https://townhall.com/columnists/bobbarr/2023/10/19/bidens-visit-to-israel-in-the-throes-of-a-war-actually-is-an-inflection-point-n2630069
Since taking office early in 2021, President Joe Biden frequently has used the term “inflection point” as a way to add gravitas to whatever issue he is speaking about. In fact, he has used it so often its meaning, or whatever it is supposed to mean, has been significantly diluted. His current visit to Israel, however, which neither Biden nor his media team has described as an “inflection point,” could accurately be seen as such a juncture for Biden and for the Middle East.
In none of the instances in which Biden has employed such rhetoric has he explained exactly what he means by the use of the term. In such linguistic laxity, the president perhaps presumes the reader or listener knows that the term “inflection point” (when not used in its technical, differential geometry context) is defined by dictionary guru Merriam-Webster, as “a moment when significant change occurs or may occur.”
In his October 15th “60 Minutes” interview with Scott Pelley, Biden declared that his principal motivation for seeking a second term despite his advanced age and the myriad domestic problems he continues to face, was because “[t]h world is at an inflection point.” Two days later, America’s commander-in-chief was en route to Tel Aviv – smack dab in the middle of a burgeoning and already extremely bloody war between our close ally Israel and Hamas, one of that country’s most militant adversaries.
What takes place in that region over the coming days, weeks, and months, may very well turn out to be a point at which “significant change occurs.”
By all public assessments, the Jewish State is poised to launch a ground attack against Hamas, whose base of operations is Gaza, the narrow and densely populated quasi-state that lies between Israel and Egypt on the Mediterranean coast.
If Israel in fact engages in a massive military invasion of Gaza, the goal of which would be to neutralize Hamas’ ability to launch future cross-border terror operations such as that on October 7th which resulted in dozens of hostages being taken into Gaza (including several U.S. citizens), the declared “war” between Hamas and the IDF (Israel Defense Forces) would almost certainly expand, probably dramatically.
In this context, the potential stakes of Biden’s wartime diplomacy could not be greater.
If Biden succeeds in convincing Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu that a massive military invasion of Gaza is neither necessary nor prudent, he will have earned significant kudos by heading off a very dangerous and negative “inflection point.”
If Biden is unsuccessful in heading off a major Israeli invasion (and possible subsequent occupation) of Gaza, the resulting expansion beyond the strict confines of Israel and Gaza — including possible direct military involvement by other NGOs (e.g., Hezbollah) and state supporters of Palestine, such as Lebanon, Syria, and Iran — risks hostilities on a scale actually imperiling world peace.
Tuesday’s hospital blast in Gaza already has complicated Biden’s mission. His plan to meet with Jordanian and Palestinian leaders in addition to Israel’s was “upended” due to the hospital disaster, thereby potentially and severely limiting the possible benefits of his trip to the region.
Still, if his discussions with Netanyahu, and perhaps indirectly with Arab officials while in Israel, results in visible movement to secure the release of Hamas-held hostages (especially Americans), he can legitimately claim a degree of success. If some form of punishment for the atrocities committed by Hamas in its most recent cross-border operations that are seen as short of a massive Israeli military operation into Gaza, even perhaps with limited, non-combat U.S. involvement, this, too, could enhance his administration’s stature, and might at least to a small but significant degree lessen the chances for a much wider conflict.
Any way you look at this presidential foray to the Middle East, it is a very real, as opposed to a merely rhetorical “inflection point.” It is one that should be supported publicly in a bipartisan way here at home – although in today’s hyper-partisan political climate that may be too much to hope for.
Bob Barr represented Georgia’s Seventh District in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003. He served as the United States Attorney in Atlanta from 1986 to 1990 and was an official with the CIA in the 1970s. He now practices law in Atlanta, Georgia and serves as head of Liberty Guard.
https://townhall.com/columnists/bobbarr/2023/10/19/bidens-visit-to-israel-in-the-throes-of-a-war-actually-is-an-inflection-point-n2630069
Florida Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz accomplished his goal last week, when his “Motion to Vacate the [Speaker’s] Chair” passed the House of Representatives with unanimous support from Democrats, plus Gaetz and seven of his colleagues who like him appear to have no vision beyond their own egos.
In kicking former Speaker Kevin McCarthy to the curb with no Plan B beyond making the rounds of cable TV and radio talk shows, Gaetz & Co. left an important segment of the government of the United States adrift in an increasingly dangerous world.
The egotism and immaturity their game reflects will have ripple effects at home and abroad, as leaders scratch their heads and marvel at what the United States has done to deserve such punishment.
Lest we place too much blame at the feet of Gaetz and his Happy Seven for this sorry state of affairs, America and the rest of the world know full well that there are other serious tears in the fabric of our mantle of leadership.
Let’s begin at the top, with the President of the United States, Joe Biden, whose somnambulance is exceeded only by the vitriol that infects virtually every public pronouncement he occasionally makes. If Biden’s handlers and his cohorts in the Congress and in Democrat-controlled state governments across the country honestly believe other world leaders, including friends and foes, do not see and act on such profound and obvious weaknesses, then they are as clueless as he is.
The Republican Party, which in our closed, two-party system is the only meaningful political counterbalance to the Democrat Party that currently controls the White House and the Senate, is being led by a proud egotist whose dealings in both politics and business have earned him the sobriquet of “multiple indictee.”
Amidst all this political chaos, we have a southern border across which uncountable thousands of aliens daily pour, at times with the help of the very federal employees whose responsibility it is to stop such illegal crossings. The rest of the world watches this madness play out, even as the Biden Administration claims with a straight face that the border is “secure.”
The cherry atop this toxic political sundae, however, is the plan by Gaetz to leave the House of Representatives leaderless, without even a bare majority of members willing to stand up and say, “Okay, at least here and now, we will put aside personal peeves and partisan bickering to ensure that this vital component of the federal government is not left twisting in the wind as the world watches.”
Domestically, governors and legislators will step in to pick up much of the political and economic slack caused by Washington’s ongoing inability (or unwillingness) to function.
Abroad, however, matters left hanging or in tatters because of the failure to engage in at least a semblance of regular order or to maintain leadership in the House of Representatives, will not be so easily patched over.
With the United States absent or dithering in countries and regions from Russia and Ukraine to Taiwan and China, and now to a suddenly exploding Middle East, allies will begin making decisions without Washington at the table; some will seek new friends of convenience. Adversaries will be emboldened to test us as perhaps never before since the interregnum between the First and Second World Wars when the United States stuck its head in the sand while Europe smoldered.
And once those new alliances or partnerships of convenience gel, it will be extremely difficult to turn back the clock and return to the status quo ante. Prestige and influence frittered away over the past several years is not easily regained. The current expansion of “BRICS” (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) to include Iran and Saudi Arabia as a counterweight to NATO and the G7, is a harbinger of things to come.
The Middle East once again is boiling over into all-out war. Until Democrats and Republicans alike get their acts together, the United States will face many more tests of our resolve and leadership in the coming weeks and months.
Bob Barr represented Georgia’s Seventh District in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003. He served as the United States Attorney in Atlanta from 1986 to 1990 and was an official with the CIA in the 1970s. He now practices law in Atlanta, Georgia and serves as head of Liberty Guard.
A four-page piece of legislation that protects federal funds for school archery and hunting programs from being cut by federal bureaucrats illustrates the many perverse effects of giving Uncle Sam control over America’s education system.
The nearly 60-year-old Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) is the multi-headed hydra that provides virtually unlimited ways by which U.S. Department of Education bureaucrats can directly and indirectly control all manner of programs in schools across the country.
The reach of these tentacles is lengthened whenever an unrelated piece of legislation applies – or can be interpreted to apply – to schools. This is exactly what Miguel Cardona, President Biden’s Education Secretary, did after his boss in 2022 signed the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA), a knee-jerk legislative response to the tragic mass shooting at a school in Uvalde, Texas, that same year.
The BSCA contained a number of gun control measures, such as funding incentives for so-called “Red Flag Laws,” but did not prohibit use of federal education funds for such school programs as archery and hunter safety courses. It did, however, include language intended to prevent federal funds from being used to provide any “dangerous weapon” (that is, a firearm) or “training in the use of a dangerous weapon” in schools. This provision was intended to stop moves by some schools to arm teachers, resource officers, and administrators as a way to protect against criminal shooters at schools.
Cardona’s Department, however, saw an opportunity to expand the restrictive language in the BSCA, and ran with it.
Last July, the Education Department issued one of its dreaded “guidance letters” declaring that hunting and archery programs in schools would no longer be eligible to receive any federal funding, because such activities necessarily involved “technically dangerous weapons.”
The problem here is that the way a “dangerous weapon” is defined under federal law is so broad that virtually any Swiss Army knife no matter how small, or any metal-jacketed pen, could be read to fall within its ambit – which is precisely what Education Department bureaucrat Sarah Martinez proceeded to do in her “guidance” letter concerning archery and hunting education programs.
This action by the Education Department was taken not because the legislation as signed by Biden placed any restrictions on such school programs (it did not), but only because the Department simply decided to interpret it that way.
The guidance letter had precisely the “chilling effect” on such programs desired by the Department. Many school administrators, concerned that they could potentially be violating federal law if they allowed such benign programs to continue in their schools, ordered them stopped.
Tommy Floyd, president of the National Archery in the Schools Program, which oversees archery programs in some 9,000 schools with 1.3 million student participants, summed it up this way: “any time the U.S. Department of Education gives guidance about anything . . . [and] until I know the final answer, I’m probably going to pause.”
That would have been the death knell for archery and hunting programs in schools, but for unusually quick action by congressional supporters of such programs.
The “Protecting Hunting Heritage Act” was introduced in the House on August 1 as H.R. 5110, and its four-page text clarified what never had been the intent of the BSCA – namely, that the prohibitory language in that 2022 legislation did not apply to “training in archery, hunting, or other shooting sports” programs in schools covered by the omnibus ESEA. By late last month, the clarifying legislation had overwhelmingly passed both houses of Congress and awaits President Biden’s promised signature.
It is laudable that Congress, in this age of nearly impenetrable partisanship, was motivated to attack this abuse of federal education control, and to do so swiftly. However, the problem and process that led to the need for such action illustrates all that is wrong with America’s public education system, with its top-down control by a massive and intimidating Education Department.
In this perverse system, bureaucrats with an ideological agenda such as opposition to any activity remotely deemed by them to support firearms or any type of “weapons,” can move to block students from benefitting from such programs as archery, and hope that those in the Congress harboring opposing views do not notice.
Thank goodness that in this instance Congress did notice, but consider all the other instances of such “guidance” abuse that slip by unnoticed.
Bob Barr represented Georgia’s Seventh District in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003. He served as the United States Attorney in Atlanta from 1986 to 1990 and was an official with the CIA in the 1970s. He now practices law in Atlanta, Georgia and serves as head of Liberty Guard.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is supposed to protect the public from unfair and deceptive business practices, such as “collusion.” But, what happens if the collusion is being perpetrated by government regulators themselves?
Unfortunately, this is precisely what the Biden Administration’s FTC appears to be doing, led by avowed anti-free market advocate Lina Kahn.
The regulatory agency Ms. Kahn heads is working to actively break up companies and industries that are operating lawfully in the marketplace, for what clearly appear to be ideological considerations rather than legitimate, honest concerns for consumer welfare.
The handwriting for this abuse actually was on the wall as early as 2021, when it became apparent that the FTC was rescinding the long-standing “consumer welfare” standard it had employed since the 1970s, according to which the Commission would not intervene in or seek to regulate businesses or sectors of the economy unless the American people’s interests were being harmed. Sadly, this is no longer the case.
Having jettisoned that standard, Kahn is now using her power to attack industries disfavored by her boss, President Joe Biden. Their targets now include prescription drug prices, and consumers may soon feel the results of this new game of regulatory abuse in higher prices at the pharmacy counter.
Specifically, Khan is going after “pharmacy benefit managers” or PBMs. These groups are hired by health plan sponsors, including the federal government, insurance companies and employers to go head-to-head with drug companies at the negotiating table to secure lower drug costs for consumers.
PBMs have been demonstrably effective at lowering prescription drug costs, as noted in a July 2022 study by Casey B. Mulligan (President Trump’s former Council of Economic Advisers chief economist), which concluded they are worth at least $145 billion annually beyond their resource costs.
So what exactly is Khan doing? Rather than praising PBM’s success in lowering consumer drug costs, she recently withdrew the FTC’s previous endorsement guidance of PBMs and appears to be moving to impose stifling regulations against them. In this context, the industry interests with which Khan has aligned herself offer some disturbing but revealing clues as to her motives.
In 2022, Khan delivered the keynote address at the National Community Pharmacists Association’s (NCPA) annual convention. This is — or should be — concerning, insofar as the NCPA has endorsed and is aggressively pushing for new regulations on PBMs and, working with America’s major drug companies, is hardly an impartial actor in the healthcare industry.
The Heartland Institute’s Ashley Herzog, for example, has described the bias of the NCPA well, writing in an op-ed for the Washington Examiner:
“The NCPA’s receipt of significant annual donations from the three monopolistic drug wholesalers that handle more than 90% of the United States’s drugs should tell Congress everything it needs to know about this group’s priorities. Far from being innocent actors, these drug wholesalers are facing an investigation from 49 state attorneys general for allegedly participating in price-fixing schemes. Yet, not only does the NCPA take their money, but it has also given executives from all three companies a spot on the board of its Innovation Center.”
It is hardly coincidental when we see the FTC working hand-in-glove with the same companies that have an interest in raising consumer drug prices, but this appears to be exactly what is happening.
It is in this context that the American Accountability Foundation recently submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to the FTC, “seeking access to all communications between Khan and other agency staff related to PBMs, the National Community Pharmacists Association, and other drug manufacturers.”
The chairwoman reportedly is poised to face an ethics inquiry, and for good reason, insofar as under her watch, the FTC appears to have reversed its position on PBMs for no reason other than major drug industry interests wanted it to.
Right now would be the perfect time for House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) to launch hearings into this — and perhaps other — clear conflicts of interest and abuses of Uncle Sam’s vast regulatory powers as wielded by the FTC.
It is no secret that massive deficit spending continues to fan inflation, including prices for pharmaceuticals. That the Biden Administration is adding fuel to those inflationary fires by apparently colluding with groups in cahoots with drug manufacturers and wholesalers to jack up prices, presents a perfect opportunity for House Republicans to highlight such regulatory abuse, and to show American consumers who’s truly on their side.
Bob Barr represented Georgia’s Seventh District in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003. He served as the United States Attorney in Atlanta from 1986 to 1990 and was an official with the CIA in the 1970s. He now practices law in Atlanta, Georgia and serves as head of Liberty Guard.