The Final Debate of 2012

Last night the Presidential debates saw some competition with the NLCS in game 7 and the Lions visiting the Bears; okay no one really tuned into the football game unless you were in those markets. The debate moderated by Bob Schieffer was on foreign policy - or on Middle East policy. Much of the debate stationed itself in the Middle East dealing with the fallout from the Libya embassy attack, the threat of a nuclear Iran, the devastation in Syria and how to back our ally Israel in the area.

While there was a brief entanglement on China, there was very little discussion of foreign policy outside of the Middle East. I do agree that the unstable nature of the Middle East poses a threat to World Peace, there is a lot more going on that the next President of the United States will need to address. Namely the economy.

The United States makes up 5% of the world population yet we consume nearly 35% of the worlds goods and resources. Countries like Russia, India, Brazil and China are seeing their middle class exploding as we did back in the 50's. Combine that will a United States economy that is slowing to a growth rate of 1.3%, our government needs to assist businesses located here in trade abroad. I know many of you are wondering how can a small government person look to the Federal government to assist business in trade outside of the United States.

It is simple. The role of the Federal government is to be that buffer in trade with foreign nations along with providing a solid infrastructure, security of private property, and settle disputes between the States. Outside of that, the Federal government needs to step out of the way and allow the States to deal with other issues of the day. But I digress.

A number of polling done after the debate has President Obama beating Governor Romney but as the commentary went along the question rose - Will the performance move the needle back to President Obama as Governor Romney had gain a lot of momentum from the first debate?

With two weeks left we will find out the answer to that question. The other observation from last night's debate was the masterful pivot that Governor Romney made from the extreme Right wing aspect of his base to the center. The pivot is similar to the one that Governor Clinton made during his campaign against President Bush. Two weeks to go and it will be interesting to see where the money is being spent and the places the candidates visit.

To those that live in states that will are already decided, when you go to the poll to vote find another candidate other than the major two to cast your die for that more closely aligns with your ideals. By doing this you will potentially give that third or fourth party increased status and we may just be able to end the gridlock in Washington D.C.

Obama short sighted on summer job program

According to the Washington Post, “President Barak Obama promised Monday to deliver more than 600,000 jobs through his $787B stimulus plan this summer.” The big picture question is how many of these jobs will be permanent versus temporary. Back in March of this year, President Obama attended the graduation of 25 police recruits in Columbus, Ohio. At that time the Administration herald the graduation as a success of the stimulus bill. The trouble is at year end, those 25 fresh graduates will be out of a job because the Columbus City Council budget will be $120M in the red and cuts will need to be made.

America needs sustained growth in the job force. As the $787 stimulus bill was being rammed through Congress, with not one person reading it, the President’s administration was claiming the unemployment rates would not rise higher “than 8 percent”. As of the last week, we are 9.4% with the expectation that we will top out around 11%. The Washington Post further reports that, “Obama has claimed as many as 150,000 jobs saved or created by his stimulus plan so far.” Never mind the fact the economy has lost 1.6M jobs in the meantime.

At least the percentage is better than the less than 1% trimming of his $1.2T budget touted two weeks ago by the President. The vast majority of the 600,000 new jobs are for temporary work. The tasks slotted to see the majority of the 600,000 jobs are improvements in the national parks, upgrades to Veterans Affairs medical centers, establishment of new rural waste and water systems, and the cleanup of Superfund sites. The one potential long lasting job creation will be the funding to the Justice department for an additional 5,000 law enforcement jobs.
Why are we not creating sustaining jobs that will contribute to our nation’s health and recovery? Instead of focusing the temporary projects, see above; let’s focus on something more permanent and benefitual. President Obama stated in his address in Cairo last week that he had no trouble with Iran power themselves with nuclear power. Over 80% of France’s energy comes from nuclear power. Why are we not moving forward with nuclear energy?

If we repeal the Carter law on re-using spent rods, we can recycle the rods and use them an additional time thus reducing the waste product by nearly 80%. Experts say that if this is done, it would take over 100 years to fill up the approved storage site in the Yucatan Mountains. Besides, if the unmanned military space craft, which was announce yesterday, is successful we can eventually launch our waste into space.

The experts say it takes 8-10 years to build a nuclear plant that is fully operational. That is sustaining growth in job creation. According to the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), a nuclear power plant generates “approximately $430 M in sales of goods and services in the local community and nearly $40M in total labor income.” Nuclear power plants employ between 400 to 700 permanent jobs while offering, according to NEI, “36 percent more than average salaries in the local area.” NEI estimates that during the construction phase a new nuclear power plant will create “1,400 to 1,800” jobs with a peak of 2,400.

So, why is nuclear energy not a top priority in the energy policy of President Obama? The numbers above are just for one nuclear site. Now if we start projects in every state we can increase the work force and establish roughly 35,000 permanent jobs and 900,000 jobs during the construction phase. Also, America would be creating a clean source of energy that will not increase our heating, cooling, and electric rates like the “cap and trade” energy policy of President Obama will do. Why stop at 1 new site per state? Nothing to stop us from expanding this policy to adding more and creating more jobs. California is looking at a huge budget deficit and already experiences rolling black outs, it would be two-fold for California. Let’s create jobs that have more bang for their buck.

Instead our President wants to start projects this summer that will create no revenue for the local communities and will only be a temporary job. I agree with the President that we need to secure our future on energy and become less dependent on coal. Then let’s get started. Lift the moratorium on nuclear power and repel Carters executive order on recycle spent rods so we can create sustaining jobs while creating an energy source that is “green”.