usmbguest5318
Gold Member
Reading your list, I think you've misconstrued activity for accomplishment.
- Set up a commission to study the improvement of rural life -- Trump issued an EO to instruct people to study something.
- "The two leaders reaffirmed the urgency of the threat posed by North Korea’s missile and nuclear programs" -- How much does it take to "reaffirm" that which had previously been affirmed? The essence of what that says is "nothing's different." Making that determination may be an accomplishment for five year old; it is not for a POTUS.
- "Veterans Choice Program Extension and Improvement Act" -- Wonderful, but he extended a program that was set to expire. Now it won't expire until next January. The Veterans Choice Program is a "work around" implemented because no actual solution had been identified and deployed to fix the actual problem. Trump too lacks a solution for the actual problem.
Veterans Choice is designed to allow veterans who have waited more than 30 days for an appointment at a VA facility, or who live more than 40 miles from one, instead to get care from private providers who then bill the VA. But it has been plagued with problems. Many vets complain that Choice actually makes getting care more difficult and time-consuming, and some health care providers have dropped out due to slow payments or administrative hassles.
-- Source - Buy/hire American -- We have shifted from the era of good work for many to the age of the hustle, where those with luck, good connections, education, and ambition can do far better than their grandparents could have dreamt, while those without see their incomes stagnate or fall and face a future filled with doubt. Thus the "Buy American" EO sounds great and it's thematically patriotic. It's far from clear, however, that Trumps having issued the EO is anything that a publicity stunt. All it's accomplished is a state of confusion and make government procurement officials ask questions for which there is no clear answer.
- He held his talk at Snap-on Tools, a firm that buys Chinese and hires Chinese, Argentinian, Brazilian, and Swedish. Seventy per cent of Snap-on’s sales are in the U.S., but many of its plants are in other countries. There is nothing wrong with Snap-on putting its factories overseas, but Snap-on is an odd place to hold a Buy American announcement. It’s reminiscent of President Trump’s celebration of jobs at a Boeing plant while the company was laying off workers. (See also: Trump’s Abuse of Government Data)
- The EO's "buy American" provisions apply only to the Executive Branch of the federal government. That's a great idea. What should procurement officers do, however?
- Buy a U.S. made items that cost more and may or may not be a better performing item merely because it's Made in the USA, or
- Buy the foreign made ones that may or may not be be a better performing item that costs less?
- The EO itself is bizarre. It’s not clear what, if anything, it will change. The order states that “it shall be the policy of the executive branch to maximize, consistent with law . . . the use of goods, products, and materials produced in the United States” without setting any measurable definition of “maximize.” Too, there is the confusing timeline -- in sixty days, the Secretary of Commerce will lead a team, advised by the Secretary of State and others, that will issue guidance. Then, within a hundred and fifty days, the heads of agencies will explain what they are doing in keeping with that guidance. Sometime in mid-September, we will (or we won’t) hear what the hundreds of agencies in the federal government are doing to meet a confusing mandate, with no obvious targets, that will (or won’t) mean that more Americans have jobs.
- The EO sounds good, but doesn't have much real meaning. Snap-on Tools is actually a good example of why Buy American is a fairly meaningless phrase. It is no mean feat to find a product manufactured entirely of material from the U.S., produced by people in the U.S., using tools made in the U.S. The EO seems to "take a page" from Switzerland and it's Swissness laws, but as such it leaves imprecisely stated the answers to a host of questions, some of which produce different criteria for what "American made" in practice means. Here's one example:
- How will the U.S.-made content of a good be defined? Whatever criterion one uses produces a different answer to the question of whether a given product is American made.
- By weight?
- By dollar value?
- By labor hours involved?
- How will the U.S.-made content of a good be defined? Whatever criterion one uses produces a different answer to the question of whether a given product is American made.
- The question of H1B visas has rhetorical importance that transcends its actual economic relevance. The unemployment rate for computer and mathematical occupations is, currently, 2.1 per cent. This is what economists consider full employment, meaning that pretty much everyone who wants a job has a job or is in a brief hiatus between positions.
