Practical Considerations Of Trade Taxes - Updated With New Developments

I've been casting-about for someone; anyone, who can explain to me how the taxation of imported goods will improve your and my prosperity and general lot in life.  If the world becomes a safer place, bonus.  So, if you're reading this and have a simple elucidation that connects the economic dots you know where to find me.  Meanwhile, while the president has promised trillions of dollars of foreign investment in the US I haven't seen anything in particular happening in Wisconsin.  

February of this year Apple announced a $500 billion effort to build a new factory in Texas and expand manufacturing in several other states.  But according to the Wall Street Journal that plan has been in the works since the Biden era.

Pharmaceutical giant - Roche - pledged $50 billion in domestic expansion; then walked-back the pledge following the president's executive order limiting drug prices.  

BMW announced that it was considering additional shifts for US factories.  Honda announced they were considering shifting Ontario production of their popular CRV to Indiana.  Last month, Stellantis commenced a planned retooling of a previously mothballed plant in Illinois; the earliest opening date is the end of 2027.  It takes awhile people.

Sure, the Trump Administration is rather loosey-goosey in claiming credit for stuff that has been in the pipeline for years, conflated or planned changes regardless of tariff policy.  I don't have a problem with that.  Politicians predictably claim credit for unearned stuff all day long.  The reality is that reshoring of manufacturing and assembly operations along with their complex supply lines takes 3 to 6 years to bring to fruition; about the time Trump is preparing to leave office in his Qatari airplane and long after the mid-term elections.  I wish I could be a fly on the wall of America's corporate boardrooms.  Do you suppose I'd be witness to talk about waiting this guy out?  I wonder.

The practical effect of the on-again, off-again, inconsistent tariff and trade policy along with a global trade war has been a freezing of business investment activity.  Last Tuesday I listened to Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson on the Julie Mason Sirius XM POTUS channel as he shared his misgivings over trade taxes and impacts on Wisconsin business.  Coming from a private-sector guy his musings over business investment grinding to a halt carry some weight.  Business wants and needs predictability and certainty before making outsized investment commitments.  Complicating this are recent retailer announcements of price increases as Trump's taxes erode already slim profit margins.

Some have speculated that a case that heard oral arguments just last week in the US Court of International Trade could end all of this nonsense if this obscure federal court grants small business plaintiffs' request for an emergency injunction upending Trump's policy ambitions.  Who knows where this shall go.  Time will tell. 

So, we'll have to wait this out and see what develops.  We're already half-way into a 90 day pause with many trade taxes already in place and in full force and effect.  What happens after the 90 day pause expires?  

Your guess is as good as mine. 

What I know for sure is that corporate America is taking a long pause to assess the matter and during this period of wait and see not much is happening.  And who can blame them.  Last week the president got up on the wrong side of the bed and in a fit of pique threatened the European Union with a 50% tax on their exports to the US.  And In a new first; he petulantly singled-out  specific companies (Apple and Samsung) with an import tax of 25% if they didn't begin moving their assembly operations to the US before the end of June. This is absolute bananas.  

I predict a summer of interesting economic outcomes.  And maybe a surprise or two*.

Meanwhile, unlike deep pocket Apple and Samsung, small business owners are taking it on the chin.  Beth Benike, an Army vet and owner of the Minnesota based company Busy Baby is just one of the millions of small business owners being impacted by President Trump’s up-and-down, back-and-forth, red light-green light and increasingly petty and impulsive import and curiously personal tax policies. Like I said - bananas.

Small businesses must now contend with the weight of burdensome new costs. “I don’t know how to operate in this new world,” Benike says. Even Trump’s lowered China tariff of “30% is still a lot.” What’s more, she says, “we don’t know what happens after 90 days” when Trump’s pause expires. In this uncertain landscape, Benike asks, “how do you plan anything as a business?”

 

 

*Kentucky Senator Rand Paul had an interesting take on all of this.  In a recent radio interview he scornfully suggested that Trump will ultimately cave and allow an automobile to be classified as "assembled in America" when it's brought here to have the wheels bolted-on.  

 

True Story.

 

Stay-tuned....... 

Edit to add:  Yesterday the US Court of International Trade ruled that Trump does not have the authority to impose sweeping tariffs under 1970s-era emergency legislation.  In fact, the judges said an injunction wasn't enough they issued a summary judgement invalidating and blocking almost all of Trump's trade levies to date.  Of course, the White House announced today they will appeal the judgement so we're back to more chaos.

 

Initial thoughts include the following:  Heretofore, Trump has only cut one deal so far - with the United Kingdom.  How does this complicate ongoing negotiations with anyone else going forward?  Does this offer Trump an off ramp for what many consider an ill-advised and poorly executed trade policy?  If things go sideways on appeal for Trump will SCOTUS agree to hear the case?  What if  SCOTUS does not and allows an adverse Trump ruling stand?

 

Stay-tuned.....  

Clueless and Feckless

The U.S. trade deficit widened to a record $140.5 billion in March as exports edged up slightly while imports surged by $17.8 billion. This was much larger than the consensus expected $137.2 billion.  

Just as in January, the jump in imports was driven by businesses rushing to front-run President Trump’s new tariffs. Pharmaceuticals led the way soaring $20.9 billion in a single month. 

Because imports subtract from GDP in the calculation process this surge became a major drag on growth. Net trade alone shaved roughly five percentage points off Q1’s growth rate, pulling real GDP down at a 0.3% annualized pace. With tariff pre-buying likely peaking in March, imports should slow and become a positive for real GDP in Q2.  These numbers are all subject to revision and perhaps the surge in imports was a one-off event.  Time will tell.

Meanwhile and on a related note, we're well-aware that the president's Big Beautiful Bill will include large tax cuts. Large enough so as to add as much a $7 trillion to our burgeoning national debt over the next decade.

Ouch.

Trade deficits and budget deficits frequently move in the same direction.  Consequently, as the president disrupts and breaks the global economy with his feckless trade taxes on imports the Big Beautiful Bill may very well compound it.

As a general rule a growing budget deficit will result in our government borrowing more money.  Which can drive-up interest rates. Naturally, higher interest rates result in a stronger dollar.  A stronger dollar makes our exports more expensive to overseas consumers.  Of course, a strong dollar makes our travel abroad more affordable and other country's stuff more affordable to us; but there's no getting around the matter of that the stuff we make here and sell abroad may become costlier in the the global marketplace.

Presently our our deficit and debt are growing as fast and as high as a wartime economy.  And in case you missed it we're not at war.  And while Elon Musk's DOGE has promised us $2 trillion dollars in savings; after all of the sound and fury DOGE suggests the savings are likely around $160 billion.  Even if that figure is close to correct, it hasn't resulting in any meaningful decline in government spending.  

Double ouch.

So here we are.  We have a president somehow fixated-upon trade deficits when in-fact trade deficits in and of themselves are not necessarily a bad thing.  Who cares if we have a trade deficit with a poor island nation like Madagascar.  We purchase their vanilla beans because we have a sweet tooth and they earn dollars to make ends meet. They're unlikely to ever become large buyers of Boeing aircraft or Ford F-150 pick-up trucks. They are not picking on us; who gives a rip?

Perhaps all of our trade deficits will go away, tariff revenue will make us wealthy beyond our means, the looming threat of recession will dissipate overnight and inflation will magically evaporate.  Ask your own financial advisor what they think.

Meanwhile, I think that President Trump is clueless as to how trade deficits operate.  The application of across the board tariffs as a solution is feckless.  Someone might want to whisper in POTUS' ear that his approach might just become another unforced error.  

Recession warnings are everywhere, except in the data.  Are we headed for a recession?  Economists are looking everywhere for signs. 

Only time will tell how this all plays-out.  Speaking for myself, and in my own enlightened self-interests, I sure hope for a soft landing, no further self-inflicted economic damage and no recession.....

Port of Vancouver

 

Traffic Jam Follow-up

Here's a follow-up on yesterday morning's post on the impact of White House trade taxes on the North American trucking sector.

Unsatisfied with disrupting and breaking the over the road freight business President Donald Trump signed an executive order Monday requiring truck drivers to pass English literacy tests as a "non-negotiable safety requirement" amid mounting communication problems between truckers and federal and local officials.

I'm sure this tough, new, executive order has been lauded in Trump World; except for the fact that federal regulations already require fluency in English to drive a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) in the United States.

According to 49 CFR § 391.11(b)(2) from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSR), a driver must:

“Be able to read and speak the English language sufficiently to converse with the general public, to understand highway traffic signs and signals in the English language, to respond to official inquiries, and to make entries on reports and records.”

If I had to hazard a guess the White House is looking for a reason to stop and interrogate brown skinned truckers who also happen to speak Spanish.

Nah.  Too conspiratorial.  They'd never do that.  Would they? 

 

Traffic Jam

I don't drive the I-43 corridor between home and southeast Wisconsin as much as I used to before retirement; nevertheless, when I've previously made a trip down and back It's not at all unusual to note a significant volume of Canadian truck traffic - particularly on the down-bound southern route.  I actually made it practice to keep an eye peeled for rigs sporting the Bison Transport logo and their distinctive Manitoba tags.  

photo credit Land Line Magazine

Unsurprising, the primary Canadian port of entry in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan is the Sault Ste. Marie International Bridge connecting Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan with Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario.  There is also my favorite border crossing; the Grand Portage-Pigeon River port of entry connecting Grand Portage, Minnesota, with Neebing, Ontario and Thunder Bay. It's a major route between Duluth, Minnesota, and Thunder Bay, Ontario.

No wonder a significant portion of Canadian freight found its way to Interstate 43.

As the chaos and confusion, Red Light, Green Light, moving of the goal posts of the White House's tariff policies roil the global economy it turns-out that the trucking industry is emerging as another victim of these tax increases on international commerce.

To be clear, truckers are not a direct object of Trump's levy wrath; nevertheless, this sector is feeling unwelcome pressures and upheavals because lots of stuff moves across North America by truck. 

How much stuff you ask?  Consider this -  The North American trucking industry is a massive sector, generating significant revenue and employing millions of people.  In 2022, the US trucking industry alone generated $940.8 billion in gross freight revenue and had 3.54 million truck drivers.  The entire North American trucking industry (including Canada and Mexico) is even larger, with over 12.7 million truck entries combined on the Canadian and Mexican borders in 2022, and the value of goods traveling via truck across the borders jumped to over $947 billion in 2022.

Impacts are not isolated to freight companies and drivers; last week Mack Truck and Volvo announced the layoff of hundreds of workers as a consequence of falling demand due to tariff troubles and market uncertainties.  It hasn't taken very long for negative impacts to ripple across the entire industry.  

It is clear that this meaningful player with our largest trading partners has been seriously disrupted.  But we all know that Donald Trump thrives on disruption and breaking things.  Pure speculation on my part; but I don't think he thought this thru sufficiently to understand how broken this is becoming.  But that's how Trump rolls (pun intended).

Anyway, follow this link for a higher-level analysis of how the president's taxes on trade have disordered and begun to seriously dislocate a previously well-oiled engine of supply chain logistics.  It's a short read and worth it.  Trust me.  Further evidence of the Law Of Unintended Consequences.

Meanwhile, If I'm driving to the Naked City for any reason I'm gonna keep an eye peeled for any Canadian transports. 

The Bitter End

The 18th Amendment to the United States Constitution was ratified on January 16, 1919 and went into effect on January 17, 1920.  This amendment prohibited the production, sale and transportation of alcohol in the United State.  This dry spell lasted from 1920 to 1933.

Naturally, prohibition didn't sit well with Wisconsinites and it was a clever tavern owner from the peninsula who found a legal work-around that kept him in business throughout the prohibition years right up to modern times.

Tom Nelsen operated Nelsen's Hall, a dance hall and saloon on remote Washington Island, thinly populated by people who referred to themselves as islanders.  Isolated from the mainland it was a terrific location for a scofflaw.   

Nelsen recalled seeing bitters for sale at a local drug store in Sturgeon Bay.  Bitters are a 90-Proof beverage.  During the prohibition years a doctor could prescribe the dispensing of alcohol for the treatment of various medical disorders.

It was a German physician, Johann Siegert, who would become a pioneer in the bitters industry.  Dr. Siegert lived with his family in the town of Angostura, Venezuela having moved from Germany in 1820 to serve as the Surgeon General of the Armies of Simón Bolívar. By 1824 he perfected the formula for Amargo Aromatico used in his medical practice as a medical elixir for the troops.  Angostura Bitters were born and eventually branched-out to the mixology surrounding the consumption of adult beverages.

Firm in the knowledge that 90-Proof bitters were used to treat digestive disorders the enterprising Nelsen applied-for, and received, a pharmacist license for purposes of dispensing medicinal alcohol.  He prescribed shots of bitters to his regulars and was able to keep the doors of his watering hole open.  Unfortunately, even very distant Washington Island eventually drew the attention of federal agents who charged him with violating the Volstead Act.

At the County Seat in Sturgeon Bay, the state made what they considered to be a straightforward case that Nelsen was selling alcoholic beverages and operating a speakeasy.  As the story goes Nelsen, testifying in his own defense, claimed that bitters were medicinal and could be purchased at any pharmacy.  Arguing that the taste was so foul the concoction couldn't possibly be anything but medicine he invited the judge to take a sip.  Recoiling from the taste the judge ruled in favor of Nelsen agreeing that no beverage served in a bar could taste so bad.

Consequently, Nelsen continued to legally serve his island customers their bitters and remained in business until prohibition was subsequently repealed making Nelsen's Hall the oldest legally continuously-operated tavern in Wisconsin.  Reputedly, Tom Nelsen consumed a pint of bitters a day (16 shots) until he passed at age 90.

Nowadays, Nelsen's Hall and Bitters Club is the world's largest purveyor of Angostura Bitters.  The pub sells 1.5-oz. shots of bitters - more than 10,000 shots a year.  Enjoy a shot and you are inducted into the club and receive an official membership card. 

Located at W19 N1205 Main Road, Washington Island, WI 54246 - at the very end of the peninsula.

Story, historic photos and more about this here. 

 

 

Nelsen's Hall Bitter Pub Review Washington Island, WI  6-15-24

Render Unto Caesar

You need not look any further than the family bible on your bookshelf to learn that taxes have been around for thousands of years.  Our country was income tax-free for most of our early history; mostly as a consequence of the absence of a federal government to establish such a tax.

Nevertheless, the early colonists were subject to real estate and head taxes imposed by their British overlords.  Additionally, the Sugar Act (1764) levied duties on imported goods such as textiles, wine, coffee and sugar.  The Currency Act  (1764) caused a precipitous decline in the value of colonial paper currency and the Quartering Act (1765) required colonists to billet and supply British troops in response to the costs of defending the empire following the French and Indian War.  

As school children we learned about the infamous Tea Tax that led to the Boston Tea Party.  It was the cumulative resentment over taxation without representation that was the largest contributing factor leading up to the revolution and break with British rule.

Following the Revolutionary War the Constitution gave Congress the authority to impose taxes and other levies on the general public.  The federal government was funded largely by excise taxes and tariffs imposed on specific goods or services such as alcohol and tobacco and other imported goods.

For a brief period during the Civil War an income tax was levied as a supplement to funding the war effort while almost every commodity possible was subject to an excise tax. Congress repealed this income tax in 1872.

Time passed, and with the rise of the Progressive Movement eventually led to the establishment of the 16th Amendment to the Constitution authorizing Congress to impose a federal income tax. Effective in 1913 rates started at 1% and with a large personal exemption the tax initially applied to only 1% of the population.  In a few short years the new income tax was a principle contributor to funding the costs of the first World War.

Yet I digress.  That's more of an intro than I initially bargained-for; perhaps one day we can take a deeper dive into our country's history of taxation.

Inasmuch as another Trump Trade War begins today between our friendly neighbors to the north and south - Canada and Mexico - the tax subject of the moment is tariffs.  A 25% tariff on imports from our two largest trading partners goes into effect today. 

China is subject to a smaller 10% tariff.

What is a tariff?  A tariff is a tax on imported goods. In his first term the President frequently reminded us that; China is paying us billions of dollar in tariffs.  Despite what the President says this tax on imports is almost always paid by the importer (a domestic company) and never by the exporting country.  

If the US imposes a tariff on a Chinese appliance the duty is paid to the US Customs and Border Protection Service at the border by the broker representing a US importer - take your pick of any Big Box store who retails appliances

China pays nothing; just like the US government pays no tax to France when exporting Kentucky bourbon whiskey.  The French importer pays the relevant duty; ironically a legacy of the unpleasantness of Trump trade wars during his first term of office.

Are you with me so far?

The importer remits the tariff to the relevant nation's customs service but who ultimately pays it depends.  If possible the business will pass the cost on to consumers.  In the instance of the Kentucky bourbon a French consumer is basically stuck with the increase in price as there is no other global competitor for Kentucky bourbon.

In the instance of the Chinese appliance the price may rise rapidly.  But there many other countries (here and abroad) that will sell a lower cost appliance.  In some instances the tax is absorbed by shareholders in the form of reduced profits or by workers in the form of lower wages.   If it is a domestic firm nobody pays a tariff.  Nevertheless, the tax on imports won't go to zero immediately; the government will collect some revenue until markets adjust.

Tariffs have been around for as long as there has been trade between nation states and what is a reliable constant is that initial higher prices will reduce consumption.  Over longer periods of time reduced competition can result in domestic companies becoming inefficient.  In the absence of competition this can lead to higher prices; not just for goods subject to tariffs but those of domestic origin too.  I've blogged about this before, an unintended consequence is not only will the price of Chinese appliances rise, but so will the price of domestically-manufactured appliances.  

What we learned from Trump's first term in office is that with the imposition of tariffs US prices will rise and demand will fall.  Chinese exports to the US will fall and will likely be replaced by imports from competing nations.

Today, the latest chapter to the story is that new tariffs will result in a windfall in federal revenue.

Nope. 

In the context of $4.4 trillion of federal revenues import taxes are insignificant; the equivalent of loose change in the federal sofa cushions.  Furthermore, this revenue is fleeting and unreliable. Importers will naturally find suppliers not subject to tariffs.  For all that, higher prices imposed on consumers are likely to persist.

Again, the Law of Unintended Consequences suggests that a large decline in Chinese exports to the US will drive down the value of the Chinese currency; offsetting  some of the rise in price.  Consequently, a reduction in sales can result in a reduction of purchases of our Treasury securities by China.  Which may push interest rates up.

The bottom line is that the interplay of tariffs on trade can be complex stuff and can result in unintended outcomes.  Thanks for staying with me; It's early in the game for the second coming of Donald Trump so I'm staying out of trouble and not making any predictions.  

The least complex takeaway is that China won't be paying us billions of dollars in tariffs anymore than we are paying France to import Kentucky whisky.  If you believe anybody that tells you otherwise I gotta bridge I want to sell to you.  

To the extent tariffs are the new sanctions regime to negotiate for better terms on an unrelated matter we'll just have to see how that plays-out.

Stay tuned and have a terrifically taxed weekend....

Storm The Bastille

On December 4, Brian Thompson, CEO of UnitedHealthcare, was shot and killed outside the entrance to the New York Hilton Midtown in Manhattan, NYC.  He was in town to attend an annual investors meeting for UnitedHealth Group, the parent company of UnitedHealthcare.

Authorities believe the attack was not a random act and are investigating it as an assassination.  The shooting occurred early in the morning and the suspect, described as a white man, fled the scene. As of the publication of this post the perp has not been apprehended.

No arrest.

No interrogation.   

No motive.

Plenty of speculation to go around.

It is unclear what motivated the incident or whether it was tied to Mr. Thompson's work in the insurance industry.  The police have yet to identify the shooter who is still on the loose.

Nevertheless, social media has exploded with an avalanche of vitriol, and glee over the murder of the insurance executive.  Sure, I get it.  People have had negative experiences with health insurance companies at some of the most difficult times of their lives.  But in the absence of the facts and circumstances of this killing has anyone considered taking a moment to take a breath and not get over their skis? 

I tried on a Face Book group to counsel restraint and got hammered.  I was slammed for not embracing the notion that a man responsible for millions of deaths of people for money got his comeuppance.  

UnitedHealthcare denied 32% more claims last year than any other insurer, it's not hard to figure out.

Posting a photo of Albert Bouria, CEO of Pfizer, from Prophetic Memetics someone else suggested that he just thought someone else might might be curious.  

Anybody else, beside me, consider that a passive aggressive threat instead of your garden variety internet troll?

It is interesting to me the instances of individuals who have flippantly shared that their grievances (large or small, real or perceived) are justifiably resolved at the point of a gun.

It is a chilling observation to note that killing someone for a slight, a political difference or an insurance dispute is justified. 

Regrettably, this is what can happen when there are no appropriate channels for people to make meaningful change to a malign system.  The Supreme Court has allowed unlimited money in our politics and politicians are voting with their corporate overlords, including health insurance companies.  

My sense is that government is broken and simply does not work very well for the average American.  As a consequence they despair.

If this shooter becomes a folk hero it will be appalling; but not surprising.  I have shared many times that capitalism is messy business.  Perhaps we've arrived at a Storm the Bastille moment where the murder of both oligarchs or a neighbor with an offending bumper sticker becomes normalized.

I sure hope not....

Immunity - Without The Jab

I never met a vaccine I didn't like.  A milliliter of prevention can go a long way.  The Missus and I even opted for LYMERix® - the Lyme vaccine when it was available.  The only vaccine previously marketed in the United States was discontinued as a consequence of insufficient consumer demand.  Nevertheless, our dogs have been inoculated with the canine version of the Lyme vaccine and receive scheduled boosters.  If you're old like me the shingles vax is another measure of protection.  Same for a routine tetanus booster of you work outdoors.  But I digress.  I want to devote the Sunday missive to another form of immunity. 

Last week the Supreme Court ruled that the office of the president is above the law; at least sometimes.  

The court ruled that there is a presumption that a president is shielded from prosecution for official acts; namely decisions as Commander In Chief, council with cabinet members,  executive action and such.  Immunity does not extend to private actions taken as a political candidate.

As to former President Trump's actions on the January 6 capitol riot the court kicked the case back to the lower court judge to ascertain whether Trump's role constitutes a private act or an official one.

Fortunately for Trump this further delays any decision on the matter until after the election.  If he wins reelection; it will never see the light of day.  The ruling might also apply to state charges the former president faces in New York and Georgia. The key takeaway is that this ruling doesn't just apply to Donald Trump but to all future presidents as well.

As Chief Justice Roberts wrote, A president inclined to take one course of action based on public interest may instead opt for another, apprehensive that criminal penalties may befall him upon his departure from office. 

Some have suggested that the decision goes too far, enabling a president to  act in a fashion that heretofore might have appeared unlawful.  Unrestrained presidential immunity can be a slippery slope and possibly abused.  Nevertheless, and counterintuitively, the ruling provides some legal protection to President Biden if Trump wins reelection this fall.  As a practical matter we'll have to wait and see.

What we know for sure is that for the present time the Supreme Court has extended broad legal protection to a president; something that is not enjoyed by anybody else in the entire country. 

That's a big damn deal, people.

Unjust Forfeiture and Seizure

Police abuse of civil asset forfeiture laws allows police to seize - and then keep and sell - any property they allege is involved in a crime.  If it is your property you need not be arrested or convicted of a crime.  Your cash, vehicles and real estate can be taken from you permanently by the government.

These forfeiture laws were originally pitched as a mechanism to cripple large criminal enterprises by seizing their resources.  Because many of these statutes are deeply flawed many police departments use forfeiture to fatten their bottom line making seizures a means of profit instead of crime fighting. 

Forfeiture laws pose one of the greatest threats to property rights in our nation.  These laws encourage law enforcement to favor the pursuit of property  over the pursuit of justice.  Citizens are encouraged to be vigilant when it comes to action by government without criminal due process protections.  Abuses of forfeiture proceedings have been well documented.

Between 2001 and 2018, Texas law enforcement agencies forfeited more than $781 million under Texas law.  In Texas, law enforcement doesn't need to arrest, charge, or convict someone to seize your property.  All that is required is a need to articulate probable cause based upon the officer's suspicion that it is linked to criminal activity; or even that it could be used to facilitate a future crime that hasn't even been committed yet.  

Texas prosecutors rush to civil court - not criminal court - to use this flimsy standard.  In criminal court you have a right to counsel and the government must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.  Neither of which apply in forfeiture cases.

Be grateful you live in Wisconsin and not Texas or another state with flawed laws on their books.  On April 3, 2018, Governor Scott Walker signed Wisconsin Act 211, a bill that changed the rules the State has to follow when it seeks to forfeit property seized in relation to a crime.  This Act significantly changed Wis. Stat. § 961.55, which had previously permitted law enforcement agencies to seize and later forfeit property, in many cases for their own benefit.  The act now protects citizens whose property is seized but who are not prosecuted or whose criminal case is dismissed.  Furthermore, the fruits of any forfeiture is turned over to Wisconsin's School Fund and not the law enforcement agency that seized the property.  

The most significant change to the old forfeiture law is that if the owner of the property is acquitted or the charges dropped, the court must order that the property be returned within 30 days.  The bill also requires seized property to be returned to innocent owners of the property unless the owners were involved with or knowledgeable about the crime related to their property.

Wisconsin Act 211 restored balance between the power of the state and the rights of its citizens. 

Yet, there is reason to be hopeful.  Last year, a Texas judge allowed a class-action lawsuit to move forward against Harris County over its unconstitutional forfeiture program.  

Everyday citizens, along with help from organizations such as The Institute for Justice are pushing back and fighting back to reform flawed and unjust forfeiture laws. 

Remain vigilant, people.

Reproduction Meets Religion

Last week The state of Alabama found itself in an unforced and awkward situation.  The Alabama Supreme Court ruled that frozen embryos are children.  Yes, embryos produced as a consequence of In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) procedures are children.  They have personhood just like me and you.

All of this means that Alabama finds itself in the unique position of being a state where a female can be forced to carry a pregnancy to term - even if a twelve year-old is raped by her incestuous father.  If you find yourself unable to naturally conceive a child, IVF treatment is no longer available to you. 

All of this stems from the Law of Unintended Consequences as no one wants to be arrested and thrown in jail or get cross ways with the State Supreme Court because nobody knows what to do with thousands of frozen children.  Murder is a capital offense in Alabama; so it's not much of a stretch to believe you could be executed if found responsible for the loss of frozen embryos.

When it comes to reproductive options Alabama now finds itself a very unwelcoming place to live.  Republicans have concocted a fine kettle of fish for themselves and I'd be willing to bet that since it's an election year the dems are going to rub their noses in this shit.  Another nail in the coffin of the suburban women vote, eh?  But I digress.

What I really want to talk about is the religious angle on all of this because Chief Justice Tom Parker had this to say about the court's decision:  Human life cannot be wrongfully destroyed without incurring the wrath of a holy God.

Once you get beyond the divine retribution part, he makes a good point.  He's being morally honest.  For him it's all about God and for many of us reproductive decisions are frequently tangled-up in moral, religious and faith beliefs.

I was raised in the Roman Catholic tradition of the Christian faith, and even though The Church has washed its hands of me following a divorce decades ago, many of the beliefs I learned as a child and young adult still ring true and continue to shape my life. 

Guidance for many conservative Christians includes a belief that life begins at conception.  This applies to IVF treatment and abortion.  There is no compromise.  Catholic doctrine expressly forbids both including virtually all modern birth control interventions as well.  Just last month Pope Francis condemned surrogacy as despicable and called for a global ban on the practice.

Catholicism also happens to have a long and rich tradition of beliefs couched in social policy regarding reverence for life and care for the the poor.  Sex outside of marriage is forbidden - the act of which is reserved for married individuals and is solely for procreation.  Masturbation causes blindness too.  That's the doctrinaire part of it; truthfully, many Catholics are not that observant and routinely use hormonal birth control and seek IVF treatment.

Protestant beliefs can be more forgiving on the subject of IVF - possibly because the result is more children.  Furthermore, Evangelicals also tend to rely-upon literal interpretation of the bible; and naturally, the bible says nothing about IVF treatment.

The Chief Justice invoked God in his ruling - presumably this is the God of Abraham from whom the three major world religions hail.  

Judaism allows assisted reproduction when medically necessary.  Having children bears witness to the command to be fruitful and multiply.  Furthermore, the destruction of unused embryos is allowed as long as they thaw and dry naturally.

Islamic beliefs also allow all assisted reproductive technologies providing that the sperm, ovum and uterus belong to a legal-married couple during the term of their marriage.  If infertility is beyond cure it should be accepted.  If there are unused fertilized eggs their treatment is consistent with that of Judaism.

Respectfully, faith traditions are not in general agreement on much of this.  And adherents to a belief system should be guided appropriately.  Unlike Iran our country is not a theocracy ruled by mullahs; our government and system of laws is secular.  So if you don't believe in IVF, abortion, divorce, birth control or whatever, don't engage in the practice.  I am not going to impose my beliefs on someone else and I expect reciprocity.  

I happen to think that government already intrudes too much in the private lives of its citizenry.  So stay out of my life, my home, my bedroom and keep your damn hands off my body.  We're rational beings and consequently should be making our own decisions about our own destiny guided only by common sense, family, medical professionals and our faith beliefs.

I know I'm being snarky; but if frozen embryos are children, why aren't parents allowed extra exemptions on their tax return?

Now get off my lawn....

A Fine Kettle OF Fish

The title of this post has origins in the Scottish tradition of cooking-up a kettle of fish parts to make guests feel welcome.  The modern etymology of the title is reference to an awkward situation.  And indeed, Alabamians and their lawmakers have found themselves in an awkward situation today.

Some basics about natural conception and reproduction.  

A male gamete (sperm) combines with a female gamete (ovum) resulting in a fertilized ovum called a zygote. The zygote holds 100% of the genetic material - mother and father each contribute one-half - this develops into an embryo.  When an embryo successfully completes its journey of days and attaches to the wall of the uterus it will develop into a fetus.  And a child is born in the end.  That doesn't sound very romantic but that's the science of it.  There's a lot of moving parts and plenty of opportunity for something to go wrong along the way.  In a perfect world all of this happens without scientific intervention.   

What about people who cannot naturally conceive and reproduce?

The term In Vitro - Latin for 'in glass' - describes medical procedures, tests and experiments that scientists perform outside of a living organism.  In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) is a treatment process whereby a woman unable to naturally conceive a child can become pregnant.  IVF has been a godsend for people who cannot naturally conceive children.  Sperm and ovum are combined in a laboratory setting resulting in a fertilized zygote which will become an embryo.

IVF Human Embryo

This embryo is frozen for future implantation.  Once implanted, if the embryo successfully attaches to the lining of the uterus it becomes a fetus and, voila!  Maybe a child is born.  The uterine part of the process is critical because without that step the embryo cannot survive.

Collecting eggs for in vitro fertilization is complicated and includes some risk.  As a consequence multiple eggs are collected with the knowledge that once fertilized some will be genetically flawed (and discarded) and some will never successfully attach to the uterus following implantation.  Many couples naturally grow their families over a number of years so having some extra frozen embryos on hand solves the defective embryo situation along with implantation failures and can lead to more children.

Unused frozen embryos have typically been discarded.  Just as an acorn is not an oak until planted and successfully germinated; without uterine implantation the genetic material of the embryo cannot result in a child. 

Back to Alabama.  The Alabama Supreme Court ruled yesterday that frozen embryos - the product of in vitro fertilization - are children.  You can read the ruling here.  This complicates things for all of the embryos in cold storage.  What if the power goes off and they spoil?  Or you drop and break the container?  Discard genetically defective ones?  Discard good ones? 

It's none of my business if someone chooses to have a family or not to have a family.  Some couples have large families and some couples never have families for all kinds of reasons within and beyond their control.  That's their business and none of my concern.  Although I should add that I have personal knowledge of many families, immediate and otherwise, who have had children as a consequence of IVF treatments performed by doctors who God has endowed with tremendous and valuable medical talents.  

I also know that in a post-Roe world which restricts abortions in many states; if Republicans want to deprive couples from using the science of IVF to conceive and welcome children into a loving family then Alabama today finds itself in a awkward position.  A place where you are forced to give birth if you naturally conceive along with being a place where you cannot obtain IVF treatment if you really, really want to have a family. 

Having classified frozen embryos as children has complicated things.  Fearful of being civilly or criminally liable and arrested and thrown in jail or otherwise get cross-ways with the Alabama Supreme Court nobody knows what to do with all the frozen embryos.  The Law of Unintended Consequences has brought IVF treatment to a screeching halt.    

Reproductive stuff is complicated and the more Republicans continue to insert themselves into the reproductive lives and decisions of ordinary people the more they will continue to have a much larger problem with getting suburban women to vote for them on election day.  It's a fine kettle of fish they have concocted for themselves.

And don't forget.  Alabama is a Capital Punishment state.  They will put you to death for murder.  They're going to have a whole heap of trouble on their hands once they begin executing moms and dads and medical professionals over any mishandling of frozen embryos.

Sweet Home Alabama!

Blockade Ends

Under pressure from Senate Republicans, Florida Man and Alabama senator, Tommy Tuberville abruptly agreed to drop his objections to eleven remaining four star officer promotions.

Following almost a year of blocking military promotions over Pentagon policy ensuring service members could receive time off and travel expense reimbursement to seek abortion or other reproductive health services in another location Tuberville performed an about face.

The promotions were swiftly approved yesterday by unanimous consent - allowing the Senate to wrap up this important business before the holiday break.

I don't know if this is further evidence that you shouldn't take hostages you aren't prepared to shoot or poetic justice for forcing the US military to fight his culture war.  Either way, coach Tuberville is a dick.

Blockade Hangover

Last week we learned that Florida resident and GOP senator for Alabama, Tommy "Coach" Tuberville had lifted most of his holds on military promotions.  Alas, since then we learn that the persistent holds on the top positions - Joint Chiefs of Staff and several theater commands - has resulted in a domino effect through the chain of command.

Think of it like a bad hangover coming on the heels of the Coach's ten month binge of political theatrics.

Putin continues his relentless efforts to annihilate Ukraine,  Hamas continues to put innocent Palestinian civilians between themselves in their effort to annihilate Israel.  US forces in Iraq and Syria face military threats on a daily basis.  Carrier battle groups have been deployed in reasonably short order.  The world is a dangerous place. 

Tuberville's abuse of power is nothing new to American politics.  Nevertheless, his jerking around of military leadership has every possibility of impeding military operations and can be problematic to our security interests given the context of the previous paragraph.

Tuberville is entitled to take a stance on the abortion issue but being a dick about the military chain of command to score political points is out of line.  Just my opinion.  But if it walks and talks like a dick and looks like a dick; a dick is a dick.  Coach is a dick.

I'm sure this will get sorted-out over time; the military can handle a Florida panhandle dick.

Meanwhile if you're interested in a short but good read; Politico scored an exclusive on the drama behind the closed-door meeting where coach got tackled.

Blockade Lifted

Florida resident and Alabama senator, Tommy Tuberville, announced today that he is ending his months-long blockade of hundreds of military promotions.

Facing growing bipartisan pressure over his meddling with military readiness Tuberville said that he is embracing an off ramp suggested by Senators Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) and Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) releasing all of his holds on military officers at the 3-star level and below.

Roughly ten nominations for 4-star generals and officers will remain on hold. 

This announcement represents an about-face from the senator who for ten months had blocked senior military promotions over a Pentagon policy that offers time off and travel reimbursement for service members seeking abortions or fertility care.

Tuberville's behavior is evidence of flaws and vulnerabilities in our institutions where one individual can put a stop to hundreds of critical national security positions.

Tuberville is entitled to his views on abortion yet I struggle to see a connection to filling key defense and security positions.

I suppose that makes him just a garden variety dick.

Blockade

These are observations made by Peter Zeihan on the blockade that Alabama Senator Tommy "Coach" Tuberville has made on armed services promotions.  I've been following this as it is fascinating to me that a single US Senator can single-handedly block promotions within the ranks of the US military establishment.

Obstructionism is hardly new to the political scene in Washington.  And while Tuberville is entitled to his opinion on abortion I'm struggling to see a connection to filling key defense and security positions.  The system is hopelessly flawed when one individual can bring the filling of critical national security positions to a grinding halt.

Zeihan claims that under normal circumstances if you learned that high-ranking military personnel were losing security clearances and access to critical information, you'd probably expect to hear some sound rationale. Unfortunately, that's not the case because the current greatest threat to our national security is orchestrated by Tuberville over abortion policy.

Senator Tommy Tuberville has placed a unilateral hold on nominations and confirmations of military officials because he doesn't like the Biden administration's current policy of allowing service members to travel for abortion services. Consequently, the affected military personnel cannot access the classified information necessary for strategic planning.

Abusing power to manipulate outcomes is nothing new for American politics; however, political deadlocks that impede military operations are detrimental and problematic for the country's security interests. Given the context of the Ukraine War and rising tensions with China does this pose a potential risk?  Is is something that as Tuberville characterizes it, no big deal?  Or is it a perfectly acceptable not to jerk military leadership and their families around for political theater?

Does Zeihan have a valid point?

And, BTW, Alabama Senator Tuberville lives in Florida.  Apparently that's not a big deal for the people of Alabama.  I have to wonder how us Cheeseheads would feel about one of our senators living in Chicago or Rockford....