“No country grants more patents for inventions than the United States,” President Obama said in promoting confidence that our economy will recover.   The remark, included in his third annual State of the Union address, however sheds light on a government failure that has transcended administrations of both parties for at least two decades.

The backlog of applications sitting in a Northern Virginia warehouse belonging to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is 1.2 million and growing.  What once took 18 months to grant now takes almost four years.  In today’s dynamics that can be “forever.”

In 1991, the financial burden of granting patents was shifted from taxpayers to the applicants through user fees.  As the number of patent applications grew, the office was actually being run at a profit.  (Sounds like a “Tea Bagger” success story, so far.) 

Then Congress began to raid the patent office piggy bank to the tune of $650 million by 2004.   As the number of applications expanded, USPTO did not have the funds to keep pace with patent examiners.

The American dream is to invent the 100 miles per gallon carburetor, the next smart phone, even a diet that really works.  The patent helps prevent anyone else from stealing your design and keeping you from making the maximum return on your efforts.

Some economists maintain more jobs will be created by smoothing the path to innovation than by reducing government impediments.  Lengthen time to review a patent application will increase chances to steal the idea.  Raising money also becomes more difficult.  Venture capitalists are not likely to contribute money to an invention that may never get out of the starting gate or has been stolen.

The job of patent examiner grows not only by the number of applications, but also patents already granted.  In the 145 years from its founding in 1790, USPTO issued its first two million patents.  Beginning in 1935 USPTO granted its second two million in the next 41 years.  All the many more issued patents an examiner has to check against the application he is working on.

USPTO says 2,900 new examiners are needed over the next five years, adding to the current workforce of 3,500.   A plan approved by the House and awaiting Senate action promises to no longer raid the USPTO piggy bank and would boost fees by 20 per cent to hire 1,500 new examiners over five years.

There is little doubt that as long as the patent process is slowed, less new jobs will be created by the lack of protected innovation.

If you are an unemployed engineer you can still find a job in China.  According to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, since the entire backlog of applications is on the Internet, engineers sift through them to determine what intellectual property is worth stealing.

All of this could lead to the following conclusion:

We are only just beginning to learn how both parties have manipulated foreign policy at the expense of American jobs.  What if the patent processing backlog was part of the same program?

Ambassador Jones tells the Sultan of Siam “I’ll tell our people that we asked and you agreed to crack down on intellectual property theft, but then we’ll keep the backlog of patents going so you can steal more of our inventions.”

Wink. Wink.

The phrase “eat your lunch” dates to the early 1900s and is slang for how one person or entity can outperform another in convincing fashion.  When you Google “eat your lunch” you get 9.3 million entries.  The fourth highest entry is a review by Reuters of a business book “The End of the Free Market” and asserts that China (and other countries) has developed new economic models that are certain to surpass our ability to produce and compete in worldwide trade.

The current problem is that we seem to resist considering this situation serious.

Trade is only one aspect and will not change soon.  The balance of trade between U.S. and China is terribly out of whack.  We continue to lose jobs and buy cheap goods for as long as (1) our Government (regardless of Party) believes this is how we bribe the Chinese into complying with our foreign policy and (2) various multi-national corporations are enriched from the imbalance.

At least in trade, we recognize the problem, even if we are impotent to change it.

Education is another matter.

CBS News reported last week that US Department of Education estimates there are approximately 50,000 children in the US learning Mandarin Chinese.  This is both the easiest and most common Chinese dialect.  Even the Taiwanese speak Mandarin.

Before you get too impressed, know there are an estimated 200 million Chinese children studying English!

We can also be ignorant at the college level, at least in Western PA.  Asian students are only beginning to be welcome to our campuses, except at Carnegie Mellon where they have long filled many classroom spots.  Schools are just beginning to recognize the Asians pay full price, we have seats for them and we can learn from them.

One small liberal arts college has been slower to learn.  A deal called for matriculation agreements whereby Chinese students would spend the first two years at their native campuses, then come to Western PA for three more years and a degree. Potential was 75 to 100 students per annum.

The faculty senate blocked the completion of the matriculation agreements with Chinese schools claiming professors didn’t believe the foreign institutions could adequately prep students for classes here.  The college would not capture another $2 million a year in revenues and the region lost an opportunity to learn more about our trading rivals.

Recent findings in another book “Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses” by sociologists Richard Arum of New York University and Joseph Roksa of University of Virginia lead to the same conclusions.

According to Associated Press “the study of more than 2,300 undergraduates found 45 per cent of students show no significant improvement in the key measures of critical thinking, complex reasoning and writing by the end of their sophomore years.”

I bear witness.  For about a dozen years I was a member of a college advisory board.  One of our duties was to review applications and interview students for scholarships to the business department.

As years passed, the differences became sharper.  Students born and raised in the US seemed uncertain of their future, less committed to learning, even disorganized.  Asian students seemed to have clear goals in mind, were more able to balance study and work and even looked forward to returning home better educated and embarking on a career or business venture.

To underscore all of the above:

Guess who the biggest employer in Saginaw, MI will soon be?  A century old factory of General Motors is being sold to a Chinese company actually owned by the city government of Beijing.  Soon Americans will be working for the Chinese on US soil.

Does anyone give a hoot?

With decidedly different styles, two major Democrats exit the Pennsylvania political stage . . . if only temporarily.

After eight mostly tumultuous years, Gov. Ed Rendell, barred from a third term, will likely drive himself back home to Philadelphia from Harrisburg shortly after Republican Tom Corbett is sworn in at noon Tuesday.

Meanwhile losing U.S. Senate candidate Joe Sestak intends to complete journeys to all 67 PA counties by the end of January to say “Thank You” to his supporters.  Within memory, he is the first candidate for a major office to lose and take on such an encore.

Sestak hoped to complete his 67 visits by the end of last year but a full agenda in Washington prevented that.  He finished his second two-year stint as a member of Congress from Southeastern PA in late December.  Now, without staff, he is booking his own appearances and driving himself to the events.

Typical of a former Admiral, Sestak tells his audiences that “As captain of the ship, I take full responsibility for my loss.”  He was narrowly defeated by Republican Pat Toomey in the General Election last November.  This loss came after Sestak defeated Arlen Specter, a 30-year incumbent, in the Democrat primary.

Sestak’s speech and demeanor is low-key, rare for a top-ranking military commander.  Without a microphone, audiences must remain quiet and strain to hear him.

Not so with Rendell.

The consummate Philadelphia politician, Rendell dialed up his bombastic delivery, both times when he ran for four-year gubernatorial terms and on the stump for other statewide Democratic candidates   Perhaps the only time his campaigning seldom rose above a whisper was six years ago when Specter (then a Republican) beat Joe Hoeffel to win his fifth term.

Rendell always claimed Specter had given him his first job when Specter was District Attorney in Philadelphia.

The outgoing Governor made his mark as Mayor of Philadelphia after running an aggressive and above-board District Attorney’s office.  While Philly Mayor, he developed a reputation for rebuilding Center City.  Later he honed his fund raising skills as Chairman of the Democratic National Committee.  In that post he was one of the first to tell Al Gore to concede the 2000 Presidential race.

By contrast, Sestak became known for becoming a three-star Admiral while in his early fifties and serving as a top military advisor to President Clinton.  While in Congress his district offices were open seven days a week.

Since recent memories are more clear, Rendell will be known in the short term for two outbursts in the past month.  In a debate about the downside of gambling, in an interview on 60 Minutes, Rendell called Leslie Stahl a “simpleton.”  When the NFL postponed a Philadelphia Eagle home football game due to a severe snow storm, he mused we had become a “nation of wusses.”

Characteristically, Rendell recently thanked his campaign volunteers at a free party at the Electric Factory in Philly with the Beach Boys in concert.  Few invites went to his helpers in Western PA.

The question now is who will re-surface first, Rendell or Sestak?  If the next life for both is dependent on public (voter) support, no doubt Sestak burned less bridges than Rendell.

This is not a riddle or trick question.

What “unimpressive” trait of leadership hinders both President Obama and Gov.-elect Corbett and fails to serve the best interests of the people they serve?

Neither seems to be able to keep the attention and loyalty of the people closest to them . . . from time to time.  Top aides are jumping ship either to pursue more lucrative interests or tend to political needs of their leader.

You almost need a lineup card (kept in pencil) to keep track of President Obama’s inner circle at the White House.  He is only half way through his first term and already there are announcements of people quitting their government positions to traipse across the street and take up shop in the Obama campaign office to plot his re-election effort.

In less than 24 months President Obama has already had three chiefs of staff.  Rahm Emanuel, the first one went off to advance his career.  Pete Rouse, the second one, held it until the President could line up another member of the Chicago Mafia, Bill Daley.

The problem is that the Chief of Staff is the hub in the wheel.  To allow the President to be President, all activities in the White House flow through and are directed by the Chief of Staff.  Almost beyond belief, the President (and later you will see Corbett) announce -- with a straight face -- the next choice is going to be every bit as good as the first. 

In Washington we read about David Plouffe moving here and David Axelrod moving there.  Even the guy who makes these announcements, Robert Gibbs, press secretary, says he will resign and join the campaign.

These people serve at the pleasure of the President, the saying goes.  What is missing is that these people should have a similar commitment to serving the people, leaving their personal agenda in hibernation for the full term of the officeholder they serve.

What is going on?  Do these people get a head start on tell-all books?  Have campaigns become so rich that you can bounce from public service to political service without losing a dime?

This brings us to the strangest case of all, Brian Nutt?

Mr. Nutt has served as Tom Corbett’s Chief of Staff in the office of Attorney General, but took leaves of absence to direct the Governor-elect’s political campaigns.  This in-and-out trail led to two conclusions.  One newspaper referred to Nutt as Corbett’s “taxpayer-funded campaign manager.”  Second, it is reasonable to assume that Corbett has more trust and faith in Nutt’s ability than any other person.

Therefore, it was no surprise that Corbett announced Nutt as his first appointment, to serve as the Chief Executive Officer in the Office of the Governor.  There is no question that Corbett faces some of the biggest problems any incoming Governor has ever encountered, but would have his most trusted sidekick in the next office over.

This is not to take away from the current appointment to chief of staff, William Ward.  He is known to be a very competent guy, but he has "zero" experience tending to Corbett's day-to-day needs.  Ward did work with Corbett in the office of the US Attorney, not really a good prep for this job.

The surprise (make that disappointment) is that Nutt spurned the offer to serve Corbett in that capacity and, instead, will now become a full-time (and constant) political operative.  He is going to work in the Pittsburgh office of the firm that directed Corbett’s campaign advertising.

What ever happened to putting your first team on the field to help run the government?

Critics, some inside the Republican Party, think Tom Corbett is taking too long to fill his cabinet.  The current Attorney General is to be sworn in as Governor January 18.  Most signs indicate his administration will not be prepared to operate that day, or very soon afterward.

As it is, sufficient time has elapsed to assume appointments Corbett announces from here on are not his first choices.

Corbett’s transition was dealt a serious blow earlier this week when Brian Nutt announced he had changed his mind and would not become chief of staff in the new administration.  Nutt said he will stay in the political area, joining Brabender Cox, the advertising firm that guided Corbett’s campaign to victory.

No reason is given, however, for the decision taking so long. 

More "no reasons" and white lies are in the offing.

Two days after Nutt declined, Corbett said he was appointing William Ward to the job.  Ward, a career prosecutor and former chairman of the state board of probation and parole, according to the new Governor, has "proven management skills" that "make him well suited for . . . Chief of Staff."  From when he was appointed Ward has 13 days to learn where the bathrooms are.

From someone who is witnessing his sixth PA gubernatorial transition, here is one theory.

Despite winning, Corbett is still not being taken at his word by some of his insider supporters.  Yet he is being taken too seriously by others, including those who have the pedigree to make good cabinet members.

Some insiders still believe “no new taxes” is just campaign poppycock.  After all, the first George Bush campaigned on “Read my lips, no new taxes,” a campaign promise that barely lasted beyond his swearing in.  (He also did not win a second term!)

People who run all these do-gooder agencies are of a mindset this means there will be less grant money available.  They think the only hardship is that they must compete for a slice of a smaller pie. 

The first group consists of Republicans who work in Harrisburg now.  The second group travels to Harrisburg looking for funds like ordinary folks go to the grocery store.

“Cabinet-eligible” people comprise a third group.  They take the new Governor at his word.   No funds, shut down programs and furlough workers will be the daily routine.  These people are typically high achievers inside the business they will be required to oversee and even promote as a cabinet member.  For example, the Secretary of Agriculture is often a farmer.  Secretary of Transportation might be an exec from a large construction company; Secretary of Welfare is coming off a job administering a program that benefits the poor, etc.

Do you really believe these people want to occupy a post where they spend most of their time telling their friends they can’t help them?  How does the Agriculture Secretary tell his farmer friends he no longer has the money to conduct research at Penn State on the latest crop pest?

Then there is the pension change which must be making it more difficult for Corbett to attract people he wants.  Recently, as part of a smoke-and-mirrors omnibus rule to reign in pension costs, the legislature decided vesting cannot occur until ten years of service. 

Vesting occurred in five years until recently.  This created an opportunity for a cabinet member to earn a pension somewhere inside the maximum eight years he or she will be a state employee.  This perk sometimes took the sting out of taking a pay cut to be a public servant.

The appointment delays take even more of a toll.

Deputy Secretaries actually run the day-to-day bureaucracies.  They can’t be appointed before the top banana so that he or she will not be viewed as a “figurehead.”  That label may already be painted on Chief of Staff Ward.

Budget work can begin as early as October or November in field offices for the next spending plan beginning July 1.  After submissions work their way up channels, the Governor usually presents his budget to the legislature in early February.  This schedule never holds in a transition year, but late blooming cabinet members are certain to delay the process even more. 

Republican chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, Bill Adolph, told the Delaware County Times until Corbett fills his cabinet "it's impossible to get in there and see where all the funding is being fully utilized."

On that note the General Assembly did swearing ins and ceremonies one day this week, then adjourned until Jan. 24th.

So much for the fiscal urgency.

Pennsylvania Republicans have already taught Texas a lesson or two on how to abuse reapportionment processes.  During the four-year span 2006-2009 Democrats gained ground everywhere but the Pennsylvania State Senate.  Republicans maintained a 29-21 margin after the 2006 elections, the only legislative body in the U.S. where the Democrats didn’t make inroads that year.  In 2008, the GOP actually picked up another seat (30-20) despite another Dem landslide year.

Keystone Republicans appear poised to show how a state government can step back and allow the natural gas industry to rape and pillage here.

First, GOP lawmakers blocked Gov. Rendell and Democrat legislators attempting to pass a tax on extracting natural gas from under Pennsylvania lands.  Marcellus Shale reserves in PA could rival the California gold rush.  State politicians are giddy about the number of jobs drilling will create and substitute use of natural gas for Arab oil.

Initially Democrats wanted a big extraction tax to help balance the state budget.  Republicans said “no.”

Then the Democrats offered to lower the new extraction tax.  Their compromise was to a level to regulate extractions, guard against brine seeping into drinking water sources and repair roads and bridges subjected to damage from heavy drilling equipment.  At least for the time being, the GOP lawmakers said “nothing doing.”

Instead Republicans bragged that PA would be the only state to not charge an extraction tax.  Drillers responded with bigger campaign contributions .to GOP candidates, including Gov.-elect Tom Corbett.

In 2011 and 2012 Republicans control both legislatures and the Governorship.  Will they modify their position to appease environmentalists or increase revenue?

The Associated Press has been documenting environmental violations by PA drillers reminiscent of its crusade against Catholic priests doing harm to young men several years ago.  The AP charged in a lengthy story appearing in media today that PA has allowed “the dumping of tainted waters from gas boom.”

The drillers deny there is risk to drinking waters, but nevertheless more of them have begun recycling brine rather than haul fluids to waste water treatment plants that are inadequate to handle increased flow.

The AP says “in the two years since the frenzy of activities began in the (Marcellus Shale), PA has been the only state letting its waterways serve as the primary disposal place for huge amounts of waste water produced by . . . hydraulic fracturing.”

Surprisingly, DER officials, still under a Democrat regime, claim the proper safeguards are in place to prevent contamination.  This after their department has been among the hardest hit by budget cuts.

The Federal EPA is now involved, testing water drawn from contaminated rivers intended for human consumption.

Everyone knows, however, how slow the EPA is to respond to anything.