Democratic Senator Introduces Bill To Abolish The Electoral College

Back when Donald Trump was lagging badly in the polls – as recently as just over a week ago – any time the republican candidate accused the electoral system of being rigged, Democrats would scream over each other to explain to him just how fair, balanced and sensible is the mandated framework of the US presidential election. Well, Trump won, and the roles are now flipped, with such pundits as Michael Moore, and even Paul Krugman earlier today, slamming the concept of the Electoral College, which Trump won decisively despite losing the popular vote.

In retrospect, Krugman may have been the rational one.

According to the LA Times reports, retiring California Democratic senator Barbara Boxer filed legislation Tuesday to abolish the Electoral College altogether in light of Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton winning the popular vote but still losing the election.

Boxer announced in a statement that the bill, which she introduced later on Tuesday afternoon, would determine the winner of presidential elections by the outcome of the popular vote. She cited President-elect Donald Trump’s victory in the Electoral College despite Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton’s apparent popular vote advantage.

“In my lifetime, I have seen two elections where the winner of the general election did not win the popular vote,” Boxer said in a statement. “The Electoral College is an outdated, undemocratic system that does not reflect our modern society, and it needs to change immediately. Every American should be guaranteed that their vote counts.”

“In 2012, Donald Trump tweeted, ‘The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy,’ ” Boxer added. “I couldn’t agree more. One person, one vote!”

While such legislation makes a symbolic statement after an election that shocked Democrats, is unlikely to gain traction with Republicans holding control of both chambers of Congress in a lame duck session.

Her bill calls for an amendment to the Constitution that would end the Electoral College system. Should such a thing pass, the amendment would only take effect if ratified by three-fourths of the states within seven years after its passage in the U.S. Congress.

Boxer was a vocal advocate for Clinton throughout the campaign and had said that electing the first female president was on her to-do list before leaving the Senate in January.

This is the fifth time in history that a nominee has won the popular vote but not the Electoral College. The same situation happened to Al Gore in 2000, when he lost to George W. Bush.

While one can debate the merits of changing the constitution just so one’s preferred candidate can win, we’ll pass and instead conclude with the following cartoon which explains everything.

* * *

Boxer’s full proposed legislation is below:

Boxer Introduces Bill To Abolish The Electoral College

 

Donald Trump to Become Fifth Person in U.S. History To Lose Popular Vote and Still Become President

 

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) will introduce legislation when the Senate comes into session later today that would eliminate the Electoral College and determine the winner of presidential elections by the outcome of the popular vote.

 

Hillary Clinton currently leads the popular vote by nearly a million votes (990,758). By the time all the ballots are counted, the New York Times estimates that Clinton may win the popular vote by more than two million votes and more than 1.5 percentage points. Donald Trump will become the fifth President in U.S. history to lose the popular vote and still win the election.

 

“In my lifetime, I have seen two elections where the winner of the general election did not win the popular vote,” said Senator Boxer. “When all the ballots are counted, Hillary Clinton will have won the popular vote by a margin that could exceed two million votes, and she is on track to have received more votes than any other presidential candidate in history except Barack Obama. This is the only office in the land where you can get more votes and still lose the presidency. The Electoral College is an outdated, undemocratic system that does not reflect our modern society, and it needs to change immediately. Every American should be guaranteed that their vote counts.”

 

“In 2012, Donald Trump tweeted, ‘The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy,’ ” Boxer added. “I couldn’t agree more. One person, one vote!”

 

During his interview on “60 Minutes” on Sunday, Trump said his views on the Electoral College haven’t changed. “You know, I’m not going to change my mind just because I won. But I would rather see it where you went with simple votes. You know, you get 100 million votes and somebody else gets 90 million votes and you win,” he said. This morning, he tweeted that the Electoral College is “actually genius.”

 

As of early Tuesday, Hillary Clinton had received 61,929,605 votes (47.8 percent) and Donald Trump had received 60,938,847 votes (47.0 percent), according to the Cook Political Report national popular vote tracker.

 

Senator Boxer’s legislation would amend the Constitution of the United States and abolish the Electoral College. The amendment would take effect when ratified by three-fourths of the states within seven years after its passage in the U.S. Congress.

via http://ift.tt/2eYgt34 Tyler Durden

Meet California’s 218,667 Public Employees Making Over $100,000/Year

Submitted by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,

Open the Books is back with another important government transparency report. This time, the organization looked closely at California payrolls, and found that 218,667 public sector employees earn six-figure salaries (in many cases far above that threshold), at a cost of $35 billion.

If Californians are fine with this sort of thing, more power to them, but it’s important to be knowledgable about where and how tax dollars are spent.

Below are a few highlight’s from Adam Andrzejewski’s (founder of Open the Books) recent article published at Forbes titled, ‘$100K Minimum Wage’ For 220,000 Highly-Compensated California Public Employees Costs Taxpayers $35B:

In many states, public service has little to do with serving the public and everything to do with using the public’s money to serve politicians. Whenever we open the books, California is consistently among the worst offenders. Recently, we found ‘animal collection curators’ making $110,290; city librarians earning $222,320; public utility commission bosses at $550,028; and county hospital doctors making $1.274 million.

 

This spring, at Forbes, we exposed 50,000 Illinois public employees earning six-figure salaries who cost taxpayers $8 billion. In California the numbers are exponentially larger:  218,667 employees making six-figures who cost $35 billion. For example, Illinois has 72 ‘city managers’ out-earning every governor of the 50 states. But, in California, the salaries of 171 assistant city managers average $201,550!

 

Using our interactive mapping tool, quickly review (by ZIP code) the 220,000 California public employees who earn more than $100,000.

 

In total, there’s roughly $35 billion in total benefit flowing to highly-compensated government workers when counting the 21,332 federal employees based in California with six figure salaries.

 

California community colleges, serving the strivers – students eating ramen noodles and working two jobs – are absolutely crushing the public pay system: 13,086 community college employees earn more than $100,000, including 178 who made more than $200,000. One of those highly compensated administrators, Thomas Fallo, retired last year after community outrage regarding his $346,895 comp plan.

For more, read the entire Forbes article, and as always, check out the great work they do over at Open the Books.

Screen Shot 2016-09-02 at 1.29.55 PM

 Open the Books is a nonpartisan, non-profit organization focused on providing transparency in government. 

via http://ift.tt/2fvxWUJ Tyler Durden

Latest Short List For Trump Cabinet Positions – It’s A “Knife Fight”

As Donald Trump’s transition team continues to debate who will fill key cabinet positions, the competition between potential appointees is growing more fierce with one insider describing it as a “knife fight.”  So far, Trump has named RNC head Reince Priebus as Chief Of Staff and the controversial Breitbart executive, Steve Bannon, as Chief Strategist.   While the transition team has been guarded so far about who will fill the remaining roles, communications adviser Jason Miller confirmed that Trump’s cabinet will be anything but “traditional”:

“You’re going to see a number of different names that are ultimately becoming a part of the President-elect’s administration.  There will be non-traditional names, a number of people who have had wide-ranging success in a number of different fields; wide-ranging success in business … People will be excited when they see the type of leaders the President-elect brings into this administration.”

Of the key open positions, John Bolton and Rudy Giuliani are the rumored favorites for Secretary of State and Senator Jeff Sessions is thought to be the front-runner for Attorney General.  With that said, per Reuters, here is a short list of people thought to be in the running for the various cabinet positions that need to be filled over the coming months:

SECRETARY OF STATE

  • Bob Corker, Tennessee senator and chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee
  • John Bolton, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations under President George W. Bush
  • Newt Gingrich, Republican former U.S. House Speaker
  • Zalmay Khalilzad, former U.S. ambassador to Iraq
  • Rudy Giuliani, Republican former mayor of New York City

ATTORNEY GENERAL

  • Rudy Giuliani
  • Jeff Sessions, senior member of the Senate Judiciary Committee who takes a hard line on immigration
  • Chris Christie, Republican New Jersey governor
  • Pam Bondi, Republican Florida Attorney General
  • Trey Gowdy, Republican congressman from South Carolina who headed the House committee that investigated the 2012 attacks on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya

TREASURY SECRETARY

  • Steven Mnuchin, former Goldman Sachs executive and Trump’s campaign finance chairman
  • Jeb Hensarling, Texas Republican congressman and chairman of the House Financial Services Committee
  • Jamie Dimon, JPMorgan Chase & Co chief executive officer
  • Tom Barrack, founder and chairman of Colony Capital Inc

DEFENSE SECRETARY

  • Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency
  • Stephen Hadley, former national security adviser under President George W. Bush
  • Jon Kyl, former Republican senator from Arizona
  • Jeff Sessions, Republican senator from Alabama and early Trump supporter, member of the Senate Armed Services Committee
  • Kelly Ayotte, outgoing Republican senator from New Hampshire and member of the Senate Armed Services Committee
  • Duncan Hunter, Republican congressman from California and early Trump supporter, member of House Armed Services Committee
  • Jim Talent, former Republican senator from Missouri who was on the Senate Armed Services Committee

HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES SECRETARY

  • Ben Carson, former neurosurgeon and 2016 Republican presidential candidate
  • Newt Gingrich
  • Rich Bagger, former pharmaceutical executive and former top aide to New Jersey Governor Chris Christie
  • Bobby Jindal, former Louisiana governor

HOMELAND SECURITY SECRETARY

  • Michael McCaul, U.S. Republican congressman from Texas and chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee
  • David Clarke, Milwaukee county sheriff and vocal Trump supporter
  • Joe Arpaio, outgoing Maricopa County, Arizona, sheriff who campaigned for Trump

HEAD OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

  • Myron Ebell, a climate change skeptic at the libertarian Competitive Enterprise Institute who is overseeing environmental policy on Trump’s transition team
  • Robert Grady, venture capitalist, partner in private equity firm Gryphon Investors
  • Leslie Rutledge, Arkansas attorney general
  • Carol Comer, commissioner of the Indiana Department of Environmental Management

ENERGY SECRETARY

  • Harold Hamm, Oklahoma oil and gas mogul, CEO of Continental Resources Inc
  • Larry Nichols, co-founder of Devon Energy Corp
  • James Connaughton, CEO of Nautilus Data Technologies and a former environmental adviser to President George W. Bush
  • U.S. Representative Kevin Cramer, of North Dakota
  • Robert Grady

INTERIOR SECRETARY

  • Sarah Palin, Republican former Alaska governor who ran for vice president in 2008
  • Jan Brewer, former Arizona governor
  • Forrest Lucas, founder of oil products company Lucas Oil
  • Harold Hamm
  • Robert Grady

COMMERCE SECRETARY

  • Linda McMahon, former world Wrestling Entertainment executive and two-time Senate candidate

CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY DIRECTOR

  • Lieutenant General Michael Flynn
  • Mike Rogers, Republican former representative from Michigan who chaired the House Intelligence Committee
  • Pete Hoekstra, Republican former representative from Michigan

NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER

  • Lieutenant General Michael Flynn
  • Stephen Hadley

UNITED NATIONS AMBASSADOR

  • Kelly Ayotte
  • Richard Grenell, former spokesman for the United States at the United Nations
  • Peter King, Republican representative from New York

U.S. TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

  • Dan DiMicco, former chief executive of steel producer Nucor Corp

VETERANS AFFAIRS SECRETARY

  • Jeff Miller, retiring congressman from Florida and chairman of the Veterans Affairs committee

via http://ift.tt/2geQqK5 Tyler Durden

Is This Trump’s Mandate to Yellen: “Print More Money Or You’re Fired”

Submitted by Michael Pento of the Pento Report

Trump’s Mandate to Yellen: Print More Money or You’re Fired!

What kind of President will Donald Trump be? Will he restore America to its former position of greatness, or end up being feckless like a long list of his predecessors? That is yet to be determined.

However, what is clear now is if Donald Trump wants to avoid starting his tenure with an economic crisis similar to that of Mr. Obama he will need to put a lid on long-term interest rates rather quickly. And in order to do that he will have to convince a supposedly politically-agnostic Fed Chair, Janet Yellen, to not only refrain from further interest rates hikes but also to launch another round of long-term Treasury debt purchases known as Quantitative Easing (QE).

The move higher in Treasury yields since the election of Trump has been nothing short of violent, but borrowing costs were already on the rise prior to November 8th. The Ten-year Note Yield began its ascent after it bottomed at 1.36% back in July. This is because central bankers arrived at a new conclusion: that a steepening yield curve would be best for the banking system and economic growth, rather than to just continually push long rates lower. The Ten-year yield climbed up to 1.83% on the day prior to the vote, then spiked to over 2.30% several days after America made its choice for president.

But why is the election of President Trump so bad for bond prices? The answer is twofold. First, Trump’s pro-growth policies of lower corporate and personal taxes, in addition to reduced regulations, are causing investors to sell fixed income products and to place funds in equities. Growth stocks simply offer the potential for better returns than the current historically-low yields found in bonds. Second, and most importantly, a Trump presidency is highly inflationary because his massive $1 trillion infrastructure refurbishment plan, along with his proposal to rebuild the military, will—at least in the short-term—significantly increase annual deficits. In fact, deficits are already soaring; the fiscal 2016 budget hole jumped to $587 billion, up from $438 in the prior year, for a huge 34% increase.

Enormously growing deficits, which will add to the intractable National debt, tends to force a central bank into an ultra-loose monetary policy. But it’s not just the $20 trillion public debt that will put pressure on the Fed to keep printing money. Total Non-financial Debt has soared from $33.1 trillion at the end of 2007, to a record $45.6 trillion in Q1 2016. That means debt as a percentage of GDP has climbed from where it was prior to the Great Recession (226%), all the way up to 250% of the economy.

A central bank that vastly increases the money supply, one that far transcends the legitimate pool of savings, is the tool used by governments to keep interest rates from skyrocketing. This has been the recipe for runaway inflation since the beginning of economics.

In addition to this, Trump’s protectionist trade policies would implement either a 35% tariff on certain imports or would require these goods to be produced inside the United States at much higher prices. For example, the increase in labor costs from goods made in China would be 190% when compared to the federally mandated minimum wage earner in the United States. Hence, inflation is on the way.

The incredible nearly 50 basis point surge in the Benchmark Treasury yield in the immediate wake of the election is proof of Trump’s fiscal profligacy and his inflationary impact on the nation.

The end of the 35-year-old bond bull market is upon us. Trump’s trade policies, along with his avowed love of debt, is putting significant upward pressure on borrowing costs. The Donald will now try to convince Janet Yellen to reverse her incipient tightening policy and bring rates back to zero—and eventually even to launch QE IV.

If rates continue to rise it won’t just be bond prices that will collapse. It will be every asset that has been priced off that so called “risk free rate of return” offered by sovereign debt. The painful lesson will then be learned that having a virtual zero interest rate policy for the past 90 months wasn’t at all risk free. All of the asset prices negative interest rates have so massively distorted including; corporate debt, municipal bonds, REITs, CLOs, equities, commodities, luxury cars, art, all fixed income assets and their proxies, and everything in between, will fall concurrently along with the global economy.

For the record, a normalization of bond yields would be very healthy for the economy in the long-run, as it is necessary to reconcile the massive economic imbalances now in existence. However, President Trump will want no part of the depression that would run concurrently with collapsing real estate, equity and bond prices.

But the problem is he will be asking Ms. Yellen to do the exact thing he accused her of doing during the campaign. Namely, being a political puppet of the President. If the Fed is truly apolitical, she will politely refuse. Nevertheless, what Yellen and Trump don’t understand is that our nation is both debt-disabled and asset-bubble addicted, which requires interest rates to be near zero percent or the whole ersatz economy will implode. The devastating bond bubble’s collapse will bring Trump to that reality very soon. And if Ms. Yellen doesn’t agree to pick up the speed on the printing presses she may hear the words “You’re Fired”, even before her tenure is up in February 2018.

via http://ift.tt/2gdWJOY Tyler Durden

Anti-Trump Protesters Block Ambulance Resulting In Death Of 4-Year-Old Girl’s Father

As the anti-Trump protests around the country rage on, they have now claimed their first life as the father of a 4-year-old girl died in an ambulance on the way to the hospital last night.  The man apparently died after his ambulance was prevented from reaching a hospital by protesters who decided they would prefer to block off a highway.  The incident was discovered by Paul Joseph Watson of InfoWars via the following FaceBook post:

“I have to unfacebook for a few days. I had a patient die during a transfer last night because our ambulance was stopped by protesters and had to drive an extra 45 minutes around the blocked roads.

 

“I can’t today. They can give their f**king safety pins to my patient’s fatherless 4 year old daughter.”

Ambulance

 

While the FaceBook post hasn’t been verified, it’s certainly reasonable to assume it’s accuracy given the shear number of highway blockades setup by protesters across the country over the past week.

The mention of “safety pins” is in reference to a campaign started by anti-Trump protesters to wear safety pins to “show support for the vulnerable” and to express the fear that Trump’s supporters “may physically or emotionally abuse minorities, immigrants, women and members of the L.G.B.T. community.”

 

The report of anti-Trump protesters blocking an ambulance has not been verified, but it’s not unlikely given that anti-Trump demonstrators have blocked roads in numerous cities and states, including the I-94 in Minneapolis, the I-5 in Portland, numerous freeways in Los Angeles, a major highway in Phoenix, and the I-95 in Miami.

 

During the DNC-sponsored violent shut down of Donald Trump’s rally in Chicago back in March, anti-Trump agitators were caught on camera blocking an ambulance outside the UIC Arena.

And while most motorists simply deal with the idiocy of protesters who feel compelled to walk into oncoming traffic, others have refused to stop which resulted in the following incident in which a young girl was hit by oncoming traffic.

 

And with the protests growing more and more out of control over the recent weeks, we we’re finally able to track down footage of Obama and Hillary condemning the idiotic violence and property destruction of America’s disaffected youth.

via http://ift.tt/2eDvTP0 Tyler Durden

Small Business Owner Rages: “Annihilate [Obamacare], Mr. Trump!”

Submitted by Andrew Solomon via AmericanThinker.com,

We, the small business owners, are the last truly repressed minorities in America today.  We used to be the engine of the economy, representing the bulk of new jobs created as well as solidly retained, in some cases lasting a person's entire life, working for just one single employer.

Much has been said regarding Obamacare's individual mandate – its stiff penalties that increase overtime, the stratospheric rise in premiums and deductibles – but there has been little coverage of how it has negatively impacted workplaces across the country from a business owner's POV.

Most businesses – not all – already provided insurance to their seasoned full-time staff.  It wouldn't seem that outlandish, therefore, to force them to do what was already being done.  This is not true.  The business always had the option of stopping coverage or modifying it if the need arose due to slipping sales.

Forcing a private entity, in this case a business, is never morally appropriate.  Number one: it is private.  Its owners have inherent sovereign freedoms.  Obama didn't seem to care about individual freedoms.  Force, the act of prying into the life of another, dictating terms by fiat under penalty of threat and violence, was morally acceptable to this man, who had never felt the heat of having to cut a single payroll or come up with a quarterly tax to the feds or the state.

But that isn't the reason for this article.  Individuals also were subjugated by Obama in the same way to buy insurance, pay a tax, or refuse both and go to jail.  

What the media never explained to people, as they never do about employers, were all the regulations that sent small businesses spinning into chaos who now had to buy expensive tracking software and monitor all their employees or face huge fines.

First, we had to deal with the 9.5% "affordability" penalty, whereby an employee could never be forced to pay more than 9.5% of his gross earnings to health care costs.  That was revised slightly higher to 9.6% this fiscal year.  What it did was force employers to track an employee's wage every month to see if his earnings exceeded that artificial benchmark.  It left us scrambling constantly, discussing rate increase with our brokers as well as allocated hours to make sure we didn't screw it up.  The vigilance of such regulations was hugely demanding of our time.

In addition, and even more perversely, we were forced to offer "affordable" coverage to any employee working over 30 hours per week.  This forced us to begin looking at employees differently.  They were now all potential liabilities to the company, land mines that could go off any time, triggering a penalty.  So since our staff always had variable hours (not fixed), we were forced to track the part-time (less than 30 hours) versus full-time every month, and if any went over that amount, we had to immediately investigate why with each manager – who had to, in turn, talk to the employee who violated that arrangement.  The time spent with these discussions were commonplace and took us away from actually running our business.

Soon, the twenty-niner club was born out of necessity, and we had more part-time staff than full.  It created less loyalty in the workforce, higher turnover, and poorer morale.  Part-time employees had to find another part-time job elsewhere to get more hours.  It was absolutely foul.  

Even more pernicious was the potential for ageism, since elderly employees had a higher premium and thus a higher cost to the company.  There was a natural in-built incentive to avoid hiring older employees due to a higher cost associated with them.  

Finally, the amount of time and money spent tracking, talking, monitoring, paying fines, and new taxes; filling out 1095 forms; and truly now being more of a health care company (thanks, Obama) that just happened to be in retail on the side just goes to illustrate how out of touch and callous Obama was, with a complete disregard for both individuals as well as employers in living their own lives.  And all for what, in the end?  To help breed dependency within the small percentage of folks who went to the exchanges and onto a subsidy so he could ingrain patronage and mine new votes from an increasingly dependent class?  

We have lost so much – not just as a company.  Our nation has wasted eight years with this vain and costly experiment in statist coercion.  It has stalled our economy and been hostile to hiring in general since now all you're doing is taking on new liabilities.  

Donald Trump needs to get us back on track.  The first thing he must do is remove the entire hallmark legislation of Obama that was nothing more than an exercise in Obama's own vanity in feeling the need to tinker with the lives of millions by manipulating them through an illegitimate use of force.

Annihilate it, Mr. Trump.  It's good that you shook hands with our sitting president as a show of good form, but now is not the time for etiquette.  You must act on your promises to those who supported you and move to end this colossal waste of time and money.

via http://ift.tt/2gdXebZ Tyler Durden

Liberarian Party Breaks Half a Million Registered Voters

The Libertarian Party (L.P.) started 2016 with around 411,000 registered voters. After a year of Trump and Clinton and the Libertarian’s Johnson/Weld campaign with its record over 4 million votes for the L.P., nearly 100,000 other voters have seen wisdom in registering Libertarian.

According to ballot access maven Richard Winger at Ballot Access News, the Libertarians are now the first nationally-organized Party in American history besides the Republicans and Democrats to break a half-million registered voters.

The L.P. had never broken 400,000 registered voters before this year.

The “nationally organized” part is key, as the California-only American Independent Party has around 507,000. It is well-understood, though, that a vast majority of people registering with it are doing so under the mistaken belief they are merely registering independent of any Party, not joining a specific party with that name. (That Party nominated Trump this year.)

Another sign of increased health for the L.P. is a yearly monetary take for the national Party of likely near $3 million, for what should be their highest-dollar year since 2000.

And another: the L.P. got the most votes ever for U.S. House candidates, 1.67 million, even though it ran the same number of such candidates as in 2014, 122.

That’s fewer than half the number of federal House candidates the L.P. ran in 2000, the year in which their House vote total was close to, but not matching, this year’s, with a total of 1.61 million. Thus, the Party’s votes per candidate have gone up enormously.

For some in-the-weeds discussion of how this year’s results on the state level improved the Party’s ballot access or “official Party” status, see the Libertarian Party’s own blog and Richard Winger’s Ballot Access News.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2fWUGM0
via IFTTT

Boeing Shutters Two Plants After United Continental Delays $5BN Worth Of 737 Orders

Earlier this morning, Boeing’s shares dropped after United Continental Airlines said it would delay orders for 61 Boeing 737 jetliners, worth roughly $5 billion, and instead order the newer 737 MAX models for delivery in later years.  Boeing, of course, downplayed the impact of the decision saying it would not affect its plan to increase production rates of 737s, and stressed that it continues to have orders for more 737s than it can produce.

Given that, it does seem to be curious timing that Boeing has just announced an operational restructuring that will result two site closures in El Paso, Texas and Newington, Virginia.  While we’re sure there are “efficiency gains” to be generated from the consolidation of sites, cutting 4.5 million square feet of facility space in just 4 years seems like there may be a bit more behind the cuts. 

“In order to push ourselves farther and win more business, we need to make the most of our resources and talent,” said Leanne Caret, president and CEO, Defense, Space & Security. “These steps will help us be a stronger partner for our customers worldwide.”

 

By the end of 2020 Boeing will reduce facilities space by approximately 4.5 million square feet. Along with that, many positions in Huntington Beach will move to El Segundo, Long Beach, and Seal Beach in Southern California, with others moving to St. Louis and Huntsville, Ala.

 

Similarly, many positions in Kent, Wash., will move to nearby Tukwila. Boeing also will close its El Paso, Texas, and Newington, Va., sites.

 

With the moves, Los Angeles County gains about 1,600 positions, with St. Louis gaining 500 and Huntsville about 400.

 

“Making better use of our facilities will enhance efficiency and promote greater collaboration,” Caret said. “This will help drive our global growth in Boeing’s second century.”

 

To bolster that effort, Boeing Defence Australia, Boeing Defense Saudi Arabia, and Boeing Defence United Kingdom will be aligned and managed in a new global operations group led by David Pitchforth. He will also continue as managing director of Boeing Defence UK. While Pitchforth will report directly to Caret, those three organizations will continue operating independently.

Boeing

 

While Boeing attempted to downplay the financial impact of the delayed United Continental order, analysts are somewhat more skeptical of it’s impact on free cash flow generation over the coming years.

But some worried that canceling 61 current-generation planes and ordering MAXs for an uncertain date could delay Boeing’s planned production increases and its cash generation.

 

“737 output is their only realistic way to increase cash flow,” said Richard Aboulafia, an aerospace analyst at the Teal Group in Virginia. Boeing is already cutting production of the 777, its other cash cow, and 787 output is due to remain steady.

 

“Now it looks like 737 output will not grow as planned,” he said.

Meanwhile, shareholders were somewhat disappointed as well:

BA

Though we’re sure it’s nothing.

via http://ift.tt/2fDnmss Tyler Durden

Five Horrifically Bad Foreign Policy Ideas That Should Disqualify John Bolton From Being Secretary of State

Former U.S. Ambassador John Bolton is reportedly on the Trump administration’s short list for secretary of state. Even though no official announcement has been made, Bolton’s consideration is already drawing rebukes from libertarian-minded Republicans like U.S. Sen. Rand Paul, who on Tuesday called Bolton’s foreign policy views “unhinged.”

Paul’s spot on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee gives him significant sway over the nomination of Bolton—or anyone else—as secretary of state, but you don’t have to share Paul’s skepticism about America’s interventionalist foreign policy to be terrified by the prospect of having Bolton in charge of the State Department.

Here’s a brief reminder of some of the terrible things Bolton has done (or wanted to do) in the realm of foreign policy. We only included five of the worst examples, but share your own not-so-fond memories of Bolton’s disastrous ideas in the comments below.

1. Bolton was a primary cheerleader of the War in Iraq and stands for everything Americans rejected about the Bush administration’s foreign policy.

Let’s just get the obvious thing out of the way up front.

“We are confident that Saddam Hussein has hidden weapons of mass destruction and production facilities in Iraq,” Bolton said in 2002 while serving as President George W. Bush’s undersecretary of state for Arms Control and International Security. That wasn’t true, as we’d later discover after it was too late.

(As an ironic aside: at the same time that Bolton was cheerleading for an American invasion of Iraq over nonexistent WMDs, he was working to derail a UN proposal to allow foreign inspectors to check on the United States’ arsenal of biological weapons.)

Hindsight is 20/20, but not for Bolton. In 2015, he told the Washington Examiner that he still thinks the Iraq War was worth it and claimed “the worst decision made after that was the 2011 decision to withdraw U.S. and coalition forces.” In Bolton’s mind, U.S. troops should have occupied Iraq in perpetuity.

I’ve given up expecting much consistency from Donald Trump, but it’s still a little surprising that The Donald would be considering Bolton for a high ranking place in his administration. After all, Trump’s initial rise in the Republican primaries was largely due to his brilliant take-down of Jeb Bush, which hinged on reminding everyone why putting another Bush in the White House would be a bad idea.

“We should have never been in Iraq. We destabilized the Middle East,” Trump said during a February debate in South Carolina. “They lied. They said there were weapons of mass destruction. There were none.”

“Obviously the war in Iraq was a big, fat mistake,” Trump concluded, before hammering Jeb for taking more than a week (earlier in the campaign) to answer a reporter’s question about whether his older brother made a mistake by launching the invasion.

Now Trump wants to hire someone who has taken 13 years (and counting) to do the same?

2. Bolton wanted the U.S. to go to war with Cuba over WMDs that also didn’t exist

A year before the United States would go to war with Iraq due (at least in part) to falsely believing that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction, Bolton was advocating that the United States should go to war with Cuba because of later debunked reports that Fidel Castro was developing weapons of mass destruction.

In May 2002, during a speech at the Heritage Foundation, Bolton said he believed Cuba was developing biological weapons and was capable of distributing them to Libya and Syria.

The New York Times reported on the speech: “‘The United States believes that Cuba has at least a limited offensive biological warfare research and development effort,’ Mr. Bolton said, taking aim at the Communist government of Fidel Castro. Cuba, he added, has also ‘provided dual-use biotechnology to other rogue states.'”

The Times noted that it was the first time an American official openly accused Cuba of developing biological weapons. When the Times asked Bolton’s office to substantiate this historic and potentially bellicose claim, they offered no evidence.

Those intelligence reports about Cuba developing WMDs? They were later debunked.

3. Bolton really, really wants to bomb Iran

Having apparently learned nothing from the decade-plus quagmire that resulted from the invade-now-come-up-with-an-exit-strategy-later Bush administration approach to the Iraq War, Bolton in March 2015 advocated for a similar bomb-now-and-figure-out-the-details-later approach to dealing with Iran.

In a New York Times op-ed titled “To Stop Iran’s Bomb, Bomb Iran,” Bolton argued that “only military action” could “accomplish what is required.” The thing being required was preventing Iran from developing a nuclear bomb. A limited strike against known nuclear production facilities could set the country’s nuclear ambitions back by three to five years, Bolton argued, and should be combined with “vigorous American support for….regime change in Tehran,” because we all know about the successful track record of regime change in the Middle East.

As Reason’s Matt Welch noted at the time: “One of Bolton’s main stated concerns is that Iran’s pursuit of nukes will (and is already beginning to) set off a regional nuclear arms race, which would indeed be alarming. But isn’t there another possible game-theory scenario here, in which a pre-emptive attack on Iran (like the pre-emptive, WMD-justified attack on Iraq) could incentivize regional powers and various nefarious regimes to go nuclear faster? After all, the U.S. doesn’t spend a lot of time engaging in forcible regime change with countries (no matter how lousy) that already have the bomb. And Ukraine, for one, can tell you what happens to your defensive posture after emptying your nuclear arsenal.”

4. President Obama followed Bolton’s terrible advice about Libya and then Bolton blamed Obama for the resulting mess

In March 2011, while mulling a potential run for president, Bolton suggested to an Iowa crowd that the United States should try to assassinate Muammar Gadhafi, the then-dictator of Libya.

“I think he’s a legitimate target,” Bolton said, according to The Daily Beast. “He has murdered innocent American civilians. He has never faced responsibility for it. So I don’t have any hesitation in saying that.”

Later during the speech, Bolton admitted that he was willing to let Gadhafi live—”I personally would be happy to send him into exile somewhere,” is how he put it, according to the Daily Beast—but said it would probably be easier to just kill him and let someone else take control.

That someone else, of course, turned out to be ISIS. After the Obama Administration intervened in the Libya to drive Gadhafi from power (the dictator was eventually captured and killed by his own people), a power vacuum developed and Islamic extremists have since set up shop in Libya—just like they did in Iraq and Syria…it’s almost like there’s a pattern here.

Proving that he can learn from the mistakes of non-Republican administrations, Bolton later blasted Obama for intervening in Libya.

5. Bolton suggested Israel should unleash nuclear weapons against Iran

Perhaps the most terrifying manifestation of Bolton’s desire to bomb Iran no matter the costs or consequences for America (to say nothing of the consequences for the people of Iran fixed in his crosshairs) occurred in 2009 while Bolton was speaking at the University of Chicago.

“Unless Israel is prepared to use nuclear weapons against Iran’s program, Iran will have nuclear weapons in the very near future,” Bolton said. It’s been seven years and Iran hasn’t developed a nuclear weapon (and Israel thankfully didn’t follow Bolton’s advice), so either Bolton was exaggerating the threat or he doesn’t have a good understanding of the words “very near future.”

The logic here is almost too twisted to untangle.

Bolton argued that Israel’s preemptive use of nuclear weapon against an enemy (an act that would smash all international norms regarding the use of nuclear weapons) should not only be considered, but should be encouraged. Such an act would not destabilize the region (to say nothing of those smashed international norms), but Iranian efforts to develop a nuclear bomb—perhaps as a defense against exactly this sort of threat from Israel or the United States—is destabilizing?

Trita Parsi, the then-president of the National Iranian American Council, told Mother Jones that Bolton ought to ponder the aftermath of an Israeli nuclear assault on Iran.

“There is a day after you use a nuclear weapon,” he said. “If you want to maximize collateral damage and really make sure that the Iranian-Israeli conflict will be another unending Middle-Eastern conflict, then nuclear weapons is your path and John Bolton is your guy.”

Pondering the consequences of an unhinged, aggressive foreign policy isn’t Bolton’s strong suit. It’s stunning that someone who has been so wrong, so many times could end up running one of the most important parts of the U.S. government.

Before the election, many people were questioning the wisdom (or lack thereof) of giving a temperamental, vindictive, and irresponsible man like Donald Trump control over America’s nuclear arsenal. Those fears hopefully will never be realized, but letting John Bolton set the country’s foreign policy does nothing to calm the nerves.

Bonus John Bolton awfulness:

He helped cover-up the Iran-Contra scandal.

He founded a political action committee with the goal of electing more hawkish candidates. Donors received this mustachioed coffee mug.

He wants to “cause Putin pain,” whatever that means.

He supports the drone warfare program created under Bush and expanded under Obama.

He fears we might miss an opportunity to go to war with North Korea.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2fvexDd
via IFTTT

Student Kicked Out Of Class For Disagreeing That Trump Election Was As Bad As 9/11

Submitted by Grace Curtis via The College Fix

Women’s college loses it when Hillary Clinton loses election.

 When Republican Donald Trump was elected president last week, the intelligent, determined young women of Converse College – along with their esteemed instructors – lost their minds.

They posted video of themselves crying on Snapchat. They walked around campus in tears, and the administration set up “safe zones” where students weren’t allowed to discuss the election results.

One of my professors pushed back a midterm “given recent upsetting events,” and students planned to organize “silent protests” on Thursday.

CF

 

If this sounds like the typical college reaction to Trump’s victory, there’s a twist: Converse is a women’s liberal arts college.

From President Krista Newkirk on down, the Converse community invested a huge part of its identity in Democrat Hillary Clinton shattering the last remaining glass ceiling in America.

The only acceptable sentiments to express since Wednesday have been grief and outrage. Feelings are so raw that the few contrarians on campus have become targets.

One student even claims she got kicked out of class after she challenged her professor’s comparison of Trump’s election to the September 11 terrorist attacks.

‘Never been so disgusted in my life’

Before she was ejected from class by her professor, the student wrote a Facebook post scolding those who were “comparing 11/9 to 9/11”:

You are comparing today to a day that killed thousands of people in MY HOME. You are disrespectful, you are unintelligent and you should think before you post things on social media. I am disgusted.

That comparison continued in the student’s class, she said. (The student requested anonymity to share her story, so The College Fix is not naming the professor either.)

The professor told the class “I haven’t felt this way since 9/11” and called Nov. 9 the second worst day in American history, according to the student. That spurred her to disagree and tell her professor it was disrespectful to those who lost their lives on 9/11.

CF

 

“I went to her class and got kicked out for expressing my opinion,” the student said. She asked to meet with the dean of the department, who told her the issue would be “rectified in a professional and acceptable manner,” according to the student.

“I have never been so disgusted in my life,” the student told The Fix.

‘All I ask is as I respect them they also respect me’

The principles that Converse stands by are Voice. Value. Vision. With fewer than 1,400 students, the school emphasizes community involvement and sisterhood.

In the wake of Trump’s election, civility and sisterhood were thrown out the window.

“I am sad that once again our young girls and women have failed to see the shattering of that glass ceiling and the first female president of the United States,” President Newkirk wrote to the student body. She said it wasn’t a “partisan statement.”

CF

 

Mourning the still-remaining glass ceiling, Converse students took to social media to express their devastation at the election of the “sexist” Trump. Those who weren’t devastated have borne the brunt of that sentiment.

“Students have been un-friending one another on Facebook based on political views and responses” since the election, student Heather Jane Clare Hiley told The Fix.

CF

 

Kathleen Price didn’t like either major-party candidate, “but for me, Trump seemed the better of the two” because his “policies lined up with my beliefs and that’s why I voted for him.”

She told The Fix she’s afraid of sharing her views on campus or even online.

“I have been quiet about my views for fear of being bashed and not wanted at Converse like some of my friends have been, and many of my fellow sisters have been bashed because of what they believe in or who they voted for,” Price said. “All I ask is as I respect them they also respect me.”

“I think there has been a change on campus, if only a slight one,” another student who requested anonymity told The Fix. “The emotions this election has drudged up are entirely valid and it’s hard pressed to compare the level of fear and disdain in our nation today as just another presidential election.”

CF

 

‘We do not tolerate intimidation’

The tension and unrest in the student body was not lost on Converse administrators.

“The election has caused a lot of stress on our student body over the past 48 hours,” the Division of Student Development and Success wrote in a letter to the student body.

It organized an “Election Aftermath Program” that divided “each school of thought into different rooms to talk about fears, hopes, and where to go from here.”

The division also warned students: “We do not tolerate intimidation or bullying for a difference of opinions – regardless of your partisanship.” It did not specify what it considers intimidation or bullying.

It also sent out worksheets instructing students on “ways to cope with election stress,” which included tips like “Limit political debate and argument” and “Unplug from social media.”

via http://ift.tt/2eDclKU Tyler Durden