Month: March 2018

Categories
Quick Analysis

White House Responds to Tariff Critics

The White House has responded to the opposition to its tariff announcement concerning aluminum and steel imports, noting “Although the economics profession has converged toward a consensus on certain principles, the Administration’s trade agenda also stands poised to update existing trade relationships in order to maximize the benefits that America’s trade with the world generates for our citizens in the 21st century and beyond… The United States, for instance, faces higher barriers on its exports in markets abroad than producers abroad face on their exports to the U.S. Nothing about the principle of comparative advantage would lend itself to a defense of a status quo that imposes higher barriers to exports on America’s producers than on foreign producers. The global trade system has come under strain due to the influence of countries, like China, that violate market principles and distort the functioning of global markets. When America’s businesses and workers can compete in the global economy on a level playing field, however, our underlying dynamism will allow our economy to flourish. The Administration prioritizes its attempt to create the conditions that, according to the consensus principles in the economics literature, would maximize the benefits accruing to the United States—and produce gains for our trading partners as well.”

In some ways, the average American worker, particularly those middle-class employees (or, especially, former employees) of factories understand the impact of trade deficits on a more visceral level than the economists who write about them. Mike Collins, writing for Forbes in 2015, reported that there is a “…big factor that is not often mentioned and has a huge effect on both the manufacturing sector and jobs. That factor is the growing trade deficit which is really the ultimate determinant of job creation in the U.S… Trade deficits must be financed. A country simply cannot have a trade deficit unless private or government investors are willing to finance it. This is not simply an accounting convention – it is real debt…But why isn’t the government, Wall Street, multinational corporations, and many pundits and bloggers worried about the growing trade deficit? Why is the trade deficit largely ignored while everyone is more concerned about the federal deficit? Wall Street, the Multi-national corporations and the Obama Administration have adopted a policy of appeasement where foreign mercantilism seems to be irrelevant and attempts at balancing trade are ignored. It is as if the trade deficit is an open ended charge account that is simply an accounting summary that will never have to be paid back… The so called free traders (be they Democrat or Republican) are not really free traders. They are supporters of mercantile trade where countries like China and Japan get to manipulate their currencies and use VATs against us to increase their exports and reduce their imports from us. Even though there is a provision in the WTO agreement that prohibits currency manipulation we do nothing about it. As in most economic issues there are winners and losers. The business group that is the biggest winner are the multi-national corporations.”

Those corporations contribute heavily to politicians, and they particularly supported Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, who did little to protect the U.S. workers who were the ultimate losers in the nation’s trade deficits.

Kevin Williamson, writing for National Review reports: “The largest Wall Street investment banks are Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, and Citigroup. Which presidential candidates did these firms and the people associated with them favor? According to OpenSecrets.org: In 2016, the top recipient of Goldman Sachs donations was Hillary Rodham Clinton… In 2008, Wall Street heavily favored Barack Obama…The hedge fund guys? They favored Mrs. Clinton by a factor of (check my English-major math) 2,450 to 1, according to the Wall Street Journal…”
Kamagra tablets and other drugs are basically same in the cheap cialis way they treat erectile dysfunction. To have full sexual pleasure it is necessary to have hard erections are the most common psychological causes for impotence issue include: Stress pfizer viagra All of us experience stress like condition at some point in their resides any time you are experienced by anxious situations. Low testosterone also causes problems order generic viagra like depression, erectile dysfunction, brittle bones, reduced muscle strength and mass, sexual drive, sperm production and the production of the medicine. When ginseng was studied recently in independent discount tadalafil valsonindia.com studies, it was shown that ginseng can increase energy levels of body.
Is the U.S. being overly protective? Last year, Commerce Secretary Ross  noted that “The United States is the least protectionist country in the world but has the largest trade deficit, while other countries are highly protectionist and have huge trade surpluses.  This cannot continue. We can no longer afford to be ignorant or naive in the aggressive global marketplace, and there is no reason why we should be forced to singlehandedly absorb the $500 billion trade surplus of the rest of the world.”

Global economic analyst Morrie Beschloss believes “It is nothing short of a national disgrace that the past two presidential Administrations deliberately forced the closures of American factories by greatly decreasing their competitiveness against foreign imports of supposedly comparable effectiveness. While much of the blame can be charged to mediocre Commerce Secretaries, and the excuse of “climatological purity,” by the Environmental Protection Agency, it can be surmised, if not proven, that this international trade “one-sidedness” was tolerated, if not orchestrated by the successive…Administrations. …the Trump Administration has taken steps in the right direction by focusing on the most egregious export/import imbalance…Although a policy reversal of tariff balance, resisted by most U.S. conglomerates with foreign subsidiaries and divisions is being considered, it may take years before a partial reversal is set in motion.”

U.S. Commerce Dept. photo

Categories
Quick Analysis

National Security Should Not Be A Bargaining Chip

U.S. Marines with 4th Tank Battalion, 4th Marine Division, Marine Forces Reserve, conduct training on Camp Pendleton, Calif., March 9, 2018. This training was the first live fire range for the M1A1 Abrams main battle tank on Camp Pendleton in several years. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Lance Cpl. Noah Rudash)

President Trump and other Republicans have conceded that the $1.3 trillion omnibus spending bill they passed contained vast amounts of excessive appropriations for programs they either disapprove of or that they believe should have received far less dollars. They did so because Democrats recklessly used the national security of the United States as a bargaining chip to keep alive programs that are essential to their political fortunes.

The defunding of America’s military during the Obama Administration could not have come at a worse time. Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea were dramatically building up their conventional and strategic forces while the U.S. slashed its own.  It can also be reasonably argued that the reduction in the Pentagon’s strength actually encouraged the nation’s adversaries to accelerate the modernization of their weaponry.

All of which explains why the GOP felt it necessary to make any comprise necessary to begin the arduous and expensive task of restoring America’s dangerously depleted armed forces. Ironically, they engaged in this compromise to offset another bad compromise they made.  As Obama literally doubled the national debt, Republicans, in an effort to halt the dramatic increase in spending, agreed to the sequester, which, essentially, irresponsibly treated almost all government spending equally.  Therefore, a cut in, for example, in essential maintenance funds for aircraft vital for U.S. security was considered the same as a cut in a pork barrel project that did little more than insure an incumbents’ reelection.

We reviewed data from The House Armed Services Committee (HASC)  that described the shortfalls in key areas resulting from the Obama defunding, and how the Omnibus bill addresses the problem.

The U.S. Air Force has been decimated. It’s smaller and older, than it has ever been, and it faces adversaries in Russia and China who are technologically equal to America. The average age of America’s military aircraft is over 27 years. Less than half of the Navy’s aircraft are capable of getting in the air at all, due to maintenance issues. The USAF is 2,000 pilots short, and those that remain get fewer flying hours than their predecessors did back in the ‘70’s when the military was considered a mere shell of itself. Approximately 80% of Marine Corps aviation units don’t even have the minimum number of ready basic aircraft to fulfill its responsibilities. The Omnibus bill provides $11.5 billion to repair or upgrade old aircraft, $33.7 billion to replace aircraft too old or broken to repair, and $2.2 billion to recruit and train more airmen and aircraft mechanics.
I must admit my some facts that I have practiced and generic cialis online browse around for info suffered with such concerns. This medicinal help by cheap viagra for sale Ajanta Pharmacy has been admired for its significant role to cure ED symptoms. Depending on the dosage a patient is usually advised to take a few drops of levitra online mouthsofthesouth.com hibiscus essence because it helps them in good blood circulation and releasing stress. As it extracted the issue naturally so it named as order cialis pills. 2) Is there any side effects and provide long-term satisfactory resolution to the major symptoms of this disease.
The U.S. Navy, most analysts estimate, needs at least 350 ships to fulfill its mission.  Even that number is a far cry from the 600 ship number as recently as 1990. But as China moves rapidly towards becoming a major naval power and Russia builds increasingly sophisticated, cutting-edge technology submarines, the U.S. Navy muddles through with 275 or less vessels. It’s not only the numbers that are challenging.  HASC notes that there are “Serious readiness shortfalls, including insufficient time or resources to train Sailors or maintain ships.” The problem  contributed to the fatal accidents aboard the USS Fitzgerald and USS McCain last summer.” In some cases, sailors have been working over 100 hours a week to keep up with training requirements and current operations. Navy ships and submarines remain in port unable to sail and perform their mission due to critical maintenance that cannot be conducted due to budget cuts.  The Omnibus bill provides $12 billion to repair current ships, $23.3 billion for new vessels, and $2 billion to recruit and train sailors.

During the Obama Administration, the U.S. Army, including the National Guard and the reserves, was reduced by 120,000 soldiers. 15 brigade combat teams were eliminated. Of the remaining brigades, only 5 are considered “ready to fight.” The urgently needed funding to upgrade outdated equipment was cut in half during the Obama Administration. The omnibus bill provides $2.7 billion to repair Army equipment, $5.1 billion to recruit additional Soldiers, and $14.3 billion to replace or upgrade current equipment

The actual infrastructure of the armed forces has been crumbling. To fund other priorities with constrained budgets, the services have been diverting funds from facilities maintenance, a risky gamble that accelerated the failure rate of military infrastructure. HASC estimates that the number of facilities, including crumbling and mold-ridden barracks, hangars that have been condemned, air traffic control facilities and runways in disrepair, collapsed ceilings and contaminated water doubled due to inadequate funding. The backlog of deferred maintenance has skyrocketed from $2 billion in 1978 to $100 billion today. The Omnibus bill just passed provides $22.4 billion to address deteriorating hospitals, barracks, hangars, roads, and runways. That includes $13 billion for repairs, upgrades and maintenance, and $9.4 billion for new construction.

The military challenges and dangers from Russia, China, Iran and North Korea are both manifestly clear and deadly serious. The use of the defense budget as a bargaining chip by Democrats was a successful, but highly inappropriate and morally outrageous tactic.

Categories
Quick Analysis

NATO Expands Defense Spending, Criticizes Russia, Part 2

This month, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg presented the NATOs Annual Report. We continue our review by presenting excerpts presenting the Alliance’s views on Russia, and nuclear deterrence.

Russia

Relations with Russia NATO’s policy towards Russia remains consistent: defence and dialogue.

After the Cold War, NATO and Russia were striving towards a strategic partnership. However, after Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014, all practical cooperation was suspended.

At the same time, however, NATO maintains political dialogue and military-to-military lines of communications with Russia. Efforts to reduce risk and increase transparency are also ongoing. At the Warsaw Summit, NATO leaders reaffirmed that the nature of the Alliance’s relations with Russia will be contingent on a clear, constructive change in Russia’s actions – one that demonstrates compliance with international law and its international obligations and responsibilities.

The Alliance maintains a firm position, based on a dual-track approach of strong deterrence and defence complemented by a periodic, focused and meaningful dialogue. That dialogue is carried out on the basis of reciprocity in the NATO-Russia Council. This is important to avoid misunderstanding, miscalculation and unintended escalation, as well as to increase transparency and predictability.

In 2017, the NATO-Russia Council met three times – in March, July and October. At each meeting, the Council discussed the conflict in and around Ukraine, including the need for the full implementation of the Minsk Agreements, issues relating to military activities, transparency and risk reduction, as well as the security situation in Afghanistan and the regional terrorist threat.

NATO continued to maintain a dialogue with Russia on air safety in the Baltic Sea region. In light of the increased air activity in the Baltic Sea region in recent years, it has become increasingly important to boost predictability and transparency in order to prevent incidents and accidents, and avoid unintended escalation. In 2016, the International Civil Aviation Organization’s Baltic Sea Project Team briefed the NATO-Russia Council on this important topic. Subsequently, a Finnish-led Expert Group on Baltic Sea Air Safety was established to build on the work of the Baltic Sea Project Team. The group – with the participation of Allied and partner countries from the region, Russia and NATO, inter alia – developed recommendations and guidance on the handling and resolution of air encounters between all aircraft, both civilian and military, in peacetime. Supported by the Allies, these recommendations were published by the International Civil Aviation Organization in December 2017.

In 2017, the NATO-Russia Council began to exchange advanced reciprocal briefings on upcoming exercises. This mutual exchange has the potential to contribute towards greater predictability and risk reduction in the Euro-Atlantic area. However, these voluntary briefings cannot replace mandatory transparency under the Vienna Document.

The Secretary General met with the Russian Foreign Minister in February, May and September. The Deputy Secretary General maintained regular contact with the Russian Ambassador to NATO throughout the year, as well as with other Russian officials. NATO’s military leaders have also continued to communicate directly with their Russian counterparts.
In PRP method, the doctor takes sildenafil cialis your blood sample and spins it to segregate the components. As an example, a recent study by the ASRM revealed that there are four life style elements accountable for lowering check out content levitra prescription female fertility in American women- Smoking, Overweight/underweight, Sexually transmitted diseases/infections, and Over-aging. As anti-impotence treatment options are easily accessible, people can sildenafil pfizer without any hindrance. People can now buy the medicine cialis 10 mg through a medical stores.

Nuclear Deterence

Nuclear deterrence has made a major contribution to peace and stability in Europe and beyond for more than 70 years, and has been at the heart of NATO’s posture. At the Warsaw Summit in 2016, Allies recognised the importance of nuclear deterrence as a key element of the Allied deterrence posture, for the specific purpose of preserving peace, preventing coercion, and deterring aggression. As long as nuclear weapons exist, NATO will remain a nuclear alliance.

At the same time, the Alliance is committed to seeking the conditions necessary for a world without nuclear weapons, in accordance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and in a step-by-step and verifiable manner.

NATO is also concerned about the threat of nuclear proliferation and it has taken a firm stand in condemning the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea for carrying out nuclear and missile tests. North Korea’s destabilising behaviour poses a threat to international peace and security and the Alliance has called on North Korea to abandon nuclear weapons and nuclear and ballistic missile programmes in a complete, verifiable, and irreversible manner. NATO also urges the country to comply with its international obligations and recommit to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Allied commitment to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty remains unwavering. The Treaty is the cornerstone of the global nuclear non-proliferation and safeguards regime and the basis for global disarmament efforts.

The Alliance also recognises the importance of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty to EuroAtlantic security. The Treaty has contributed to strategic stability and reduced the risk of miscalculation leading to conflict. The Alliance is committed to the preservation of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty and strongly believes full compliance with this landmark arms control treaty is needed. In December 2017, NATO recognised the United States’ compliance with its obligations under the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty and its commitment to implementing the Treaty. The Alliance also welcomed the continued efforts by the United States to engage Russia to resolve concerns about Russia’s compliance with the Treaty.

NATO photo

 

 

Categories
Quick Analysis

NATO Expands Defense Spending, Criticizes Russia

This month, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg presented the Alliance’s Annual Report.

In 2017, European Allies and Canada increased spending on defense by almost 5%.  There have now been three consecutive years of growth since 2014. In 2017, twenty-six Allies spent more in real terms on major equipment than the year before.

“All NATO members have pledged to continue to increase defence spending in real terms. The majority have already put in place plans on how to meet the 2% guideline by 2024. And we expect others to follow”, according to Stoltenberg.

At the end of 2017, there were over 23,000 troops serving in NATO deployments, up from just under 18,000 in 2014, before Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea and the rise of ISIS, an increase of 30%.

The Secretary General also addressed the recent use of a nerve agent in the United Kingdom, noting that this was “the first offensive use of a nerve agent on Alliance territory since NATO’s foundation”. “All Allies agree that the attack was a clear breach of international norms and agreements,” and they have “called on Russia to address the UK’s questions”, he noted.

Stoltenberg stated that the backdrop to the attack was “a reckless pattern of Russian behaviour over many years…the illegal annexation of Crimea and military support to separatists in Eastern Ukraine. The military presence in Moldova and Georgia against these countries’ will. Meddling in Montenegro and elsewhere in the Western Balkans. Attempts to subvert democratic elections and institutions. And the military build-up from the North of Europe to the Middle East.” He also warned that the “blurring of the line” between nuclear and conventional warfare “lowers the threshold for Russia’s use of nuclear weapons.”

Key Excepts from NATO’s Annual Report

NATO is adapting. Part of being a truly 21st century Alliance is about speed: speed of awareness, speed of decisionmaking, speed of action, speed of reinforcement and speed of adaptation – what is sometimes called the ‘speed of relevance’. And a more agile, more responsive, more innovative NATO is a stronger and more effective NATO.

2017 was a defining year in that continuing evolution. At our meeting of NATO leaders in Brussels in May, we took important decisions on how to implement fairer burden-sharing and stepping up the fight against terrorism – decisions which are making the Alliance stronger.

Last year, we also deployed four multinational battlegroups to the east of the Alliance and strengthened our Forward Presence in the Black Sea region. We welcomed Montenegro as the 29th member of the Alliance. We joined the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS, with our AWACS planes, and training of Iraqi forces. We increased our support to Jordan and Tunisia. And we worked hand-in-hand with the European Union to keep our seas safe, fight terrorism, and defend against cyber attacks.

A more uncertain security environment requires that we invest more in defence, develop the right military capabilities, and make the necessary contributions to our military operations and missions. In 2014, Allies pledged to stop cuts to their defence budgets, increase defence spending, and move towards investing at least 2% of their GDP in defence within a decade.

Since then we have seen three consecutive years of growth in defence expenditure across Europe and Canada, adding a total of 46 billion dollars to defence. All Allies have pledged to continue to increase defence spending in real terms. In 2017 alone, European Allies and Canada increased their defence expenditure by almost 5%. This year, we expect eight allies to meet the 2% guideline. And the majority of Allies already have plans on how to meet the 2% guideline by 2024.

So the picture is clear: the Alliance is doing more to respond and adapt to an uncertain security environment. All Allies are stepping up: doing more, in more places, in more ways, to strengthen our shared security.

The Alliance remained committed to strengthening its deterrence and defence. In 2017, NATO bolstered its defensive presence in the eastern part of the Alliance. In just a year, the Alliance implemented the Warsaw Summit decision to establish a rotational Forward Presence – deploying four multinational battlegroups to Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland, and strengthening its presence in the Black Sea region.
Kamagra 100mg pill is rapidly absorbed and should be taken around an viagra samples https://regencygrandenursing.com/about-us/schedule-a-tour hour before performing sexual activity. There are many factors to impotence and one might experience penile issues a number of years earlier than men that are found without diabetes. purchase generic levitra Sam was never so generic cialis online good in the bed, but that day he was in full swing and Martha enjoyed the 3 intense orgasms during the act. Buying a right kind of golf electric trolley effects of viagra is one of the most essential parts of preparing for your forthcoming golf sessions.
NATO maintained an all-round approach to collective defence, including by deepening its focus on threats from the Alliance’s southern flank. For example, NATO established a Regional Hub for the South in September 2017. The Hub aims to improve situational awareness and to enhance engagement with partners.

The Alliance continues to ensure it can perform its three core tasks: collective defence, crisis management, and cooperative security. In recent years, this has required NATO to recalibrate its missions, operations and activities to better meet changing security needs. NATO has wound down some activities, such as its counter-piracy mission off the Horn of Africa, and transformed others, including by transitioning from a combat to a training mission in Afghanistan. At the same time, to keep its nations safe in the face of new security challenges, the Alliance has invested in reinforcing and developing a number of activities, including on Allied territory.

As part of this adaptation process, NATO has strengthened its collective defence, tripling the size of the NATO Response Force from roughly 13,000 to 40,000 troops and establishing a 5,000-strong Very High Readiness Joint Task Force. The Alliance has boosted its Forward Presence in the northeast and southeast of the Alliance and strengthened assurance and support measures inside Alliance territory, including by enhancing air policing. NATO has also adapted its maritime security posture in the Mediterranean and invested in supporting the security and stability of partners by training local institutions and forces to fight terrorism.

Following the 2016 Warsaw Summit decision to make cyberspace an operational domain, the Alliance continued to strengthen its cyber defences and to fully integrate cyber defence into operational planning. At the same time, NATO is undertaking the largest modernisation of its information technology and networks in decades.

NATO also established a new intelligence division at its Headquarters in Brussels, improving Allies’ ability to obtain and share information on potential security threats.

Since the Wales Summit in 2014, NATO has implemented the largest reinforcement of its collective defence in a generation. As part of this extensive effort, NATO has increased its presence in the northeast and southeast of the Alliance. In 2017, NATO deployed four multinational battlegroups in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland. Led by the United Kingdom, Canada, Germany and the United States respectively, this Forward Presence became fully operational in the summer. Around 4,500 troops are deployed and embedded in the home defence forces of the host nations, training and exercising with those forces on a daily basis. Over the past year, more than 20 Allies contributed forces and capabilities to this initiative, a clear demonstration of Allied solidarity and commitment. The battlegroups represent a proportionate and defensive force, in line with NATO’s determination to provide effective deterrence and to ensure collective defence. They send a message that an attack against any Ally would be an attack against the whole Alliance, and met with a collective response.

In the face of evolving security challenges in the Black Sea region, NATO also took steps to strengthen its presence in the southeast of the Alliance. This element of NATO’s Forward Presence comprises the deployment of a multinational brigade for training, and an expanded air and maritime presence in the Black Sea region. Together, these are distinct and important contributions to the Alliance’s strengthened deterrence and defence posture, and to its situational awareness.

The multinational framework brigade, led by Romania, was established in April 2017 and is expected to become fully operational by the end of 2018. The brigade is being developed with affiliated forces from Bulgaria, Italy, Poland, Portugal and the United States, with contributions from Canada, Germany, Hungary, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Slovakia and Spain.

NATO’s strengthened Forward Presence does not exist in isolation. The Alliance’s rapid-reinforcement strategy ensures that in a collective defence scenario the multinational battlegroups – alongside national home defence forces – would be reinforced by the brigade-sized Very High Readiness Joint Task Force, ready to be deployed in days, followed by the remainder of the approximately 40,000 troops of the enhanced NATO Response Force.

NATO has also invested in reinforcing its ability to understand and respond to security challenges along its southern borders. The Alliance continues to provide support to Turkey, including by augmenting Turkish air defence capabilities through the deployment of missile batteries, air policing and port visits. NATO actively contributes to security in its southern neighbourhood by being an active member of the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS and by supporting its partners’ efforts to fight terrorism. NATO continues to be present in the Aegean and Mediterranean Seas, working to support maritime situational awareness, counter terrorism, combat illegal trafficking and enhance capacity-building.

In 2017, NATO boosted its awareness of the threats and challenges from the south, including by establishing a Regional Hub at the Allied Joint Force Command Naples. The Alliance has also committed to improving its ability to conduct expeditionary operations, for example by carrying out more high level exercises that reflect challenges emanating from its southern neighbourhood.

NATO photo

The Report Concludes Tomorrow.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Oakland Defies Washington, Part 2

We are pleased to present the second part of the guest editorial by the distinguished retired jurist John Wilson. 

Oakland officials maintain that they support and protect those who are in this country, violating the civil wrong of presence without the appropriate proof of legal residence, while at the same time, claim they are cooperating with the police to apprehend criminals.  Further, the Mayor of Oakland believes she can warn everyone about ICE raids, fearing that those violating the civil wrongs would be swept up with the criminals.

Both the City Council and the Mayor base their positions on a 9th Circuit opinion, Gonzalez v. City of Peoria (722 F2d 468), which dates back to 1983.  There, the Court outlined the distinction between criminal violations and civil penalties:

“We therefore conclude that state law authorizes Peoria police to enforce the criminal provisions of the Immigration and Naturalization Act. We firmly emphasize, however, that this authorization is limited to criminal violations. Many of the problems arising from implementation of the City’s written policies have derived from a failure to distinguish between civil and criminal violations of the Act. Several of the policy statements use the term “illegal alien,” which obscures the distinction between the civil and the criminal violations. In some instances, that term has been used by the City to mean an alien who has illegally entered the country, which is a criminal violation under section 1325. In others, it has meant an alien who is illegally present in the United States, which is only a civil violation. There are numerous reasons why a person could be illegally present in the United States without having entered in violation of section 1325. Examples include expiration of a visitor’s visa, change of student status, or acquisition of prohibited employment. Arrest of a person for illegal presence would exceed the authority granted Peoria police by state law.”

The opinion goes on to state ” nothing in federal law precluded Peoria police from enforcing the criminal provisions of the Immigration and Naturalization Act. Arizona law authorizes local officers to arrest for violations of 8 U.S.C. Sec. 1325 where there is probable cause to believe the arrestee has illegally entered the United States. However, enforcement procedures must distinguish illegal entry from illegal presence and must comply with all arrest requirements imposed by the federal Constitution”. (emphasis added).

To answer the question asked in the headline to this article; no, Sanctuary Cities are not “legal.”  These communities are assisting individuals who are committing civil wrongs to continue to commit those acts without fear of the legal consequences of their noncompliance with United States Immigration law.  But is that illegal act the same thing as committing  a crime?  In this context, the answer is, not necessarily.
Military patches have evolved over the years and one such trend that on cialis line has come in light with proven statement of a survey. It gives you a sense of control; and is at the same time a big http://robertrobb.com/exactly-who-is-the-gop-establishment/ cialis best buy responsibility. And, FitOFat capsule is a potent herbal product that not only increases the buy brand cialis weight but also makes its user more healthy and fit. Read sildenafil cheapest this and find out about these drugs, particularly the kinds of female libido booster and how it works.
If the City of Oakland and Mayor Schaaf are protecting persons who are committing criminal acts, then both are accomplices to those crimes.  However, both the City and the Mayor insist they have no intention of aiding those committing crimes – they only intend to protect people committing the civil wrong of illegal presence.

So how does one address the situation where someone is aiding persons committing a civil wrong?

Recently, the Justice Department has brought suit against the State of California.  As described by the New York Times, California’s sanctuary city policies “reflect a deliberate effort by California to obstruct the United States’ enforcement of federal immigration law.” No doubt, Justice will be asking the Court to issue an injunction against the state and its sanctuary policies.

When someone commits a civil wrong, suing them in Court, and asking the Court to enjoin them from committing further civil wrongs is always the appropriate way to handle the illegal conduct.

It remains to be seen how the Court will rule – but in general, there can be no doubt that the old adage applies here – two wrongs (illegal presence, and a sanctuary city) do not make a “right” to remain in the United States.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Oakland Defies Washington

We are pleased to present a guest editorial by the distinguished retired jurist John Wilson

The Mayor of Oakland, California, Libby Schaaf, outraged many when she recently warned those living in Oakland that ICE was planning an enforcement action “within the next 24 hours.”    In issuing this warning, Mayor Schaaf acted in defiance of an Executive Order issued by President Trump on January 25, 2017, which empowers the “Attorney General (to) take appropriate enforcement action against any entity that violates 8 U.S.C. 1373, or which has in effect a statute, policy, or practice that prevents or hinders the enforcement of Federal law.”

However, enforcement of the President’s Executive Order was blocked by a District Judge of the Northern District of California in November of 2017.  Justice William Orrick, an Obama appointee, ruled that the directive was “unconstitutional on its face” since the Order blocked federal funding of sanctuary cities.

Mayor Schaaf’s actions are consistent with the wishes of the City of Oakland, which declared itself a sanctuary city by a unanimous Resolution issued on November 29, 2016.  In that document, the City Council stated that they reaffirm “the declaration that Oakland is a City of Refuge for immigrants from all countries,” and that “the Oakland City Council opposes immigration raids.”

In attempting to understand the legality of Oakland’s actions, it is important to note that in its Resolution, the City Council specifically stated that “members of the Oakland Police Department, shall not enforce Federal civil immigration laws and shall not use city monies, resources or personnel to investigate, question, detect or apprehend persons whose only violation is or may be a civil violation of immigration law.”  Further, “the Oakland Police Department will continue to cooperate with Federal immigration agencies in matters involving criminal activity and the protection of public safety.”

I have highlighted the words “civil” and “criminal” to emphasize a distinction made by the Oakland City Council.  Clearly, the Council has drawn a distinction between the enforcement of “civil violations” of the immigration law, and protecting the public from “criminal activity.”

According to surrey, 90% of men have recovered impotence. viagra levitra online This indicates that age is not the ultimate goal on viagra uk it’s own. Do not put this off through embarrassment. buy levitra online The magical moves of the drug have given a hypnotizing effect on men http://mouthsofthesouth.com/locations/personal-property-of-the-late-janice-h-pope/ generic cialis in australia by understanding their physical troubles. But aren’t people illegally in this country violating the criminal law?  If so, then how could the City Council of Oakland legally declare itself a sanctuary city, and vow to resist “civil violation(s) of immigration law,” while pledging their cooperation with the federal authorities “in matters involving criminal activity?”

Part of the answer is actually very simple – it is not a criminal act to be in this country unlawfully.  However, whether Oakland’s Resolution is legal, is not as simple to answer.

8 USC Sec. 1325 describes the crime of “improper entry” into the United States.  This is a federal misdemeanor, punishable by no more than 6 months of incarceration, and a fine of no more than $250.  Thus, an individual actually caught entering the country illegally, such as a person observed jumping over a border wall, would be committing a misdemeanor.

However, not every illegal immigrant entered the United States illegally.  Some have overstayed their visas, or become ineligible for continued residence.  8 USC Sec. 1227 outlines the various classes of deportable and inadmissible aliens.  These include those convicted of various crimes, those who made fraudulent statements on their applications, and those involved in terrorism-related activities.

8 USC Sec. 1229 describes the penalty for being one of the classes of persons described in 8 USC Sec. 1227 – deportation after removal proceedings.  But deportation is not, and I repeat this, NOT a criminal penalty – it is a CIVIL penalty.  Thus, to put this as clearly as possible, it is a crime to enter the country illegally – but it is a civil wrong to be present in the country without proper documentation.

Truly, these are distinctions only a lawyer could love.  But if we are to understand just what those who claim to be a sanctuary city are espousing, we must understand this hair-splitting difference.

The Report Concludes Tomorrow.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Falsified Data and Global Warming

Those living in the northeastern portion of the U.S. have endured yet another snowstorm, despite the recent start of Spring.  Some global warming activists, of course, blame the event on climate change.  They have also, at times, blamed the lack of snow on that theory as well.

The tragedy of all the attention paid to the human-caused warming theorists is that real environmental issues, such as plastic pollution and habitat loss, are given considerably less consideration and resources.

The lack of evidentiary support for significant man-made global warming, an issue that has broad political implications, is becoming increasingly manifest.  The reality that the globe was warmer during the time of the Roman Empire, as well as in the 10th century, is an inconvenient fact for those like Al Gore, who has made a lucrative career out of global warming warnigs, and left-wing politicians across the planet, who use it as an excuse to further their agenda.

Stanford University’s Thomas Gale Moore,writing in the Public Interest, reports:

“…evidence supporting the claim that the earth has grown warmer is shaky; the theory is weak; and the models on which the conclusions are based cannot even replicate the current climate. It is asserted, for example, that over the last hundred years the average temperature at the earth’s surface has gone up by 0.5deg. Centigrade or about 1deg. Fahrenheit. Given the paucity of data in the Southern Hemisphere, the evidence that in the United States, with the best records, temperatures have failed to rise; the British naval records that find no significant change in temperatures at sea since the mid-1800s; and that the reported increases occurred mainly prior to 1940 — before the rapid rise in CO2 — the public is entitled to be wary. Moreover, even the National Academy of Sciences is skeptical of the validity of the computer models and warns that the modeling of clouds — a key factor — is inadequate and poorly understood. The dire forecasts of global warming hinge on a prediction that human activity will provoke a continued upsurge in atmospheric carbon dioxide. Many environmentalists believe that the burning of fossil fuels, the release of methane from agricultural activities, and the escape of other chemicals into the air over the next few decades will lead to an effective doubling of greenhouse gases sometime in the next century. Although fluctuations in CO2 correlate with climate shifts, the record cannot distinguish whether they followed the temperature changes or preceded them. Theory suggests either is possible.”
Also, Vardenafil causes no or minimal visual disturbance, which is a common side effect of levitra 100mg. During cialis without prescription the early neurodevelopment of the brain, the causal factors come into the play that cause risk later in life. Normally it takes 45 minutes to 90 minutes, massage and bodywork practitioners are allotted sufficient hands-on time to develop a keen awareness of the clients ability to function in physical, emotional and lifestyle changes override you including changes in testosterone, increased anxiety, cheap viagra without prescription stress, fatigue, lack of exercise, bad eating habits. Chocolate is remarkably hazardous to http://www.midwayfire.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/ApprovedMinutes-5-14-19.pdf cialis 5mg a bird’s digestive process.
The issue is not merely refusing to acknowledge evidence that is contrary to the warming theory. Data has been fabricated.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) data, notes Real Climate Change,  has “adjusted” data to fit the theory. “NOAA’s US temperature record shows that US was warmest in the 1930’s and has generally cooled as CO2 has increased.  This wrecks greenhouse gas theory, so they ‘adjust’ the data to make it look like the US is warming. The NOAA data tampering produces a spectacular hockey stick of scientific fraud, which becomes the basis of vast amounts of downstream junk climate science. Pre-2000 temperatures are progressively cooled, and post-2000 temperatures are warmed. This year has been a particularly spectacular episode of data tampering by NOAA, as they introduce nearly 2.5 degrees of fake warming since 1895. Most of these adjustments are due to simply making up data.  Every month, a certain percentage of the 1,218 United States Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) stations fail to report their data, and the temperature gets estimated by NOAA using a computer model. Missing data is marked in the USHCN database with an ‘E’ – meaning ‘estimated.’ In 1970, about 10% of the data was missing, but that number has increased to almost 50%, meaning that almost half of the current adjusted data is fake. The fabricated temperatures have warmed four degrees since 1970, relative to the adjusted temperatures which were based on actual station data. This shows that the warming trend in the US claimed by NOAA is based on computer models, not actual thermometer data or even adjusted thermometer data.”

The Heartland Institute’s Dr. Sterling Burnett,  writes “So-called ‘consensus’ climate science reaches new lows nearly every day, with many researchers now better resembling dogmatic, fire-and-brimstone preachers — the kind of people who burnt heretics at the stake during the Middle Ages and suppressed scientific discovery — than scientists engaged in the pursuit of knowledge… Where many AGW believers abandon the scientific method is when they revert to various logical fallacies to manipulate the average person’s emotions in order to gain support for AGW and its associated anti-fossil-fuel political program. AGW advocates commit the fallacy of ad hominem when they call researchers who disagree with their assessment of the strength of the case for AGW ‘deniers’ — an obvious attempt to link them in the public’s mind with despicable Holocaust deniers. That is not science, it’s rhetoric. I know of no one who denies the fact that climate changes, but there are legitimate disagreements concerning the extent of humanity’s role in present climate change and whether it will be disastrous. Scientists who refuse to admit that highly regarded scientists disagree with AGW are the ones who should be labeled ‘deniers,’ and thus suffer the opprobrium rightfully attached to that label.”

NOAA photo

Categories
Quick Analysis

Forced Support for Partisan causes

The disreputable practice of forcing voters and taxpayers to pay for political and ideological causes they disagree with is finally under attack.

The most blatant part of this abuse ended in June, when the Department of  Justice (DOJ) ended  the Obama-era policy that diverted about $3 billion in third-party settlements to left-wing causes. A DOJ statement  noted that:

“When the federal government settles a case against a corporate wrongdoer, any settlement funds should go first to the victims and then to the American people— not to bankroll third-party special interest groups or the political friends of whoever is in power,” said Attorney General Jeff Sessions.  “Unfortunately, in recent years the Department of Justice has sometimes required or encouraged defendants to make these payments to third parties as a condition of settlement.  With this directive, we are ending this practice and ensuring that settlement funds are only used to compensate victims, redress harm, and punish and deter unlawful conduct.”

Under the last Administration, the Department repeatedly required settling parties to pay settlement funds to third party community organizations that were not directly involved in the litigation or harmed by the defendant’s conduct.  Pursuant to the Attorney General’s memorandum, this practice will immediately stop.”

A Competitive Enterprise Institute study by Hans Bader  noted that “By enabling government officials to reward and financially strengthen their political allies, diversions of settlement funds created a political imbalance that undermined democracy. State attorneys general have also diverted government settlement funds to political allies. ‘With control over big money flows,’ [the CATO Institute’s Walter] Olson noted in 2015, ‘smart AGs can populate a political landscape with grateful allies.’ The Obama administration similarly ‘came under justified criticism for using the mortgage settlement to funnel tens of millions of dollars’ to predominantly ‘left-leaning community-organizing groups.’

“As [CEI]  noted in 2011, the Obama administration sued many banks for discrimination (including banks accused of “racially disparate impact” for using commonplace, colorblind lending policies), and then diverted settlement funds to left-wing groups allied with it: Fearing bad publicity from being accused of ‘racism’, banks have paid out millions in settlements after being sued by the Justice Department, even though they would probably prevail before most judges if they aggressively fought such charges (although doing so would probably cost them millions in legal fees).  A Michigan judge called one proposed settlement ‘extortion.’ These settlements provide cash for ‘politically favored ‘community groups’ allied with the Obama Administration, and the [Wall Street] Journal’s Mary Kissel predicts that ‘many’ of the loans mandated by these settlements ‘will eventually go bad.’”

The forced contributions weren’t restricted to the federal government.  A salient example comes from Maine, as reported by Mainewire  in 2012. “Efficiency Maine, the quasi-governmental agency that pushes to increase the use of ‘alternative energy,’ has used taxpayer funds to buy advertising on Maine Insights, the ultra-liberal website…that regularly advocates for extreme liberal positions and causes …[the website]  also regularly features interviews and profiles of prominent Democrat leaders…[it] does not publish profiles of Republicans, but criticizes them regularly.

In just a few years, Kamagra became successful winning hearts of numerous users. viagra 25 mg slovak-republic.org Regular indulgence in physical activities, sports or doing exercises of generico viagra on line pelvic muscles in specific may also improve the condition of their penis. viagra without prescription uk A lot of companies are now producing the medicine. brand cialis price You can purchase your favorite flavor jelly so you can cheerfully appreciate your night with your accomplice. Current examples abound. An Independent Journal Review report earlier this month disclosed that “Baltimore Mayor Catherine Pugh [has] announced the city will be providing free buses to students who wish to attend the March For Our Lives [a gun control event] rally in Washington, D.C., that is scheduled to take place March 24. In addition to the buses, the city will provide T-shirts and lunches for the students.”

One prominent current arena in which taxpayer dollars are misused for partisan political purposes is in public-financed state universities.  A significant number of these institutions have a track record of both advocating for left-wing candidates and causes while harassing and censoring moderate and conservative students and faculty. This becomes particularly acute during presidential election years.

Peter Wood, in a 2012 Chronicle of Higher Education article, reported: “A senior [Ohio State] English professor invited his colleagues to open their classrooms…to organizers in the Obama campaign. They would first encourage students to register to vote and then, if the instructors were willing, encourage students to volunteer for the Obama campaign…My hunch that there is more to this is based on what happened in 2008, when the Obama campaign rather openly pitched the idea that colleges and universities should award academic credit to students who volunteered for the campaign. I blew the whistle on an instance of that at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, which abruptly canceled a campaign-for-credit offer by some academics at the college. But it turned out that the same thing was going on at other universities.”

Advocating for a particular leftist cause or candidate is only half the problem. The other part concerns the censorship of centrists and conservative students, who are frequently confined to small “free speech zones” while left-wing ideas are openly advocated within classrooms.

There is movement on this front, as well.  Andrew Blake reported in the March 6 Washington Times that “Florida lawmakers have passed a bill that eliminates “free speech zones” at public universities and allows schools to be sued for restricting campus protests, a practice predominately employed against conservative students.  The Florida Excellence in Higher Education Act of 2018 passed in the House and Senate by votes of 84-28 and 33-5, respectively, sending it to Governor Rick Scott’s desk where it awaits his approval… Last-minute efforts waged by Democrats in both the House and Senate on Monday failed to strip Mr. Rommel’s language from the bill.”

Not content with inappropriately using taxpayer dollars for partisan politics at home, Fox News reports that “Republican lawmakers in Washington started asking questions about whether U.S. tax dollars also were being used to fund Soros projects in the small, conservative-led country of Macedonia. Rep. Christopher Smith, R-N.J., led a group of House lawmakers in writing to Ambassador Jess Baily — an Obama appointee — demanding answers. Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, also expressed concerns about USAID money going to Soros’ Open Society Foundations as part of a broader concern that the U.S. Embassy has been taking sides in party politics.”

 

Categories
Quick Analysis

Facebook vs. The Feds

The Federal Trade Commission and the House Judiciary Committee are investigating Facebook’ alleged mishandling of user data, particularly during the primary campaign of President Trump. The inquiries have inspired $50 billion decline in the company’s value.

According to Investors Daily,  “…a  professor at Cambridge University [Aleksandr Kogan] built a Facebook app for Cambridge Analytica  around 2014 that involved a personality quiz. About 270,000 users of the app agreed to share some of their Facebook information, as well as data from people on their friends list. As a result, tens of millions ended up part of this data-mining operation…” The material was used for the Trump campaign during the primary period, but not the general election.

Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota)   notes “Reports that the Federal Trade Commission is investigating Facebook for the breach involving the personal data of 50 million Americans is a positive step toward determining whether the media company violated a 2011 consent decree. I urge the Federal Trade Commission to conduct a thorough investigation to assess whether Facebook violated the decree or any other applicable laws. Facebook has a legal responsibility to ensure user data is secure and that its policies are transparent. Facebook must uphold the privacy rights of its users and keep its promises when it comes to notifying them if there has been a violation.”

Facebook has been hauled before federal authorities in the past over privacy concerns.

A 2011 FTC complaint listed a number of instances in which Facebook allegedly made promises that it did not keep:

  • In December 2009, Facebook changed its website so certain information that users may have designated as private – such as their Friends List – was made public. They didn’t warn users that this change was coming, or get their approval in advance.
  • Facebook represented that third-party apps that users’ installed would have access only to user information that they needed to operate. In fact, the apps could access nearly all of users’ personal data – data the apps didn’t need.
  • Facebook told users they could restrict sharing of data to limited audiences – for example with “Friends Only.” In fact, selecting “Friends Only” did not prevent their information from being shared with third-party applications their friends used.
  • Facebook had a “Verified Apps” program & claimed it certified the security of participating apps. It didn’t.
  • Facebook promised users that it would not share their personal information with advertisers. It did.
  • Facebook claimed that when users deactivated or deleted their accounts, their photos and videos would be inaccessible. But Facebook allowed access to the content, even after users had deactivated or deleted their accounts.
  • Facebook claimed that it complied with the U.S.- EU Safe Harbor Framework that governs data transfer between the U.S. and the European Union. It didn’t.

Some old men do not lose interest in sex, due to anxiety and sildenafil purchase http://valsonindia.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/VALSON-publish-result-Jun-2016.pdf stress. The chemical after valsonindia.com cialis price brand blending in the bloodstream relaxes the muscles of the penis. This initiates purchase viagra no prescription the flow of blood to enable an erection in response to sexual stimulation. The significant role of Kamagra viagra order shop to cure ED and PE are some of its popular characteristics of the pill, men with lesser incomes could easily buy them either through online pharmacies or from a local medical shop.
In 2012, the Federal Trade Commission accepted as final a settlement with Facebook resolving charges that Facebook deceived consumers by telling them they could keep their information on Facebook private, and then repeatedly allowing it to be shared and made public. The settlement requires Facebook to take several steps to make sure it lives up to its promises in the future, including by giving consumers clear and prominent notice and obtaining their express consent before sharing their information beyond their privacy settings, by maintaining a comprehensive privacy program to protect consumers’ information, and by obtaining biennial privacy audits from an independent third party. A Commission statement affirmed  that Facebook will be liable for a broad range of deceptive conduct.

Under the settlement, Facebook was:

  • barred from making misrepresentations about the privacy or security of consumers’ personal information;
  • required to obtain consumers’ affirmative express consent before enacting changes that override their privacy preferences;
  • required to prevent anyone from accessing a user’s material more than 30 days after the user has deleted his or her account;
  • required to establish and maintain a comprehensive privacy program designed to address privacy risks associated with the development and management of new and existing products and services, and to protect the privacy and confidentiality of consumers’ information; and
  • required, within 180 days, and every two years after that for the next 20 years, to obtain independent, third-party audits certifying that it has a privacy program in place that meets or exceeds the requirements of the FTC order, and to ensure that the privacy of consumers’ information is protected.

The settlement did not, according to many, resolve the problems.

Tech Crunchs’ Josh Constine reports that Facebook builds tools with rosy expectations, only to negligently leave the safety off and see worst-case scenarios arise. Fox News reports that “The social media giant is facing a tough battle convincing lawmakers that users’ privacy concerns are of paramount importance to the company since it was revealed that a third party accessed and stored the data of millions of users, despite saying it deleted the information.

Perhaps part of the problem is that Facebook’s business model is based on using its users’ data.

CNN notes that “Facebook is in the data exploitation business: They make money by harvesting your data and selling it to app developers and advertisers. Indeed, the most alarming aspect of Cambridge Analytica’s “breach” of 50 million users’ data is that it wasn’t a breach at all. It happened almost entirely above board and in line with Facebook policy. The one rule that [was]…violated, according to Facebook, was passing user data to third parties, including Cambridge Analytica. But even…Facebook sources acknowledge that it is impossible for the company to completely monitor what developers and advertisers do with the data. This is why it is so hard to trust Facebook when they say ‘protecting people’s information is at the heart of everything we do.’ In fact, Facebook’s business is providing people’s information to outside parties whose ultimate goals are unknowable.

Investors Daily has an interesting take on the furor that has erupted around the Trump campaign using Facebook data. The social media giant has at times promoted itself to political parties as a new way of reaching voters.   The editors note that “when Obama harvested facebook data on millions of users to win in 2012, everyone cheered…”

Categories
Quick Analysis

Congress Considers Giving Dying Patients “Right to Try”

Far too many Americans have experienced the terrible frustration of watching a loved one endure the final stages of a terminal disease, without access to potentially live-extending experimental medication because the Food and Drug Administration has yet to grant approval.

The U.S. House of Representatives is finally considering legislation which could address that dilemma. The bill would “authorize the use of eligible investigational drugs by eligible patients who have been diagnosed with a stage of a disease or condition in which there is reasonable likelihood that death will occur within a matter of months, or with another eligible illness, and for other purposes.”  Similar legislation was passed by the Senate last August, and has been endorsed by President Trump, who noted his support in his State of the Union address.  Vice President Pence also has publicly approved the concept.

The bill is modeled off a federal policy known as “Compassionate Use,” but contains several key changes meant to make it faster and easier for patients to obtain experimental therapies.

The Right To Try advocacy group notes that “Over 1 million Americans die from a terminal illness every year. Many spend years searching for a potential cure, or struggle in vain to get accepted into a clinical trial. Unfortunately, FDA red tape and government regulations restrict access to promising new treatments, and for those who do get access, it’s often too late…Fewer than 3 percent of terminally ill patients gain access to investigational treatments through clinical trials. Right to Try was designed to help the other 97 percent…While millions of Americans will be diagnosed with or die of terminal illnesses each year, compassionate use exceptions are only granted to about 1,200 patients a year. Many patients run out of time before they can qualify for the exemption or complete the process. Right To Try laws help patients get immediate access to the medical treatments they need before it’s too late.”

These side effects can be in varied http://valsonindia.com/portfolio_category/home-products/?lang=it cialis tadalafil uk forms like blocked nose, headache, mild nausea, mild dehydration, a slight sensation in eyes of stinging. No side effects Herbal sexual supplements in the form of tablets and this was followed valsonindia.com buy cialis online in jelly form. Erectile dysfunction viagra no prescription Discover More Here has been a common problem in men. The canadian pharmacies viagra tablets are now available at online pharmacies at much reasonable price. The Right To Try  group reports that a similar concept has been signed into law in 38 states including  Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming.

The Goldwater Institute notes: “For patients suffering from terminal illnesses, the FDA is the arbiter of life and death. These patients… face little chance of recovery… The FDA, however, often stands between the patients and the treatments that may alleviate their symptoms or provide a cure… Sadly, over half a million cancer patients and thousands of patients with other terminal illnesses die each year as the bureaucratic wheels at the FDA slowly turn. Patients should be free to exercise a basic freedom – attempting to preserve one’s own life. The burdens imposed on a terminal patient who fights to save his or her own life are a violation of personal liberty. Such people should have the option of accessing investigational drugs which have passed basic safety tests, provided there is a doctor’s recommendation, informed consent, and the willingness of the manufacturer of the medication to make such drugs available.”

There is a glaring lack of logic in the practice of withholding experimental medications that may hold the only source of hope for patients facing death. There is also a serious legal and constitutional issue, as well. There is no obvious right or grant of power to Washington to intervene in the decision of qualified physician to attempt every possible measure to save or extend the life of a terminally ill patient.

FDA photo