Financial

The Forex Market – The Pillar Of Gobal Trade

Known as VPS, a virtual private server is a type of web hosting that utilizes data center facilities permitting businesses to find physical hardware to provide a direct connection to an internet service provider (ISP), with Forex VPS data centers or facilities of professional computer-server giving the capability for trading units to host their software for trading to uninterruptedly operate 24/7. Moreover, this could be done autonomously from the trader’s personal computer with less effort.

The forex market in numerous ways is the mainstay of global trade, since it is where exchanges of every major as well minor currencies happen, typically on a trading platform by expert forex traders. This has an enormous influence on global trade, with regards to importing and exporting, together with local business, since it could have a bearing on the outlay of creation, production and more. The forex market is influenced by numerous factors that are imperative for every type of businesses to be aware of.

Major Political Affairs Impact Forex Market

The elections could have an enormous impact on the currency of a nation, whether they are anticipated or sudden. These present a large number of political ambiguities in a lot of cases, wherein it typically causes the value of its currency phases of high volatility. Following the poll, if administration has changed, it could see an increase or decrease of the value of the currency which is determined by its policies on finance.

Bearing on Import and Export

In support of the industries of import and export, the forex market is imperative. Growth in the global economy will struggle if the capacity to trade in various currencies is absent since the transfer of resources and goods is fundamental and crucial in generating supply and demand for services and goods that support and sustain economies.

Distinctions in the values in currency, wherein could be influenced by the high and low levels of forex traders ‘demand, could either make importing or exporting between countries cheaper or pricier. For businesses in nations that have a strong currency, this could bring about immense importing opportunities, whilst tendering better exporting opportunities for those in countries whose currency is struggling.

Market Manipulation

In the forex market, one concern which could affect businesses is the presumed market manipulation. Fundamentally, forex fixes are the set point of reference, with the major ones carried out in London, to help in reflecting better the worth of one currency comparative to others. These rates of forex are utilized by numerous corporations to value assets, accountabilities and much more.

Not only does a possible outcome of market manipulation toss scandal into the world of finance but to several other businesses as well. If this come to pass then businesses will fathom that their orders haven’t been justly dealt with, valuations are out of bounce, and trade could be disturbed.

Investments

Lawmakers Are Afraid Facebook Libra Might Take Over The Financial Industry

With the rise of cryptocurrency, crypto signals have also come into view. Crypto signals or crypto trading signals are trade suggestion or ideas to buy and/or sell a certain crypto coin at a specific time and value. Typically, the trade signals have included a take profit as well as a protective stop loss. You are then essentially protected from every side.

Because of the success of cryptocurrency such as Bitcoin, many companies and industries have ventured into it as well. For instance, when the interest of Facebook in cryptocurrency has become public, it set off a great deal of different reactions from the worldwide community.

Libra’s Effect on the Cryptocurrency Industry

Cryptocurrency has grown in popularity but has been silent for quite some time. And although many investors still continue their crypto dealings, it hasn’t drawn uncalled-for attention from third parties as well as the government.

But, when Facebook publicized its plan to release its own digital currency, political figures as well as powerful officials of the government have directed their attention to the industry of cryptocurrency and called for its regulation.

If favored, the regulation might generate a considerable impact on the crypto industry. There is an increasing concern though as legislators aren’t well-versed about cryptocurrency or digital currency. Then again, the present attention that the industry of crypto had gotten might gain digital currency bitter and strict regulations from government legislators.

Libra’s Impact on Politics and the Financial Industry

Similarly, there is a developing concern that cryptocurrency might take control over the financial industry. Numerous media have reported that Facebook’s digital currency, Libra, was made to provide a platform for payment for Facebook users. Furthermore, it was also created for other platforms as well like Instagram, Messenger, and WhatsApp. It was also reported in the news that this will be available to about 2.7 billion active users.

As per Coinetelegraph, the plan attempts to target people who are unbanked, which makes up about 1.7 billion adults worldwide, with an emphasis on remittance that is cross-border. The latter feature places Libra in conjunction with the likes of Mastercard and Visa.

This feature of cryptocurrency has likewise gained undesirable comments as well as strong disapproval from numerous people. But, leaders worldwide are troubled about the probability of the digital currency to seize the financial market and industry as individuals perceive it as a practical and feasible alternate to fiat currency.

The attention that Facebook Libra is receiving is due to the size of social media platform, its resources, as well as its capacity to incorporate an efficient, economical payment network utilizing digital currency through numerous of its own platforms wherein it can fetch considerable adoption to the cryptocurrency space. Others haven’t gotten a similar degree of interest, primarily since they don’t have the capacity to hasten the acceptance and adoption of a stable coin, wherein Facebook has no difficulty achieving.

Politics

The Political Agenda Behind Credit Reporting Agencies

In this generation, we are living within a digital financial framework. Identities of Americans exist in set databases made to monitor details about them and used mainly to run commerce. This power destroys anonymity which takes even the slightest info about our social bonds and reputations then converts them straight into structured data. This very same structure can tag you with bad credit and ruins your chances for further finances not if you consider other specialized lending institutions. Check out https://www.forafinancial.com/blog/working-capital/get-business-loan-bad-credit/ to help you get your finances straight.

Driving all this are the credit reporting agencies (credit bureaus), like Equifax. The credit reporting business acts like a governor of each and everyone’s credit interactions, reputations as well as individuality. It had been recognized by the congress in the late 60s to early 70s that the power inlayed in data involves political matter and thus developed a regulatory command for these agencies. However, through the years, the regulatory program vested upon these agencies is insufficient. The government bodies such as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and also the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) are generally poor. Therefore the credit-reporting program on which we have vested our identities as well as our commercial existence continues to be opaque and also susceptible to misuse.

Credit Reporting Background

Credit Bureau Prior To The 70’s

Like organized business relationships, prejudice and biases have been integrated into the rules of the Credit Bureau and the types of facts they collect. Before 1970, Black, gay, single women, or a person with a strong political opinion – all of these could make an impact on the person making it difficult to find jobs, get credit, loans, insurance purchases, or stay away from police investigations. In WWII, credit reporting agencies conducted loyalty checks on the military to keep the business. This relationship continued even after the war. Millions of Americans undergo background checks for many reasons but mostly political in nature.

Credit had been always associated with social norms. In the 19th century, black and white tenants were exposed to undesirable interest rates and also credit terms to undermine their freedom. In the 1950s, a fixed-rate mortgage for 30 years was a liberation force for white families and the strict credit circumstances for black families were a way of controlling races.

Since the 1950s, politicians have received grievances from people who have severely suffered due to bad credit reports. And while many ordinary citizens suffered by mere noise from their apartments, that would enter their credit report and will eventually destroy the reputation of one person. As suggested by the CEO of Retail Credit in 1968, this is a “discipline” for US citizens.

The Age of Computerization

The changes that took place in the 1970s were mainly computerization of identity and money. Americans have seen the verge of computerization than the prediction of data problems. In the 1960s, there were many books on databases of American society as well as congressional hearings on this matter. In 1974, Congress included the Federal Act’s authority to manage all databases in the Privacy Act, however, it was withdrawn immediately as an act for a favor to a Republican staff who helped the conference committee discussion.

This birth and the expansion of the credit card business clearly required a means to confirm identities quickly. It required a computer system, which meant the credit reporting agencies along with their lengthy files of claims from nosy people which will soon prove useless.

The Introduction of Fair Credit Reporting Act (1970)

Then came the FCRA or the Fair Credit Reporting Act of 1970 (and soon after the law to regulate debt collection practices). The FCRA had been the very first federal law to regulate data use and is part of a legislative initiative motivated through the civil rights movement. This essentially views credit report as a public tool that had been given a new set of rules. This includes the principle of anti-discrimination and the rules by which people share information and data.

The FCRA is not perfect, but the transition from social relations to structured data has brought significant changes to the politics of credit share. The FCRA was written by liberals trying to stop discrimination in the business community. While it did not totally remove it, it had a major impact on preventing the apparent racism and gender discrimination realized by credit channels.

There is now a dynamic domestic and international credit market. We do not take into account the cost of goods and services traveling abroad or using a credit card. Manage your pipeline tasks for all payments and identities. Discrimination is absolutely not permitted, and debt collection is somewhat regulated.

Discipliine in Credit and Commerce

The foundation of credit and business is discipline. When you borrow money, you owe something to the creditor. You can’t have a business community unless you’re sure who’s accumulating debt. If you do not recognize your identity and account, you can not deposit salaries into people’s accounts. Banks, workers, and merchants cannot just trade cash. Whenever you use a card to pay for anything in a store, whenever you place an order online, rules are made that make your business life less difficult.

The terrible thing about the old credit bureau is that it doesn’t track people, but the rules had been constant with the sensitivity of racism and gender discrimination that we abandoned. This is not the collection of data, but the use of data to empower people to manipulate people in a way that we think we hate.

Politics

Trump Unleashes a New 10% Tariff Threat vs China after Latest Trade War Talks Ended Last July 30, 2019

Trump’s latest announcement of imposing a 10% tariff on the remaining $320 billion worth of Chinese goods entering the U.S., clearly denotes that the most recent U.S.-China did not end well. Although Trump had previously described the ongoing talks as “constructive”, his newest tariff announcement, is an indication that nothing constructive was agreed upon by both sides.

Effectivity date of the new tariff is on September 01, 2019, which means it could still be averted if China makes good on its previous commitment. According to a White House announcement, trade negotiations will resume in Washington by early September.

Trump Asserts China is to Blame Why Recent Negotiations Failed

According to Trump, China failed to honor its previous commitment of increasing its purchase of agricultural products as a show of goodwill. In return, the U.S. government eased sanctions imposed on controversial Chinese telecoms giant Huawei Technologies Co Ltd.

Yet according to Chinese state media Xinhua, the government of China declared that millions of tons of soybean shipments from the U.S. arrived in China since July 19, 2019; whilst numerous Chinese companies have placed new orders for U.S. cotton, soybean, sorghum and pork.

Trump vows to increase the 10% tariff to 25% if after the September resumption, China will not budge from its present negotiation demands that include stripping of the existing duties that were imposed during the ongoing trade war.

To date, the U.S. imposes tariff rates of 25% exclusively on $250 billion worth of Chinese imported goods. On the other hand, China applies exclusive 25% tariffs on U.S. imported goods valued at $110 billion. If Trump will not find future negotiations favorable, the 10% tariff on the $320 billion worth of Chinese importation will be raised to 25%.

Prior to the closing of the 2-day trade talks in Shanghai, Hua Chunying, the spokeswoman for the Chinese Foreign Ministry said that it was clear that the United States continued to “flip flop” on the negotiations, although she added that she was not aware of the latest developments that transpired during the ongoing talks.

Investments

Political Power and Fair Lending Rules

Consumer credit or consumer debt, like what Forbrukslån.com offer, is personal credit or debt taken for the procurement of goods and/or services. While any form of personal loan can be regarded as consumer credit, the word is typically utilized to refer to a debt or credit that is unsecured taken on to purchase daily goods as well as services. Usually, consumer credit is not utilized to describe the buying of a house, for instance, wherein it is regarded an investment that is long-term and is typically bought by means of a mortgage loan, which is secured. Offered by retailers, banks, and others, consumer credit allow for consumers to immediately buy goods or contract services and settle repayment over a period of time including interest.

Politics and Fair Lending Rules

As per a statistical research, when home-state senator ascents through the ranks, lenders stand on the winning point whereas consumers of color as well as low income earners are on the losing point. Lenders who are shielded by powerful and influential office-bearers seem able to lessen their compliance with the rules on fair-lending without the probability of penalizations. Reductions in the compliance of fair lending rules are most obvious in vicinities where financial institutions, such as banks, have evidence of allocating donations for campaigns to these legislators.

These discoveries, together with the deregulatory actions by the Trump Treasury Department, carry extensive repercussions for the future of regulations and laws that work to fight against lending practices that are unfair and discriminatory.

The Community Reinvestment Act has been in the news broadcast, with the Treasury Department of the United States implying major amendments to the landmark 1977 legislation necessitating banks to create and offer loans areas that are undeserved inside the communities in which they operate.  Supported by the industry of banking, the Treasury has made a proposal for a series of amendments or revisions narrowing down the range of enforcement as well as to for it to be less difficult for lenders to attain high scores for fair lending.

Reduce Compliance Because Of Political Protection

Regulators, however seem to encounter obstacles in implementing the standards on fair-lending like that CRA as well as the Equal Credit Opportunity Act or ECOA.  It has been documented that the compliance of lenders with the standards on fair-lending were subsequently reduced when their voted representative or politician grow to be more influential and powerful.  With this power, they are able to influence how rules are enforced or implemented by regulatory agencies. Accordingly, lenders who are protected by these politicians could lessen compliance with the regulations on fair-lending without worrying about the possible adverse penalties.  In accordance with this case, after home-state representative climbs the ladder to become the head of a focal committee, lenders are found to limit the offers on credit to populations that are underserved like racial minorities as well as low income earners.

 

Politics

U.S. Vice Pres. Pence Sees Mexico Tariff Kicking Off On June 10, 2019, Not Unless…

After meeting with the Mexican envoys to discuss solutions for averting the dreaded 5% – 25% tariffs that the U.S. will impose on goods imported from Mexico, U.S. Vice President Mike Pence said the tariffs are likely to kick off as announced on Monday, June 10, 2019. Not unless the delegation headed by Mexico Foreign Secretary Marcelo Ebrard returns to the negotiation table with an acceptance of Trump’s demand for a “safe third country” agreement and of the “Migrant Protection Protocol.”

However, instead of accepting those conditions laid out to them last Wednesday, the Mexico envoys returned with a promise to deploy around 6,000 of the Mexico’s National Guards to the country’s southern border with Guatemala. The purpose of which is to cut off the flow of Central American migrants whose advancements to the US – Mexico south border has led to even sharper increases during the recent past months.

According to V.P. Pence, Mexico’s non-acceptance of the aforementioned conditions, is for the U.S. president to decide. Pence though, hinted that negotiation talks will continue.

Trump views the Thursday negotiations as having made “a lot of progress”, and is expressing determination to impose the initial 5% Mexico tariff on June 10, 2019 (Monday.) Yet, he is also dropping hints that are not short of dangling possibilities of foregoing the tariffs altogether. That is, if Mexico fully accepts the “safe third country” agreement and the “Migrant Protection Protocol.”

When asked by reporters about those specific demands, Mexico Foreign Secretary Ebrard avoided the question, but commented that the meeting on Friday could be one of the last sessions in the negotiation talks. Other Mexican officials said that they will agree to solutions in curbing the flow of asylum seekers, but only if such solutions are dignified, as well as effective.

What Exactly is the “Safe Third Country” Agreement?

Under a “Safe Third Country” covenant, a country agrees to grant asylum to refugees if that country has jurisdiction on the territory on which the refugees first set foot or landed. If this agreement is accepted by Mexico, the country automatically becomes responsible in granting the refugees asylum, as well as in preventing them from pushing forward should they prefer the U.S. as their place of asylum.

As it is, the government of Mexico is hardly in a position to take in hordes of refugees, in light of the country’s own economic conditions. In fact Mexico President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador had slashed down the country’s immigration and refugee budget for 2019. According to reports, Mexico’s refugee agency is practically receiving less than $1 million for the year.

Canada, the only country with which the U.S. maintains a “Safe Third Country” agreement is currently seeking to end the pact, as Canadian official no longer regard the U.S. as a safe third country. .

Politics

Accounts of Crypto-Funded Political Campaigns

On May of 2018, Colorado State Secretary Wayne Williams suggested a new political movement financing rules that now include a portion of the cryptocurrency content.

In May 2014, FEC presented a set of regulations that responded to a survey of a super PAC called “Make Your Laws.” The entity advocates to replace representative democracy with a comprehensive liquid democracy and asks for clarification if BTC (https://pheeva.com/bitcoin/trading/best-crypto-trading-bots/) donations can be accepted to finance political campaigns. During that time, Bitcoin was valued at about $400, and the altcoin was not actually regarded as an accepted means of financing campaigns. The FEC decided that Bitcoin can be accepted as an “in-kind donation” for campaigns. A kind of contribution that supplies the services and goods necessary for the organization’s functions, instead of using the funds to pay for those services and goods.

This means that the campaign cannot pay Bitcoin directly. It should be liquidated and then deposited into the campaign account. In terms of the donation ceiling, the percentage is dispersed throughout the party lines where the Democrats use a limit of $100, the Republicans at $2700 ceiling. Since the advisory opinion outlines recommendations rather than rules, GOP support for a larger cap had later inspired some politicians to allow themselves to go with the $2,700 limit. As the advisory watch laid out the suggestions instead of the guidelines, the Republican support for the larger limit afterward encouraged some political figures to let themselves take the $2,700 cap.

Given the somewhat uncertain federal rules, several state regulators had been struggling with related investigations after the distribution of the FEC regulation.

Politicians Who Advocated Crypto-Funded Campaigns

Below are a few of the most compelling American politicians at the state and federal levels who were transparent on their acceptance of crypto funds.

  • Andrew Hemingway. Hemingway is a Republican candidate for the Governor of New Hampshire in 2014. He is the first in the office who has used cryptocurrency donations during his campaign.
  • Austin Petersen. Petersen is from Missouri, a Republican candidate running for the Senate. He supports cryptocurrency based on his pro-market ideas.
  • Brian Forde. Forde is set to become the political digital currency star. A Democrat seeking to be elected in the U.S. House representing California 45th Congressional District. He previously worked at MIT Media Lab as the head of digital currency. He also had been tech adviser under the administration of Obama.
  • Dan Elder. Elder, Libertarian bidding for the House of Representatives for Missouri in 2016. He held the first campaign to be financed all by Bitcoin.

Other politicians who advocate cryptocurrency during their campaign includes Jared Polis, Greg Abbott, Patrick Nelson, and Rand Paul. Politics is full of inertia and devotedness to the status quo. Therefore, there is no doubt that cryptocurrency for political finance is not even close to popular taking.

Politics

World Leaders Responded to Climate Change via Paris Agreement

Back in 2015, over 196 nations have taken part on a common cause and made a historical agreement. Collectively, they’ve made a vow to do their best efforts in cutting greenhouse gas emissions and pour research and development in discovering other sources of clean energy. This is in an effort to combat climate change.

Whether you believe it or not, USA is one of the leading polluters in the globe. Given the fact that they’re one of the major contributors to climate change, they have heavily supported the historic pact termed as Paris Agreement. This was under former US President Barack Obama’s administration.

The Start of a New World

The agreement was then adopted on the 12th of December 2015 at the UN climate summit in Paris France. This has the aim of limiting warming of planet to below 2 degrees Celsius while aiming to reach 1.5 degrees Celsius by the start of 2100. Being part of the pact, countries were expected to lower its emission of greenhouse gases. The US set a personal goal for itself by facilitating 26 to 28 percent reduction of 2005 greenhouse gas emission levels as 2025 enters. It is actually a big leap and a time-sensitive task as well.

According to an analysis from Nature Climate Change, it has been discovered that we need to stop emitting greenhouse gases by up to 2060 in an effort to keep the warming below the 1.5 degrees Celsius threshold by 2100.

As a matter of fact, this effort has affected the world as a whole for various companies and industries have started the shift on more efficient industrial production. From crypto signals, market trends, etc. are affected by this agreement.

In 2016 of November, the agreement takes effect and required a minimum of 55 countries which account almost half of global emissions to be on board. To date, 179 countries or parties out of the 196 signatories has been accepted or ratified. There are only couple of nations in UN Framework Convention on Climate Change or UNFCCC whose leaders have refused signing the agreement and these are Nicaragua and Syria.

Then All of a Sudden…

But come Trump’s administration, the President made an announcement in 2017 becoming the third country not to be included in this global pact. Though one of the largest contributors of greenhouse gases, they’re the first nation to ever rescind in its commitment to the pact.

Politics

Trump Vetoes Resolution to End U.S. Support of Arab Coalition Forces vs. Iran-Backed Houthi Movement in Yemen

U.S. President Donald Trump sent back to Congress without Executive Approval, the joint resolution passed by Senate last March 13, 2019 under S.J. 7. The joint resolution bars Trump as the Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces from approving further provision of military assistance, to the Saudi-backed Arab Coalition Forces waging war against the Iran-backed Houthi movement in Yemen.

In a letter addressed to the United States Senate, Donald Trump asserts that the resolution is unnecessary, since there are no U.S. military personnel in-charge or participating in the ongoing hostilities in Yemen. Yet he also stated that the resolution presents a

”dangerous attempt to weaken his constitutional authorities.”

S.J. 7: An Unprecedented Bill in the History of U.S. Congress

S.J. 7 of the 116th Congress is a resolution that puts an end to U.S. military support for the Arab-backed coalition forces that intervened in Yemen’s affairs since 2015. The intervention aims to restore Yemen’s internationally recognized government, taken over by the Iran-aligned Houthi. The resolution includes barring arms sales and sharing of intelligence.

Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, calls the joint resolution historic, because this is the first time in 45 years that Congress has taken measures to stop U.S. forces from participating in an unauthorized war. Senator Sanders, a long-serving independent from Vermont who later sided with the Democrats said,

”For many years, under Democratic presidents, under Republican presidents, Congress has abdicated its responsibility and allowed presidents to take our people into war without congressional authority,”

Although it is true that there are no U.S. military personnel actively taking part in the long running civil war in Yemen, the U.S. has been refuelling Arab Coalition aircrafts blamed for airstrikes that have killed thousands of Yemen civilians.

Last December 2018, Timothy Lenderking, Trump Administration’s Deputy Asst. Sec. for Arabian Gulf Affairs gave assurance to the United Arab Emirates in a security forum, by stating

“We (Trump Administration) believe that the support for the coalition is necessary. It sends a wrong message if we discontinue our support.”

Still, after Congress passed S.J.  7 last month, the U.S. military has ceased refueling Arab Coalition aircrafts.

Politics

Amazon HQ 2 Plans Move Forward: Arlington and Nashville In, New York City Out

Tech giant Amazon pursues expansion plans in Arlington, Virginia and Nashville, Tennessee, whilst scrapping New York City out of the picture.

Nashville was actually chosen in 2018 as a minor player, while New York City was scrapped after much hullabaloo was raised by local grassroots organizations, several New York state politicians and local NY City council members. The subject of protest  was the near $3 billion tax incentive offered to Amazon by the city government, as part of the Request for Proposal submitted to Amazon.

Amazon’s Original Choices

After more than a year of evaluating the proposals submitted by 238 cities, which included Toronto, Canada, the company chose the proposal submitted by the cities of New York and Arlington. The plan was to build 2 additional headquarters instead of building just one (1), whilst dividing the 50,000 new technology-related jobs between the 2 selected cities. The new employees can expect to receive salaries of more than $100K annually.

Actually, the benefits the cities will reap in having the tech giant as new addition to their landscape go beyond the creation of new jobs. According to the tech company, surveys showed that 70 percent (70%) of NYC residents supported Amazon’s decision to accept the NY proposal.

However, the company decided last February 2019 not to move forward with the NY HQ plans, as there are groups unwilling to work with them in connection with the project envisioned for the Long Island City.

Amazon’s new plan though will add only 5,000 new tech jobs to Nashville, the city being ranked Number 45 nationwide as a tech talent resource. Nonetheless, the tech giant plans to construct a 2-tower headquarter at the Nashville Yardsite. The additional office will be instrumental in growing Amazon’s technology hubs and corporate offices in in the U.S. and Canada, as means of easing the current load carried by the existing Seattle headquarter.

Plans for Amazon Expansion in Arlington, Virginia Still on the Table

On its part, the city of Arlington’s proposal includes an offer to give Amazon a $750 million in financial package, which the Virginia General Assembly had already approved with very few resistance. The package is actually more of a performance-based incentive, to which the local government will award financial grants.

That is if Amazon succeeds in meeting Arlington’s expectations once the tech giant builds its 2nd headquarter across the six (6) million sq.ft. space at the National Landing.

Politics

Democrats All Set to Stop Trump in His National Emergency Track, by Using All Possible Means

Many are looking to Congress for actions that would overturn Trump’s national emergency declaration last February 15, 2019. Finally, an announcement coming from the Lower House has been released, stating that House Democrats are set to file a resolution on Friday, aimed at overturning Trump’s national emergency declaration. NY Democrat and Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer also said

Identical companion legislation to the House resolution will soon be introduced in the Senate”

How the Democrat Resolution will Run in Congress

If filing of the resolution pushes through on Friday, full house voting is likely to take place as early as next week or by the middle of March, 2019. If the bill passes muster at the lower house, it will then move up for deliberation and voting by the Senate. Since the measure will be introduced as a “privileged resolution,” the Senate will have to vote on the House-approved bill within eighteen (18) days.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is confident that the bill will move swiftly from the lower house to the Senate and finally to the Oval Office. Her confidence stems from the fact that some lower House and Senate Republicans will side with the Democrats. Republicans who won from perennial swing districts and states; namely Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Wisconsin are in a precarious situation. Apparently, how those GOP Senators will vote on the proposed bill, can impact their chances of winning in the forthcoming 2020 elections.

In the event that Trump vetoes a Congressional resolution that will block the implementation of his national emergency declaration, which is likely to happen, Congress will again go into voting to nullify the presidential veto. This time, a bill overriding the veto must garner at least two-thirds vote in the lower house, and another two-thirds in the Senate upper chamber.

What Happens Next if the Democrat Resolution Fails?

House Speaker Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Schumer avow that they intend to pursue all possible means to overturn Trump’s declaration. That is assuming that Trump’s presidential veto prevails due to lack of Congressional support in overriding such veto.

The next step available is for the Democrats to a file lawsuit in the same way that 16 American states have already pursued as course of action. Their court petition is to prevent Trump from using military and homeland security funds allocated for their respective state. Many believe that the Democrats have better chances of stopping Trump from his track, by filing their own lawsuit.

Apparently, the Republicans had set a precedent in 2014, when their lawsuit versus the Obama administration, won the support of the district court judge. The matter brought to court pertained to an attempt by the Obama administration to use funds already allocated for other purposes, to subsidize health insurance under the Affordable Care Act. This previous ruling therefore, applies as helpful argument in contesting Trump in his use of his national emergency powers, as means of diverting military funds to his US border wall project.

Politics

What May Happen if Congress Maintains Its NO Border-Wall Appropriation

Trump’s agreement to bring the U.S. government in full operation is only temporary and conditional, giving Senate up to February 15, 2019 to decide on his request for a $5.7 billion border-wall funding. What will happen, if after February 15, 2019, Trump fails to get the funding?

Upon signing the short-term funding bill, Trump still made it clear that his border-wall funding request stays on the negotiations table. If not, he will be constrained to initiate another partial government shutdown or declare a State of National Emergency. This means that if another partial shutdown happens, around 800,000 government workers will once again be without paychecks, while several badly needed government services will be suspended anew.

Now what will happen if Trump decides to use his executive power to declare a State of National Emergency?

Trump’s State of National Emergency Alternative

A U.S. President is empowered to declare a State of National Emergency under the provisions of the National Emergencies Act (NEA 50 U.S.C 1601). According to CNN, the White House is currently updating the proclamation draft that was previously prepared. The draft presents courses of action, in case Trump decides to invoke the power vested by the NEA 50 U.S.C 1601, as alternative.

The proclamation draft will have Trump declaring that

a national emergency exists at the southern border of the United States….. The massive amount of aliens who unlawfully enter the United States each day is a direct threat to the safety and security of our nation and constitutes a national emergency

CNN further reported that if the incumbent U.S. President uses his NEA power to obtain the border-wall funding, the related emergency actions that will be undertaken include extracting sums of budget appropriations, from the following:

National Treasury – $681 million in Forfeiture Funds
Military – $3.6 billion of construction budget
Pentagon – $3 billion in civil works funds
Department of Homeland Security $200 million in unspecified funds

Still, the NEA alternative is not a foolproof course of action, because the amended version of the Act has formally given Congress the power to exercise check-balance; along with the power to invalidate the national emergency proclamation, if found unwarranted.