Welcome to Home & Away. It is September 1, 2023, which means that summer is all but over and fall is hovering off stage. Apples are close to being picked and turned into pies, cider, and sauce. Students are back in school, although it is difficult not to wish that many public schools did a better job of educating them.
While I’m at it, I would add to my wish list that there was more school choice; it is outrageous that the teachers unions and the politicians they support limit the number of charter schools rather than improve the quality of what is offered in the public system. More competition at the K-12 level might actually make things better for students. And it is essential that public education improve, as it is central to providing a ladder for mobility for all Americans. Those who want to preserve American democracy might begin here.
A big issue that could well come to something of a head as summer gives way to fall is RTO, or Return to Office. A lot of businesses and other organizations are looking to roll back some of the remote work options introduced out of necessity during the pandemic but that have since become options of choice. I would argue that a minimum of three anchor days on site is essential for creating an office culture, for collective work, and for providing younger staff with the mentoring they need if they are to realize their potential.
What else to say about the end of summer? Football is in the air, which is a good thing for any fan of New York’s baseball teams, although at least they play in New York, unlike two of the three professional football teams that claim to be New Yorkers but in fact require crossing over a bridge or through a tunnel into New Jersey. That said, I am excited about my Giants, who under their second year coach and general manager are well on their way to again being a quality team.
Here at Home, there is much that is new yet little that is new. The first Republican debate is now a distant memory. It does not seem to have had much impact on Donald Trump’s lead. The same can be said for his multiple legal entanglements. We will all need to hang a new calendar on our wall, one that combines the political with the legal, although the odds are high that the political will outpace the legal, which is to say that Donald Trump will likely be the Republican nominee before any of his cases come to trial and certainly before he is found guilty of anything. And while we are discussing matters of guilt, just imagine how jet-propelled his candidacy would be if he were to be acquitted. He is not the only one at risk when it comes to what is about to play out in several of our courts.
On the Democratic side, the polls continue to suggest that enthusiasm for President Biden is scarce. Age and scandal, not to mention inflation and higher borrowing costs, all work against him. So, too, would most third party candidates. We are just 14 months away from what could well be the most consequential election in modern American history and no one can be confident of the outcome. What we do know is that the gap between the two likely candidates is large when it comes to fealty to democracy and issues such as Ukraine and climate change—although not all that large when it comes to China or trade or Afghanistan, where similarities far outweigh any differences.
I want to highlight one issue that adds to Joe Biden’s political vulnerability: the southern border. One quality that makes a sovereign country sovereign is that it controls its borders. The United States is clearly failing in this regard. People are coming across the border in large numbers and straining the absorptive capacity of cities such as New York they are moving to or being sent to.
What is happening is that people are leaving their native countries and coming to the United States for a host of reasons. Some are fleeing dangerous situations. But many are choosing to come here for a better life. They are migrants, attracted by the prospect of living conditions far superior to what they have at home. There is nothing wrong with that, and we actually need more immigrants to fill jobs in this country. But what is happening is wrong, in that many of these people are using the asylum system in a manner never intended. Many or arguably most of those coming here under the guise of asylum ought to apply like everyone else through the legal immigration system.
So what needs doing? I would argue we could do more to close the border through physical means and enhanced surveillance. We need to sharply increase the number of asylum judges to clear up the backlog of pending cases; those who are granted asylum could stay, those denied would have to leave. New York City should suspend or modify its “right to shelter” as it is a “right” that was never meant for this purpose or scale. Asylum criteria and procedures also need to be revised so that they apply only to a narrow set of cases and limit the ability to enter the country before a determination is made.
Addressing root causes of migration pressures sounds good, but it is a long-term proposition at best and requires a willingness on the part of foreign governments to welcome help with sensitive matters of internal capacity and governance. Such cooperation tends to be rare. A more realistic path is to work with select governments on specific cooperation arrangements, such as the United States and Mexico did for a time on asylum screening.
Legal immigration numbers ought to be increased and linked to a greater degree to needed skills and education levels. Country quotas (which can act as floors as much as ceilings) make little sense absent special circumstances in a particular country justifying increased flows. I have no illusions as to how difficult enacting any of this would be given the politics within each party and between them. But the fact that both the mayor of New York City and the governor of New York state, both Democrats, are calling on the president and a fellow Democrat to do something to reduce the flood of migrants tells you that the current situation is politically and socially untenable.
Away, Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo, widely viewed as one of the most capable members of this cabinet, visited China, becoming the fourth senior administration official to travel to Beijing in recent months. Her mission was and is a delicate one: to promote non-sensitive economic ties between China and the United States and to limit those (mostly involving technology) that can contribute to Chinese military might. Her role is especially critical as the Commerce Department oversees the U.S. export control regime.
Her mandate might sound relatively straightforward, but in reality it is anything but, as virtually any technology can be dual-use, i.e., it can add to China’s economic growth as well as enhance its military power. This is made even more complicated because of China’s “military-civil fusion” policy, which aims to link the country’s civilian economy with its military industrial base. From the Chinese perspective, U.S. export controls and outbound investment restrictions look a lot like economic warfare, designed to slow Chinese economic growth and weaken its competitiveness. Actually, China is doing a pretty good job of that by itself, something I wrote about in last week’s Home & Away and in Project Syndicate.
A few weeks back I opined about Oppenheimer, and promised a reaction to Barbie if I were to see it. Well, see it I have, and it is not hard to see why the movie is so popular. Barbie is a clever, creative piece of work, one that manages to be funny and not take itself too seriously.
My only real criticism (I can already hear the chorus of “lighten up” coming for me) is its depiction of men. It is one thing to make a film that makes girls and women feel empowered, but do all the men have to be that insipid? This is especially so as so many of the trends in this society show that girls and women are outpacing men and that the real demographic and social problem today and going forward is the poor educational performance of boys and the deteriorating prospects of many adult males. David Zaslav, if you are reading this, please consider a sequel in which Ken and his fellow Kens do something more significant than work on their six-packs and promote a patriarchy. How about a film in which the Kens embark on a Barbie-like trajectory of becoming more than they currently are?
Golf Update
As for golf, I received quite a lot of reaction to my golf commentary last week. My quest for a single digit handicap remains just that, a quest, although I am relieved to report I am striking the ball much better even if the scores have yet to fully reflect it.
On the professional level, Viktor Hovland has won yet another tournament in dominant style, adding $18 million to his bank account in the process. It is a treat to watch him as it is any great athlete in the proverbial zone. Hovland is hitting great shots with such consistency that it is easy to forget just how complete a game he has and just how well he is playing. He will be one reason this year’s Ryder Cup, to be played in Italy at the end of September, should be thrilling to watch. The only thing certain is that transatlantic unity will be put to the test.
As always, some links to click on. And feel free to share Home & Away.
Monday, August 28: MSNBC Way Too Early on Prigozhin, the war in Ukraine, and China (begins at 24:45; audio-only).
Check out The Bill of Obligations: The Ten Habits of Good Citizens.
ncG1vNJzZmiqmZi1or7DoZiaq6NjwLau0q2YnKNemLyue89omZqqkp6ybq3NnWSbp6KZsrO%2FjKycqayVoq%2BmvoxqZGtoYmg%3D