DEFEND UTAH

Our current published national debt is approximately 33.8 trillion dollars. There has to be a bipartisan consensus on not exceeding the Federal Debt Ceiling. It is estimated that we will spend approximately 300 billion on debt interest payments. While we have to protect our entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare, we also need to make common sense reforms to ensure they have a more secure longevity. We can’t keep borrowing from Social Security and expect it to be solvent for people who need it.

The alternative to ensuring these programs remain solvent is likely more taxes or more quantitative easing. This is simply not an acceptable solution.

In December 2023, I wrote the following:

“With the advent of National Asset Companies (NACs), the Biden Administration’s solution is more taxes and more avenues for espionage attempts by adversarial nation states. One of the solutions by the Biden Administration is to adopt National Asset Companies (NACs), which allows foreign interests to ‘manage’ America’s ‘natural resources.’ These NACs will have a listing on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE). NACs will allow foreign countries (including China, and Russia) to actively manage, maintain, restore, and grow the value of natural assets within the United States. The United States already allows China to own land here, which allows them to buy land in Oklahoma and patrol it with guards carrying assault rifles. It allows China to buy land close to our nuclear missile sites and military bases to conduct passive listening to our military communications. This is with full recognition that China does not allow Americans to own land in China.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is poised to make a decision on whether to allow NACs to be listed on NYSE by January 2nd of 2024 (Note: comment period extended for 21 days before decision is made). The real issue is that the SEC should not be making such a decision - because of the consequence of national security, Congress should have direct oversight on whether to allow NACs to be listed on NYSE. Instead, the Biden Administration and the supporters of NACs have purposefully circumvented Congress.

China clearly has an agenda to project its own power to degrade democracies across the world. Allowing countries like China to make decisions or manage federal lands in the United States will be a mistake.

Conveniently, there has been no advertisement from the main-stream media on this topic. On the face of it, NACs sound like a good idea. However, NACs will give foreign nations management powers in our federal lands for their profit. The entire premise of NACs is to provide land in America so that an NAC can create revenue by using the land for farming as long as it is ‘sustainable.’ The term used is, “commercially sustainable” which uses ecological value of any given piece of land - this would include harvesting various types of farming including tree harvesting as long as it is sustainable.

While the language of NACs has yet to be fully understood, it appears that NACs will have the latitude to do “conservation easements” (take land away from landowners) for the sake of sustainability or conservation. These ‘conservation easements’ will be driven by a loose understanding of an adjacent properties ecological threat - meaning, if an NAC determines that the working land (adjacent to the federal land) is not sustainable or threatens the environment, it can take the land.

Some of the ways NACs will make money are associated with putting a financial value on diversity, carbon sequestration, freshwater production, food provisioning, or esthetic/cultural values. These scores combined will result in an underline asset value of the land. This may be familiar to us as we look at China’s social credit system. China’s social credit system also takes certain obtained values to assign scores to people.

While this system sounds like it is going to save the planet from humans, my concern is related to its obfuscation and the theft from legitimate landowners for the sake of the environment. NACs will effectively remove the management of federal lands by federal organizations and put the management in the hands of bureaucrats and foreign nation states who already have been taking our land from us for nefarious purposes.

While I am a proponent of preserving and protecting the environment, I am fully opposed to NACs due mainly to the lack of Congressional oversight and the potential for ecological exploitation by foreign investors.”

Since my submission to the SEC opposing the implementation of NACs on the NYSE, they have decided not to list NACs for sale to other countries.

Two points:

This should have never been a decision for the SEC - this should have had Congressional oversight, but none of our elected politicians or media reported on it.

This has been a continuing problem for the Biden Administration - they have pushed a United Nations socialist agenda very aggressively in since 2020 without advertising, voting, or soliciting to the American public.

. . .

Quantitative easing (QE) can have several effects on the U.S. dollar, including potential harm. When the Federal Reserve implements quantitative easing, it increases the money supply, which can lead to a devaluation of the domestic currency. This devaluation can make imports more expensive, increasing production costs and consumer prices.

I am not a proponent of QE because as we have implemented QE in the past most data shows it is difficult to quantify how it will affect the economy in the short and long term. Moreover, can impact bank lending - An increase in central bank reserves due to quantitative easing can reduce new bank lending by about $140 billion per year on average, with a significant effect on lending to firms. For every $1 increase in central bank reserves, around 8 cents of new bank lending is crowded out, especially lending to firms.

Furthermore, quantitative easing can influence the stock market positively. There is a positive correlation between a QE policy and a rising stock market, with some of the largest stock market gains in U.S. history occurring during QE policies.

While quantitative easing can stimulate economic activity and benefit certain sectors like borrowers and investors, it also poses risks such as devaluing the currency and impacting bank lending patterns. For these reasons I am skeptical QE is a solution to problems generated by often, what many consider, is poor policy by our federal government.

While quantitative easing hurt the value of the dollar, it also contributes to the trus the United States' ability to sanction other nations, as it has led to an increase in the supply of U.S. dollars. This has prompted countries like China to advocate for their currency as a potential replacement for the dollar in international transactions. Notably, China's efforts to promote its currency were evident during its visit to Saudi Arabia and other countries, where it sought to persuade them to consider using China’s currency over the dollar.

Ultimately, QE events result in the devaluing of the U.S. currency, which discourages international investors and can lead to inflation and higher costs to the American consumer.

While it appears that the Federal Reserve is not being politically manipulated, I have real concerns in the future that it might – especially in this political climate.

Realignment of the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury

There are proposals, to realign the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury with the principles outlined in the U.S. Constitution. This includes advocating for a more limited role of the Federal Reserve and a return to sound monetary policies that prioritize the stability of the currency and the overall economy. The emphasis should be on ensuring that the actions of these federal institutions align with the constitutional framework and the principles of fiscal responsibility, not just another agency to push political agendas.

I would consider supporting proposals to re-align or consolidate/streamline the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury.