Perspectives for the New Year

Perspectives On the New Year—————–

                A commentary

                By J. F. Kelly, Jr.

The year 2017 was a runaway train careening around bends but never quite derailing. Donald Trump’s first full year in office was not for the faint of heart and it left him with an historically low approval rating. Business leaders and the stock market, however, heartily approved, with the market reaching record highs. Unemployment continued to fall and the economy continued to grow toward the 3+% needed as a minimum to sustain an economy of our size and provide the jobs for a growing population. Much of the improvement can be attributed to a reduction in the burdensome regulations that hampered businesses during the Obama years and the prospects of corporate tax relief.

 

The tax relief came as a year-end present which cut the corporate tax rate, lowered taxes for nearly all Americans (those that actually pay income taxes, that is), doubled the standard deduction and simplified the tax code to the extent that nearly all American taxpayers will just take the standard deduction rather than itemize. A number of corporations responded immediately by announcing bonuses for employees, pay raises, and plans to hire more workers. Lowering the corporate rate from what was the world’s highest should make American businesses more competitive. As businesses grow and expand their workforces, the competition for workers will grow, forcing wages higher. That’s the premise anyway and it’s worked before.

 

Liberals and the liberal mainstream media, naturally, do not approve and claim the tax bill was a giveaway to the rich. By rich, they presumably mean those who own stock which is a pretty large segment of the population given that most investment and retirement portfolios and pension plans contain stock. Perhaps by rich, they mean anyone with more money than they have. Well, the purpose of the tax bill was to help businesses make the economy grow and provide more and better- paying jobs. God loves the poor and we should, too, but nobody ever got a job from a poor person. For workers to prosper, the companies they work for must prosper first. They have been sitting on piles of cash for two reasons. One was uncertainty about the future. Businesses hate uncertainty. The second was doubt over whether America was the best place to invest in or locate a business because of regulatory burdens and high corporate taxes. The tax bill changed that.

 

But House minority leader Nancy Pelosi said that the tax bill reflects “the greed of those with power, the cruelty that is in the heart of the tax scam”. Scam? Please. She and Chuck Schumer must be getting all their material from the mainstream media. Oh, well. They’re going to oppose anything that Trump and the Republicans come up with. More troubling is that polls indicate that over half the public was opposed to the bill. I attribute that to ignorance regarding how the economy works, disinformation spewed by the mainstream media and our current state of political polarization. If the tax reform works as intended, most Americans will benefit. But meanwhile, its passage into law should end all opposition, at least until the next election. It now behooves us all to hope that it does work. When it does, however, don’t expect Pelosi, Schumer or the liberal media to admit that they were wrong.

 

Other events that will dominate the news in 2018 include the North Korean problem and China’s continued refusal to do all that it must to curb the nuclear ambitions of Kim Jong Un in order to avoid a military solution which could lead to catastrophic casualties. We need to be much more persuasive in this regard, including a warning to China that failure take the necessary steps could result in an end to our recognition of the one-China policy and the undertaking of actions to facilitate Japan’s transition to a major military power with nuclear weapons.

 

China’s economy continues to grow and is on track to overtake ours. With that will come increased military capability as China transitions from a regional to a global military power. While China grows its military, ours remains undersized with respect to the demands on it which have grown. Will we be willing to devote the resources necessary to keep pace? Maintaining a military of the size and capability necessary to protect our vital interests will not come cheaply or quickly. Promises to expand the Navy’s fleet, the smallest since the Great Depression, have not been accompanied by the necessary funding action.

 

Radical Islamic terrorism at home and in other western nations will continue to keep us on edge, illustrating the need for greater border security and enhanced means for determining who is entering our country and why. Finally, Trump’s decision to fulfill a campaign pledge by recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel resulted in a UN resolution condemning the U.S. which was, remarkably, supported by most of our allies, including the former colonial empires of Britain and France, whose empires included vast Muslim lands, many of whose people now reside in Britain and France and apparently need to be pandered to. The vote, an insult to the U.S. which hosts the UN, provides more of financial support than any other nation and, as a sovereign nation, has a right to locate its embassy wherever it wishes, again raises the question of why we should provide any support to such a blatantly anti-Israeli and anti-American organization.  No nation that voted for this resolution should henceforth receive a penny of U.S. aid.

 

It will be another interesting year. Enjoy it if you can. Happy New Year to all.

December 30, 2017

Christmas in America

Christmas in America——————————————

                A commentary

                By J. F. Kelly, Jr.

The Republican Congress is poised, as of this writing, to give American taxpayers a Christmas present in the form of a tax overhaul, the largest since the Reagan administration. For most Americans it will lower their taxes. Whether or not it will be the gift that keeps on giving, only time will tell. Clearly our stock market is bullish on the matter and so are foreign markets. When things go well in the world’s largest economy, other economies tend to benefit also.

 

There will be winners and losers and it would be better, of course, if there were no losers. But no plan is perfect and most of those seeing higher taxes will be residents of the high tax, high property value states like California, New York, New Jersey and my home state of Connecticut where many high income residents are bailing out to lower tax climates like Florida. Perhaps there’s a lesson there. Limits on deductions for mortgage interest and state and local taxes will impact many taxpayers in these red coastal states where the state and property tax burdens are so heavy and home prices are out of reach for most. And with the cap on mortgage interest deductions, the market value of luxury homes will likely fall.

 

Opponents’ claims that the tax overhaul benefits only the rich are bogus. The standard deduction doubles and tax rates are lowered. The reduction in the U.S. corporate tax rate, currently among the highest in the world, should free up money for businesses to expand which should increase jobs. And with an already low unemployment rate, that should result in upward pressure on wages which have been stagnant for years. After eight years of anemic growth, income redistribution policies and over-regulation, it’s time to try a return to supply-side economics.

 

Democrats wail that this tax bill was written with no Democrat support or input. Whose fault is that? Remember Obamacare which had to be passed before even legislators could figure out what was in in and which was passed with no Republican input or support? Still, it’s unfortunate because it illustrates how divided we have become as a society. In this polarized political climate, Democrats are unlikely to support anything that the Trump administration does.

 

Perhaps the greatest Christmas gift that the political class could give to their fellow Americans would be an end to polarization and identity politics and a return to collegiality and compromise politics which is the only way to govern successfully in a democracy like ours. And the greatest holiday gift that we Americans could give to each other would be an end to this hardening of views and disrespect for any opinion that differs from ours that is dividing our nation.

 

There are so many issues on which we as a people are almost evenly divided. Does that really mean that half or nearly half of the people are entirely wrong? Does it mean that the half or nearly half of the people who hold a view that is different from ours are bad or ignorant people? If we could only tone down the anger and the attitude and the refusal to compromise, or even to listen or at least agree amicably to disagree, that would be a blessing. We would probably see that on most contentious issues that divide us there is at least some logic, basis and truth on both sides. We are not at war with each other. We are, after all, all Americans and we want the best for our country and its people, although we may differ on the ways to achieve that goal.

 

Merry Christmas and happy holidays and God bless America.

December 24, 2917

The Capital of Israel

Pray for the Peace of Jerusalem———————–

                A commentary

                By J. F. Kelly, Jr.

                “Pray for the peace of Jerusalem: May they prosper that love you.”

                                                                                                –Psalm 122:6

President Donald Trump’s announced decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital came in defiance of world opinion and was greeted with dire warnings of violence and a return to intifada. Western diplomats wailed that the decision overturned decades of policy, as if foreign policy were carved in stone. They said that we handed Israel a major victory and got nothing in return in terms of Israeli concessions, as if this were some zero-sum game. It therefore, according to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, all but ended any role that Washington could play in future peace negotiations.

 

Fair enough. Our role was neither successful nor constructive anyway. It’s long past time to acknowledge that the United States cannot serve as an objective broker in the so-called peace process because Israel is our ally, our only reliable ally in the turbulent Middle East. We championed the establishment of the Jewish State which remains the only fully democratic republic in the region and a country that shares our values. U.S. efforts to broker a two-state solution were not in Israel’s interest because of our clumsy attempts to assign equal value and credibility to each side’s arguments regardless of their relative merits rather than judging them objectively.

 

The reality is that most Palestinians and Israel’s Arab neighbors never fully accepted Israel’s right to exist, a basic requirement for any two-state solution. The Palestinian Authority still pays the families of Palestinians who murder innocent Israelis. A two-state solution could be a reality today had the Palestinian leaders been realistic in their demands during earlier negotiations but Israeli concessions were invariably met by more Palestinian demands and often by more violence when the talks collapsed.

 

Critics ask why Mr. Trump would risk provoking violence now by such an announcement. The short answer is that he is fulfilling a campaign promise. Imagine that; a president keeping another campaign promise. What a novel concept. This particular campaign promise helped him win the support of America’s large Christian Evangelical community. The decision also acknowledges reality.  The U.S. recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel in 1995 during Bill Clinton’s presidency. Other presidents campaigned on promises to, promises that they, unlike Trump, never kept.

 

The victor of two wars in which it was attacked by invading Arab armies, Israel gained control of all of Jerusalem as a result of the Six-day War in 1967. A sovereign nation has the right to designate its own capital.  Israel has regarded Jerusalem as its capital since its War of Independence in 1948. Its president and prime minister are located there as is the Knesset, the Supreme Court and most other ministries.

 

Washington, in deference to its imagined responsibilities for brokering a two-state agreement, has for decades stood too quietly by while Israel was attacked both at home by Arab terrorists and in the United Nations by western diplomats as well as Muslim nations. Those days are now over, said our Ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley. It’s about time.

 

If this decision frees the U.S. from its role as broker in the so-called peace process, so be it, although Mr. Trump says that he is still committed to the process. Uh huh. Our role in the past has not enhanced our reputation as a diplomatic dealmaker and Israel’s interest in a two-state solution has waned over the years. And if the Palestinians and other Arab nations insist on resorting to violence over this long-promised and expected decision, it will only lessen chances that Israel will ever embrace a two-state solution. Why would it welcome a new independent hostile state on its borders?

December 18, 2017

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               

A Bad Year for the Surface Navy

A Deadly Year for the Surface Navy—————————

                By J. F. Kelly, Jr.

By any measure, it’s not been a good year for the surface Navy. Two deadly collisions involving Japan-based ships resulted in the deaths of seventeen sailors and another Japan-based ship went aground near Yokosuka. The three ships comprised one-fourth of the anti-ballistic missile-capable cruisers and destroyers of the Seventh Fleet at a time of greatly-increased tensions with North Korea whose growing nuclear weapons capability and hostility poses an existential threat to our South Korean and Japanese allies, our own forces based there and to our homeland as well.

 

All these accidents have been attributed to poor shiphandling, improper watchstanding, failure to comply with written directives and other instances of substandard performance and seamanship. The guided missile destroyer Fitzgerald collided with a merchant vessel at night near the southern terminus of the Tokyo Wan Traffic Separation Scheme, a very busy waterway. The captain, incredibly, wasn’t even on the bridge. The guided missile destroyer John S. McCain collided with a liquid natural gas tanker at night in the even busier Singapore Strait. The captain was on the bridge but preoccupied with what he and the watch mistakenly believed to be a steering casualty. The guided missile cruiser Antietam went aground after dragging anchor. The anchor was not properly set.

 

All three commanding officers and others in the ships were relieved. So were their immediate superiors in the chain of command, a battle group commander, and the three-star Seventh Fleet commander. The four-star Pacific Fleet commander was advised that he would not be selected for another assignment and announced his early retirement. So did the three-star Surface commander here in Coronado. That’s pretty much standard procedure in the Navy. Fire the usual suspects. But that won’t solve the problems if they are replaced by more of the same. Nor will the recommendations that have poured forth in abundance following the investigations into the disasters. The problems run deeper and they involve the very culture of the Navy itself.

 

The surface Navy is the poor man of the warfare communities in terms of resources, influence and prestige. The prevailing mindset is that it takes a heavy investment in training and maintenance to operate aircraft and submarines but almost anyone can learn to drive and maintain a ship. Surface warfare is the default career path for those not qualified to become aviators, submariners, special warfare operators or staff corps specialists. We can always figure out something for them to do on a ship even if we have to invent a job for them.

 

Aviators and submariners are extensively trained before reporting to their first squadron or submarine. Surface officers report onboard their first ship often without even rudimentary training which they are expected to acquire on board with occasional sessions in a shiphandling simulator. Most of them, moreover, have no intention of remaining in surface warfare but are trained anyway, diluting  the limited training resources available which would be better utilized if focused on the best, brightest and most motivated.

 

Over the years, as the warfighting technology has become infinitely more complex, shiphandling and seamanship have been relegated to the status of collateral duties. But warfighting skills and capability are of no use if we can’t get the ship safely to where it’s needed. Our ships are largely driven by junior officers. Fewer than 70% of them achieve passing scores on a Coast Guard Rules of the Nautical Road exam. They are relative amateurs in comparison with the licensed mariners who stand bridge watches on the merchant ships that comprise nearly all of the maritime traffic our ships deal with in today’s increasingly congested seaways.

 

Driving a ship in a dynamic, high density contact environment does not equate to rocket science but it does require mastering a very unique skill set that is best acquired through the experience that comes from years at sea. It is not a career for everyone. Yet current policies require that many officers must first qualify in surface warfare before moving on to other specialties. This is a colossal waste of resources which should be focused on training the best and most career motivated. That was the underlying purpose of the 1973 Fleet Staff Reorganization, in which I participated, that created the three-star surface force commanders. It was designed to create an elite surface warfare force equal in prestige and professionalism to the aviation and submarine forces. It simply didn’t work out that way because the culture never changed.

 

Seventeen sailors are dead and three very expensive, complex, guided missile ships are out of action at a time of increasing threats and tensions because of inexperience, lax watchstanding , poor seamanship and mind-boggling incompetence. But nothing will change until the culture changes and that will require action at the very top to instill seagoing professionalism in the surface Navy. It is sadly absent today.

December 11, 2017

(Kelly, a retired Navy Captain who commanded three San Diego-based ships and a Navy laboratory, teaches shiphandling, seamanship and navigation at Naval Base San Diego.)

Changing Standards

Changing Times, Changing Moral Values——————————

                A commentary

                By J. F Kelly, Jr.

                To say that the times are changing is to utter a gross understatement. Fair enough; we’ll just have to keep up with the times, I guess, but trying to re-write history and judging behavior in past decades by current standards involves the risk of unintended consequences. Tearing down statues of Confederate leaders or founding fathers who owned slaves because they offend people today, who may be ignorant of history or the changing mores of our society, doesn’t change the reality of that history. Nor can we erase it or rewrite it more to our liking.

 

Attempts to eliminate traces of history that offend us, or, for example, to cease teaching the history, literature and philosophy of western civilization as some schools have just contributes to the continuing dumbing down of education in our country and has lessened the value of a liberal arts education. In my humble opinion, the greatest threat to our society today is political correctness run amuck. It is slowly destroying our ability to engage in rational, candid discussion. We mustn’t say or write anything that might offend someone for to do so would indicate a lack of sensitivity.  A large percentage of university students today actually believe it is appropriate to shout down anyone they disagree with and a small percentage actually feel that violence is appropriate if necessary to silence them. Name calling and slogans have replaced civil discourse and many students are simply incapable of rational debate.

 

Our universities deserve a large share of the blame for this. They have been taken over by progressives who account for most, in many cases over 80%, of the faculties and administrative staffs. They are producing generations of graduates who cannot deal with or even tolerate hearing opinions that differ from theirs. They must be provided with safe spaces and trigger warnings, lest they be exposed even briefly to opinions which clash with theirs.

 

In addition to trashing our history and finding fault with the founding fathers, we are now tending to judge people for behavior which took place decades ago by today’s moral standards which have changed significantly from the 1960-1970 era of the sexual revolution. What may have once been considered harmless flirting can now be considered unwanted sexual advances or the creation of a hostile environment or even sexual harassment.  Again, the universities are not blameless. At the Obama Administration’s forceful urging, many universities adopted “preponderance of evidence” standards, rather than normal rules of evidence in dealing with complaints of sexual harassment. Denial of legal counsel or the right to confront the accuser amounts to a denial of due process. A student can be considered guilty until proven innocent. In our society, people must be considered innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. But today, the mere allegation of sexual harassment can destroy a career, a marriage, a family and even a life.

 

We are seeing a tidal wave of women today alleging sexual harassment for incidents that occurred often decades ago, particularly against men in positions of power. The alleged victims were brave in going public with embarrassing details, but they would have been braver still had they spoken out earlier when memories were fresher. Yes, I realize that times were different then and some women felt they had little choice but to go along to get along or even keep a job. For many of them it took others speaking out to encourage them to come forward. There is comfort in numbers.

 

There is also a danger in overreacting and the risk of unintended consequences. The good news is that men in general must finally be realizing that that power, fame or office does not entitle them to sexual liberties or other forms of exploitation and that the definition of sexual harassment has broadened considerably. The downside is the risk that this new awareness could have a chilling effect on gender relationships in the workplace because of an overabundance of caution. This could work to the detriment of women in the workplace if it leads to reduced access to male superiors, particularly in a counseling or mentoring role. As a former Human Resource Director and one who has been an advocate for women in the military and the business world most of my adult life, I’m hoping that common sense, mutual respect and good judgment will keep this from happening.

 

December 3, 2017