Constitutional Amendment for Privacy

This is an open letter submitted to my Senators and Congressman on November 18, 2013.
-----
I am writing to ask you to end government spying on ordinary American citizens, and to enact a Constitutional Amendment for Privacy.   The guarantee of privacy is a basic right of a free people.

The Privacy Amendment should prohibit indiscriminate data collection by both business and government.  My personal information is my property; it may not be taken without my explicit permission.  Further, commercial enterprises must not require my personal information as a condition of providing service to me beyond what is necessary for the delivery of that service.

Recent revelations from Edward Snowden have revealed the extent of government spying to the American people.  It seems the NSA has gathered all of my e-mails and keeps record of all of my reading on the Internet.  The NSA has worked very hard to keep the extent of their incursions a secret.

There are two reasons for secrecy in government.  The first reason is to protect Americans from our enemies.   The second reason is to hide what the government is doing from the people.

It is clear to me that we are in the second situation.   The NSA brazenly lied to Congress about the extent of its proposed programs when seeking budgetary authority for their data center in Utah.  They seek to avoid public knowledge of their actions, and to avoid Congressional oversight.   Such secrecy and deception does little to convey confidence in their integrity.

Domestic spying is a defining characteristic of despotic regimes.  At this time, anyone who says, “I have nothing to hide” is missing the point.  This amount of secret power will be abused.  We have many examples of the abuse of power in our own history.  These examples pale in comparison to the horrors which occurred in other countries through the past century.  America is not immune to such abuse; our only defenses are the Constitution, our courts and Congress.

The NSA should not collect nor read my e-mail. They should not collect the history of my Internet searches nor accumulate metadata about my telephone calls.  While these programs are in effect, I cannot write candidly, for fear some keyword or combination of words will somehow trigger a computerized alarm about my communications.  Freedom of speech doesn’t exist in a constant condition of surveillance. I recommend a recent column by Leonard Pitts, in which he worries about his Google searches while researching a novel about terrorism.

By what logic do we have a secret court, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, approving spying programs on American citizens?  What place does a secret court hold in our democracy?  How has this court become a 34-year institution in our government?  The court is clearly a rubber-stamp for the NSA, having denied only 11 of 33,942 requests for domestic surveillance warrants from 1979 to 2012.  Will the court define secret offenses, and approve secret penalties and restrictions on citizens deemed to be security risks?  If you answer no, how do you know?

Domestic spying is inconsistent with what it means to be a free people.  The spying programs conducted by the NSA are expressly forbidden by the Fourth Amendment, but somehow continue.   It is up to you; it is up to Congress to put a stop to it and protect American freedom.

Confronting Evil -- Analysis of American Intervention in the Syrian Conflict

Many years ago I tried to express my feelings about relations between different societies, countries, or individuals from different cultures.   It went something like this:

Celebrate that which is different.

Learn from that which is new and unexpected.

Respect that which you cannot understand.

Tolerate things which to you are merely unpleasant.

Confront that which is evil.

--

The world struggle against facism in the middle of the 20^th century is the clearest example of confronting evil.  World War II has been called “The Good War”.   World War II was the greatest military conflict in history; it cost a staggering number of lives and the devastation of a continent.  But the war ended (at least for our generation) the notion of world subjugation by any people or ideology.   The war ended a campaign of conquest, torture, and genocide on a massive scale not seen before on earth.

--

In recent years, America has embarked on two wars under the justification (in principle, at least) of confronting evil.   The result of those wars has been over a decade of human misery in the afflicted countries.   In Iraq, over 100,000 Iraqis have died, and over 4500 United States soldiers.  About four million people were made homeless or refugees, and one million children lost one or both parents.  Civil society, infrastructure, secular education, culture, and museums were devastated.  And the fundamental basis for the American war against Iraq – that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction – was false.

--

As a youth, I had a different formulation of the ethics of war.  As a child of the Vietnam era, I wrote letters to a soldier in Vietnam, until a Sunday newspaper carried the name of my correspondent in the weekly list of the dead. 

By age 14, I understood that war was a cooperative act, made possible only through the willing participation of a majority of people in society.   Each person makes an individual choice to participate in war; without collective participation, war could not exist.   As a youth, fresh from reading Henry David Thoreau, it seemed to me that war could be ended by common consensus if most people made the ethical choice to refuse to participate.

As an adult I understand that not enough people make that choice.  War will not be ended by conscientious objectors.

--

America is now on the brink of another conflict in the Middle East.  President Barack Obama declared that the use of chemical weapons was a “red line”, which would draw the United States into the conflict.  Chemical weapons have clearly been used in an attack against a rebel neighborhood, killing and wounding a large number of people, including children.  Chemical weapons are a particular and recognized evil due to the indiscriminate and devestating damage caused to the victims (including non-combatants and civilians).  Chemical weapons were banned by the Hague Peace conventions in 1899 and 1907, by the Geneva Protocol in 1925, following World War I, and by numerous subsequent international agreements.

--

Is this use of chemical weapons sufficient to demand an American military response?  

To me, the first question is whether the attack was genuinely an act of the Syrian government.  In the prior conflict in Iraq, the United States stupidly acted on mis-information about weapons of mass destruction.  This mis-information was probably provided by opponents of Saddam Hussein, and those who later benefited from the chaos of war.  Could the most recent use of chemical weapons in Syria be a ruse, conducted by rebels or by rogue elements of the Syrian military?  Certainly.   There is not sufficient evidence of government involvement to justify entry into this conflict.

--

In a broader sense, however, what logic should govern decisions about entry into war to confront evil? 

The first principle is certainty.   In my life, I have often assumed the worst about something or someone, only to discover later (sometimes much later) that I was mistaken.  By the time I realize my error, my angry response has already caused damage to a relationship, a child, a stranger, or a loved one.   How much worse when the error is committed by a nation, when the undeserved retaliation is measured in death and destruction!   To confront wrong-doing or evil requires certainty “beyond a reasonable doubt” about the crime, exactly as in an American court of law.

Secondly, the consequences of action or inaction must be considered.    What is the likelihood that an evil act will be repeated?   If evil is allowed to persist without confrontation, will it grow and spread, as facism in the 20^th century?   Or is the evil something limited, incapable of growing into a larger threat?   Is the evil something that can change and disappear through discussion and diplomacy?  Distinguishing the nature and future path of an immoral government is critical to the decision to confront evil.

Finally, confronting evil must not create a greater evil.  Results matter.  The “limited police action” of the early 1960’s in Vietnam resulted in a war lasting a decade, with no change in the ultimate political outcome in the country.  The quick and simple “regime change” expected in Iraq resulted in devastation to a society, as noted above.  

 Violent conflict is unpredictable and contagious.  Any country entering into war to confront evil must be certain that the resulting society will be peaceful and better for the people than if no intervention occurred. 

The Syrian conflict fails each of these three tests.   The facts are not certain; the future behavior of the Assad regime is not clear; and the result of intervention might result in a greater evil.  Military intervention at this time is not justified.

--

At the present time, a negotiated settlement seems possible.  The negotiated settlement would prevent future use of chemical weapons, and avoid an American attack.  It may be that Barack Obama expected this result, and played a game of brinksmanship to achieve this goal.  Nevertheless, it seems to me a bad idea to present an ultimatum. At some point, a threat may have to be carried out, with all of the consequences that entails.

---
Edited -- A later analysis of the Syrian conflict can be found on my blog for science, economics and policy, here:  http://dougrobbins.blogspot.com/2015/12/the-syrian-civil-war.html

An Open Letter to President Obama about Domestic Surveillance

I am writing to protest the NSA’s broad programs of domestic surveillance, and ask for a constitutional amendment guaranteeing the right of privacy.

I supported Mr. Obama in the 2008 and 2012 elections through campaign contributions, social media and writings on the Internet.  I now feel betrayed by Mr. Obama on the issue of privacy and domestic surveillance.

The right to privacy is a fundamental American freedom, recognized by multiple Supreme Court decisions.   The right to privacy has been recognized as implicit in the First, Third, Fourth, Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution.  Nevertheless, these are not sufficient, and we need a new Amendment, specifically defining and protecting the right of privacy against intrusion by government and business.

Funding for the NSA data center in Utah was obtained through misleading testimony to Congress. Authority for domestic surveillance was given by secret decisions by a secret court. Democracy cannot function when the actions of the government are taken in secret.  Secret surveillance, the secret court, and misleading testimony to Congress give credence to those who say we cannot trust the government.

Our constitution was carefully constructed in order to provide checks on the powers of government and protection of individual freedoms. The Fourth Amendment is a particular embodiment of that restraint on government. A 1989 Supreme Court ruling made a narrow exception to the Fourth Amendment, and allowed wire-tapping on a case-by-case basis where a known security threat existed. The expansion of that ruling to perform comprehensive surveillance across the nation on the correspondence, reading and conversations of the citizenry is an outrage.

I believe that these powers of surveillance will be abused by future administrations, in ways small and large. History does not speak well of human nature, given the opportunity to use secret powers to perpetuate power. The NSA, with the permission of this administration, has built and institutionalized the apparatus for political repression in the United States.  Like the surveillance itself, the criteria to track or prosecute violators must also be secret, and the decision to prosecute is likewise secret, and beyond appeal.  At best, it resembles Vladimir Putin’s “managed democracy”.   At worst, it resembles the Stalinist terrors of the 1930’s.

I no longer feel free.  I cannot look at webpages or write an e-mail without thinking about how it might be misconstrued by a computer program or some government hack.  Under the current policies of NSA surveillance, I no longer live in a free country.

Shame.

United States Federal Income Tax Breaks

In 2011, the United States received 47 percent of its Federal tax revenue through income taxes on individuals and 8 percent from corporate income tax.  (Payroll taxes, i.e. funds dedicated to Social Security and Medicare, provide 36 percent of Federal receipts.)    Individual income taxes provided 1,090 billion dollars, and corporate income tax provided 181 billion dollars. 

Through the years, the government has established many exclusions (termed "tax expenditures") which permit individuals and corporations to avoid taxes on part of their income.  Congress established these exclusions for reasons of fairness, or as incentives for certain economic or social goals.   The Washington Post reports that there are 172 tax breaks, primarily benefiting individuals, which deprive the treasury of over a trillion dollars of revenue each year.  The table below was created from the Washington Post interactive graphic, and show the top 73 tax breaks, using the threshold of one billion dollars.  The top 73 tax breaks amount to nearly 1.2 trillion dollars of lost annual tax revenue, an amount approximately equal to the 2012 Federal deficit.   Over 200 billion dollars of new tax breaks have been enacted since the year 2000.

Although each of the tax exclusions was designed to create specific benefits to society, the cumulative result is massive complexity in the tax code.  The GAO reported that economic distortions resulting from tax preferences cost the United States between 2% and 5% of GDP annually.

These tax breaks are deeply ingrained in American culture.  Individuals have been promised tax relief on their retirement savings and on their home mortgages.  These tax benefits are critical elements of life-long financial planning for many individuals.  Nevertheless, in the interest of simplicity, transparency, and economic efficiency, many of these tax exclusions should be gradually removed from the tax code.

Tax Break	Year	benefit	Billion $
Exclusion of Employer Contributions for Health Care	< 1975	Individuals	173.8
Mortgage interest deduction	< 1975	Individuals	88.7
401K Plans	2001	Individuals	62.9
Earned Income Tax Credit	1975	Individuals	62.5
Step-up of Capital Gains at Death	1977	Individuals	50.9
Exclusion of Net Imputed Rental Income	2004	Individuals	47.0
Making Work Pay Tax Credit	2009	Individuals	44.0
Child Credit	1997	Individuals	42.5
Employer plans for Income Security	< 1975	Individuals	42.2
Deferral of Income from Controlled Foreign Corporations	1977	Corporate	41.4
Deductibility of charitable contributions *	< 1975	Individuals	39.6
Deductibility of non-business state and local taxes **	< 1975	Individuals	37.7
Capital Gains (except Agriculture, Timber, Iron Ore & Coal)	< 1975	Individuals	37.6
Exclusion of Interest on Municipal Bonds	< 1975	Individuals	31.3
Capital Gains Exclusion on Home Sales	1997	Individuals	27.6
Treatment of qualified dividends	< 1975	Individuals	23.6
Exclusion of Interest on Life-Insurance Savings	< 1975	Individuals	21.2
Social security benefits for retirees	< 1975	Individuals	20.3
Property tax deduction	< 1975	Individuals	19.3
Accelerated Depreciation of machinery	1977	Individuals	17.5
Keogh Plans	1983	Individuals	15.0
American Opportunity Tax Credit	2009	Individuals	14.4
Individual Retirement Accounts	< 1975	Individuals	13.9
Deduction for US Production Activities	2004	Corporate	13.8
Exclusion of benefits and allowances to Armed Service Personnel	< 1975	Individuals	13.3
Exception from Passive Loss Rules for $25,000 of Rental Loss	1987	Individuals	10.9
Credit for Homebuyer	2008	Individuals	10.4
Deductibility of Medical Expenses	< 1975	Individuals	10.0
Social security benefits for disabled workers	< 1975	Individuals	7.2
Exclusion of workers'compensation benefits	< 1975	Individuals	7.0
Expensing of Certain Small Investments	1993	Individuals	6.7
Self-employed Medical Insurance Premiums	1998	Individuals	6.2
Credit for Low-Income Housing Investments	1986	Corporate	6.0
Credit for Energy Efficiency Improvements, existing homes	2005	Individuals	5.5
Exclusion of income earned abroad (citizens)	< 1975	Individuals	5.5
Carryover Basis of Capital Gains on Gifts	1988	Individuals	4.8
Expensing of Research and Experimentation	< 1975	Corporate	4.6
Deductibility of charitable contributions; Education	< 1975	Individuals	4.5
Deductibility of charitable contributions; Health	1977	Individuals	4.5
Exclusion of veteran's death and disability payments	< 1975	Individuals	4.5
Credit for Increasing Research Activities	1981	Corporate	3.9
Lifetime Learning Tax Credit	1997	Individuals	3.9
Exclusion of Interest on Hospital Construction Bonds	1980	Individuals	3.6
Graduated Corporate Income Tax Rates	1978	Corporate	3.3
Social security for spouses & dependents	< 1975	Individuals	3.2
Alcohol Fuel Credits	1980	Corporate	3.1
Exclusion of Employee Reimbursed Parking Expenses	1993	Individuals	3.0
Exclusion of scholarship and fellowship income	< 1975	Individuals	3.0
Parental exclusion for students 19 & older	< 1975	Individuals	3.0
Inventory Property Sales Source Rules Exception	1986	Corporate	2.9
Build America Bonds	2009	Corporate	2.6
Credit for Small Business Health Insurance	2010	Individuals	2.6
Additional Deduction for the Elderly	1986	Individuals	2.5
Exclusion of Interest on Bonds for Private Non-Profit Educational Facilities	1983	Individuals	2.4
Premiums on Group Term Life Insurance	< 1975	Individuals	2.0
Credit for Child and Dependent Care Expenses	< 1975	Individuals	1.9
Medical Savings Accounts/Health Savings Accounts	1996	Individuals	1.9
Energy Production Credit	1978	Corporate	1.6
State Pre-paid Tuition Plans	1997	Individuals	1.6
Special Rules for Employee Stock Ownership Plans	1988	Corporate	1.5
Deductibility of Student Loan Interest	1997	Individuals	1.4
Discharge of Mortgage Indebtedness	2007	Individuals	1.4
Employer Provided Child-Care Exclusion	1983	Individuals	1.4
Low and Moderate Income Savers Credit	2001	Individuals	1.4
Exclusion of Interest on Owner-Occupied Mortgage Subsidy Bonds	1978	Individuals	1.3
Deferral of interest on US Savings Bonds	1975	Individuals	1.2
Exemption of Credit Union Income	< 1975	Corporate	1.2
Excess of Percentage over Cost Depletion Fuels	< 1975	Corporate	1.1
Exclusion of employee meals and lodging	< 1975	Individuals	1.1
Exclusion of Interest on Rental Housing Bonds	1980	Individuals	1.1
Qualified School Construction Bonds	2009	Individuals	1.1
Exclusion of certain allowances for Federal Emp. Abroad	1999	Individuals	1.0
Work Opportunity Tax Credit	1978	Corporate	1.0
Total Tax Expenditures >  $1 billion			1169.5
* non-health or education
** other than owner-occupied homes

Source: 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/tax-code-break-by-break/

http://www.gao.gov/assets/250/247539.pdf

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/background/numbers/revenue.cfm

http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/federal-revenue-sources

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals