Today, Donald Trump appointed Jerome Powell as the next chair of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve system (Fed) replacing Janet Yellen. The announcement was expected as Powell must now prepare himself to go through the gauntlet called confirmation. Since he is already part of the board there should be no surprises and he is expected to be in place when Yellen’s term ends in February.
“I congratulate my colleague Jay Powell on his nomination to be Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board. Jay’s long and distinguished career has been marked by dedicated public service and seriousness of purpose. I am confident in his deep commitment to carrying out the vital public mission of the Federal Reserve. I am committed to working with him to ensure a smooth transition.” Janet Yellen, 11/2/17
Yellen was appointed as chair by President Barack Obama in 2014 and her term officially ends February 3, 2018.
Generated by IJG JPEG Library
Prior to taking over the chair’s functions she was second in command under then Fed chair Ben Bernanke. Many in the financial sector applaud her tenure as being a steady force in guiding the United States monetary policy. Even though the position is supposed to be non-partisan, her primary criticism came from those on the opposite side of President Obama who took fault with anything and everything he proposed. Yet, like most things history has the final say and the economy is in much better shape as she exits – stage left!
Not fake news
Her critics and several others have short memories or blatant amnesia as they forget about a decade ago, the United States economic condition was becoming quite perilous and eventually exploded in 2008 resulting in hardships for millions of citizens and people around the globe. It was through focus and commitment that Bernanke and his team as well as the leadership of President Obama who accepted the daunting task of stabilizing the markets. The rest is history and the residual effect is an economy which has regained its footing, including a stock market which has grown to unprecedented levels.
Fed rate remains unchanged
Yesterday the Fed’s Monetary Committee met and decided to maintain the fed discount rate, although it is still projected to increase before the end of the year. The concern conveyed by members was acknowledgment the economy is moving is a positive direction.
As Yellen is preparing to move on the one concern being voiced is the GOP’s proposed tax reform bill. Monetary policy is a methodical process and it takes extreme discipline to not allow partisan politics to be the guiding force to ensure normalization.
“That task could be complicated by the GOP plan to inject huge stimulus into an already-healthy economy. Doing so may force the Fed to more aggressively raise rates to prevent the economy from overheating. “
Photo courtesy of Getty Images. Photographer: Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg
[Washington, DC] To the chagrin and frustration of Donald Trump and his administration, today the Bureau of Labor Statistics released employment data for September. The decline was expected but goes against the mantra Trump spouted about the HUGE success workers would see once he was running things.
No one can predict natural disasters. Hurricane season is common for the Caribbean and states which buffer against the Gulf of Mexico. It’s something you can never get use too, however the magic of those states, territories and countries is why people choose to call it home. Harvey and Maria packed a punch not seen in years. The result was pure devastation and many workers were sidelined as whatever job they previously performed disappeared.
Unemployment rate dips to 4.2%
Even though job numbers dipped, there was good news as the unemployment rate slid to 4.2%. These numbers are important as they affect the psyche of those in the workforce and have a direct impact on consumer confidence.
Trump is known for his bombastic rhetoric and marginalization of anything which places him in a negative context. Ever since taking over as the president, he coined a new phrase to counter such news as “fake.” He was warned repeatedly that running government is different from a family held business. Yet, he boasted tremendous improvement that has never been seen before would occur! The big difference is accountability and factual public data which will contradict even the most confident-appearing person. While the clock is ticking, reality is setting in for many and they are pleading for his critics, “just to give him a chance.”
As we move into the fall season, October is also projected to be down as the employment effects of hurricane Maria will be announced.
Students attending school are required to take United States history in the eighth grade. The basic curriculum is intended to provide the fundamentals of how our government was created and how it has transitioned through the years. Sadly, not everyone who took the class received a passing grade. Or, perhaps they did at the time but as years have gone by they may have forgotten the basic tenets of what they learned, especially the facts of the United States constitution?
Protesting is a basic and fundamental privilege of citizenship.
Protesting is a basic right covered in the first amendment. It is very clear. There is never a right time to protest. The primary intent of protest is to raise awareness. In doing so, some may feel institutions, symbols or things they view as sacred are being disrespected. That is a false premise, especially with the Colin Kaepernik and the current NFL’s reaction.
Protest is meant to be disruptive. Protesting is often non-violent, but it is not to be confused as a courteous gesture or something where the protestor’s say “excuse me.”
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” First Amendment of the United States Constitution
Is Trump allowing Puerto Rico to be his “Katrina”?
The Colin Kaepernick protest started over a year ago. Just this past week it picked up steam as Donald Trump felt it was his duty to admonish the NFL teams for showing support for Kaepernick and disrespecting the flag, the anthem and anything else determined by him to be patriotic.
In doing so, sadly Trump demonstrated his sheer ignorance of the first amendment. His public outcry was done and played out while Puerto Rico and victims of the recent hurricanes are in desperate need for government intervention. He has been stubborn to understand the genesis of the protest and instead has insisted the narrative he created is the truth; the protest disrespects the flag, the anthem and the military.
Worse, this week he and his administration have taken to the airwaves to report how well the recovery is going, specifically in Puerto Rico. Unfortunately, reporters on the ground and spread over the island have been in stark contradiction to the administration’s assessment.
“They require policy guidance from the president on what he wants them to do,” Honore said while reacting to the administration’s slow response time. “I think that’s where the gap is. Should have been moving the military last Saturday, the president was out playing golf and twittering.” Lt.Colonel (retired) Russell Honoree
The question begs for many? With human life at stake, why in the world is Trump so focused on the NFL and the player protest? Yet, while he claims such patriotism, he has never served in the military and has taken glee in criticizing and making derogatory comments about those who indeed have served or who have lost loved ones while in military service!
Is this a diversion? Has Trump found yet another wedge issue where people lose focus on his lack of legislative success? Is it a coincidence that the majority of NFL players are African-American and the obvious factor of race is quite clear? Football is a game. The current situation in Puerto Rico is real life. People have short memories but they tend to remember who was in office during natural disasters. They remember their actions, as well as their inactions.
After hours of careful consideration, and even a visit from Nate Boyer, a retired Green Beret and former NFL player, we came to the conclusion that we should kneel, rather than sit, the next day during the anthem as a peaceful protest. We chose to kneel because it’s a respectful gesture. I remember thinking our posture was like a flag flown at half-mast to mark a tragedy. Colin Kaepernik, August 29, 2016
Facts get in the way
Whatever motivation Trump felt to unleash his tirade against the NFL players or his insistence to go on twitter spewing irritation of the protestor’s actions, history will be the ultimate judge. The United States is replete with examples of those who staged protest and at the time suffered tremendous public scorn. Yet, as time elapsed and their actions were better understood they took on martyrdom status and many are in the annals of historic figures.
The notion of Kaepernick disrespecting the flag might be a plausible conclusion or might make sense and convince the most patriotic person he is subject to treason.? This becomes truer for those who support Trump and his ideology. They refuse to accept anything contrary to what they believe, or have been told by Trump that it is the truth. The problem and this is where so many who blindly follow others leave you shaking your head; Kaepernick got the suggestion to kneel and continue his protest from a decorated Green Beret, Nate Boyer!!!! Now how patriotic can that be? Kaepernick headed his advice and to the chagrin of many, to this day, they have a very positive relationship. Why is this important? Because Boyer has a better understanding of the privileges of the first amendment better than Trump or those like him who feel it is okay to dismiss this basic fact. Why do they dismiss this fact? It appears the narrative does not jive with the way they see things.
“Until that flag represents what it is meant to represent, ” Colin Kaepernick, August 29, 2016
Homework assignment
For Trump and those who support his position I would plead they do some homework and understand what and why was Colin Kaepernick protesting in the first place? To be generous they will be given one week to turn in their assignment. LOL. Second, they must study protest movements and get a handle of the strategies used in protest movements? Again, protest is not meant to be comfortable. However, as mentioned many are very peaceful.
Who qualifies as the protest police?
Who among us can claim to be the authority on acceptable protest? Donald Trump? The Military? Further, who can dictate which symbols we allegedly treasure within our society that are off-limits to protest?
While there are many traditions within our society that we treasure, over the years and surely with the Kaepernick incident those on the opposite side of whichever issue is being protest swear outright disrespect and crying foul by interpreting the actions as unacceptable.
The genesis of the Kaepernik protest
What is ironic is it appears the very people claiming the flag, the anthem or even the military is being trampled care very little of why Kaepernick protest in the first place. If they did care, surely their position may be changed as why they still may have a problem with what they view as a sacred symbol, in the final analysis they would have to conclude Kaepernick and all those who took a knee or didn’t take a knee, stood or didn’t stand, clap or didn’t clap are well within the protections of our constitution.
Donald Trump takes great pride as a successful businessperson. Some might conclude he is a master manipulator. He appears to relish in the notion of speaking for “the America people.” Perhaps, but over the past several years it has been documented his commentary is strategic in creating a divide. Oftentimes the divide is on racial lines or to stoke discontent among various groups. Yet, as mentioned those who support his ideology are swayed by the rhetoric being fomented and have been conditioned to marginalize any other perspective.
The Bottom-line
All you have to know is a person has the right to protest and does not require approval or permission!
It is also your right or reaction to dismiss or despise the method of a person’s protest. Just because you don’t approve of the method of protest, does not mean you are right and the protestor is wrong. The first amendment gives protection for both positions.
It can’t be stressed enough, assuming you are truly seeking an objective analysis on protest that it you feel the person is protesting something you hold sacred, it is your right to not support them. Period! But, you must be very careful in maligning them as in the end, you wind up trying to dictate behavior. So, you can’t claim allegiance to the Constitution while refusing the basic core of protest.
If you will recall the unrealistic timeline to have something in place within 30 days of the announcement was missed. The key to today’s update is guidelines have been FRAMED but until adopted/approved, it is business as usual. However, if in doubt those traveling to Cuba should check OFAC or their congressional representative for any questions.
UPDATED JULY 25, 2017
Department of the Treasury
Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)
Frequently Asked Questions on President Trump’s Cuba Announcement
1. How will OFAC implement the changes to the Cuba sanctions program announced by the President on June 16, 2017? Are the changes effective immediately? OFAC will implement the Treasury-specific changes via amendments to its Cuban Assets Control Regulations. The Department of Commerce will implement any necessary changes via amendments to its Export Administration Regulations. OFAC expects to issue its regulatory amendments in the coming months. The announced changes do not take effect until the new regulations are issued.
2. What is individual people-to-people travel, and how does the President’s announcement impact this travel authorization? Individual people-to-people travel is educational travel that: (i) does not involve academic study pursuant to a degree program; and (ii) does not take place under the auspices of an organization that is subject to U.S. jurisdiction that sponsors such exchanges to promote people-to-people contact. The President instructed Treasury to issue regulations that will end individual people-to-people travel. The announced changes do not take effect until the new regulations are issued.
3. Will group people-to-people travel still be authorized? Yes. Group people-to-people travel is educational travel not involving academic study pursuant to a degree program that takes place under the auspices of an organization that is subject to U.S. jurisdiction that sponsors such exchanges to promote people-to-people contact. Travelers utilizing this travel authorization must: (i) maintain a full-time schedule of educational exchange activities that are intended to enhance contact with the Cuban people, support civil society in Cuba, or promote the Cuban people’s independence from Cuban authorities, and that will result in meaningful interaction between the traveler and individuals in Cuba; and (ii) be accompanied by an employee, consultant, or agent of the sponsoring organization, who will ensure that each traveler maintains a full-time schedule of educational exchange activities. In addition, the predominant portion of the activities engaged in by individual travelers must not be with prohibited officials of the Government of Cuba or prohibited members of the Cuban Communist Party (as defined in the regulations). Once OFAC issues the new regulations, new individual people-to-people travel will not be authorized.
4. Will organizations subject to U.S. jurisdiction that sponsor exchanges to promote people-to-people contact be required to apply to OFAC for a specific license? No. To the extent that proposed travel falls within the scope of an existing general license, including group people-to-people educational travel, persons subject to U.S. jurisdiction may proceed with sponsoring such travel without applying to OFAC for a Department of the Treasury Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) 2 specific license. It is OFAC’s policy not to grant applications for a specific license authorizing transactions where a general license is applicable. Once the State Department publishes its list of entities and subentities with which direct transactions will not be authorized and OFAC issues its regulations, no new transactions, including travel-related transactions, may be initiated with these identified entities and subentities. Prior travel arrangements that may involve these entities or subentities will still be authorized. See FAQ 8.
5. How do the changes announced by the President on June 16, 2017 affect individual people-to-people travelers who have already begun making their travel arrangements (such as purchasing flights, hotels, or rental cars)? The announced changes do not take effect until OFAC issues new regulations. Provided that the traveler has already completed at least one travel-related transaction (such as purchasing a flight or reserving accommodation) prior to the President’s announcement on June 16, 2017, all additional travel-related transactions for that trip would also be authorized, including if the trip occurs after OFAC issues new regulations, provided the travel-related transactions are consistent with OFAC’s regulations as of June 16, 2017. Once the State Department publishes its list of entities and subentities with which direct transactions will not be authorized and OFAC issues its regulations, no new transactions may be initiated with these identified entities and subentities. Prior travel arrangements that may involve these entities or subentities will still be authorized. See FAQ 8.
6. How does the new policy impact other authorized travel to Cuba by persons subject to U.S. jurisdiction? The new policy will also impact certain categories of educational travel as well as travel under support for the Cuban people, as set forth in the National Security Presidential Memorandum signed by the President on June 16, 2017. In addition, following the issuance of OFAC’s regulatory changes, travel-related transactions with prohibited entities identified by the State Department will not be permitted, unless otherwise authorized by OFAC. Guidance will accompany the issuance of the new regulations.
7. Will persons subject to U.S. jurisdiction be required to apply to OFAC for a specific license to engage in Cuba-related travel and transactions consistent with the other authorized categories of travel? To the extent that proposed travel falls within the scope of an existing general license, persons subject to U.S. jurisdiction may proceed with such travel without applying to OFAC for a specific license. It is OFAC’s policy not to grant applications for a specific license authorizing transactions where a general license is applicable. Once the State Department publishes its list of entities and subentities with which direct transactions will not be authorized and OFAC issues its regulations, no new transactions may be initiated with these identified entities and subentities. Prior travel arrangements that may involve these entities or subentities will still be authorized. See FAQ 8. Department of the Treasury Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) 3
8. How do the changes announced by the President on June 16, 2017 affect authorized travelers to Cuba whose travel arrangements may include direct transactions with entities related to the Cuban military, intelligence, or security services that may be implicated by the new Cuba policy? The announced changes do not take effect until OFAC issues new regulations. Consistent with the Administration’s interest to avoid negatively impacting Americans for arranging lawful travel to Cuba, any travel-related arrangements that include direct transactions with entities related to the Cuban military, intelligence, or security services that may be implicated by the new Cuba policy will be permitted provided that those travel arrangements were initiated prior to the State Department listing of the entity or subentity. Once the State Department adds an entity or subentity to the list, new direct financial transactions with the entity or subentity will not be permitted, unless authorized by OFAC.
9. How do the changes announced by the President on June 16, 2017 affect companies subject to U.S. jurisdiction that are already engaged in the Cuban market and that may undertake direct transactions with entities related to the Cuban military, intelligence, or security services that may be implicated by the new Cuba policy? The announced changes do not take effect until OFAC issues new regulations. Consistent with the Administration’s interest in not negatively impacting American businesses for engaging in lawful commercial opportunities, Cuba-related commercial engagement that includes direct transactions with entities and subentities related to the Cuban military, intelligence, or security services that may be implicated by the new Cuba policy will be permitted after the issuance of new regulations by OFAC, provided that those commercial engagements were in place prior to the issuance of the forthcoming regulations. For example, businesses will be permitted to continue with transactions outlined in contingent or other types of contractual arrangements agreed to prior to the issuance of the new regulations, consistent with other CACR authorizations.
10. Does the new policy affect the means by which persons subject to U.S jurisdiction may purchase airline tickets for authorized travel to Cuba? No. The new policy will not change the means by which persons subject to U.S. jurisdiction traveling to Cuba pursuant to the 12 categories of authorized travel may purchase their airline tickets.
11. Can I continue to send authorized remittances to Cuba? Yes. The announced policy changes will not change the authorizations for sending remittances to Cuba. Additionally, the announced changes include an exception that will allow for transactions incidental to the sending, processing, and receipt of authorized remittances to the extent they would otherwise be restricted by the new policy limiting transactions with certain identified Cuban military, intelligence, or security Department of the Treasury Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) 4 services. However, consistent with the President’s policy announcement, changes will be made to the definition of prohibited members of Government of Cuba that may exclude certain persons from receipt of such remittances.
12. How will the new policy impact existing OFAC specific licenses? The forthcoming regulations will be prospective and thus will not affect authorized transactions under existing specific licenses, unless explicitly noted.
13. How will U.S. companies know if a Cuban counterpart is affiliated with a prohibited entity or subentity in Cuba? The State Department will be publishing a list of entities and subentities with which direct transactions generally will not be permitted. Guidance will accompany the issuance of the new regulations. The announced changes do not take effect until the new regulations are issued.
14. Is authorized travel by cruise ship or passenger vessel to Cuba impacted by the new Cuba policy? Persons subject to U.S. jurisdiction will still be able to engage in authorized travel to Cuba by cruise ship or passenger vessel. Following the issuance of OFAC’s regulatory changes, travel-related transactions with prohibited entities and subentities identified by the State Department generally will not be permitted. Guidance will accompany the issuance of the new regulations.
Some of you may have seen this hour clip from David Axelrod’s latest venture; “The AXE files.” It featured a great interview with the iconic John Lewis, who is the Congressman from Atlanta.
The interview was conducted at the King Center in Atlanta, GA and gives you an idea of how Lewis got involved in the civil rights movement as well as his admonishment of Donald Trump’s behavior. Interestingly, it also covers how he and George W. Bush developed a positive relationship which led to the opening of the National Museum of African-American History and Culture.
The bureau of labor statistics (BLS) released its monthly employment report this morning. The Trump administration is all smiles as over 222,000 new jobs were reported for the month of June. In comparison to the Obama administration at the same time (June 2009), 467,000 jobs were lost. Some may have forgotten the details as there is always comparisons of the two leaders? The big difference is despite being hounded for not moving the economy at a faster pace, even those subjected to a confessional would admit or remember the comparison of the Obama administration is like apples and oranges! In June 2009, the country was reeling from a severe economic collapse.
Interestingly, once the Obama administration “pulled the car from the ditch” and got the economy moving forward, there was blistering criticism from the right that he was influencing or fudging the numbers.
Rev. Jesse Jackson once quipped about the obstruction and lack of support Obama had to endure as the United States of America was going through very perilous times,
“They (GOP) would rather sink the ship just to get the Captain!!”
The BLS is a non-partisan government agency who has been providing employment data for decades. Yet, during the Obama administration tenure as the economy stabilized, it became regular political fodder to marginalize the BLS reporting and label it some type of hocus-pocus or unbelievable data. Even then citizen, Donald Trump quickly jumped on the bandwagon to dismiss the authenticity of the report. Instead the spin because verbal combat of stating the only reason the numbers were improving was because able body workers simply grew to frustration and stopped looking for work.
Fast forward to today, the numbers are the numbers and the Trump administration earned the positive report and the word to the wise is to “be careful what you criticize today, as tomorrow it may be an attribute which allows you to be viewed in a positive manner.
Also as the health care debate rages forward regarding how bad the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and how it was the worse law anybody could pass. The rhetoric about the “job killer” that it is, on and on is almost as laughable as those who are demanding health care remain in place, not knowing it is called “Obama care,” or perhaps they too have come to accept the reality?
It will be interesting to see how the spin of the employment report is communicated. Not surprising is one of the tenants of the ACA was the revolution of job growth. So, it is no secret that, health care was the leading industry of the 222,000 new jobs?
Thomas Reports 