2020 Election Promises To Be Tough on the Constitution

by Ray Keating

The Keating Files – April 15, 2020

Just in case you somehow forgot amidst a pandemic and related economic shutdown, there’s a presidential election in about seven-and-a-half months. Unfortunately, no matter how it turns out, this promises to be a rough one on the U.S. Constitution.

Once again this week, it became clear that President Donald Trump has failed to read and/or understand the Constitution. Meanwhile, former Vice President Joe Biden likely has read one of this nation’s two essential founding documents, but he really doesn’t care what it says.

During this past Monday’s briefing on the coronavirus, Trump said, “I'm going to put it very simply: the president of the United States has the authority to do what the president has the authority to do, which is very powerful. The president of the United States calls the shots. When somebody’s the president of the U.S., the authority is total, and that’s the way it’s gotta be.”

Um, excuse me? But there’s more.

Consider this deeply disturbing claim of total authority on top of a couple of comments in July and June of last year. In June 2019, Trump said, “Article II allows me to do whatever I want.” And the following month, he declared, “Then I have an Article 2, where I have the right to do whatever I want as president.”

Of course, Article II of the Constitution does not grant total authority to a president or give a president the right to do whatever he wants. In fact, the powers of the president are rather limited by Article II, such as executing laws, commander in chief of the armed forces, and negotiating treaties that must be approved by two-thirds of the Senate. In fact, the U.S. Constitution, through its checks and balances, and enumerated powers, seeks to guarantee limited government, and that the purpose of such limited government is to protect the liberties and rights of all men and women – liberties and rights, by the way, that are not granted by government but pre-existed government. That is, our natural rights.

Declaring that for a president “authority is total” explicitly goes against the Constitution, and effectively violates the oath taken by presidents, who say, “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

And given the importance of the Constitution to the foundational principles and ideas of conservatism and this country, my fellow conservatives particularly should be outraged over this authoritarian, anti-Constitution proclamation of President Trump. Indeed, they would have been screaming their outrage if someone like President Obama had said such a thing.

But many Republicans and some conservatives will counter that Trump has appointed and will appoint judges who understand and abide by the Constitution. Perhaps, but how would he know? Well, Trump in effect cut a deal with conservatives during the 2016 election to appoint Supreme Court justices who have received the seal of approval from the Federalist Society and the Heritage Foundation. Thank goodness for that list because no one knows who would be appointed without it. Let’s hope it holds if Trump gets a second term.

As for Biden, in response to Trump’s comments, he said, “I am not running for office to be King of America. I respect the Constitution. I’ve read the Constitution. I’ve sworn an oath to it many times.”

Well, good for Biden, I guess? The problem is that his reading the Constitution doesn’t mean that the Constitution’s purpose and meaning have sunk in or taken hold. After all, Biden pledged in late December, “The people that I would appoint to the Court, are people who have a view of the Constitution as a living document...”

“Living document”? That’s the nice label the Left has adopted for a pernicious judicial philosophy known as judicial activism. The “living document” principle means replacing what the Constitution says with the latest preferences of the Left. Judicial activism violates the Constitution by having judges – especially U.S. Supreme Court justices – claim legislative powers, ignoring what’s actually written in and the intentions of the authors of the document. 

For good measure, the “living document” view of the Constitution rejects the idea of limited government protecting natural rights. Instead, it serves up the notion that government decides the rights that are granted to the people. That, too, points to an authoritarian, anti-Constitution streak.

Rather than interpreting and applying the Constitution and the law, the “living document” crowd, including Biden, believes that a majority on the Supreme Court gets to re-write the Constitution as it sees fit.

So, the depressing choice in November comes down to two men who have little or no regard for the Constitution. That’s deeply troubling, to say the least, for our republic right now, and in terms of political precedents set for the future.

__________

Ray Keating is a columnist, economist, podcaster and entrepreneur.  You can order his new book Behind Enemy Lines: Conservative Communiques from Left-Wing New York  from Amazon or signed books at RayKeatingOnline.com. His other recent nonfiction book is Free Trade Rocks! 10 Points on International Trade Everyone Should Know. Keating also is a novelist. His latest novels are  The Traitor: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel, which is the 12^thbook in the series, and the second edition of Root of All Evil? A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel with a new Author Introduction. The views expressed here are his own.

Presidential Elections Mean Wall Street Talking Heads Slip into Denial

by Ray Keating

The Keating Files – February 24, 2020

Well, 2020, of course, is a presidential election year, so get ready for some ridiculous political analysis courtesy of various Wall Street, business, and even on occasion, free-market analysts. Many will be in denial regarding what candidates pledge to do on assorted policy issues.

And given that the race for the White House this year will feature a hard-Left Democrat – with socialist Bernie Sanders in front at least for now – against the populist Donald Trump, who exhibits no self-control while on Twitter or near a hot microphone, denial might be ramped up in unprecedented ways. 

Why the denial? As a recent Fox Business article by Randy Swan opened, “Conventional wisdom has long held that investors should dismiss most of what they hear from presidential candidates on the campaign trail.”

Consider a few examples. When Barack Obama ran for president in 2008, assorted business – and even a few free-market – analysts argued that if elected, Obama certainly wouldn’t carry through on his agenda of expanding government’s role in health care, raising taxes, and pushing ahead with protectionist measures on trade – as he most clearly pledged to do on the campaign trail. 

Yet, Obama and Congress imposed ObamaCare; taxes were increased under ObamaCare and at the start of 2013; and while Obama thankfully didn’t push ahead with his protectionist promises, he did largely move the U.S. to the policy sidelines when it came to trade, until his support for the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade accord very late in his administration and to no avail.

So, contrary to widespread assumptions among assorted Wall Street talking heads, Obama pretty much did what he promised to do.

And then there was Donald Trump’s strident anti-free-trade rhetoric on the campaign trail. Many in the chattering class tried to assure investors that Trump wouldn’t go protectionist and/or start a trade war. After all, the argument went, no one would benefit. Well, of course, no one would benefit, yet, Trump shifted U.S. trade policy into a protectionist mode – pulling the U.S. out of the TPP; threatening and imposing higher tariffs on an array of products; attacking our closest trading partners with threats and/or the imposition of costly trade policies; and yes, starting a trade war with China.

So, despite assurances emanating from various “experts,” Trump did exactly what he said he would do on trade.

Go figure.

Why are the carriers of conventional wisdom in denial? Part of it might be a belief that politicians will say anything to get elected, so why believe them? While one is tempted to buy into that, in reality, most people run for the White House for a reason, and even if they seek power, it is power to do something.

More likely, the conventional wisdom-eers actually seem to think that politicians are too smart to do what they’ve promised to do, such as raising taxes, getting government more involved in health care, and engaging in trade wars. Wow, that really is denial!

Politicians have long served up dumb ideas that, for example, fly in the face of sound economics, and they’ll continue doing this, as evidenced by an astounding number of bad ideas being served up by Democrats seeking the White House this year. They, in fact, aren’t smart enough not to believe it. That was the case with Obama and taxes; is the case with Trump and trade; and most certainly is the case with, for example, Bernie Sanders and socialism, and Pete Buttigieg falling in love with seemingly every tax imaginable to man.

Don’t be talked into anything else. In the end, playing the denial game when it comes to politicians willing to do what they promise is highly dangerous. As is often the case with conventional wisdom, it’s dead wrong once again. Investors and everyone else should take what they hear from presidential candidates on the campaign trail very seriously.

__________

Ray Keating is a columnist, an economist, a novelist (his latest novels are The Traitor: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel, which is the 12^thbook in the series, and the second edition of Root of All Evil? A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel with a new Author Introduction), a nonfiction author (among his recent works is Free Trade Rocks! 10 Points on International Trade Everyone Should Know), a podcaster, and an entrepreneur. The views expressed here are his own.

Trump, Clinton and Sanders: Welcome to New York, America

by Ray Keating

For some bizarre reason, I’ve chosen to live my entire life in loopy New York. From a political standpoint, that has meant suffering under a one-party system. This New York reality is now spreading across the nation in the current presidential race.

Hillary Clinton, former U.S. senator from New York, squares off with Bernie Sanders, originally from New York, on the Democrat side, and New York City businessman and reality TV star Donald Trump leads among Republicans.

But what do I mean by this “one party” comment? Yes, New York is a deep blue state, but there are Republicans in the state. In fact, Republicans still have effective control of the state senate – barely. The problem is that both parties, for the most part, are Democrats.

The New York Democratic Party ranks among the most hard core of Democrats. They are unabashedly left wing, whether on economic matters or social issues.

Meanwhile, New York Republicans amount to little more than Democrat-Lite. They love big government; are a mixed bag, at best, on most social issues; and are far too interested in pandering to keep some sliver of power. Notions that Republicans should be principled in any way, and work to change hearts and minds on the issues, are treated as an absurdity. Sure, there’s a real conservative here and there in New York, but they are the exceptions. There’s a reason why New York has a Conservative Party. It was created in 1962 to serve as a conservative check on the Republicans, and that need has not gone away for more than a past half-century. Apparently, few Republican Party leaders grasp the idea that if voters have a choice between Democrats and Democrat-Lite, they’re more likely to choose the real thing. And hence, the long decline of Republicans in New York.

Welcome to New York, America.

Turning to the current presidential campaign, the Clintons, of course, chose to move to New York as this Democrat state would give her an excellent shot at winning a U.S. Senate seat. In her 2000 victory, Mrs. Clinton was helped by the fact that Republicans made a complete mess of matters, with Rudy Giuliani dropping out of the race and being replaced by Congressman Rick Lazio, who ran an inept campaign.

Of course, Clinton is an unabashed liberal on nearly every issue imaginable, from abortion to taxes to foreign policy, and beyond. That’s no secret.

Meanwhile, Senator Bernie Sanders, a New Yorker for the first 27 years of his life before moving to Vermont in 1968, manages to stake out ground to the left of Clinton. That’s not easy. But, heck, the guy warmly embraces the socialist label. What else needs to be said?

Welcome to New York, America.

And then there’s Donald Trump. Given his flip-flopping on nearly every major issue, his being devoid of any principles, and his willingness to say just about anything to gain power, along with an inability to think and express himself clearly on issues, Trump rather nicely fits the New York Republican model.

Welcome to New York, America.

In fact, America has become New York. The Democrats serve up radical Lefties. The current leader among Republicans lacks any kind of commitment to or understanding of conservatism and conservative policies.

Funny, I thought New York long ago no longer mattered when it came to national politics. Silly me.

______________

Mr. Keating is an economist and novelist who writes on a wide range of topics. His Pastor Stephen Grant novels have received considerable acclaim, including The River: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel being a finalist for KFUO radio’s Book of the Year 2014, and Murderer’s Row: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel winning Book of the Year 2015.

The Pastor Stephen Grant Novels are available at Amazon…

Murderer’s Row: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel

The River: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel

An Advent for Religious Liberty: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel

Root of All Evil? A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel

Warrior Monk: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel

Blame Trump’s Supporters

by Ray Keating

So, how do we explain the Trump phenomenon?

Well, quite frankly, I’m sick of the seemingly endless gymnastics being performed to pin blame for Donald Trump on seemingly anyone but the people actually supporting and voting for Donald Trump.

The list of excuses turns out to be quite lengthy.

Some say it’s President Barack Obama’s fault. After all, he’s been such a bad, weak, left-wing president – and he most certainly has – that Obama has driven people to support Trump. Of course, one does not necessarily follow from the other.

And then there’s the nefarious, mysterious and elusive “Republican Establishment,” which supposedly has not done enough to take on Obama. As a result, the excuse goes, frustrated voters have no choice but to turn to Trump. For good measure, so-called “conservative” talk radio hosts feed the idea of Trump being anti-Establishment, and their listeners follow, accordingly. What the “Establishment” actually is really makes little sense any more, amounting to little more than name calling, while ignoring Trump’s long affiliation with those long distrusted by conservatives, such as Hillary Clinton.

Of course, there also are those darn foreigners. According to Trump, illegal immigrants and free trade with other nations lie at the core of our economic troubles, and the entire D.C. establishment – this time both Democrats and Republicans – stands unwilling to do anything about it. But Trump is ready to round up 11-12 million illegals and kick them out of the country, build a massive wall on our border with Mexico, and dump free trade agreements and impose some big time tariffs. Never mind the economic havoc this would wreak, as well as the human rights violations.

In the end, I don’t even blame Donald Trump for Donald Trump’s success. After all, any candidate who, for example, has flip-flopped (from liberal to populist or conservative) on nearly every major issue for pure political convenience, favors crippling the economy via protectionism and a massive government-forced migration, supports taking private property in favor of crony capitalism, takes foreign policy advice from his own “good brain” and watching television, attacks women (including the wife of anther candidate and Megyn Kelly) in seemingly countless ways, advocates using the military to kill innocent people, donated to his most likely Democratic opponent, mocks war heroes for their brave actions during war, indicates that riots and violence in support of his campaign are okay, has a long list of bankruptcies and shady business dealings, and is not too fond of the First Amendment, deserves only the votes of the flaky few.

Nonetheless, Mr. Trump is well on his way to gaining the Republican nod. There’s no one to blame for this other than the people who are actually voting for this ignorant, dangerous individual. Anger, frustration or whatever other excuses simply do not hold water.

We are each responsible for our actions, and have the responsibility to be informed voters. Trump voters either fail to understand such responsibilities, or care nothing about them.

______________

Mr. Keating is an economist and novelist who writes on a wide range of topics. His Pastor Stephen Grant novels have received considerable acclaim, including The River: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel being a finalist for KFUO radio’s Book of the Year 2014, and Murderer’s Row: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel winning Book of the Year 2015.

The Pastor Stephen Grant Novels are available at Amazon…

Murderer’s Row: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel

The River: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel

An Advent for Religious Liberty: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel

Root of All Evil? A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel

Warrior Monk: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel

Throwback Thursday: Elections Do Not Repeal Laws of Economics

by Ray Keating

As we watch the carnage of the 2016 presidential election process, it pays to keep in mind that policy matters, and that so-called smart people frequently make bad economic policy decisions. The following column, which originally ran in Long Island Business News in November 2008, debunked the idea served up by many at the time that Barack Obama was just too smart to actually carry through on the policies he supported during the campaign. We, unfortunately, have learned that Obama actually meant what he said, as I argued at the time…

Politics and elections do not repeal the laws of economics.

This fact of life tends to irritate many politicians. On the campaign trail, they pander for votes, and put forth the idea that government can do just about anything. It can tax, regulate, and spend with impunity.

Of course, it’s a complete myth that fundamental economics can be repealed by political rhetoric or legislation. And that is the harsh reality that confronts President-elect Barack Obama and his fellow Democrats who will have larger majorities in both the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate come January.

During his time in the U.S. Senate and on the presidential campaign trail, Obama had very little use for sound economics. For example, he put forth an agenda featuring higher taxes on successful entrepreneurs and investors, as well as on energy companies. Obama also revealed protectionist leanings on the trade front. And he exhibited few qualms about embracing more government spending or an activist regulatory agenda.

Economics 101 tells us that all of this would mean higher costs for businesses and consumers, and bad news for an already-reeling economy.

But in the days leading up to and following the election, assorted experts and talking heads on television have assured everyone not to worry. After all, as we have been told over and over again, Obama is a smart fellow, and he will surround himself with other smart people.

The point, or hope, seems to be that Obama and his aides are just too intelligent to actually try to put his campaign agenda into law. After all, these smart people are not going to do anything that would jeopardize Obama getting re-elected in four years.

There are two major problems with this line of reasoning.

First, history is rich with so-called smart people who made – to put it less than delicately – dumb decisions. That list includes a variety of U.S. presidents. Let’s recall that Herbert Hoover was very smart. In fact, so were Richard Nixon and Jimmy Carter. Yet, these smarty-pants made some of the worst economic policy decisions in our nation’s history; decisions that rattled the nation and the globe. Hoover and Carter also wanted to be reelected, but were booted out of office by big numbers.

Second, the unsavory implication is that Obama did not really believe all of those things he declared and proposed during the campaign. It was just what had to be said to get the Democratic nomination, and then to win the White House.

I don’t believe that. I take the president-elect at his word. If you look at Obama’s short voting record in the Senate and his campaign proposals, they reveal a consistent liberal philosophy that favors bigger government, more regulation, and higher taxes, along with skepticism of free trade.

In the real political world, smart people make bad decisions all of the time. Political ideology, poll watching and/or simple emotion often overwhelm or blind elected officials to sound economic thinking.

Where then is the hope for the economy? Well, at least on the policy front, there isn’t a heck of a lot. We’re in a bad economy right now, and most of the policy proposals offered by President-elect Obama will, at best, do nothing to help, or at worst, make matters worse.

One hope is that President-elect Obama and his staff will quickly learn through on-the-job training what policies make for sound economics, and which ones do not.

But our best hope comes from the private sector – from the innovative entrepreneurs, the risk-taking investors, the courageous small business owners, and their hard-working employees. These are the people who will have to find ways to survive and thrive in what is likely to be an increasingly hostile policy climate. Through their ingenuity, they must find avenues around governmental obstacles in order to move ahead, in order to grow the economy, in order to create new jobs. Unfortunately, this already difficult task looks like it will only grow harder in the immediate future.

______________

Mr. Keating is an economist and novelist who writes on a wide range of topics. His Pastor Stephen Grant novels have received considerable acclaim, including The River: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel being a finalist for KFUO radio’s Book of the Year 2014, and Murderer’s Row: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel winning for Book of the Year 2015.

The Pastor Stephen Grant Novels are available at Amazon…

Murderer’s Row: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel

The River: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel

An Advent for Religious Liberty: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel

Root of All Evil? A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel

Warrior Monk: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel