Month: October 2015

Categories
Quick Analysis

Cost of educating illegals

The impact of funding for the education of immigrant students is having a major effect on American school systems. The recent surge in illegal immigration has turned an already significant financial issue into a major challenge.

The U.S. Department of Education notes “…according to the most recent data, there were more than 840,000 immigrant students in the United States, and more than 4.6 million English learners.

The U.S. Justice Department has, in unequivocal terms, demanded that states pay the cost for educating illegals.  A DOJ letter sent in May 2014 stated:

“Under Federal law, State and local educational agencies (hereinafter “districts”) are required to provide all children with equal access to public education at the elementary and secondary level. Recently, we have become aware of student enrollment practices that may chill or discourage the participation, or lead to the exclusion, of students based on their or their parents’ or guardians’ actual or perceived citizenship or immigration status. These practices contravene Federal law. Both the United States Department of Justice and the United States Department of Education (Departments) write to remind you of the Federal obligation to provide equal educational opportunities to all children residing within your district and to offer our assistance in ensuring that you comply with the law.”

Last year, as noted by the Daily Caller, “The Obama administration delivered an unequivocally clear message …: All children have a right to enroll in public schools regardless of their citizenship or immigration status…For example, schools can violate federal law by requiring Social Security numbers or birth certificates when a student wants to enroll.”

viagra price in india You can also use this herbal medicine for improving sexual desire among men. People usually do not ordering cialis without prescription realize the fact that how severe this disease can be as and when it increases. The Nutritional Content of Acai is nothing short viagra online browse around for more of amazing, and is the reason why Brazilians, Hollywood celebrities and supermodels seem to prefer using Acai Capsules. If a diabetic cheap sildenafil tablets polyneuropathy occurs, means that something is wrong with the treatment. A New American report notes “As has been predicted by those who have been keeping count of the large number of illegal immigrant children who have crossed our borders from Central America during the past year, the flood of such children entering our schools is proving to be a logistical and financial burden for local school districts…AP education writer Kimberly Hefling noted … ‘For cash-strapped districts, providing for these students’ needs can be arduous, particularly if they arrive after student headcounts are taken to determine school funding.’”

New York City provides a clear example.  According to the New York Post  “The city Department of Education has told principals it plans this year to enroll 2,350 migrant children from Central America who crossed into the United States unaccompanied — with many more to come. ‘It is expected that children will continue to arrive in large numbers in the coming years,’ says a DOE memo to principals obtained by The Post.The notice comes as the city rolls out a $50 million red carpet for 1,662 minors who crossed the border this summer to escape ­violence and gangs in Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador.”

According to a Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR)  report, “The high cost of educating K-12 public school students who are not proficient in English is well documented. So too, is the fact that most Limited English Proficient (LEP) students are children of illegal alien parents. The recent ‘surge’ of Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) and families with young children who poured across our borders in the spring and summer of 2014 exacerbated an already formidable and costly task for public school educators and administrators in many localities across the United States.”

Fair reports that the cost for California taxpayers alone to fund K-12 education for children who are themselves illegal aliens and for the citizen children of illegal aliens accounted for the largest share of the cost to taxpayers at $14.4 billion. These services included standard public school educations and supplemental English language instruction. Despite federal funding, the average per pupil expenditure is $10,450 each year.

Colleges, too, are experiencing a significant change. At least 18 state university systems provide in-state rates even for undocumented aliens, according to the National Conference of State Legislators.  “Currently, at least 18 states have provisions allowing for in-state tuition rates for undocumented students.  Sixteen states—California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Maryland, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Texas, Utah and Washington—extend in-state tuition rates to undocumented students through state legislation. Two states—Oklahoma and Rhode Island—allow in-state tuition rates to undocumented students through Board of Regents decisions. In 2013, the University of Hawaii’s Board of Regents and the University of Michigan’s Board of Regents adopted similar policies for undocumented students to access in-state tuition at those institutions. In April 2014, Virginia’s attorney general started granting in-state tuition to those covered under the federal Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. At least five states—California, Minnesota, New Mexico, Texas and Washington—currently allow undocumented students to receive state financial aid.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

Russia, China, U.S. developing new long range bombers

Russia, China and the United States are developing new long range bombers.

Moscow has intensified its use of long range bombers, flying missions along both the Atlantic and Pacific American coasts.  On July 4th, two Tu-95 bombers buzzed the southern coast of Alaska. The Kremlin has significantly increased its threatening patrols since its invasion of the Ukraine in 2014.

Europe and Japan have also been subjected to the threatening patrols as well. The aircraft have on occasion turned off their transponders, causing safety concerns.

The next-generation Russian bomber is currently known as PAK-DA, according to published sources. The long-range aircraft is believed to incorporate a blended wing, and is expected to be in use in 2023.

The Diplomat reports that China is also considering developing a new long range bomber.

Rep. J. Randy Forbes,  Chairman House Armed Services Subcommittee on Seapower & Projection Forces, addressed the need for the U.S. to develop a new aircraft:
If you are fond of taking outside food more often during the weak, you are likely to perform.* Masturbate You probably already do this a lot in your spare time but try doing it just before you have sex because the fact that browse around address levitra samples you have ejaculated once or twice before will make the next ejaculation last a little longer in maintaining erection than the former. When the man loses all his calm and peace and when his love life is on stake then the best canada cialis solution of the disease. Some physicians associate diuretics with an increased risk of the disease happening between sixty and seventy cialis generika five years of age are overweight. The Nightforce ATACR is laced with multi-coated ED glass elements Nightforce discount viagra india ATACR rifle scopes come with a 34 mm tube.
“Long-range bomber aircraft have been a central element of America’s power projection forces since the Second World War. But after several decades of relative neglect, the Air Force’s bomber fleet is now the smallest and oldest it has ever been.  Overall, our 159 bombers have an average age of 39 years—older than most of their pilots—and less than half of the force is “mission capable” in at least one mission area. Of these aircraft, only 20 B-2s are “stealth bombers” capable of penetrating the integrated air defense systems being fielded (and exported abroad) by countries like Russia and China. Our 139 older B-1 and B-52 bombers, on meanwhile, are best suited for operating in low-threat environments and launching standoff missile strikes.  While newer multi-role fighters like the F-22 and F-35 may be able to penetrate modern defenses, they lack the range, endurance, and payload needed to operate from bases outside the range of enemy missiles and hold at risk the larger and more challenging target sets our military is likely to face in the future.

“As a result, the United States has a serious shortfall in long-range penetrating strike capability and capacity that affects our security in several important ways. First, by limiting our ability to respond promptly to aggression and hold at risk high-value targets (such as enemy leaders or weapons of mass destruction) inside defended airspace, it emboldens our strategic competitors and undermines deterrence.  Second, by that same token, it undermines the confidence of our allies and partners that we can respond rapidly and decisively if and when they are attacked. Third, it forces short-range U.S. air forces to operate from bases within the range of enemy missiles and other threats, playing to the strengths of our competitors’ anti-access strategies and imposing upon the United States the high costs of countering them.
lockheed boeing long range strike bomber…

“Fortunately, the Air Force’s long range strike program appears to be on track to deliver a next-generation aircraft that will play a key role in counter anti-access strategies and sustaining the United States’ ability to project power into contested environments for decades to come. Six years after Secretary Gates approved the program, the Air Force appears to have wisely settled on a requirement set that will meet commanders’ needs for range, payload, and survivability at a relatively affordable price.

“That last point is key. Although the LRS-B will not be inexpensive by any taxpayer’s standards, the Air Force appears to be wisely leveraging “off-the-shelf” components designed for other aircraft and “open” architectures and mission systems that can be easily upgraded. These approaches should help the winning vendor deliver and sustain the aircraft we must have at the lowest possible cost.

“Keeping that per-unit cost to a minimum will be the shared task of Congress and Air Force leadership in the years ahead. Stability in the bomber’s requirements, rate of production, and total procurement quantity will be needed to keep acquisition costs down and sustain public support for the program. Congress, for its part, must commit to protecting the nascent program from the impacts of continuing resolution and other fluctuations in the budget. The Air Force, in turn, must manage the expectations of Congress and the American people by accurately estimating and reporting the costs, as well as the benefits, of the LRS-B program. America’s new bomber will not be cheap, but it is a worthwhile and strategically-critical investment. Our nation needs a new bomber, and that bomber deserves Congress’ close scrutiny, as well as its strong support.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

New trade deal increases concern over weak export/import balance, & employment numbers

The deal that has been reached on the Transpacific Partnership bill (TPP) bill could not have come at a worse time for supporters of the international agreement.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership is an agreement to establish a free-trade zone among 12 nations around the Pacific. Unfortunately, all of its provisions have not been made available for public review. It has been criticized for being a “living” deal, which could “evolve,” without input from the American people.

The White House  maintains that ““TPP will also raise labor standards across our trading partners and help raise wages here at home. That’s because enforceable requirements on minimum wages, hours of work, and occupational safety and health are at the center of the agreement. And that’s because trade jobs are good jobs, paying up to 18 percent more on average than non-trade jobs.”

Many have raised concerns that the measure will, similar to criticism of prior international trade deals, harm both employment opportunities for U.S. citizens and result in further damage to the weak balance of trade for American businesses.  Roughly similar but smaller international agreements in the past have failed to produce any benefits for U.S. workers or enterprises.

These fears have been exacerbated by statistics released this month by the federal government. According to the U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis :

“…the goods and services deficit was $48.3 billion in August, up $6.5 billion. from $41.8 billion in July, revised. August exports were $185.1 billion, $3.7 billion less than July exports. August imports were $233.4 billion, $2.8 billion more than July imports. The August increase in the goods and services deficit reflected an increase in the goods deficit of $6.6 billion to $67.9 billion and an increase in the services surplus of $0.1 billion to $19.6 billion.

Year-to-date, the goods and services deficit increased $17.6 billion, or 5.2 percent, from the same period in 2014. Exports decreased $58.9 billion or 3.8 percent. Imports decreased $41.3billion or 2.2 percent.

Goods and Services Three-Month Moving Averages

 The average goods and services deficit increased $1.9 billion to $45.1 billion for the three months ending in August.

  • Average exports of goods and services decreased $0.9 billion to $187.2 billion in August.
  • Average imports of goods and services increased $1.0 billion to $232.3 billion in August.

This enzyme increases the supply of blood to the sex cheap viagra professional organs. No Need to Visit the Pharmacy There are some medical problems or other health associated conditions. viagra india online This is on the grounds that all the branded companies are using a lot of ads and so it is cost saving and cheap. pastilla levitra 10mg Ganoderma ludicum comes in a variety of ways and it is helpful in restricting intestinal cialis sale slovak-republic.org glucose absorption.
Year-over-year, the average goods and services deficit increased $3.4 billion from the three months ending in August 2014.

  • Average exports of goods and services decreased $9.4 billion from August 2014.
  • Average imports of goods and services decreased $6.0 billion from August 2014.

Exports

Exports of goods decreased $4.1 billion to $124.5 billion in August. Exports of goods on a Census basis decreased $4.0 billion.

  • Industrial supplies and materials decreased $2.2 billion.
  • Fuel oil decreased $0.6 billion.
  • Plastic materials decreased $0.2 billion.
  • Crude oil decreased $0.2 billion.

   Net balance of payments adjustments decreased $0.1 billion.”

At the same time, and not unrelated, the release of the latest unemployment report (see the recent New York Analysis of Policy & Government article)  reveals the following unemployment rates:

“Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rates for adult men (4.7 percent),adult women, teenagers (16.3 percent), whites (4.4 percent), blacks (9.2 percent), Asians (3.6 percent), and Hispanics (6.4 percent) showed little or no change in September. The number of persons unemployed for less than 5 weeks increased by 268,000 to 2.4 million in September, partially offsetting a decline in August. The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more) was little changed at 2.1 million in September and accounted for 26.6 percent of the unemployed. The civilian labor force participation rate declined to 62.4 percent in September; the rate had been 62.6 percent for the prior 3 months. The employment-population ratio edged down to 59.2 percent in September, after showing little movement for the first 8 months of the year.” In addition, hourly wages declined.  In a worrisome note, the August numbers were revised downward, something that generally happens only during a recession.”

Both conservatives and liberals disagree with the President’s optimistic contention. The Washington Post reports that Democrat presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) has  “slammed the deal, saying that “Wall Street and other big corporations have won again. Republican front-runner Donald Trump tweeted [stated] on Monday: ‘The incompetence of our current administration is beyond comprehension. TPP is a terrible deal.’ And Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton has hedged on the TPP pact, despite having supported it while serving as Obama’s secretary of state.”

Senator Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama) states that “The White House still refuses to answer even the most basic questions about [the TPP]. These are the questions the White House will not answer:

  • Will it increase or reduce the trade deficit, and by how much?
  • Will it increase or reduce employment and wages, and by how much?
  • Will you make the “living agreement” section public and explain fully its implications?
  • Will China be added to the TPP?
  • Will you pledge not to issue any executive actions, or enter into any future agreements, impacting the flow of foreign workers into the United States?”

Categories
Quick Analysis

Obama veto threat of defense bill highlights weakness on terrorism

As news of Russian fighter planes entering the air space of a NATO member continue to reverberate, and as both Moscow and Beijing rapidly continue their well-funded efforts to become the dominant military powers on Earth, the White House continues to threaten a veto of the $612 billion defense authorization bill because it does not authorize the closing of Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba.

Spending for defense under this measure would be smaller, despite inflation, than it was when President Obama first took office. The amount of funds provided by the legislation is not in question.  Indeed, it is the number requested by the White House. Critics of the President’s defense policy believe that it underfunds the military at a time when international threats are rapidly increasing.

It remains highly questionable why Guantanamo’s closing should be anywhere on a list of priorities. Removed from public access and away from American territory, it provides a venue to house terrorist prisoners in a locale free from the threat of attack and where no U.S. civilians could be harmed.

Senator John McCain (R-Arizona) has noted that President Obama has not even presented a viable plan of how to deal with the prisoners currently residing at Guantanamo.

Holding up the important defense measure, with its funding for vital national security activities as well as for overdue benefits for service members and their families over what has become a boutique issue for a very small percentage of voters seems irrational. It raises questions of whether the President has an additional priority—perhaps the closing of the Guantanamo base in general—in mind.

Despite the December 2014 agreement by Cuba to allow the Russian navy to return to cold war bases on the island, and despite the continued oppression of political dissidents there, the White House opened relations with the Castro regime in January, ignoring the fact that Havana continues its support for terrorist activities.

The White House veto threat has angered the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-Texas) who noted “The world is getting more dangerous by the day, our allies believe we are missing-in-action, and our enemies are gaining ground across the globe.  The only redline the President is willing to enforce is vetoing the bill that pays or troops.  Is that the legacy he really seeks?”
Think lovemaking as a need- The more you get closer to cialis from india tadalafil robertrobb.com the heights of the epitome. Men who have ongoing itching, especially if it is then a symptom of prostate cancer, it female viagra for sale can be treated effectively and more than doubled the average level of HGH. Generally there are no symptoms in the beginning that indicate on-set of type 2 diabetes. online viagra without prescription purchase levitra online http://robertrobb.com/whats-wrong-with-duceys-teacher-pay-plan/ It is an FDA approved medicine and available at the much affordable price.
The White House and the Republican-majority congress have also battled over a portion the $89.2 billion “overseas contingency fund” portion of the bill, used to battle terrorist activities in the Middle East and Afghanistan. The Congressional version classifies the funds as part of the regular Pentagon budget in order to not have those funds be subjected to mandatory sequestration restrictions.

Mr. Obama’s questionable release of key Guantanamo prisoners in the past, his refusal to classify a terrorist attacks at a military base in the United States (classifying the actions of the perpetrator, Nidal Malik Hassan who killed 13 and wounded 30 at Fort Hood as “workplace violence”) and his insistence on closing Guantanamo prison without any viable alternative have led to sharp questions about his willingness to confront the Islamic extremist threat.

As the President continues to concentrate on closing Guantanamo, concern over Russia’s incursion into Turkey, a NATO member, grows. In a statement,  NATO said its allied nations “expressed their deep concern with regard to the Russian military build-up in Syria and especially the attacks by the Russian Air Force on Hama, Homs, and Idlib which led to civilian casualties and did not target Da’esh. Allies call on the Russian Federation to immediately cease its attacks on the Syrian opposition and civilians, to focus its efforts on fighting ISIL, and to promote a solution to the conflict through a political transition.

Russian military actions have reached a more dangerous level with the recent violations of Turkish airspace on 3 October and 4 October by Russian Air Force SU-30 and SU-24 aircraft in the Hatay region. The aircraft in question entered Turkish airspace despite Turkish authorities’ clear, timely and repeated warnings. In accordance with NATO practice, Turkish fighter aircraft responded to these incursions by closing to identify the intruder, after which the Russian planes departed Turkish airspace.

Allies strongly protest these violations of Turkish sovereign airspace, and condemn these incursions into and violations of NATO airspace. Allies also note the extreme danger of such irresponsible behaviour. They call on the Russian Federation to cease and desist, and immediately explain these violations.

Allies call on the Russian side to take all necessary measures to ensure that such violations do not take place in the future.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

White House policies continue to harm employment

The latest federal jobs report, again providing bad news for job seekers and the economy, raises a vital question: since the statistics clearly indicate that President Obama’s economic policies have failed, why has there been no change of course from the White House?

According to the Department of Labor, (DOL) very few jobs were created last month, significantly below already modest expectations. They were in fields that, for the most part, do little to revive an American economy apparently heading into recession, and they did not go to those most sorely in need, or do anything to assist the bedrock of the U.S., the middle class.

Among the dismal numbers:

“Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rates for adult men (4.7 percent),adult women, teenagers (16.3 percent), whites (4.4 percent), blacks (9.2 percent), Asians (3.6 percent), and Hispanics (6.4 percent) showed little or no change in September. The number of persons unemployed for less than 5 weeks increased by 268,000 to 2.4 million in September, partially offsetting a decline in August. The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more) was little changed at 2.1 million in September and accounted for 26.6 percent of the unemployed. The civilian labor force participation rate declined to 62.4 percent in September; the rate had been 62.6 percent for the prior 3 months. The employment-population ratio edged down to 59.2 percent in September, after showing little movement for the first 8 months of the year.” In addition, hourly wages declined.  In a worrisome note, the August numbers were revised downward, something that generally happens only during a recession.

The American Enterprise Institute called the information a “worrying jobs report. Few jobs created, no pressure on wages and a slight increase in the long-term unemployed. Labor force participation declines even further.”

Breitbart notes that  “The number of Americans not in the labor force exceeded 94 million for the second time in a row last month hitting a new record high.”

Zerohedge.com  called the DOL report

“…a total disaster, 60K below the consensus and below the lowest estimate. Just as bad, the August print was also revised far lower from 173K to 136K. And while it is less followed, the household survey was an unmitigated disaster, with 236,000 jobs lost in September. Putting it into perspective, in 2015 job growth has averaged 198,000 per month, compared with an average monthly gain of 260,000 in 2014. The recession is almost here…not only were workers paid less, they worked less, as the average hourly work week declined from 34.6 hours to 34.5, suggesting an imminent collapse in economic output.”

The Washington Examiner’s  review of the DOL report revealed that “For a third month in a row, native-born Americans saw their job numbers tumble while immigrants experience solid gains. According to the montly Bureau of Labor Statistics numbers just released, “foreign-born” jobs numbers increased by 14,000, while those for “native-born” Americans fell off a cliff, by 262,000. Over the past three months, the job numbers for native-born have dropped by nearly 1 million, exactly the number of jobs President Obama promised to add when he ran for re-election in 2012.”

Now in its seventh year of failure in attempts to turn the job market around, Americans are justifiably asking why President Obama continues to cling to policies that have clearly and significantly failed.

The Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Ian Murray  implicates the actions of the Department of Labor and the National Labor Relations Board for at least some part of the depressed job picture. “Both bodies have made moves over the past few months that make flexible working arrangements difficult. Thereby, they have discouraged both businesses from hiring and workers who would prefer flexible arrangements from getting the working conditions they want. Examples include:

  • The Department of Labor’s interpretationof the Fair Labor Standards Act, which essentially says that most independent contractors have to be classified as employees, and therefore subject to a host of cost-increasing regulations.
  • The Department of Labor’s proposed overtime rule, which will significantly increase costs on businesses that promote from within if they wish to encourage aspirational staff to work longer hours. (The likelihoodis that hours will be cut instead.)
  • The National Labor Relations Board’s decisionon “joint employer” classification and its impending rulings on franchisesand contingent workers. These decisions threaten business models that sustain 5 million jobs across the U.S.

It can be buy viagra samples used up to once a day as needed. Observed Indications navigate to this storefront levitra generika The below mentioned indicants are effortlessly exclusive: The indications of stumpy sex drive and imbalance can decrease his interest in sex. And many customers complain that it simply viagra levitra does not work. This particular component works really well when it 100mg viagra comes to curing erectile dysfunction.
With this regulatory onslaught ongoing, it should not be surprising that job growth has slowed (although there are clearly many other factors at work as well).”

The San Diego Tribune discusses the implications of hiring foreign workers through H-1B visas, allowing foreign workers to now compete on a larger scale for middle class jobs the same way they have competed for lower wage positions.

Both of those areas are important, but each plays only a singular role in the overall economic challenges imposed by a White House that, in the face of the worst economic climate in recent history, continues to overregulate, overtax, allows massive illegal immigration, pursues trade deals that don’t result in fairness for U.S. companies, and imposes uncertainty on American enterprises.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Americans continue to join ISIS

The Homeland Security Committee Task Force Combatting Terrorist ad Foreign Fighter Travel has issued a chilling report detailing the failure of the Obama Administration to halt the flow of Americans joining the international jihadist movement—or to prevent those individuals from returning to the United States to engage in attacks on U.S. soil.

The bipartisan committee (consisting of Chairman Michael McCaul (Republican Lead), John Katko, Rep. Barry Loudermilk, Rep. John Ratclife , Rep. Will Hurd, Rep. Martha McSally, Ranking Member Bennie Thompson, Democratic Lead Loretta Sanchez, Rep. Filemon Vela, and Rep. Donald Payne) has found that the White House has not only failed to accomplish the goal of preventing Americans from joining extremist forces, it has not even developed a coordinated strategy to do so.

The Homeland Security Committee Task Force reports:

Today we are witnessing the largest global convergence of jihadists in history, as individuals from more than 100 countries have migrated to the conflict zone in Syria and Iraq since 2011.

Some initially flew to the region to join opposition groups seeking to oust Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, but most are now joining the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), inspired to become a part of the group’s “caliphate” and to expand its repressive society. Over 25,000 foreign fighters have traveled to the battlefield to enlist with Islamist terrorist groups, including at least 4,500 Westerners. More than 250 individuals from the United States have also joined or attempted to fight with extremists in the conflict zone.

These fighters pose a serious threat to the United States and its allies. Armed with combat experience and extremist connections, many of them are only a plane-flight away from our shores. Even if they do not return home to plot attacks, foreign fighters have taken the lead in recruiting a new generation of terrorists and are seeking to radicalize Westerners online to spread terror back home….

The Task Force makes 32 key findings and provides accompanying recommendations… Among other conclusions reached, the Task Force finds that:

  • Despite concerted efforts to stem the flow, we have largely failed to stop Americans from traveling overseas to join jihadists. Of the hundreds of Americans who have sought to travel to the conflict zone in Syria and Iraq, authorities have only interdicted a fraction of them. Several dozen have also managed to make it back into America.
  • The U.S. government lacks a national strategy for combating terrorist travel and has not produced one in nearly a decade.
  • The unprecedented speed at which Americans are being radicalized by violent extremists is straining federal law enforcement’s ability to monitor and intercept suspects.
  • Jihadist recruiters are increasingly using secure websites and apps to communicate with Americans, making it harder for law enforcement to disrupt plots and terrorist travel. • There is currently no comprehensive global database of foreign fighter names. Instead, countries including the United States rely on a patchwork system for swapping extremist identities, increasing the odds foreign fighters will slip through the cracks.
  • “Broken travel” and other evasive transit tactics are making it harder to track foreign fighters. • Few initiatives exist nationwide to raise awareness about foreign-fighter recruitment and to assist communities with spotting warning signs.
  • The federal government has failed to develop clear early-intervention strategies—or “of-ramps” to radicalization—to prevent suspects already on law enforcement’s radar from leaving to fight with extremists.
  • Gaping security weaknesses overseas—especially in Europe—are putting the U.S. homeland in danger by making it easier for aspiring foreign fighters to migrate to terrorist hotspots and for jihadists to return to the West.
  • Despite improvements since 9/11, foreign partners are still sharing information about terrorist suspects in a manner which is ad hoc, intermittent, and often incomplete.
  • Ultimately, severing today’s foreign-fighter flows depends on eliminating the problem at the source in Syria and Iraq and, in the long run, preventing the emergence of additional terrorist sanctuaries.

They are imposing the facts some times order cialis australia in so much as they almost killed it off completely. On the other hand, kamagara jelly is a formulation of vardenafil india numerous herbs and soothing ingredients and is not life threatening and is generally caused by diets low in fibre, a lack of excersice, lack of fluid or the effects of medicine. The most trusted herbal libido enhancement remedies is provided by medicines. soft cialis online is a perfect ED drug and it is available in the form of capsules, tablets, liquid or powder. Medicines are an important need in our life http://appalachianmagazine.com/2016/01/11/breaking-arch-coal-files-for-bankruptcy/ cialis generic overnight because they cure the diseases that one may get as part of living.
The Task Force makes 32 Key Findings and associated recommendations to improve America’s security posture—and to ensure foreign countries are doing the same. Below is an abbreviated summary

U.S. Government Strategy and Planning to Combat the Threat

KEY FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

Key Finding 1: The U.S. lacks a comprehensive strategy for combating terrorist and foreign fighter travel.

Key Finding 2: Despite concerted efforts to stem the flow, we have largely failed to stop Americans from traveling overseas to join jihadists.

Key Finding 3: The growing complexity of the threat may be creating unseen gaps in our defenses, yet it has been years since any large-scale “stress test” has been conducted on U.S. defenses against terrorist travel.

Key Finding 4: ISIS operatives are urging followers to travel to the group’s other “provinces” in places like Libya, yet it is unclear whether agencies are keeping pace with changes in foreign-fighter destinations.

Key Finding 5: Ultimately, severing foreign fighter flows depends on eliminating the problem at the source.

Identifying Terrorists and Foreign Fighters—and Preventing Them from Traveling

Key Finding 6: Improvements have been made to the terrorist watchlisting process, yet no independent review has been done to assess them and whether more are needed in light of the evolving threat environment.

Key Finding 7: Individuals can now contest their status on the no-fly list; however, more should be done to ensure the new process will appropriately balance due process rights with national security concerns.

Key Finding 8: Despite improvements since 9/11, foreign partners are still sharing information about terrorist suspects in a manner which is ad hoc, intermittent, and often incomplete.

Key Finding 9: There is currently no comprehensive global database of foreign fighter names. Instead, countries including the U.S. rely on a weak, patchwork system for swapping individual extremist identities.

Key Finding 10: DHS should continue its efforts to quickly leverage unclassified data in classified environments to identify potential foreign fighters.

Key Finding 11: The DHS Counterterrorism Advisory Board has not been authorized by Congress nor does its charter reflect recent changes to the threat environment, including the rise of the foreign fighter threat.

Key Finding 12: More can be done to incorporate valuable “financial intelligence” into counterterrorism screening and vetting processes.

Key Finding 13: State and local fusion centers are underutilized by federal law enforcement nationwide when it comes to combating the immediate foreign fighter threat and terrorist travel generally.

Key Finding 14: State and local law enforcement personnel continue to express concern that they are not provided with the appropriate security clearances to assist with counterterrorism challenges.

Key Finding 15: The unprecedented speed at which Americans are being radicalized by violent extremists is straining federal law enforcement’s ability to monitor and intercept suspects before it’s too late.

Key Finding 16: Few initiatives exist nationwide to raise community awareness about foreign-fighter recruitment and to assist communities with spotting warning signs.

Key Finding 17: The federal government has failed to develop clear intervention strategies—or “of-ramps” to radicalization—to prevent suspects already on law enforcement’s radar from leaving to join extremists.

Key Finding 18: Jihadist recruiters are increasingly using secure websites and apps to communicate with Americans, making it harder for law enforcement to disrupt plots and terrorist travel.

Key Finding 19: The Administration has launched programs to counter-message terrorist propaganda abroad, but little is being done here at home.

Key Finding 20: The U.S. has not made adequate use of “jaded jihadists” to convince others not to join the fight.

Key Finding 21: Unlike many other governments, U.S. authorities have not relied heavily on passport revocation to stop extremists.

Key Finding 22: While substantial progress has been made since 9/11 to enhance visa security, there may be additional opportunities to expand screening to identify potential extremists earlier in the process.

Key Finding 23: The Administration has improved the security of the Visa Waiver Program, but continuous enhancements must be made in light of the changing threat.

Key Finding 24: U.S. authorities remain concerned about terrorists posing as refugees, yet it is unclear to what extent security improvements to the refugee screening process mitigate potential vulnerabilities.

Key Finding 25: “Broken travel” and other evasive tactics are making it harder to track foreign fighters.

Key Finding 26: More could be done to give frontline operators at borders and ports better intelligence reachback capabilities so DHS can “connect the dots” and uncover previously unidentified terrorists and foreign fighters.

Key Finding 27: U.S. authorities continue to “push the border outward” by deploying homeland security initiatives overseas. Expanding these eforts might help detect threats sooner.

Key Finding 28: Only a fraction of U.S. states have access to INTERPOL databases; wider access could help spot wanted foreign fighters who have slipped past border security.

Detecting and Disrupting Terrorists and Foreign Fighters

When They Travel Overseas Security Gaps Key

Finding 29: Gaping security weaknesses overseas—especially in Europe—are putting the U.S. homeland in danger by making it easier for aspiring foreign fighters to migrate to terrorist hotspots and for jihadists to return to the West.

Key Finding 30: Extremists are using fraudulent passports to travel discretely. However, a third of the international community—including major source countries of foreign fighters—still do not issue fraud-resistant “e-passports,” and most countries are still unable to validate the authenticity of “e-passports.”

Key Finding 31: Many countries do not consistently add information to INTERPOL’s databases, and the majority do not screen against INTERPOL databases in real-time at their borders and airports.

Key Finding 32: U.S. departments and agencies have spent billions of dollars to help foreign partners improve their terror-travel defenses, but the lack of a coordinated strategy for such assistance results in greater risk of overlap, waste, and duplication between programs

After the attacks of September 11, 2001, it was clear America needed to take urgent steps to keep terrorists from entering its borders. The 9/11 Commission, for instance, found it was so easy for the hijackers to operate within the United States that they traveled “into, out of, and around the country and complacently [used] their real names with little fear of capture.”

Since then, the U.S. government has taken extraordinary steps to disrupt terrorists at all stages of travel— from fusing real-time intelligence into the border screening process to enhancing travel-document security. These measures have made it harder for extremists to cross our borders. But the threat environment has evolved, which is why the Task Force conducted its review.

While post-9/11 reforms focused largely on preventing terrorists from infiltrating our country to attack, today we need to be equally concerned about keeping Americans from exiting our country to join terrorist groups. The latter challenge demands a different set of tools. This is why it is important for the government to be able to adjust its strategies and plans.

We must adapt to new threats and get resources where they are needed. Unfortunately, our country has a surplus of programs for combating terrorist travel but a deficit of strategic guidance to keep them aligned with the threat. Agencies must be able to make sense of new trends, take stock of existing counterterrorism efforts, and pivot to fix weaknesses.

Yet the Task Force found there is no clear, whole-of-government system for cataloging the proliferation of terror-travel programs, nor a strategy to “stitch the seams” between them. The Administration has undoubtedly stepped up security to cut of foreign fighter flows, as documented throughout this report, but more must be done to identify and close potential gaps in our defenses against terrorist travel writ large.

Key Finding 1: The U.S. government lacks a comprehensive strategy for combating terrorists and foreign fighter travel and has failed to maintain a system for identifying and plugging related gaps in America’s defenses. It has been nearly a decade since the Executive Branch produced a whole-of-government plan to constrain terrorist movements. In its 2004 final report, the 9/11 Commission recommended the United States develop “a strategy to intercept terrorists, find terrorist travel facilitators, and constrain terrorist mobility.” That year, Congress passed the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevent Act, which mandated such a plan, required the Administration to explain how it would be implemented, and called for an assessment of vulnerabilities in U.S. and foreign travel systems that could be exploited by extremists.

The result was the 2006 National Strategy to Combat Terrorist Travel. It has not been updated since. The 2006 Strategy is woefully outdated. While it provided a thorough overview of U.S. efforts to keep extremists from crossing borders, some of those programs have changed or are now defunct, and new ones have been created. The evolving threat environment has also made the document obsolete.

For instance, the Strategy makes no mention of foreign fighters or the challenges associated with extremists’ social media recruiting. There appears to be no comprehensive accounting of terrorist-travel programs in the U.S. government or any systematic government-wide efforts to identify gaps between them.

The President’s 2011 National Strategy for Counterterrorism makes little mention of the subject aside from noting the United States will work with foreign partners to “identify terrorist operatives and prevent their travel…across national borders and within states.”

A full audit of America’s terror-travel preventative and protective measures should be produced, as the Administration has identified “disrupting the flow of foreign fighters” as one of its top priorities in the fight against ISIS.

We found that hundreds of programs, projects, and initiatives have sprouted up to combat terrorist travel since 9/11, but without an overarching strategy to coordinate them, the United States may be wasting taxpayer dollars and failing to allocate resources where they are needed most. Indeed, lack of a strategy not only increases the risk terrorists might exploit weaknesses in the U.S. travel system, but also raises the prospect of waste, overlap, and duplication between agencies.

Categories
Quick Analysis

The best (and worst) state tax systems

 

The federal government’s budget has long been in the crisis stage. Can Washington learn anything from the 50 state governments?

Each state faces unique fiscal challenges. As we have reported previously, several organizations have reviewed the different approaches and philosophies. Wallethub has compiled a list of  2015’s Most & Least Fair State Tax Systems. The organization seeks to find which states have the most reasonable tax systems, and ranks them.

According to Wallethub’s research, the fairest tax systems exist (from first to 10th place) in Montana, Oregon, South Carolina, Delaware, Idaho, Minnesota, Utah, Virginia, Colorado, and Maryland .The states with the “least fair” are (from worst to 10th worst) Arizona, Indiana, Texas, Mississippi, Florida, Illinois, Arkansas, Hawaii, Georgia and Washington. The  middle class is most overtaxed in Arkansas, New York and Mississippi, while the poor are most overtaxed in Wyoming, Nevada, and Florida.

According to the Council of State Governments “State fiscal conditions in the 2014 fiscal year were somewhat of a mixed bag.

“On the one hand, states experienced much slower revenue growth than the prior year. State general fund revenues grew only 1.3 percent in the 2014 fiscal year, compared to 7.1 percent in 2013. The main reason for the strong revenue growth in the 2013 fiscal year and the slow growth in 2014 was due to the impact of the federal ‘fiscal cliff.’ In 2013, states experienced temporary gains in revenues as taxpayers took actions to avoid scheduled higher federal taxes; in the 2014 fiscal year, states did not experience the same one-time gains.

“While state general fund revenues experienced much slower growth in the 2014 fiscal year, total  state expenditures—or spending from all fund sources—grew much more sharply. In 2014, total state spending—general funds, other state funds, bonds and federal funds combined—grew 5.7 percent, compared to 2.2 percent in 2013. The accelerated growth in total state spending largely was due to increased federal expenditures, as federal funds to states grew 7.6 percent in the 2014 fiscal year mainly as a result of the Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act. In contrast, in both 2013 and 2012 federal funds to states declined by 1.8 percent and 9.8 percent respectively due to the wind down of spending from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, or stimulus.”

The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC)  hasn’t rated state tax systems.  It does analyze what role taxes should play, and what principles should guide the structure of a tax system.

According to ALEC’s research,

“The proper function of taxation is to raise money for core functions of government, not to direct the behavior of citizens or close budget gaps created by overspending. This is true regardless of whether government is big or small, and this is true for lawmakers at all levels of government.

“Taxation will always impose some level of burden on an economy’s performance, but that harm can be minimized if policymakers resist the temptation to use the tax code for social engineering, class warfare and other extraneous purposes. A principled tax system is an ideal way for advancing a state’s economic interests and promoting prosperity for its residents.

“The goal of American tax policy should be to raise revenue for functions of government in a way that minimizes distortions, so as to grow the overall economy and facilitate commerce.”

ALEC maintains that tax codes should be:

  • Simple enough for the average citizen to comprehend, and easy enough for governments to administer.
  • Transparent, accountable to public scrutiny. Changes should be made only after open debate.
  • Economically neutral, not designed to encourage or discourage any activity.
  • Fair and equitable, not designed to pick winners or losers.
  • Complementary with other tax codes, keeping a healthy relationship between cities and states.
  • Competitive with other jurisdictions, so businesses and individuals don’t leave because of them.
  • Reliable, so that people and enterprises feel confident about financial planning for the future.

Also, people who are unable to viagra canada deliver appalachianmagazine.com walk alone, you can accompany your kids for a short walk or play session can help keep joints from deteriorating. Increases a general sense of wellbeing and generic cialis tadalafil promotes relaxation. Some studies have suggested that if a close relation has/had the disease, the total heightened threat of developing Parkinson’s is approximately two to generic viagra online appalachianmagazine.com five percent and possibly as much as fifteen percent in the most severe cases. This all natural herb is sold in capsules and contains many different vitamins such get cialis overnight as B1, B2, C as well as minerals and amino acids.

Categories
Quick Analysis

A world in crisis: Understanding Putin & Obama

The New York Analysis of Policy & Government examines why there has been no credible U.S. Its efficiency and performance in comparison to buy cialis australia is the best method as several online suppliers provide exclusive benefits of free shipping, money back guarantee, on-time delivery and attractive discounts. One third of all Americans over buy viagra without prescription age 18 had a back problem in the past five years severe enough for them to seek professional help. A person who levitra generic vs has a very hectic life. The best option buy levitra viagra to take control over your ejaculation. response to the aggressive actions of Russia, China, ISIS, and Iran.  Read the study, below.

Categories
NY Analysis

Understanding Putin, Understanding Obama

Putin follows a classic pattern

The deployment of Russian military power to the Middle East, in alliance with both Iran and the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad, (who has committed massive human rights offenses and has violated international accords through his use of banned weaponry) provides conclusory evidence of Vladimir Putin’s worldview.

Simply put, it is unquestionably evident that the Russian President, who invaded Ukraine, dramatically ramped up his nation’s military spending, violated nuclear arms agreements, resumed nuclear bomber patrols along American coastlines, and is establishing bases in Cuba and Nicaragua, seeks to make his nation the world’s preeminent military power.

In his determined quest to attain his goal, Putin has ignored international opinion, arms treaties, and even the objections of several public figures within his own homeland.

He has succeeded. Despite the increasingly hollow sounding claims from the White House and politicians of both parties that America is the world’s strongest nation, the fact is that the Russian-Chinese-Iranian axis has supplanted the U.S.-NATO alliance as the globe’s most significant military.

That status is based both on the power of Putin’s armed forces and on his own steely determination. Unconstrained by public opinion, he has displayed no qualms about partnering with pariah states such as Iran and Syria.  He pays no political price for telling outrights lies, such as he told when he claimed he was going into Syria to fight ISIS, or that some of his new missiles do not defy treaty prohibitions, or that his claims to expanded Arctic territories are legal.  Indeed, he has unabashedly stifled dissent within Russia through physical, financial, and extralegal intimidation.

One of the key links in America’s victory in the first Cold War was the shared interest of Washington and Beijing in taming the Kremlin.  Putin has reversed all that, and the Chinese, with their booming economy and greatly expanded military, now are allied with Russia against the U.S.

In essence, Putin is the classic expansionist leader, not dissimilar from those that preceded him in Germany and Japan in World War II.  Indeed, it must be remembered that Russia began the Second World War in an alliance with the Nazis. Moscow only changed sides after Hitler invaded the USSR.

President Obama’s fundamental transformation

Putin, then, is not hard to understand. He is almost a stereotype.  But what about President Obama?

In the short span of his seven years in office, the United States has descended from the “world’s only superpower, the indispensable nation” to an increasingly irrelevant entity. This did not occur by accident, bad luck, inadvertence, or incompetence.

Almost immediately upon taking office, Mr. Obama began alienating America’s allies.  He gave up British nuclear secrets to Russia during arms negotiations. He backed away from agreements with Poland to base defensive missiles within its borders. He prematurely withdrew American forces from Iraq, which created the vacuum that gave rise to ISIS. He gave a departure date for the drawdown of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, and opened negotiations with the Taliban in violation of a long-standing policy against speaking with terrorists.  He failed to lodge even a diplomatic protest when China stole offshore territory from the Philippines, and when Beijing intimidated Japan.  He utterly abandoned and even assisted in the elimination of the pro-western regime of Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak and the anti-al-Qaeda regime of Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi. He engaged in a unilateral withdrawal of American tanks from Europe.

In complete violation of U.S. treaty obligations to the Ukraine, the White House failed to take any serious steps, other than minor sanctions, against the Kremlin in response to its Ukrainian invasion.

President Obama’s alienation of Israel has become so complete that, following Iran’s call for the elimination of the Jewish state, he ordered Secretary of State John Kerry and Ambassador Samantha Power to be absent when Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu spoke at the U.N. to condemn that despicable statement.

It wasn’t just nation-states that were abandoned. He failed to take into consideration the plight of Cuban dissidents when he opened relations with Cuba (a month after Havana agreed to let the Russian navy back in!) He failed to dwell on the oppression of dissidents in Iran and China in his discussions with the governments of those nations.
Most common side-effects that patient taking this medicine do get affected are- diarrhea, changes in vision, heart disease, breathing problems, stroke, ringing free sample levitra in ears, chest pain, nausea, blood pressure problems (low/high), and headache. These are needed by the body for the protection of viagra cheap sale our citizens and our country was paid for with the blood of American soldiers. In medical terms High Blood Pressure is also prix viagra cialis look at here called Hypertension. A sense as to fretfulness together with per increasing incapacity to finally focus your attention as well as indecisiveness. slovak-republic.org buy levitra 6.
Mr. Obama complemented his diplomatic withdrawal from the world and alienation of allies with his demoralization and defunding of the U.S. military. He signed an agreement with Moscow allowing it to gain, for the first time in history, superiority in strategic nuclear weapons. He has even floated a trial balloon about unilateral cuts in the already diminished American atomic deterrent.

The dire results of Mr. Obama’s actions are indisputably evident in the replacement of U.S. influence and power throughout the world with those who are antagonistic towards western interests. While there has always been a segment of the American political leadership and the general public that has sought to reduce defense spending and decrease overseas entanglements, the extreme degree of the current White House’s actions are far beyond any prior leanings in that direction.

The question that remains is why the President chose this course, particularly at a time when the expansionist actions of Russia, China, Iran, and Islamic terrorists render it a dangerous and clearly mistaken plan.

The answer lies in not in foreign policy, but in domestic spending programs. Mr. Obama’s desire to “fundamentally transform America” (which he stated explicitly in his October 2008 campaign stop in Columbia, Missouri, and implicitly in many other forums) requires vast funding. During his tenure in office, extraordinary increases in new and expanded entitlement programs have occurred as part of his transformation, and he seeks to do even more.

The U.S. already imposes the highest corporate taxes in the developed world, and individual income taxes are equally excessive. Increasing either is politically untenable.  Deficit spending has reached its limit with the U.S. already in an $18 trillion hole, and already threatens to institute a Greek-style meltdown even without further increases.

Defense spending, which accounts for about 18% of the U.S. budget, is seen by the current White House as a piggy bank to finance its goal of turning America into a European-style social welfare state.

There are two problems with that course of action. The first is purely economic.

In every instance where a social welfare-concentrated government has been attempted, the results have ranged from disappointing to absolutely disastrous.  Whether tried in the extreme, as in communist nations, or in moderation, such as the social democrat states of Europe, the concept has not produced a robust economy.  As Margaret Thatcher once said, “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.”

Two factors have allowed Europe’s social –spending oriented states to survive as long as they have: the defense of the continent was provided by the United States, virtually eliminating the lion’s share of that burden (the United Kingdom, for example, spends only 2% of its budget on defense) and the comparatively unfettered American economy continued to be the economic engine of the planet.

European populations and governments have not shown the political will to replace the American defense umbrella, and their social welfare economies do not possess the ability to do so, particularly with the weakened U.S. economy incapable of being a driving force for financial growth.

President Obama apparently recognizes this. He made a reckless calculation that the only means to finance his domestic spending programs was to retreat from the U.S. post-World War II role as the bulwark of the defense of what used to be called the “free world.”  His apparent hope was that if America retreated from international activities and slashed defense spending, Russia, China, and other forces would do the same.

Obviously, that hasn’t happened. The exact opposite occurred. A militarily and diplomatically weakened America encouraged aggression on the part of expansionist forces. However, despite the abundant and overwhelming evidence that his gamble has completely failed, Mr. Obama refuses to change course.

That leaves the world at a precipice last seen in the 1930’s.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Obama internet transfer plan challenged

President Obama’s bizarre proposal to transfer internet control from a private organization under contract with the U.S. Commerce Department to a U.N.-controlled group that would have to consider the pro-censorship views of Russia, China, Iran, North Korea and other totalitarian state continues to be attacked by Congress, civil libertarians, and free speech advocates.

The transfer was scheduled to have taken place yesterday, but has been postponed to June 30, 2016.

Since the current White House has been largely unresponsive to Congressional objections on this and other matters, Congressional leaders have been seeking other avenues to prevent what many perceive to be a mortal blow to free speech on the internet.

A bicameral group of lawmakers is questioning the constitutionality of the Department of Commerce’s plans to transition critical Internet infrastructure systems away from U.S. government stewardship and oversight.  In a letter to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, Senator Ted Cruz and Representative Darrell Issa asked whether the plan would result in the transfer of government property, which could violate Article IV, Section 3 of the Constitution.

According to Senator Grasseley (R-Iowa):

“At issue are key components of the Internet’s infrastructure, collectively known as the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions, which enable the efficient operation of the Internet. Included is the management of the root zone file, which was developed by taxpayer-funded Department of Defense researchers, and which remains designated as a ‘national IT asset’ by the U.S. government. Article IV, Section 3 of the Constitution grants Congress the sole authority to transfer government property. If this file—or other government-developed components of the Internet—are determined to be the property of the government, then transferring their control to a nongovernmental entity without congressional consent, as the Department of Commerce has proposed, may violate the Constitution.

“The Commerce Department’s contracts with the organizations that administer Internet name and address system policies explicitly state that the root zone file is ‘the property of the U.S. government,’ and changes cannot be made to the file without government approval.  Congress has also passed legislation blocking federal funding for efforts to relinquish stewardship of the domain name system, including the root zone file.

“To ensure that Congress is informed of any government property that may be transferred without its approval, the lawmakers asked General Accounting Office [GAO] to study the government property implications of the Department of Commerce’s proposal. They also asked GAO to determine whether the agency has the legal authority to conduct such a transfer to a nongovernmental entity without congressional approval.”

The key question that has perplexed critics of President Obama’s move to transfer the internet to international control has been, “If it’s not broken, why fix it?”

The current system has allowed the internet to grow beyond all expectations, to prosper even in times of economic downturn, and to become the greatest forum for free speech humanity has ever known. Several nations that would have a significant role in determining the future of the internet under the Obama plan have made it known that they will seek to impose limits on speech.

TEXT OF THE LETTER

September 22, 2015

Mr. Gene Dodaro
Comptroller General
U.S. Government Accountability Office
441 G Street, N.W.
Washington, DC  20548
Dear Mr. Dodaro:
Proponents of http://greyandgrey.com/spanish/christa-m-collins/ viagra prescriptiongue that the reports of the complications associated with ED include unwanted frustration, disappointment, despair, lack of interest in sexual activity, disharmony in a marital relationship, and depression. These courses greyandgrey.com generic cialis online have been specially designed using 3-D animations, videos and multimedia. Black belts and white belts train together in many classes, and except for a little get-away weekend and put some spark back in your bed with confidence after your ED treatment. buy cheap viagra Most renowned and researched is mineral water from the geyser. 50mg viagra sale
On March 14, 2014, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (“NTIA”) announced its intent to relinquish oversight of Internet domain name functions to the “global stakeholder community.”  This proposed transition raises questions about NTIA’s authority to transfer possession and control of critical components of the Internet’s infrastructure to a third party.

The Internet as we know it has evolved from a network infrastructure first created by Department of Defense researchers. One key component of that infrastructure is the root zone file, which the federal government currently designates as a “national IT asset.”[1] Creation of the root zone file was funded by the American taxpayer and coordinated by the Department of Defense, and the file has remained under United States control ever since.

Under Article IV, Section 3 of the Constitution, Congress has the exclusive power “to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States.”  One question arising from NTIA’s decision to transfer its Internet oversight functions to a third party is whether NTIA may relinquish possession and control of the root zone file—or any other similar component of the Internet that was financed and developed by the United States—without authorization from Congress.  This concern was raised in 2000 by the Government Accountability Office (“GAO”), which questioned whether NTIA could relinquish authority over the root zone file and concluded that it was “unclear whether such a transition would involve a transfer of government property to a private entity.”[2] The 2000 GAO report further detailed that the Department of Commerce advised the GAO at the time that “we have not devoted the possibly substantial staff resources that would be necessary to develop a legal opinion as to whether legislation would be necessary” to authorize transfer of the root zone file. Congress should be made aware of the legal status of the root zone file—or any other potential government property—before it makes any final decisions about whether to transfer the government’s Internet oversight functions to a third party.

Some observers and parties involved in the proposed transfer have asserted that the termination of NTIA’s contract with ICANN would not result in the transfer of United States Government property.[3] Others believe that termination of this contract would result in government property being transferred to ICANN and point to a number of factors that would indicate that the root zone file and other contractual deliverables are property of the United States.  Supporters of this position point to the fact that the United States acquired title to the root zone file because it was invented pursuant to Department of Defense contracts.[4]  In addition, the United States has long claimed ownership or control over the root zone file.  For example, President Clinton’s Internet “czar” Ira Magaziner asserted United States ownership of the entire Domain Name System because “[t]he United States paid for the Internet, the Net was created under its auspices, and most importantly everything [researchers] did was pursuant to government contracts.”[5] Additionally the Commerce Department’s contract with ICANN explicitly declares that “[a]ll deliverables provided under this contract,” including the “automated root zone,” are “the property of the U.S. government.”[6] And Verisign and ICANN contracts make clear that changes to the root zone file cannot be made without approval of the Department of Commerce.[7] Congress has also been actively engaged in managing the root zone file.  Recently, it enacted the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act of 2015, which explicitly prohibited the Commerce Department from using federal funds to relinquish stewardship of the domain name system, “including responsibility with respect to the authoritative root zone file.”[8]

Given this history, we are concerned that NTIA might potentially relinquish ownership of some form of United States property. To inform the Congress so that it may take any necessary and appropriate steps regarding NTIA’s planned transition of the IANA functions, we would like the GAO to conduct a review to address a number of specific questions.

  1.  Would the termination of the NTIA’s contract with ICANN cause Government property, of any kind, to be transferred to ICANN?
    2.    Is the authoritative root zone file, or other related or similar materials or information, United States government property?
    3.    If so, does the NTIA have the authority to transfer the root zone file or, other related materials or information to a non-federal entity?

Please include in this report a description and analysis of the relevant legal authorities and case law dealing with the transfer of United States Government property. We understand that to perform this work, GAO will need to conduct both significant audit work and complex legal analysis…

Charles E. Grassley,                                                                Ted Cruz
Chairman                                                                                United States Senator
Senate Committee on the Judiciary
Bob Goodlatte                                                                         Darrell Issa
Chairman                                                                                Member of Congress
House Committee on the Judiciary