• Comments off

    The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act: Half a Year Later

    The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was signed into law last December, and implementation began in 2018. The purpose of the act is to reduce the corporate tax rate, allow increased expensing of costs, and eliminate the Alternative Minimum Tax.

    It’s been over six months since the Act was passed, and while it is too early to predict long-term benefits, it’s undeniable that taxpayers are already seeing some positive changes.

    Among them are the many workers who are seeing an increase in their paychecks.  Utility bills for electric, gas, and power are dropping.  More products are being made in America instead of overseas.  More jobs are available than in decades and the unemployment rate has dropped to its lowest in more than fifteen years.

    Over the next six months and into the 2019 tax season, we will see more of what’s to come with the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. But I believe that by what we have seen so far, consumers benefit with more disposable income and businesses and corporations are investing more in capital improvements, are hiring more people and are providing higher wages.

    This economic growth is long overdue but can also get overheated.  The Federal Reserve is increasing interest rates to keep things from becoming too speculative.  President Trump’s new tariffs and the threat of a trade war that could even include our allies can also throw cold water on growth.

    It’s a very tricky balancing act.  Unfortunately, whether it’s balancing policies or budgets, progress is never made through partisan politics, the disease that has gripped our nation for the past ten years.   So ask your representatives in Washington when their bickering will end so prosperity can be preserved?

  • Comments off

    “I Really Don’t Care, Do U?”

    We live in an age where it seems that everything a public figure does, says, and wears is immediately posted on the internet and on the news.  We all live with the reality that we must be very careful with what we do, say, and wear in public given the likelihood that there will be a camera or a phone recording us, only to be instantly exploited.

    As a public figure, I know too well what it is like to be dissected.  I served for seven years as a prosecutor; three terms as a Congresswoman; and a full term as Governor for the Commonwealth of Virginia before becoming the Republican nominee for president in 2016.

    I recall every morning reflecting on the message I want to send to the public, my colleagues, those who would vote for or support me, and those who I have to persuade.  But should what I wear matter?  If someone with an unflattering picture of me decides I look disheveled, have a tear in my stocking, or wear a suit jacket that is missing a button, should Americans not to take as a serious candidate?  Should they be persuaded by how I look, or by what I say?

    But I cannot ignore the reality of the social media world and must adjust to it by taking such irrelevant issue off the table.  So I always dress professionally and rarely in a relaxed fashion.  That way, the media has to focus on what I had to say, rather than distract their readers or viewers about whether my pencil skirt was too tight or an ugly shade of blue.  I know all too well that one mishap of my dress and it will be all over the news for the rest of the day, and my words wouldn’t matter.

    I think fashion stylist Rachel Zoe puts it best when she said: “Style is a way to say who you are without having to speak.”

    When the First Lady of the United States wears a jacket that says “I Really Don’t Care, Do U?” on a plane to visit children at our border, what is her style saying about her?

  • Comments off

    Why Not Win with the Truth?

    New Jersey has a controversial Senate election this November. The likely challenger for incumbent Robert Menendez is Republican Bob Hugin, a former pharmaceutical executive. The ads have started. Problem is, they’re devoid of substance and filled with personal attacks.

    In particular, Hugin’s most recent ad is filled with lies. No doubt we’ll eventually see the same from Menendez. Such is the case with political advertising today – lies, misrepresentations, and no substance on the issues. Even when an issue is addressed, it’s in vague terms with no specific plan on how those issues will be resolved. God forbid if a politician actually tells you what they’re going to do. You have a right to know that before you enter the voting booth. And you should not vote for any candidate who is not clear on the specific direction he or she thinks is best for you.

    Unfortunately, today’s politicians think we’re all either right or left, conservative or progressive, or hawks or doves. How about intelligent and reasonable and sick and tired of the partisan politics played in Washington and State capitals while we continue to see no meaningful progress on important issues?

    Hugin, for example, attacks Menendez with accusation, based upon a Senate ethics probe and an indictment against Menendez claiming he used the influence of his office to benefit of a longtime friend and political supporter. In exchange, Menendez allegedly received expensive gifts, lavish vacations and more than $750,000 in campaign contributions. All that is public record so it’s fair game. But Hugin’s ads either state or most definitely imply that Menendez was guilty. That’s a lie. He has never been convicted of any of the allegations. And while I’m certainly not supporter of Menendez, he deserves better and Hugin needs to be more responsible before he will earn my vote and, hopefully, yours.

    Sadly, it will take little time for Menendez to start personal attacks on Hugin. Truth is, Hugin has his seen his share of controversy too. I’ll refrain from listing them. But I have no doubt Menendez will. And he’ll probably be just as misleading as Hugin.

    So it will be politics as usual. Lies, misrepresentations, and no substance. As Hugin says of Menendez, “New Jersey deserves better.” Mr. Hugin needs to know that New Jersey’s voters need better than him, too.

  • Comments off

    Confirming Gina Haspel as CIA Director is a Step Forward for Women

    Gina Haspel, President Trump’s nominee for CIA Director, was approved by the Senate in late May. This is a step in the right direction for women—she is the first woman CIA Director to ever be confirmed to the position. This is historic.

    And yet, instead of celebrating history, there have been complaints about her role in the CIA’s controversial waterboarding program in the aftermath of 9/11.

    Those in public service have all faced moral dilemmas because of the position they hold and the decisions they’ve made. I, for one, condemn capital punishment. But when I was the Governor of Virginia, I was put in the position of either putting a murderer and rapist in the electric chair or keep him in jail baring release under parole. I wanted him to stay in jail and suffer for the rest of his life. But before commuting his sentence, I chose to meet with him while he wallowed in prison. After speaking with him, I realized that he didn’t regret a thing he’d done, and never would. He would rape, murder and dismember that poor girl again if he could. So I let he electric chair put the animal off this earth. When the gravity of my rejection of opposition to capital punishment hit me, I realized my mistake and commuted the death sentence for anyone else then awaiting execution.

    Haspel assured the Senate that she would never authorize water boarding – or any torture – again. There is every reason to believe her. So let’s not throw away her years of experience and dedication in the intelligence committee by focusing only on her actions during a time our country was in turmoil.

    Gina Haspel is a highly respected person in the intelligence community. She did what she had to do for her country. And she will continue to do what she has to do for her country as CIA Director. Moreover, she will be a role model for women who dream of working in the intelligence community or in government.

  • Comments off

    MS-13: Yes, They Are Animals

    President Donald Trump recently made a statement about the gang MS-13, calling them “animals.” There was, of course, an uproar about it, with people crying foul claiming the President was calling all illegal immigrants “animals.” But that is not what he said.

    In the typical media frenzy against anything Trump, many in the press misrepresented his statement. Indeed, his comment about MS-13 was not about a particular ethnic population. It was about one of the most vicious gangs this country has ever seen who routinely engage in murder, kidnapping, child prostitution, human smuggling, drug trafficking, and racketing.

    MS-13 is a gang that originated in Los Angeles. While most members are of Central American origin, principally El Salvador, others are from any number of countries and comprised of almost a hundred thousand members it is a worldwide scourge. Thousands of those members are in the United States. Many are illegal immigrants; some are not. Many have been deported time and time again after committing terrible crimes.

    And kudos to White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who added, “Frankly, I think that the term ‘animal’ doesn’t go far enough and I think that the President should continue to use his platform and everything he can do under the law to stop these types of horrible, horrible, disgusting people.”

    Let’s not sway from what the President is trying to do here – ridding this country of gang members, illegal immigrants, or otherwise. President Trump does not, and never has, suggested deporting immigrants who come here legally, pay taxes, and contribute to the community.