Damages From Judicial Activism
The True Cost of "Equal Protection"
November 5, 1997
The "equal protection" clause of the Fourteenth Amendment was written specifically for a very narrow application--the freeing of slaves, and ensuring their citizenship and right to vote. Justice Douglas notes in OREGON V. MITCHELL, 400 U.S. 112 that the first time the term "equal protection" was applied on a basis other than race was in 1961, "NEARLY A CENTURY AFTER THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT WAS ADOPTED". It was subsequently applied to women in 1971, an unprecedented, unnecessary, unconstitutional, and unexplained application of the term "equal protection". The effect was to apply "equal protection" to 67% of the population, while denying it to a 33% minority--the white males of the country who earn the majority of US income and who pay more than their fair share of taxes.
To protect judges against criminal and civil liability for their role in the social and economic destruction which followed, the Supreme Court ruled beyond it scope and authority in granting themselves "absolute judicial immunity" in 1978 and 1988, an act allowed only within the province of Congress ( judimunt.htm ). This was instantly followed by knees in the negative direction for each of 39 social and economic statistics--fatherlessness rate, marriage rate, divorce rate, abortion rate, birth rate, illegitimacy rate, drug use, violent crime, suicide rate, capital punishment, incarceration rate, government spending rate, government employees, increased litigation rate, reduced R&D and capital expansion funds, rate of increase in the Trade Deficit, reduced family incomes, reduced fatherless children's incomes, 11 fold decline in the value of the dollar, reduced US share of world auto market, US banking decline, reduced GDP per Capita, reduced Personal Savings Rate, reduced total Personal Savings, increased Public Debt, increased poverty rate, increased welfare costs, IRS Tax Credits, child abuse, domestic violence, a[FM1]ffirmative action, "child support", reduced education quality, elimination of ethics training in schools, increased body weight, reduced male sperm count, increased drunk driving arrests, increased health services costs, and increased TV viewing by children.
This is sufficient evidence for we the people to understand the true extent of the damages caused by this misapplication by the Supreme Court of the Constitution and its Amendments as ratified by we the people.
It is in stark contrast to historic and effective principles of the Bible, the Magna Charta, the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution, which each stress the positive aspects of society, families, fatherhood, and men. The pervasive, negative attitude towards men in general and fathers in particular by politicians, the media, the courts, feminists, and ultimately citizens at large was brought about by this failure to heed the instructions of our Forefathers and "we the people". Historians, sociologists, religious experts, philosophers, psychologists, psychiatrists, politicians, citizens, voters, our Forefathers, and other men have warned throughout history that the breakdown of the family would spell economic and social disaster.
The following summary of government statistics are a witness to just how correct they were. The assumption that undermining the role of the father in the family would improve any condition, reduce the number of single-mother households, or even reduce the number of single-father households is not born out by any shred of the data. This negativity has itself led to dissatisfaction amongst the mothers and wives in this nation who, prior to the ruling, had the world's highest standard of living and a considerably more family stability than today, both of which they were the primary beneficiaries. It has adversely impacted fathers from every background and status in the nation--black, white, Asian, and Latino; rich and poor; Southern and Northern; rural and urban; truck drivers, doctors, and engineers.
Based solely on these statistics, collected mostly by government agencies over the last
3-4 decades, an astounding, hard to believe fact becomes apparent--the economic loss and
the loss of life due only to the negative CHANGE in these factors is in the hundreds of
trillions of dollars, and tens of millions of lives:
Due directly to the Supreme Court's misapplication of the term "equal protection" to women, and because of Congress' failure to correct it, there are 26,410,102 children in the US who now live without the presence of their biological fathers. David Blankenhorn in "Fatherless America" estimates that soon 40% of America's children will go to sleep without a biological father in the home (compared to 4% who will sleep in a father-only home). This is up from an already high rate of 17.5% 3 decades ago. Applying the concept "equal protection" to women in 1971 reduced the desirability and viability of marriage for many men and potential fathers, and undermined family stability so much that the rate of divorce doubled, and men who were not married chose not to do so because of adverse treatment of married men which they personally witnessed. The rate of legitimate marriage plunged 34%, which directly paralleled a 40% drop in the birth rate, a quadrupling of the illegitimacy rate, and 1,528,930 abortions per year. Divorced fathers experienced significant financial risk and loss. It made divorce, and not marriage, financially rewarding for the nation's mothers, who now file up to 85% of all divorces. The average marriage now lasts a median of only 6 years. A responsible Congressional act, rather than increasing the rate of fatherlessness even further, would have been to have enhanced the stability of families sufficiently that the marriage rate increased and the divorce rate decreased sufficiently to completely eliminate fatherlessness.
Compared to their peers who grow up in families, fatherless children are more likely to go to prison by 8 times, to commit suicide by 5 times, to have behavioral problems by 20 times, to become rapists by 20 times, to run away by 32 times, to abuse chemical substances by 10 times, to drop out of high school by 9 times, to be seriously abused by 33 times, to be fatally abused by 73 times, and to have a 72% lower standard of living. [The Garbage Generation, Dr. Daniel Amneus]. As a direct result of this lack of paternal discipline, the murder rate doubled, the incarceration rate quadrupled, drug use doubled, the male suicide rate increased 25%, the "clearance rate" for murders plunged from 92% to 63%, violent crime increased 560%, welfare expenditures increased 10 fold, personal Savings dropped from more than 12% to less than 2%, more than 1 1/2 million abortions are performed each year, SAT scores declined 98 points, the number of hours per day that children watch TV increased 40% from 5 to 7 hours per day, we now have more government employees than manufacturing workers (versus 2 1/2 times as many manufacturing workers in 1965), 70% of the world's lawyers are now in California, and we as a nation have 63 times as many lawyers as Japan, who has 4 times as many engineers as us [Sources follow].
DRUNK DRIVING ARRESTS UP 8 FOLD
This unprecedented high rate of fatherlessness is one reason drunk driving arrests are up 5 fold while the motor vehicle fatality rate increased from 30% lower than Germany's to 45% higher in the same period. These 1.6 million arrests per year cost the economy roughly $18 Billion per year, and since the enactment of these laws in 1983, a total of roughly $117 Billion [FBI, Uniform Crime Reports, 1993].
HEALTH SERVICES COSTS UP 8 FOLD
It is also a key reason that health services costs are up 8 fold and that just the extra paperwork required to meet recent government regulations costs 3% of GDP, or roughly $2,000 Billion over the last 2 decades [Newsweek, Rich Thomas].
TV VIEWING UP 40%
The lack of discipline both in the home and in school due to increased fatherlessness led to an increase in the amount of time PER DAY that children watch TV increased from 5 hours to 7 hours.
BODY WEIGHT UP 25 POUNDS
The average weight of an American increased by 25 pounds. The loss in productivity due
to this health problem is reflected in reduced US GDP.
DIVORCE RATE DOUBLED
Per the Bureau of the Census, the 1960 US divorce rate of 2.4 per 1,000 population was already one of the industrial world's highest, 5 times higher than Japan's and 9 times higher than Italy's. Since that time, as the direct result of this destabilization of the family, it more than doubled to 4.9 divorces per 1,000 population, giving the US the distinction of having the industrial world's highest divorce rate. Had this rate remained at its already high level of 1960, there would have been a total of 17,863,505 fewer divorces between 1961 and 1997. If the legal costs of each divorce in 1997 dollars averaged just $40,000 each, $48 Billion might still be in family savings accounts rather than paid out in legal fees last year, and $714,540,399,446 might still be in family savings accounts which were instead paid in legal fees in the last 3 decades.
MARRIAGE RATE DROPPED ONE THIRD
Per the Bureau of the Census, the licensed marriage rate dropped by a third, from 10.6 to 7.1 per 1,000 population, at the same time that the divorce rate more than doubled from 2.2 per 1,000 population in 1961 to 4.9 today. A footnote in this data informs us that this includes legal but unlicensed marriages, or "common law marriages". Subtracting these unlicensed marriages might produce an even lower marriage rate today. These two factors contributed to a decrease in the percent of males who are married from 75% in 1970 to 63% in 1994--a 16% reduction in the proportion of men who are willing to take on the responsibility of starting a family. There can be no doubt that the havoc played on society by applying "equal protection" to families is a key factor which leaves these marriageable men unmarried. With 96,643,486 total men of marriageable age, this increase in the number of unmarried men resulted in 11,597,218 fewer families being formed than there would have been had the term "equal protection" been confined to its original legal intent.
The creation of these families would have been enough to have avoided every one of the 1,280,000 illegitimate births and every one of the 1,528,930 abortions each year. Had men instead been encouraged by a beneficial marriage arrangement to take on this responsibility, and had these families been created, and had each of these families had only one child every 4 years, both illegitimacy and abortions would have been totally unnecessary. Had each of these unformed families had one child every 3 years, no abortions would have been necessary, no illegitimate births would have been necessary, and the birth rate could have remained as high as its level of 1960 or even increased.
Children and families are the most important parts of the lives of the majority of US women. Parents Magazine notes that two thirds of working wives would rather be working part time, and one third would rather not work at all. A leading feminist magazine notes that 50% of working women would rather be in the home while only 10% of women in the home envy women in the workplace. In "FEMINISM IS NOT THE STORY OF MY LIFE: How Today's Feminist Elite Has Lost Touch with the Real Concerns of Women", Elizabeth Fox-Genovese, Doubleday, New York 275 pages says:
"fewer than one in five college women now consider themselves to be
feminist ... membership in NOW, the National Organization of Women
in the United States, totals only 300,000"
Women who have provided direct inputs state outright that "less than 2% of my female friends accept or believe feminists." Making marriage a bad deal for men is not a good deal for most women and almost all children. It is also not a good deal for all taxpayers, who have to pay the estimated $1 Million life cycle cost of each single-mother household which cannot sustain itself. This transition in our society is nothing less fundamental than a transition from a matriarchy to a patriarchy. It switched primary responsibility for children from fathers to mothers, and subsequently to the courts as mothers proved unable to meet the challenge. 92% of the children of divorce are given by the courts into the custody of the divorced wives, causing a dramatic increase in the number of children whose biological mothers cohabit. According to the Heritage Foundation, "THE CHILD ABUSE CRISIS: THE DISINTEGRATION OF MARRIAGE, FAMILY, AND THE AMERICAN COMMUNITY", Patrick F. Fagan, William H. G. FitzGerald, Senior Fellow in Family and Cultural Issues, Dorothy B. Hanks, Research Assistant, May 15, 1997, these children are up to 73 times more likely to be killed and 33 times more likely to suffer serious abuse than children in families. This greater incidence of abuse in single-mother households is an indicator of why children from these environments are 8 times more likely to go to prison than children from families, and 16 times more likely than children from single-father households ( statistc.htm ). To accommodate the expansion of criminal activity the prison incarceration rate quadrupled since 1961, which robbed vital resources from education, further increasing our economic problems.
The benefit children, women, and society derive from placing the father at the head of his family is not the creation of single-father households, but the creation and preservation of families. The primary beneficiaries are women and children. No society is known to have established "equality" in family affairs without causing family breakdown and the social pathologies quantified in this paper.
Even with a 40% decline in the birth rate, there were still 1,280,000 illegitimate births in 1992. The fact that the decline in the birth rate outpaced abortions by 578,770 births, and that the illegitimacy rate quintupled from 6% of all births in 1961 to 31% of all births today, is evidence that the large number of abortions is not the only reason for this declining birth rate. It is evidence that making marriage a risky investment for men caused the reduction in the marriage and birth rates, and caused the increase in divorce and illegitimacy rates. It suggests that, even though the natural tendency for women to have children was significantly suppressed, and even though there is still a stigma attached to illegitimate births, and even though these illegitimate births subjected single-mother households to both increasing poverty and the stigma of welfare, this natural tendency for women to have children was even stronger than man's law.
It is estimated that the increased costs of welfare, social security, medicare, incarceration, tax credits, drug abuse, education decline, and economic disincentives, when amortized over all fatherless households, cost taxpayers in excess of $1 Million over the life of each fatherless household. There have been 24,002,288 illegitimate births since 1961, and at 1.8 children per household this represents a long term cost to taxpayers of $13.3 Trillion, with a cost of $711 Billion last year alone.
MORE THAN 36 MILLION ABORTIONS
According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, N.Y., the legalization of abortion in 1973
with Roe v. Wade led directly to more than 1,528,930 abortions annually, and to more than
36,295,570 total abortions in the last 23 years. This legalization of abortions was
against the will of the people, against the advice of every religious leader in the world,
and against the religions of 86% of North Americans--Christianity and Judaism--as
evidenced by a recent poll by Aaron Klein at firstname.lastname@example.org
Question 1: Is abortion positive or negative?
Question 2: Should we allow abortion on demand for the sake of convenience?
Question 3: Should we allow abortion on demand for gender selection?
Question 4: Should we allow partial birth late term abortions?
Question 5: Should we allow abortion if the life of the mother is at stake?
Question 7: Should taxpayers pay for any abortions?
BIRTH RATE DOWN 40%
In spite of the quintupling of the illegitimacy rate--the 1ï¿½ million abortions annually, the doubled divorce rate, and the one third lower marriage rate, all contributed to a 40% decrease in the US birth rate. Per the US National Center for Health Statistics, the US birth rate had been relatively stable at around 24 births per 1,000 population for a century or so, but began a chronic decline in 1961. It is now at 15 births per 1,000 population producing 2,381,428 fewer births each year than there would have been if the birth rate had remained at its 1961 level, and a total of 58,195,387 fewer births (a number which represents about half of the entire US workforce) between 1961 and 1997. The economic loss, which would not have happened if the "equal protection" clause had not been misapplied, at $1 Million per life, is $2.4 Trillion annually and $58.2 Trillion over the last 3 decades.
The "Drug War", which did not exist and was not necessary prior to 1971, was made necessary by the greater tendency of the children of fatherless households to abuse drugs and alcohol. In spite of this expensive war, The Univ. of Michigan Inst. for Social Research, National Institute on Drug Abuse, reports that cocaine use rose 45%, and today 56% of all college students surveyed have used illicit drugs. This war created a complete drug subculture which is disenfranchised from the judicial system. It created its own system of "justice" which depends for its survival on some of the most heinous crimes known around the world. Fighting this war is estimated by "The Drug Policy Institute" to have cost taxpayers, not including incarceration of drug users and pushers, $40 Billion per year, and $800 Billion since its inception. The actual number of drug-related deaths is not reported in any known national publication, but the National Safety Council notes that there are around 6,000 deaths from solid and liquid poisoning. A rough-order-of-magnitude guess would place drug-related deaths at about one sixth of this number, or 1,000 per year, and 30,000 over the last 3 decades.
The biggest losers in this "Drug War" were black males, 70% of whom are incarcerated prior to age 30, and 73% of whom grow up in fatherless households. Removing their fathers from their homes through welfare (which included obscene policies which required mothers to throw fathers out before they could receive welfare and laws which prevented welfare agencies from even contacting fathers before their children were placed under the stigma of welfare), erratic and destructive "child support" enforcement unaccompanied by "custody and visitation" enforcement, AFDC, HUD, etc., increased their likelihood of both living in poverty and using drugs. At the same time that government policy contributed significantly to their increased drug abuse, stricter drug enforcement laws resulted in their greater incarceration rate. David Tristan, California Department of Corrections, estimates that 74% of all of California prison inmates are there due to drug use or drug related crimes.
US EXECUTES MORE JUVENILES THAN REST OF WORLD
Amnesty International, "FACTS AND FIGURES ON THE DEATH PENALTY", 30 June 1995, notes that more than half the world's nations have outlawed the death penalty, while the US continues to execute more criminals than most other nations. And while our executions of juveniles may be a small number, it is still an even worse indictment of "equal protection" that more than half of the juveniles known to have been executed around the world were executed in the US. The fact that the creation of single-mother households caused such a serious crime problem that we had to resort to executing juveniles suggests that "equal protection" of children of single-mother households would have been more "equal" if their mothers had not been motivated, allowed, and/or encouraged to rear them in a fatherless household in the first place.
CANADA'S DOUBLE STANDARD ON PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY
In Canada the cynicism of legislators knows no boundaries in that respect. After parental authority over children has been completely stripped to the point where no force of any kind can be used in persuading a child (not even confinement to a corner for a few minutes) legislation is now being introduced that will hold parents responsible for any crimes that their juvenile children become involved in. If the trend continues -- chances are it will -- parents will be held criminally responsible for crimes that their adult children commit. That trend has already begun in the psychology industry. At least for women who have been indicted for crimes, it is quite common to be acquitted because of past alleged actions by their parents. The logical progression will be to hold the parents criminally responsible and to "make them pay." One province already has either passed or is in the process of passing legislation that will hold the parents responsible for civil damages that their children have caused.
VIOLENT CRIMES UP 560%
"The Guardian" notes that the US experienced in the last 3 decades "a 560% increase in violent crime, a 419% increase in illegitimate births, a 3000% increase in single-parent households, and a drop of almost 80 points in SAT scores." The FBI report "Economic Loss to Crime Victims" estimates the total annual loss to crime victims at $21 Billion, and a 560% increase in this loss is $17.8 Billion per year, or $267 Billion over the last 3 decades.
According to the FBI "Uniform Crime Reports", 1993, the murder rate more than doubled from 4.89 murders per 100,000 population in 1961 to 9.8 in 1996 (while the "clearance rate" for murders declined from 92% to 63%). This increase in the RATE of murders in the US was due primarily to four factors:
Murders caused by the increase in drug-related crimes brought about by the tendency of the children of fatherless households to abuse drugs.
The general increase in all crimes as a result of this tendency of children from fatherless households to commit crimes.
The strife surrounding adultery, exacerbated by failure to enforce existing adultery law.
Affirmative Action which required the justice system to hire less qualified employees who collectively were unable to solve more than 253,234 murders over the last 3 decades.
Responsible legislation would have prevented two thirds of the 24,890 murders last year, saving 16,676 lives just last year. Had this responsible legislation been able to gradually reduce the US murder rate to 1.3 murders per 100k population by 1997 (a rate equivalent to Japan's), there would have been 19,466 fewer murders last year and 471,653 fewer murders in the US over the last 36 years. At $1 Million per life, this is an annual loss of $19.4 Billion and a 3 decade loss of $471.7 Billion.
According to the National Center for Health Statistics' "Suicides by Age, Race, and Sex, 1994", the rate of male suicides per 100,000 males increased from 16 in 1961 to 20 last year, a 25% increase, while the female suicide rate decreased by 33%, from 6 to 4. Where the male suicide rate was already 2.6 times higher than the female's rate, it is now 5 times higher. 5,603 more men committed suicide last year, and 87,934 additional men have committed suicide since 1961, than if the male suicide rate had just remained constant at its 1961 level. At a time when "equal protection" was becoming a byword, and at a time when the courts and Congress could have and should have (but didn't) consider why men were committing suicide at a rate already more than twice that of women, the Supreme (as Congress sat idly by and watched) single-mindedly undermined family unity and made an already existing serious problem even worse.
With a male suicide rate five times that of women, a male homicide rate 5 times that of women, with men constituting 94.5% of a prison population (which quadrupled in just 3 decades and is now 1.8 times the rate of incarceration of Canadian men), knowing that men are acquitted one fifth as often and receive prison sentences 3 time longer than women for the same crime, with fathers "winning custody" of less than 4% of their children of divorce, Congress has failed to act responsibly with regard to fatherhood and family stability. Apparently Congress can be relied upon to continue to fail to act responsibly on behalf of family stability. Conversely, it ignored this massive anti-male, anti-father, anti-family discrimination and provided billions of dollars of funding for VAWA (Violence Against Women Act), which every politician must know, or must be made aware, will do nothing less than extend and exacerbate the social pathology.
The nation with the once world's highest standard of living, which now has a federal budget of $1.8 Trillion, with more government employees than manufacturing employees, had the resources then (and still has the resources now) to have been able to have understood and headed off the problem in 1961. Had the male suicide rate been reduced to a level equivalent to that of females in that year, there would have been 21,599 fewer male suicides last year, and 573,307 fewer male suicides over the last 36 years. In other words, our failure to act responsibly as a nation cost us almost twice as many lives as the total number of American battle deaths occurring during World War II (573,307 additional suicides, versus 292,131 W.W.II battle deaths). In terms of lives lost, as well as their economic impacts, it is a more important issue than World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, and the Gulf War combined (US Department of Defense) costing $21.6 Billion annually and $573.3 Billion over the last 3 decades.
According to the US Statistical Abstract, Charts No. 349 & 350, the US jail and prison population increased four fold in the last 3 decades, from 292,124 inmates in 1961 (a rate of 161 per 100k population) to 1,725,596 inmates last year (a rate of 638). Newsweek noted that this is a rate 5 times higher than China and 14 times higher than Japan [UN Profile--Japan, http://www.ifs.univie.as.at/~uncjin/profiles/japan.html ]. 61% of the prison population exists solely because of the increase in the rate of fatherless households. By reestablishing strong families in the 1960s, we could have gradually reduced the incarceration rate until it reached a level equivalent to Japan by 1997, resulting in 1,613,264 fewer inmates in our jails and prisons who might instead be in the workforce earning an average of $44,000 each and contributing $71 Billion to last year's GDP . The accumulated loss of manpower over this 3 decade period as the direct result of 19,116,839 *extra* years of incarceration is $985 Billion--equivalent to 14.7% of one year's GDP--not including overhead costs like criminal justice system employees, increased taxpayer costs like welfare, medical, and social security expenditures.
A report entitled "The Invisible Boy" from Canada provides some insight into our notion that only women are victims and only men are perpetrators. The report notes that up to 80% of "rapists, sex offenders, and sexually aggressive men" were themselves sexually abused by females in their youths, and that sexual abuse of males by females is producing the lion's share of males who sexually abuse females. It notes that "professionals working in the field" have always believed that women represent at most 2-3% of sexual abusers.
The result of this systemic bias against males is that males represent 94.5% of the prison population. Their imprisonment not only fails completely to stem this socially devastating female perpetrated sexual abuse, but it assures its continued growth. The very females who are creating the lion's share of this social chaos are not punished by a judicial system whose bureaucratic growth is assured by this continuous flow of males who are sexually abused by females. The very fact that men are being removed in ever-increasing numbers from their families is one of the factors that increases the rate of sexual abuse of children by women. The fact that only 5.5% of the prison population are females is evidence enough that this problem will continue until the Supreme Court's redefinition of "equal protection" is struck from our vocabulary, and fair application of the law begins.
Preservation of bureaucratic growth is assured by placing 92% of the children of divorce in the custody of their mothers where they are most likely suffer abuse of all kinds. It guarantees a continued increase in the future client base of the same judicial system which openly and fraudulently practices systemic discrimination against men & fathers. It satisfies demands from "law and order" advocates who haven't taken the time to understand why the current crime fighting strategy doesn't work. And it guarantees that future Personal Savings accounts will be emptied out to pay the burgeoning cost of this failed, dead-end policy.
JUSTICE EXPENDITURES EXCEED DEFENSE EXPENDITURES
Per the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the number of criminal justice system employees (police, judicial, and corrections) as a percent of the US population increased from 0.23% in 1961 to 0.9% in 1996, a four fold per capita increase. Its total cost (including loss to GDP by both employees and inmates of jails and prisons, increased welfare, social security, HUD, and CAPTA expenditures, salaries, increased retirement benefits, etc.) increased 10 fold to $360 Billion per year, or 5.4% of GDP This is larger than the budget for national defense and if this trend continues on its current course, the criminal justice system alone will cost more than 20% of US GDP within 2 decades.
The children who will grow up to populate future prisons have already been subjected to the environment which causes them to be 8 times more likely to go to prison in later years. These single-mother households have already been created. There is no possibility of alleviating the deferred future expense of the Criminal Justice System even with an immediate correction of current policies. Its future prison and jail population is assured, and this 20% of future GDP must be paid.
Had the number of justice employees remained fixed at its 1961 rate, the US would have expended 25,178,390 fewer man-years over the last 36 years to sustain the system, which is $1.3 Trillion or 19.4% of one year's GDP. Over the next 14 years this increased cost will exceed 40 million man-years, or more than 30 percent of one year's GDP.
MORE GOVERNMENT THAN MANUFACTURING EMPLOYEES
According to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, since 1965, the ratio of manufacturing employees to government employees declined from 2.5:1 to less than 1:1, giving the US for the first time more government employees than manufacturing employees.
66 TIMES AS MANY LAWYERS AS JAPAN
It is primarily government growth aided by this misapplication of the term "equal protection" which both increased the size of government and the amount of litigation. The number of lawyers increased to 66 times more than Japan while Japan has 4 times as many engineers, which is per capita 33 times as many lawyers and half as many engineers.
$151 BILLION TRADE DEFICIT
The US trade deficit increased from $2.3 Billion in the black in 1970 to $151 Billion in the red in 1994 (Office of Trade and Economic Analysis, US Department of Commerce). The primary, if not only, factor in this "inexplicable" rise is the 4 fold per capita increase in the size of government brought about by this misapplication of "equal protection". Increased taxation, laws like affirmative action, the breakdown of the family, all forced US corporations to manufacture offshore and then to "import" their own products back to the US to sell to US consumers. This loss of manufacturing capability opened up tremendous opportunities for foreign competitors to grab key technologies and stake a claim in US market share.
GOVERNMENT SPENDING IS 42 CENTS OF EVERY WAGE DOLLAR
Government spending as a percent of the average American's income exceeds 42% and is rising, compared to 27% in Japan and 32% in the US 3 decades ago. In Japan, the 15% difference between the taxes paid by a Japanese citizen and those paid by an American citizen, in addition to another 10% of the average Japanese salary, goes into a Japanese bank. In the US, the 15% which Americans might have saved (had it not been taken in taxes) is instead used to fund welfare, HUD, social security, CAPTA, the record high incarceration rate, the interest payments on the Public Debt, etc. If government spending had remained at its already high level of 3 decades ago, it would have spent $670 Billion less last year and $10.5 Trillion over the last 3 decades.
LOSS OF MANUFACTURING JOBS REDUCED FAMILY INCOMES
According to the US Manufacturer's Association, the percent of the world's autos supplied by the US declined from 60% to 20%. Many other industries experienced similar losses of market share. American Shoe manufactured shoes in the US, and went bankrupt, as Nike, who has never made a shoe in the US, became a $multi-billion corporation. As more and more manufacturing operations moved off-shore to avoid Affirmative Action litigation, sexual harassment and discrimination litigation, the "Equal Pay Act", poor worker education, the cost and stress of family breakup, the higher paying jobs went with them and reduced US incomes.
Internet surveys have shown that family breakdown, actions taken by the judicial system as the direct result of this ruling, demoralizing "child support" guidelines, erratic enforcement of "child custody orders", and the time and energy spent by fathers on behalf of their disenfranchised children, have reduced motivation and earning potential of disenfranchised fathers, which reduced their average annual incomes by 35%. An average 35% reduction in the median incomes of 12 million fathers at $44,000 per year is a $184.8 Billion annual loss to the economy, and a total loss over 36 years of $3,326.4 Billion . Immediate cessation of such policies could thus provide an immediate $184.8 Billion (2.8%) boost to the economy, plus prevent this from happening to future families, children, and fathers.
But other estimates show this loss to GDP to be higher than that. Per the Department of Health & Human Services, "child support" payments are $14 Billion per year, with more than 95% of that paid to subsidize fatherless households. Even though this is not a large number, it provides a financial and immoral incentive for the breakup of families which is even more significant than its relatively small amount would indicate that it is. The estimated loss to "child support" over the last 2 decades is $175 Billion.
George Gilder notes in "Naked Nomads", Pg. 12, that the incomes of married men are 81% higher than the incomes of single men. The US Department of Labor reports that the average incomes of married men are $44,000 per year. The US Bureau of the Census, reports that there are now 11.6 million MORE unmarried men than there would have been if the marriage rate had not dropped and if the divorce rate had not skyrocketed in the last 2-3 decades. This increase in the number of unmarried men had a $228.5 Billion negative impact on the economy last year, and $3,427.5 Billion over the last 3 decades. It is clear that the majority of this negative impact on the economy is due to the negative incentives of fathers required to pay "child support" to an ex-spouse for the "privilege" of having his own children withdrawn from him.
Most of this $14 Billion does not get to children, and there is no accountability to assure that it does. This encourages divorce and subsidizes single-motherhood, which is extremely bad for children. It reduces the available incomes which would otherwise be available to pay this $14 Billion by $214.5 Billion MORE than the amount allegedly paid. Other costs include multi-billion dollars for computer systems designed to collect this money and the fact that DAs now spends $3 for every $1 they collect, neither of which is expected to achieve a return-on-the-investment (ROI). These costs are estimated at $42 Billion last year and $630 Billion over the last 3 decades.
FATHERLESS CHILDREN'S REDUCED INCOMES
The psychological, emotional, financial, and moral problems caused to children who grow up without paternal guidance results in an estimated 19% reduction in their lifetime earning capacity relative to their peers who grow up in father-present families. The current 26,410,102 fatherless children will have average incomes of only $35,640, rather than the average Per Worker Income of $44,000, a difference of $8,360 each. This is a total future loss to the economy of $234 Billion per year. 17.3 million of these children have already reached working age and their net reduction to current GDP is estimated at $144.6 Billion per year, or $1,948 Billion over the last 2 decades.
PERSONAL SAVINGS RATE LESS THAN 2%
The annual savings rate dropped to less than 2%--compared to more than 25% in Japan.
ONLY 3 OF WORLD'S TOP 50 BANKS ARE US
The number of the world's Top 50 Banks which were US declined from 22 to only three--with assets of $570 Billion. 24 of these Top 50 Banks are Japanese, with assets $12,000 Billion.
TOTAL PERSONAL SAVINGS LESS THAN 1% OF JAPAN'S
Per the US Department of Treasury, total US Personal Savings are $212 Billion, while Japan has $22,000 Billion (that is $22 Trillion) just in their Postal Savings Account--less than 1% of these Japanese savings. Our Personal Savings have declined by 69.2%, from the equivalent of 1.69 billion ounces of gold in 1970 to .52 billion ounces today. Had Personal Savings continued to grow at their pre-1973 rate, the gold equivalent today would have been 8.15 billion ounces of gold, which is 7.63 billion ounces of gold higher than it now is. This level of savings would have been, at $420 per ounce of gold, $3,423 Billion, or 51% of GDP.
Federal expenditures as a percent of GDP increased from 13.8% in 1965 to 22.13% in 1994. If federal expenditures had remained at their already sufficient and perhaps high rate of 1965, federal expenditures in 1994 would have been $550 Billion lower and total federal spending between 1965 and 1997 would have been a total of $7,204 Billion lower. This amount placed in family savings accounts rather than spent on government welfare programs would have resulted in Personal Savings 34 times higher, or $7,414 Billion.
VALUE OF DOLLAR DOWN 11 FOLD
The value of the dollar declined by four fold per the Consumer Price Index, by 7 fold indexed against the German Mark and Japanese Yen, and by 11 fold per the gold standard (from $38/oz to $420/oz),even though the values of both the German Mark and the Japanese Yen have also dropped. This disguised the true magnitude of both the drop in incomes and the drop in Personal Savings.
Per the US Department of the Treasury, Bureau of Public Debt, interest payments on the Public Debt as a percent of federal outlays grew from 9.6% to 20.5% since 1965--more than 2.1 times. There are five primary reasons for this unprecedented growth of Public Debt:
The public debt increased from 11.4 billion ounces of gold to 12.7 billion ounces, an 11.4% increase which made the US the largest debtor nation in world history. Without the misapplication of "equal protection", it is certain that the US would have had the opportunity to reduce this debt to 5 billion ounces of gold, leaving us with a $3,234 Billion smaller Public Debt. This would have reduced interest payments to 12.75% of federal outlays.
POVERTY RATE RISES FROM 11.1% TO 15.4%
Welfare is paid almost exclusively to the single-mother households created by divorce and illegitimacy, with a small percentage to men, mostly in step-father households and occasionally to single-father households. Even though more has been spent on welfare than the entire asset value of every Fortune 500 corporation and every acre of farm land, combined, the Bureau of the Census reports that the poverty rate increased from 11.1% in 1968 to 15.4% in 1996. This is solid statistical evidence that welfare is not about reducing poverty, but only about transferring wealth from those who earn it to those who spend it irresponsibly [read: from men to women].
The fact that poverty increased as welfare expenditures increased is also evidence that welfare does not really benefit those locked into a state of welfare-dependency. Families which might have been created and/or ultimately been able to overcome short-term problems, if it were not for welfare providing this incentive for illegitimacy or divorce, are testimony to this colossal failure. A fraud is committed against the taxpayer when an American citizen states that no jobs are available, and another fraud is committed when the welfare agency accepts this fraudulent statement, but the real loser in the final analysis is the person, and especially the children, trapped in this welfare-dependency cycle.
The Heritage Foundation estimates that the total annual cost of welfare alone is in excess of $360 Billion.
It is estimated that taxpayers would have saved $4,320 Billion over the last 2-3 decades had "equal protection" not been misapplied like this.
IRS TAX CREDITS
The "Earned Income Credit" and the "Child Care Credit" are really welfare programs without social workers, since the funding comes directly from the IRS which collects it from working taxpayers. They are paid mostly to fatherless households, and amount to more than $50 Billion per year, and roughly $500 Billion over the last 2 decades.
The increasing rate of fatherlessness required the passage of CAPTA in 1974. Coupled
with the Family Law Acts which were passed across the nation in 1972, it created an
environment in which false accusations of child abuse became profitable for the States, at
the great expense of fathers' incomes, savings, family stability, Constitutional rights,
children, and basic freedoms. It is essentially another welfare program in disguise, where
affirmative action allows the hiring of the least qualified and unqualified employees to
accomplish nothing. Under CAPTA, the federal government pays $285 Billion annually through
96 different agencies [Coalition of Parental Support, Mike Neligh] in the name of
"child abuse prevention" for nothing other than taking custody of children with
almost no accountability or responsibility assigned to those who defraud the government
with it. It is known as the Mondale Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-247) or the Child Abuse
Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) and has cost more than $3,135 Billion since its
Affirmative Action was made possible by the misapplication of the term "equal protection", and is yet another welfare program in disguise. An Internet poll conducted in October 1995 showed that 65% of those responding opposed it. A Gallop Poll showed that 84% of whites and 76% of blacks oppose it, and always have. A majority of California's voters rejected it in a mandate called "The California Civil Rights Initiative" or Proposition 209 in November 1996, but it took the Supreme Court almost one year to ultimately uphold its unconstitutionality, which finally occurred on November 3, 1997. It has been some of the most divisive legislation in our history, and it would never have been possible without the misapplication of the principle of "equal protection". The fact that, after 25 years of inaction, it took a public mandate to get the Supreme Court to strike down this intentional and institutional form of discrimination and to uphold basic principles of the US Constitution tells us much about their judicial activism and their failure to do their job--to uphold the existing US Constitution. The 65,000 lawsuits filed with the EEOC represent a small percentage of the real cost of this litigious system, but just this part is estimated to cost the economy $800 Billion per year, or $9,600 Billion over the last 2 1/2 decades.
The temptation to place the US Department of Education in the "welfare" category is great, as this organization was not formed and was not necessary prior to this misuse of "equal protection". It was required primarily because of the poor educational and moral guidance provided to children of single-mother and step-father households, plus Affirmative Action coupled with the "Equal Pay Act" which legally required the hiring of less competent educators and the displacement of the more highly qualified educators and applicants. According to the College Entrance Examination Board, since formation of the Department, SAT scores plunged 98 points, from a median of 1,000 points in 1960 to a median of 902 points today. On the IAEP (International Assessment of Educational Progress) tests, the US now ranks 27th out of 31 participating nations -- which do not include Germany nor Japan -- while spending more as a percent of GDP than most other nations. The Japanese school system teaches 96% of its students calculus at a cost of $1,978 per secondary school student, whereas the US school system teaches only 4% of its students calculus at a cost of $3,843 per secondary school student ["National Household Education Survey, 1996", National Center for Education Statistics, US Department of Education].
WOMEN IN EDUCATION
A disproportionate share of education spending is received by females. Boys constitute only 45% of college admissions even though they constitute more than 65% of those who score over 550 on SAT Math. This increase in spending to educate females, at the expense of males, is an economic and education disaster--around the world as well as in the US:
In each of 14 industrialized nations, for each one percent increase in the percent of women who have completed higher education, average TIMSS Scores decline by two points.
In each of five industrialized nations, for each one percent increase in the percent of women who have completed higher education, average IAEP Scores decline by 1.25 Points.
In each of fourteen industrialized nations, for each one percent increase in the percent of the workforce which is females, average TIMSS Scores decline by 13.5 Points.
In the US, since 1960, for each one percent increase in the percent of high school graduates enrolled in college who are females, SAT Scores declined by 8.4 points.
In each of 13 industrialized nations, for each one point decrease in the gender gap in IAEP Math Scores, average IAEP Scores decline by 8 points.
In the US, Spain, Ireland, the UK, and Korea, for each 1% increase in the percent of students who believe "I am good at math", IAEP Scores decline by 1.07 Points (William Bennett, "Index of Leading Cultural Indicators").
PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN EDUCATION, U.S Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, "Fathers' Involvement in Their Children's Schools", NCES 98-091.
In single-mother households, the mothers' moderate involvement in their children's educations decreases their likelihood of getting mostly A's by 32% [Table B8].
In single-mother households, the nonresident fathers' moderate involvement in their children's educations increases their likelihood of getting mostly A's by 39% [Table 10].
In single-father households, the fathers' moderate involvement in their children's educations increases their likelihood of getting mostly A's by two fold [Table B7]
In two-parent families, fathers' "highly involved" in their children's
educations increase their probability of getting "mostly A's" by 30%, while
"there is no association between children getting mostly A's and the mothers'
involvement ...", Pg. 10.
ADVANTAGES OF FATHER CUSTODY AND CONTACT FOR THE PSYCO-BIOLOGCAL WELL-BEING OF SCHOOL-AGE CHILDREN.
Child Custody, Home Environment, Human Sex Differences, Parent Child Relations, Well Being
Examined the impact of the custodial parent gender, contact with the nonresident
parent, and circumstances in the resident parent's household on the psychological
well-being of 187 children (aged 5-13 yr.) from divorced families. 72 Ss were in father
custody (PC) and 115 were in mother custody (MC). Results show that across a variety of
Clarke-Stewart, K. Alison & Hayward, Craig. (U of California,School of Social
Ecology, Psychology & Social Behavior,Irvine, CA). Journal of Applied Developmental
Psychology, 1996(Apr-Jun), Vol 17(2), 239-270. [PA,
ARE SAT SCORES BIASED?
SAT Scores Correlate With Parents' Incomes, College Grades (When Separated By Gender), and NAEP Scores by State.
PRAYER IN SCHOOL DROPPED
Dropping school prayer was a key factor in undermining classroom discipline & declining education quality. It is difficult to imagine who possibly could have benefited from this direct violation of the spirit and intent of the First Amendment right to "free exercise [of religion]", but it is now evident that those who predicted disaster were correct.
EXCESS COST OF EDUCATION
According to the US Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, "Statistics of State School Systems" Figure 2, total educational costs in the US in 1959 were 4.8% of GDP, compared to 7.7% in the US in 1992, and 2.6% in 1991 in Japan. Had the cost of education as a percent of GDP remained at its 1959 level, the US would have spent $2,063 Billion less in current dollars for education between 1961 and 1997. Had "equal protection" not been misapplied, and had the cost of US education been gradually reduced by the year 1997 to 2.6% of GDP--a level equivalent to that of Japan--the US would have spent $341.7 Billion less for education last year, $4,466 Billion less between 1961 and 1997. The cost of the declining quality and the declining percentage of Americans being educated is clearly in the $Trillions and is probably the biggest part of the gap between the estimated costs of these 39 factors and GDP projected from 1970.
The total estimated loss per year due to the above 15 factors is $7,488.7 Billion, and $132,766.9 Billion over the last 3 decades. But projecting 1996 GDP from what was expected in 1970, per statistics from the Bureau of Economic Analysis, US Department of Commerce, provides a much larger estimate. 1970 US Gross Domestic Product was $1,015.5 Billion in current 1970 dollars, giving us by far the world's highest GDP per Capita--five times higher than Japan's. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there were 78,678,000 employed Americans in 1970 producing (at $32/oz of gold) the equivalent of 403.3 ounces of gold each per year. In current dollars, 1996 US GDP was $6,700 Billion, which is an apparent increase, but the 130 million employed Americans produced (at $420/oz of gold) the equivalent of only 122.7 ounces of gold each per year.
That is less than a third of what each worker had produced only 3 decades earlier.
The "Consumer Price Index" makes it appear that US incomes are up, but the "gold standard" suggests that real per worker purchasing power declined by 3.3 fold--to less than a third of the purchasing power of 1970. This is consistent both with the fact that Japan's GDP per worker increased from one fifth of ours to 55% higher today--a 7.5 fold increase against US incomes, and that twelve countries now have a higher GDP per Capita than the US--Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Iceland, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, and Switzerland. Without Affirmative Action and the Equal Pay Act, the percent of the population in the workforce would have remained constant at its competitive 1970 level of 40.7%, resulting in only 107,855,000 employed Americans today--22,145,000 fewer employees than there now are. If their productivity had done nothing but remained FLAT at 403.3 ounces of gold each per year, US GDP per Worker would today would have been $169,386 per year, and total GDP would be $18.2 Trillion rather than only $6.7 Trillion--$11.5 Trillion higher last year, and a total over the last 3 decades of $172.5 Trillion.
If their productivity (as measured in gold) had increased at the same rate as Japan's employee productivity (as measured in gold) had increased -- roughly 2.5% per year -- it would have been 766.3 ounces of gold per worker, or $321,846 per worker, which is a total GDP of $34.6 Trillion -- $27.9 Trillion higher than it actually was last year, and a total over the last 3 decades of $418.5 Trillion.
The difference between the lower projected shortfall above of $11.5 Trillion, and the 15 identified factors whose total loss to GDP is $7,488.7 Billion (or $4,011.3 Billion), could be due entirely to the decline in education quality, or to other unidentified factors, or to the fact that the estimates for these factors are all too low.
Judicial activism has been the colossal mistake Thomas Jefferson warned us it would be. Not a group, race, gender, corporation, company, state, city, county, school, college, nor university can legitimately claim to have benefited from the above. Not even N.O.W. can legitimately claim any benefit, and indeed they have not advanced a single statistic which demonstrates that they have produced any benefits for women as a group, they admit they cannot produce such evidence, and they cling to the false hope that the American public will continue to subsidize them in the name of "equal rights". Except for a small, counterproductive, destructive minority which should never have existed and which shouldn't exist much longer, applying the term "equal protection" to women has done tremendous harm to women, both individually and as a group.
Table 5 Summary of Losses of Lives & Dollars Due Only to the Misapplication of
ï¿½ 1999 Fathers' Manifesto