BDA

Saturday evening President Trump claimed that United States strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities had been completely and totally obliterated.   

Bomb damage assessment (BDA) is the process of assessing damage inflicted on a target following aerial bombing or following a strike from a stand-off weapon; this continues.

Clearly the sites Iran had been using to produce highly enriched uranium have been seriously damaged as a consequence of US bombing.  The question on everyone's minds is whether Tehran's program had been decapitated or simply pushed into smaller, secretive scattered facilities.  In the run up to the latest hostilities it was assumed that most, if not all, of Iran's cache of 60% enriched uranium was stashed at the bombed locations.    

There are plenty of analysts who believe Iran moved much of its enriched uranium—especially its 408 kg (~900 lb) stockpile enriched up to 60%—to undisclosed or underground locations before the strikes on Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan. 

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) access is now severely restricted following the strikes.  Inspectors have no immediate access to key sites and the IAEA is presently unable to conduct comprehensive assessments to confirm damage to centrifuges and other production technology, confirm damage to actual uranium, or if it has been removed. 

The strikes appear to have slowed Iran’s nuclear program temporarily, but not destroyed it. Iran likely relocated both enriched uranium and centrifuge assets beforehand. Without full IAEA access, the true scope of Iran’s enriched stockpile and hidden capabilities remains unclear. Analysts estimate Iran could produce enough weapons-grade uranium for 6–10 bombs within weeks given its current enriched stock and capacity.  Considering that Iran has patiently proclaimed Death To America for fifty years; proliferation risks persist.

I could be wrong, but without further information, verification and diplomacy I'm unconvinced President Trump has made your and my world a safer place.  And, jessus, this second rodeo has so many bright shiny objects it's enough to make the heads of us great unwashed spin faster than an enrichment centrifuge.  

Note: In the early-mid 1990s The Missus and I were on a western road trip and found ourselves slightly lost while looking for Knob Noster State Park. Stumbling-upon the guard gate to Whiteman Air Force Base we asked for directions, got turned around and set straight for the campground. I actually spotted a B-2 Spirit bomber on that drive to the state park.  Low on the horizon it was possible the aircraft was making an approach for landing.  Distinctive in that it could be seen in thin profile during a turn; vanishing from sight on the level.  It is still amazing to me these messengers of death and destruction can depart from a sleepy Missouri location, travel to the other side of the world, wreak havoc and return home in the space of a four shift workday.  

Photo Credit - Air and Space Forces Magazine

 

Impoundment

Our Founding Fathers crafted our government to be small.  Not so small and ineffectual as the one under the Articles of Confederation (which the Constitution replaced) even so, limited.  In the century and a half leading up to just before the Great Depression, federal spending consistently hovered-around 3% of GDP; evidence of a constrained government.  With the passage of time things changed.

In an effort to limit patronage and corruption the civil service system was created in 1883.  With the exception of a wartime economy government continued to remain limited in both size and power.  Nevertheless, with the best of intentions, a small bureaucracy was born.

The arrival of Roosevelt's New Deal in 1933 gave rise to a vast collection of regulatory agencies, government-supported recovery programs and creation of various federal safety nets.  Considering the magnitude of a decade-long depression most of this was welcomed by a beleaguered citizenry. And the administrative state grew.

Fast forward to nowadays.  Several generations had come and gone since WWII and all the while government had grown larger.  Allow me to introduce you to the power of impoundment. 

In the simplest of terms an impoundment is any action – or inaction – by an officer or employee of the federal government that precludes federal funds from being obligated or spent, either temporarily or permanently.  Presidents dating back to Jefferson had periodically wielded the impoundment power.  

Naturally, Congress holds the legislative power of the purse.  It is the prerogative of Congress to hand the president a purse full of money; but not the capacity to compel the president to spend the entirety of the contents of the purse.  Presidents retained executive discretion in that regard. 
In 1974, Congress passed a law with the intent to limit the president's power of impoundment. 

The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 created procedural mechanisms by which the Congress considers and reviews executive branch withholdings of budget authority.  It requires the President to report promptly to the Congress all withholdings of appropriations and to abide by the outcome of the congressional impoundment review process. 

Although the basic framework of the act is sound, it set the table for a clash between the three branches of government - Executive, Legislative and Judicial. The Founding Fathers May have been prescient.

Enter the Unitary Executive Theory; a Constitutional law theory according to which the President of the United States has sole authority over the executive branch. It is an expansive interpretation of presidential power that aims to centralize greater control over the government in the White House.

The Executive Branch of the government exists because of Article II of the Constitution, which vests executive authority with the president.  Yeah, in a very short period of less than a month our new president has cut spending authorized by Congress.  Some are sore about this sudden turnabout.  Consider this; if a president is to have reign over the executive branch, has he the authority to eliminate the positions needed to spend that money?  Or can Congress or unelected judges force him to spend it by essentially commandeering executive power?

Therein lies the rub.

This is not rocket science.  If Congress passed a law last year saying money should be spent this year, then it might come as a surprise that a new president can just cancel that spending.  It is already impacting local government where I live.  The seeming abruptness of this is we haven’t had a president in fifty-plus years willing to fully test the limits of their constitutional authority, including impoundment. 

It's still very early in the game and the president has flooded the zone with enough sound and fury as to make one's head spin.

We'll have to wait a bit to see how this plays-out.  Only time will tell.

You're welcome......