with the other party’s positions. Winston Churchill switched twice, and you knew at length what the policy differences were. In my last two posts, I’ve shown this isn’t the case for those switching to support Biden. I’m not seeing well thought out explanations why the policies of Joe Biden and the Democrats are so much better for America. Instead, they claim Trump is dangerous and has destroyed the Republican Party.

Two Political Action Committees (PAC) have been leading the effort to help the Democrats crush Trump. Republican Voters Against Trump (RVAT) and the Lincoln Project are actively campaigning to bring down the present President. The former puts its efforts into dumping Trump while the latter also works against down-ballot Republicans. It’s a distinction without a difference. If both get their wish and Trump loses in a landslide, both houses of Congress would almost certainly be in Democratic hands. With complete control, nothing would stand in the way of enacting the whole progressive agenda. Some form of the Green New Deal, packed courts, and government healthcare are among many other things that would become law. With two more states, a newly renamed District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico, good luck winning back the Presidency. Neither of these PACs has offered any detailed explanation of why thy now favor these policies.

Two of the leading Republican defectors are syndicated columnist George Will and former Ohio Governor John Kasich. Will has loudly announced becoming a Democrat, while it’s reported Kasich will actually speak at the Democratic Convention. I’ve enjoyed Will’s well-reasoned articles for more years than I’d like to admit. If Kasich had won the Republican nomination, he would’ve had my vote. Surely these communicators have statements of their reasoning.

Continue reading →

Adding It Up

Dave Davis Commentary, Dave's Healthcare Plan, Policy, The Future Party, Uncategorized

In my last post, I gauged the Trump administration has a more robust awareness of the world dangers facing us. It seems more appreciative of the goals of the leaders of China, Russia, and Iran. Nothing in the Obama-Biden administration’s history showed they were genuinely apprehensive of these players’ real motives. Biden may surprise us, but a man with no deeply held principles will probably do as he has always done. He will go where the current wind is blowing. Trump seems closer to the traditionally conservative world view. For this group of pro-Biden conservatives, the reasons for their move must lie with domestic policy.

Conservatives, if they are known for anything, stand for smaller government. A government not invading all facets of our lives. Governments are intrusive by expanding regulations. In the wake of the Great Recession, the Obama-Biden significantly increased rules in most areas. Many conservatives saw these as the main reason for the worst recovery from a recession in history. The regulations made it more difficult and expensive to do business. It showed a particular disdain. The “you didn’t build it” attitude.was hardly welcoming. Remember, business goes and grows where it’s welcome. Many economists give more credit to a better regulatory climate than tax cuts to the high employment pre-COVID-19 economy.

Continue reading →

Arriving at a Decision

Dave Davis Commentary, Policy, The Future Party, Uncategorized

Looking through my morning Washington Post Opinion email, I noticed many of the Op-Ed articles were authored by people once known to be right of center. Max Boot, Joe Scarborough, and George Will were once Republicans but now compete to show how much they loath President Trump. They are joined by a legion of other writers once on the right at the Post and other opinion outlets. In the Sunday New York Times, Frank Bruni crowed the Lincoln Project made up the last Bush administration staffers had raised $18 million to run anti-Trump ads. Apparently, the online journal “the Dispatch” raised its capital to criticize the President. All seem poised to cast their vote for Democrat Joe Biden.

As readers of this blog know, I’m no great fan of our present President. I didn’t vote for him in ’16. Faced with the choice between Trump and Clinton, I opted for the Libertarian Ticket. By voting for two successful governors and a chance to expand our options, this was the best I could do. With Justin Amash’s failure to launch, this time, there is no reasonable alternative to the two major-party candidates. It looks like I’ll have to choose between Biden and Trump. (Still time for Michelle)

To come to a decision, a look at how each stands on the significant issues foreign and domestic is mandatory. Neither is going to fully satisfy me, but on balance, which in my opinion would be better. Let’s look at how each candidate might approach Foreign and domestic issues.

Continue reading →

Some Observations

Dave Davis Commentary, COVID-19, Policy, The Future Party

It is interesting to observe some of the things I predicted would happen have taken place. If we did a better job of protecting the elderly and others with underlying conditions, I said we could reopen the country without causing a massive death toll. Younger and healthier people may get the coronavirus in higher numbers, but very few would die. Most of the country has now been opening up. Protecting the vulnerable has been better. Also, people at risk and those close to them are more aware and have taken proper actions. Mask wearing other PPE use around the vulnerable has dramatically expanded. Even Gov. Cuomo now seems to recognize nursing homes must be protected. We still haven’t taken all the measures I proposed, but we have made progress. If better-targeted protections didn’t reduce mortality, then increasing confirmed cases would lead to increased deaths. This chart shows otherwise. Cases have significantly increased, but as I predicted, fatalities haven’t.

Early on, I also wondered why mask-wearing, especially where vulnerable people are present, wasn’t at least encouraged. Even though masks were widely worn in Asia where they had better outcomes, it wasn’t until April 3. The CDC reversed itself and favored masks. There was a shortage of medical gear, but the CDC in April encouraged homemade masks. Peop[e responded. Nothing prevented earlier adoption. This waffling by the authorities has led to needless controversy. Until now, our President seemed to resist wearing a mask. He should’ve set the right example. Can we all agree to wear a mask whenever you might be near an at-risk person? You may save your grandma.

Our failure to do targeted things to protect the at-risk early on has caused needless deaths. Now that more is being done, the results are evident. The better job we do protect the at-risk, the lower the number of deaths. That was always the choice. Not the false one of lives vs. the economy expounded by so many of our leaders.

n my posts at the time of the Ferguson, Mo in 2014 riots after the death of Michael Brown, I warned of the “Ferguson Effect.” If the police were placed in a no-win situation, they would be much less aggressive. This would result in rising crime and murder rates in lower-income areas. The statistics since have borne this out. Rather than recognizing more deprived regions anywhere in the world need more not less police presence, the police are demonized. Instead of striving for a workable community balance to improve the lives in higher crime areas, we have gone in the opposite direction. By disrespecting policing to the point of defunding, the predicable rise in minority deaths is already occurring. This will only get worse. We will see even more Blacks’ lives lost. We are endlessly told “Black Lives Matter,” but do they? To whom?

Continue reading →

An Expanded “Dave’s Plan” Could Help

Dave Davis Commentary, COVID-19, Dave's Healthcare Plan, Policy, The Future Party, Uncategorized

Our government fumbled the lockdown leading to depression. Its actions have resulted in over 40 million jobs lost, and many businesses gone forever. Even after spending trillions, we have uneven results. We see long lines at food banks. Some are receiving aid, and some are still waiting. Many people receiving assistance are getting more than if they returned to work. Many people are losing or endangered of losing their health insurance along with their jobs. In a word, we have a mess.

It got me to thinking how much better off so many would benefit from a Personal Benefits Account (PBA). The bedrock of “Dave’s Plan” (Series on this site), the PBA combines your tax-favored savings plans with catastrophic health insurance. Each and everyone would be enrolled. By eliminating the paperwork associated with most medical claims, it would be cheaper and more efficient. It further lowers cost by virtually banishing credit risk. The very idea “pre-existing conditions would ultimately cease to exist. Big health problems are covered. It makes tax-favored savings available to every person. Everyone would have formed a connection to a financial institution. Run through the Internal Revenue System; it pulls existing programs into something workable and easy to use.

Most Americans have direct- deposit. The government already uses it to send people their social security, tax refunds, and EITC checks. Wouldn’t it be easier to combine all our safety-net programs into a single cash deposit? Under Dave’s Plan, everyone must file an income tax form. Once net income is determined, we can compute a safety net support payment. Just using a non-tax-sheltered account. Call it, “The Expanded Dave’s Plan.”

If we totaled all of our existing programs designed to help those down on their luck and the poor, it comes to a tidy sum. Food stamps(Snap), housing, EITC, job retraining, Tanf, and unemployment insurance are just some of the programs. What if we get rid of all of them and combine the money into a cash payment.s In the August 22, 2016 post “A Strong People” in my series on “The Long Journey to More” (Available on this Site), I noted the Cato Institute computed the programs a single mother qualified for would equal $2,000 a month cash payment in 2013. It’s ,of course more now. If your income falls below a certain point say through job loss or reduced hours it starts to kick in. You file an amendment to your return online. We should structure in a way they are high enough to sustain people bur low enough so as not to discourage anyone from working. The existence of so many income levels for different support programs means earning a few extra dollars may cost a recipient thousands. The is known as “the Poverty Trap.” Consolidating into one cash payment would avoid this disincentive.

Continue reading →