U.S. MILITARY TO START FIVE-DAY EXERCISES, WITH F-35s
The State of Hawaii has released a series of video messages letting Hawaiian citizens know that they may hear the air raid siren that has not been used much since World War II. The siren will be tested on Dec. 1, and the state is warning the public about what to do in the event of a nuclear attack from North Korea.
Japan, too, is on guard, with news reports that movement in North Korea indicates another missile is about to be launched. U.S. intelligence indicates the test site Punggye-ri is damaged by repeated underground nuclear tests. If the North Korea regime uses above-ground testing, it could appear as an imminent attack, especially if the test contains a warhead.
Meanwhile, on Dec. 4, the U.S. and South Korea will engage in a five-day air force drill as part of a pressure tactic against Pyongyang.
The exercise, dubbed Vigilant Ace, will deploy 12,000 U.S. military personnel and an unknown number of South Korean airmen, with 230 aircraft flying in and out of eight U.S. and South Korean military bases, including six F-22 Raptor stealth fighters that will be deployed to South Korea for what may be the largest deployment ever of that aircraft
South Korean media is reporting the F-22s from U.S. Kadena Air Base in Okinawa, and up to four F-35 stealth aircraft will take part in the exercise. Must Read Alaska wasn’t able to determine whether Alaska-based personnel and aircraft will take part.
The US Air Force’s first operational overseas deployment of the F-35A Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter is already operational on Okinawa, the US Pacific Command reported last week.
During the summer, North Korea launched two intercontinental ballistic missiles that were capable of reaching American mainland. Two more missiles passed over Japan, and North Korea conducted its sixth nuclear test in September.
Part I: This was part of an introduction to a piece I helped author during the Frank Murkowski for Governor campaign in 2002:
A Republican governor cannot staff the State government with loyal, qualified appointees.
The Governor’s Office of Management does not manage and its budget functions largely duplicate those that are or could be performed at a lower level.
The current structure is ossified and intensely hierarchical.
Each department is stove-piped.
Most State employees have no sense of a corporate culture or values beyond bureaucratic self-preservation.
The integrity of the State’s human resources and financial management systems has been severely compromised.
There is no incentive to excel.
Employees generally know more about their work than their politically appointed managers.
The State’s statutory and contract pay schemes are inadequate to attract quality managers.
Only the first of these assumptions is a good thing.
* * *
ART CHANCE
Only the last sentence is somewhat less true than it was fifteen years ago when this was written.
The State’s managerial pay has improved but is still barely competitive in those agencies that adhere to and properly apply the State’s statutory pay plan.
We went on to set out a plan to reorganize State government to essentially widen and flatten the organizational charts and modernize and simplify lines of authority, thereby reducing the number of appointees with that authority.
We proposed to start the reorganization in the State’s then badly deficient and corrupted human resources and labor relations function and its grossly inefficient and excessively expensive information technology (IT) functions.
Gov. Murkowski and Chief of Staff Jim Clark approved the plan and ordered it to proceed.
The director of personnel and I (by then I was director of labor relations) worked with trusted subordinates, fleshed out the plan and an implementation scheme, and did it all, in essence, by dark of night.
We called the people who would be most affected into a meeting in the governor’s conference room, told them what their world was going to look like tomorrow, and gave them only the choice of whether or not to be in that world.
The opposition was swift and intense, but with fits and starts it was fairly quickly implemented and on the whole successful. That success was irrelevant to those who had lost power and position in the reorganization and they nipped and back-bit at every turn.
My co-conspirator and I had enough personal horsepower to fend off the attacks, but she retired a couple of years in and the attacks on the Personnel side intensified and became more effective. I retired in mid-2006, and there was nobody left who could effectively resist the congenital bureaucrats who wanted their power back, and sadly, nobody who really wanted to have the fight.
The return to the bad old days began, and from the outside looking in, it now appears worse than ever and for the same reason: Democrats are in charge.
On the IT side, the administration foolishly put the Administrative Services directors in charge of carrying out the reorganization and, as might be expected since it was their territory being diminished, the fought it tooth and nail. Of course the fight was always, in business buzzword terms, about “stakeholders” and “consensus” and “buy-in” and all that biz school BS calculated to make sure nothing happens.
At the end of the administration if there was any change at all in the mess that was in IT: It was worse organized and less efficient than ever, but all the right people still had their power.
All the things we were trying to fix then exist today in every department of the executive branch; we just happened to have a desire to fundamentally change those two functions and had the power to at least initiate it. But we didn’t stay with the government long enough to finish it and couldn’t stop the bureaucrats from sabotaging the IT effort.
In retrospect, if we’d remained with the government the same forces that undid it in Palin/Parnell would have likely undone it in spite of us, and Palin, especially, wouldn’t have minded letting them do it over our dead bodies. Figuratively, of course.
The central organizational culture of State government is totally self-interested and deeply corrupted; there is absolutely no public service value proposition in the government.
The bureaucrats serve their self-interest. Political level management –the appointees — serve the administration and the specific constituencies important to the governor;. The general welfare of the people and the state isn’t even a consideration for most.
Most of this is a product of how the government is organized, and that is something a Republican governor with a bit of courage and some people who understand the government can do something about.
In the next pieces I’ll discuss how the State’s WWII era organizational structure guarantees that the State will be stove-piped, self-interested, and unresponsive and what can be done about it.
The State’s structure harks back to the days of manual typewriters and five-sheet carbon paper when all communication was by first class mail and most of Alaska wasn’t even accessible by telephone. The people in power got that power by knowing how to work that system and they know that any change in that system will reduce or eliminate their power and perhaps their position. Therefore, they will fight to the death, and anyone who wants to change that system, cut the operating budget, and make the State responsive to the people, rather than the lobbyists, has to be prepared to bring about some first class career funerals. I’ll show you how.
Art Chance is a retired Director of Labor Relations for the State of Alaska, formerly of Juneau and now living in Anchorage. He is the author of the book, “Red on Blue, Establishing a Republican Governance,” available at Amazon. He only writes for Must Read Alaska when he’s banned from posting on Facebook. Chance coined the phrase “hermaphrodite Administration” to describe a governor who is simultaneously a Republican and a Democrat. This was a grave insult to hermaphrodites, but he has not apologized.
Rep. Geran Tarr, a Democrat from District 19, had a verbal dispute last February with Rep. Mike Chenault, and it went something like this, according to those in the Capitol:
Tarr was yelling at Chenault and pointing her finger in his face in a jabbing motion. He told her, “If you ever get in my face again, I’ll bite back.” She accused him of threatening her, he denied it, and she marched over to Capitol Security armed officer, Rayme Vinson, who was standing about 10 feet away from the scene.
All of this took place in the vestibule between the hallway and the House Chambers.
Chenault, for his part, went to Speaker Bryce Edgmon and reported the dispute and the fact that Tarr had gone to Vinson to complain.
Each of them filed reports on the incident. The tape of the incident, which would not have had audio, would have been erased after 30 days.
WHAT HAPPENED THIS MONTH
During the fourth special session, just when the #MeToo women’s campaign against sexual abuse started getting traction, Tarr asked to see the Capitol Security report and the tape.
There was no tape, but she was allowed to see the report. When she read it, she asked to make revisions to it because she remembered more things about the incident.
Capitol Security told her no: She had already filed the report and she was not going to be allowed to revise it nine months later. She complained to House Speaker Edgmon, saying that she wasn’t being taken seriously by Capitol Security. Steve Daigle, head of Capitol Security, may have rolled his eyes at this point and pondered his retirement.
Tarr has a history of berating members in the House, but also has screamed at her own staff members as well as staff working for other legislators.
Must Read Alaska profiled some of her abusive behavior in February and wondered if it was time for an intervention.
Now, it appears she is ginning up a #MeToo moment and dragging former House Speaker Chenault through the mud. But if it really happened like she now remembers it, why didn’t Speaker Bryce Edgmon take action at the time?
An onerous provision of Obamacare — the so-called Affordable Care Act — was delayed until 2018, but it’s about to hit with a nearly 3 percent tax on health insurance plans.
Alaska is one of the states that will get hit the hardest by the “health insurance tax,” known aptly as the “HIT.”
Premiums in Alaska are expected to increase by between $300 and $500 per insured individual per year in 2018 as a result, and even more in later years.
WHAT’S THE BACKGROUND?
Under Obamacare, every insurer that offers fully insured health insurance must pay what the federal government calls the health insurance provider tax.
The tax is supposed to fund the now nearly monopolistic health care markets, or “exchanges,” as the federal government calls them, although there are so few providers that the term “exchange” is euphemistic at best.
The exchange in Alaska is just Premera Blue Cross and it serves individuals and families who are not covered by an employer plan, Medicaid, or Medicare. Up to 18,000 Alaskans are covered by this insurance company, as Obamacare also levies tax penalties on those who don’t purchase coverage.
In 2017, Congress approved a one-year delay on collecting the HIT tax, but that delay expires on Dec. 31.
WHAT HAPPENS IN JANUARY?
If Congress does not eliminate the HIT, people buying insurance will see pass-through costs that will raise their rates. Premiums will increase by about 2.7 percent in 2018, and every year after that will go up between 2.6 and 2.8 percent.
Over 10 years, this will mean premiums will increase over $5,000 per person in Alaska’s individual market, to over $7,000 per family. Also, Medicare Advantage members will see their costs go up by over $3,000 and Medicaid enrollee’s costs will increase by a similar amount, which varies state to state. That latter increase gets passed along to taxpayers, not to Medicaid enrollees.
The tax will raise $14.3 billion for the federal government so it can run the federal health care exchange.
WHAT ARE SOME OF THE OTHER POTENTIAL IMPACTS?
The tax burden’s impact on insurance premiums for small employers that are fully insured will be enormous, while self-insured companies and State of Alaska employee plans will not be required to pay the tax.
More younger and healthier people may simply avoid purchasing health insurance, which will destabilize rates as more of the insured pools will be made up of sicker people.
The health insurance tax also applies to Medicare Advantage, Medicare Part D, and Medicaid Managed Care.
In Alaska insurance rates will climb in 2018:
Single: $386 per year
Small group single: $263 per year
Small group family: $632 per year
Large group single: $238 per year
Large group family: $661 per year
Medicare Advantage: $269 per year
Medicare PDP: $21 per year
By 2027, this will result in total increases to Alaskans:
According to the IRS, the following entities are exempt from paying the HIT:
A self-insured employer
A governmental entity
Certain nonprofit corporations
Certain voluntary employees’ beneficiary associations (VEBAs)
ALASKA DELEGATION’S ROLE
A bipartisan group of 400 members of Congress passed a delay of the HIT tax for 2017 for one year, with Sen. Lisa Murkowski as a co-sponsor.
Now, Senate Bill 1859, introduced by Sen. Cory Gardner of Colorado in September would need to pass before Dec. 31.
That leaves little time, since Congress will likely recess for the Christmas break on Dec. 14.
A host of Republican senators have co-sponsored SB 1859, including James Inhofe-OK, Tom Cotton-AR, Ron Johnson-WI, Rob Portman-OH, Jeff Flake-AZ, Roy Blunt-MO, John Barrasso-WY, Ted Cruz-TX, Dean Heller-NV, Tim Scott-SC, Roger Wicker-MS, Johnny Isakson-GA, Shelly Moore Capito-WV, John Kennedy-LA, Todd Young-IN, Mike Rounds-SD, and Chuck Grassley-IA.
Must Read Alaska has reached out to Murkowski and Sullivan and will update this report with their comments and perspectives. Senator Dan Sullivan has voted to repeal all of Obamacare. Sen. Lisa Murkowski is on record to repeal the individual mandate, but has not yet made public her position on the HIT tax.
CFPB is a government agency created by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010. It was established as an independent agency, like the Central Intelligence Agency and the Federal Communications Commission, but the agency’s status is under review by the US Court of Appeals.
As Director Richard Cordray stepped down, he appointed Leandra English as deputy director, which made her the acting director upon his departure.
Cordray, appointed by President Barack Obama in 2011, is a lawyer and was a Democrat politician before becoming the first-ever head of CFPB.
As he left, Cordray wanted to ensure his policies at the agency would be perpetuated.
But President Trump immediately named White House Budget Director Mick Mulvaney acting director.
Mick Mulvaney
“The President looks forward to seeing Director Mulvaney take a common sense approach to leading the CFPB’s dedicated staff, an approach that will empower consumers to make their own financial decisions and facilitate investment in our communities,” the White House said in a Friday night news release.
“Director Mulvaney will serve as Acting Director until a permanent director is nominated and confirmed,” the White House wrote.
Politico says the Dodd-Frank Act, “explicitly says the consumer bureau’s deputy director shall ‘serve as acting Director in the absence or unavailability of the Director,’ giving the edge to English.”
Cordray’s power move was an attempt to prevent the president from appointing his successor, which raises a constitutional question:
Is a functionary of a government agency in a democracy empowered to name his or her own successor?
And it raises another question:
Is this part of the swamp that Trump said he was going to drain?
The joint development agreement signed by Gov. Bill Walker and Alaska Gasline Development Corporation President Keith Meyer with various Chinese entities to develop Alaska’s natural gas was released last week. Without the cover page and the Chinese translation, it’s about four pages long and is nearly identical to the one the Walker Administration signed with KOGAS (Korea) earlier this year.
The “agreement” is essentially an agreement to continue discussions. It contains no binding commitments nor pledges of financing.
As Indivisible and MoveOn.org saturate Alaska’s airwaves with #killthebill messages warning of dire consequences if the Senate’s Tax Cuts and Jobs Act passes, a look at the actual impact on Alaskan taxpayers shows they’ll keep more of their income in most tax brackets.
Here’s how the Not One Penny movement describes the tax reform bill:
As President Trump and congressional Republicans push their plans to give massive tax breaks to the rich, progressive groups and grassroots organizations are mobilizing across the country to demand that elected officials provide not one penny in tax cuts for millionaires, billionaires, and wealthy corporations.
The last thing working-class Americans need is a tax code that further rigs the system in favor of corporations or gives another leg up to the top one percent. + Trump’s so called ‘tax reform’ plan uses the same trickle-down economics that has left working families and small businesses behind as corporate profits skyrocket and wages stagnate. + We should call these efforts what they are: a scheme that will pad the pockets of the wealthy at the expense of working families.
In fact, the Senate tax bill does not increase taxes on Americans at any income level.
The average Alaska individual filer makes over $33,000 a year, and according to calculations from the Tax Foundation, they will see a 3 percent decrease in their IRS tax bill, should the legislation be signed into law.
The median income for joint filers in Alaska is over $73,000, and they, too, will see their tax bills cut by 3 percent.
OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE TAX REFORM BILL
The child tax credit increases from $1,000 under current law to $2,000, which is more than the original proposal of $1,650.
The Obamacare individual mandate penalty would be eliminated, meaning there will be no penalty for not purchasing health insurance.
Graduate tuition waivers are restored. Under current law, students who get a tuition waiver must declare that as income.
Pass-Through Income: The proposal expands the number of businesses in service industries that claim a special 17.4 percent deduction. Most service industries are disallowed the deduction, but there is an exception for smaller businesses by which they can claim the deduction regardless of industry classification. The new limit would be $500,000 for married filers and $250,000 for individuals, increased from $150,000 and $75,000 respectively in the introduced bill. The Chairman’s Mark makes the bill’s W-2 provisions more generous, and expands it to include sole proprietors. This provision has been opposed by Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisc. — his family business would be affected.
Net Operating Losses: Starting in 2024, net operating loss carry-forwards would be limited to 80 percent of taxable income, down from 90 percent.
Research and Experimental Expenditures: These expenditures would need to be amortized instead of deducted, starting in 2026.
Business Tax Trigger: The proposal has a federal tax trigger so that if federal revenues from Oct. 1, 2017, to Sept. 30, 2026, exceed $27.487 trillion by more than $900 billion, several business tax increases would not take effect for the 2026 tax year.
Reduced Alcohol Excise Taxes: The proposal lowers excise taxes rate on alcoholic beverages.
Clearly, neither the House nor Senate versions of the tax bill represent radical departures from current law. Rather, they make U.S. companies more competitive internationally, improve the tax treatment of many small businesses, and deliver modest reductions in marginal tax rates across the individual income spectrum.
Setting aside the economic illiteracy of the “Not One Penny” movement, both versions hold the promise of accelerating economic growth and rising incomes. We are hopeful that Sen. Murkowski will not be swayed by the recent barrage of left-wing advertising and pressure tactics.
AUTHOR OF MICHAEL JACKSON BIO DEFENDED THE POP STAR
Alaska Public Media had to scramble to fill the 11 pm to midnight slot in its television programming after talk show host Charlie Rose came under a shadow cast by women in his production company who said he sexually harassed them. The allegations were reported on Monday. Rose was fired from PBS shortly thereafter.
The new anchor for that time slot in Alaska’s public television offerings is Tavis Smiley. He’s a well-known public broadcasting talk show host and author of a biography of Michael Jackson, “Before You Judge Me.”
Ironically, he has judged Jackson innocentof the child molestation charges that haunted the pop star in his final years.
In 2003, police raided Jackson’s Neverland Ranch in Santa Barbara, California, as part of an investigation into child molestation charged. Jackson was acquitted in that case, but after he died in 2009, a collection of child pornography emerged, and some of it was sourced to the Santa Barbara County Sheriff Department. The collection included images of children’s faces digitally placed on adult bodies, as well as materials investigators said is typically used to de-sensitize young children and groom them for future abuse.
In an interview with Jenny McCarthy in 2016, Smiley said, “All of us have some effed up parts of who we are. I don’t believe in throwing any human being away, because none of us are human and divine, we’re just human. Thirdly, for his fans, they didn’t trust the DA, Tom Sneddon, who was on a vendetta against Michael. They didn’t trust Sneddon and his investigators then, and these are the same police, seven years later, who we are told this information comes from.”
“My point is this: Whatever you thought about Michael Jackson seven years ago, you still feel the same way. If you think he did it, you’re mind ain’t changed, and if you think he didn’t do it, your mind ain’t changed. So it just appears to me that Michael couldn’t live in peace, he sure didn’t die in peace, and apparently he ain’t gonna be able to rest in peace. It’s going to be this way for time eternal, so was I surprised? Not at all.”
On another show, “Tell Me Everything,” with host John Fugelsang, Smiley said he doesn’t think Jackson abused children.
“I have to believe that he didn’t, and that’s the key phrase. For me, I have to believe that he didn’t.” – Tavis Smiley
For the author and friend of Michael Jackson, “have to believe” may be the key phrase. But the case against Jackson continues even in 2017.
The first accuser of Jackson, Jordan Chandler, settled with the Jackson estate for $20 million and is blocked from speaking publicly about what happened. But both of Chandler’s parents said they had found Jackson in bed with their young son.
Chandler, however, has allegedly left the United States to avoid being embroiled in a case brought by Wade Robson and Jimmy Safechuck against the Jackson estate.
The Wade Robson v JacksonEstate lawsuit is set for March 5, 2018, in Los Angeles.
In that complaint, Robson, now a celebrity choreographer, claims that “MJJ PRODUCTIONS and MJJ VENTURES were held out to the public to be businesses dedicated to creating and distributing multimedia entertainment by MICHAEL JACKSON, however, in fact, they actually served dual purposes. The thinly-veiled, covert second purpose of these businesses was to operate as a child sexual abuse operation, specifically designed to locate, attract, lure and seduce child sexual abuse victims.”
Now that Thanksgiving’s “main event” dinner is past, it’s time we ask the question: Are we obliged to believe all women who make allegations of sexual harassment? Go!
