The GOP Payroll Tax Cut/UI Extension Proposal

“will they finally hold the line on their own promises this time, or will they pass all the extensions without the reforms, riders, and spending offsets? This package must be the final offer.”

Earlier today, House Republican leaders unveiled their package deal to extend the payroll tax and unemployment benefits for another year and to continue Medicare ‘doc fix’ for another two years.

While bipartisan passage of the payroll tax cut and doc fix were a forgone conclusion, the real issues for conservatives were the UI extension and the spending cuts.  Unfortunately, they are acquiescing to another extension, albeit with some reforms.
The major reforms include mandatory drug testing and participation in reemployment services as a condition for receiving benefits.  Those receiving the 99 weeks of UI will gradually be reduced to 79, and then finally 59 weeks.  Also, states would be authorized to use some of the funds for job training programs.  The UI component of the bill falls short of transformational reform, but at least it precludes 99 weeks from becoming the standard duration of payments.

In order to ameliorate yet another welfare extension for conservative members, two more sweeteners were added: 1) A law to force Obama’s hand on the Keystone Pipeline 2) A provision that would keep illegal immigrants from receiving the refundable portion of the Child Tax Credit, by requiring that recipients provide a valid SSN.  This would save $10 billion over 10 years, according the GOP sources [more background on that issue here].  The bill also has a provision to reduce Clean Air Act regulations for industrial boilers.

The proposal, which includes the aforementioned three extensions, will cost about $200 billion.  Republicans say they will pay for it with the following reforms, many of which were adopted from the Senate Republican proposal:

Anti-Pipeline Dave Heineman Should Not Run for Senate in Nebraska

One of the biggest political and policy winners for Republicans is their strong support for expeditious approval of the Keystone Pipeline.  Their unified support for this propitious project has provided voters with a sharp contrast to Obama’s casual disregard for private-sector job creation and cheap energy for consumers.  Hence, it is a no-brainer that the pipeline issue should be used as a rallying cry for all Republicans running for elected office in 2012.

In that vein, Nebraska Governor Dave Heineman would be wise to remain in Lincoln, and discard any aspirations to run for Senate.

Toward the end of the summer, amidst pressure from members of his own administration, Obama was on the verge of signing off on the deal.  The State Department had published yet another favorable environmental impact study, and even Energy Secretary Steven Chu seemed to concede that opposition to the pipeline was indefensible.  But then came the vociferous protestations from Obama’s base; greenies, hippies, Hollywood bimbos, and….Nebraska Governor Dave Heineman.

Late in August, the Nebraska Republican penned a letter to the President and Secretary of State requesting that they deny the permit for the pipeline.  Heineman stated that he objected to the route of the pipeline for fear that an oil spill would affect that Ogallala Aquifer – an underground water table in western Nebraska.

Never mind that unlike oil tankers, pipelines are much safer, and in the rare event of a spill, the affected area is measured in tens of feet, not thousands.  Never mind that the EPA and the State Department saw no concern with the proposed route of the pipeline.  Disregard the fact that the only legitimate threat to the water supply comes from the ethanol production that is so blithely promoted by Nebraska’s Republicans, without any concern for the Ogallala Aquifer.  Dave Heineman felt that he must convene a special session of the legislature and block the pipeline, granting Obama the vital bipartisan cover he needed to scuttle the project.

Two months later, buoyed by Republican Heineman’s moral support, Obama suspended the pipeline until after the 2012 elections.  As they say, the rest is history.

Now, Senators Cornyn and McConnell are imploring the governor to seek the Republican nomination in the Senate race against Ben Nelson.

Let’s not muddle our unified message on energy policy by electing the Keystone Pipeline slayer to the Senate?

End All Green Corporate Handouts in 'Tax Extenders' Bill

Here's our opportunity to end corporate cronyism, eco-socialism, and market distortions in the energy sector

It's that time of year again.  The clock is ticking toward December 31, and green energy special interests are discreetly lobbying for the extension of their choice handouts, credits, and grants.  We must remain vigilant against these powerful interests.

At the end of every calendar year, Congress passes a 'tax extenders' bill to temporarily reauthorize specific tax breaks that have not been permanently written into law.  These bills have traditionally dealt with issues like the AMT patch, the R&D business credits, and universal deductions for depreciation, as well as state and local taxes.

In recent years, tax extenders have been magnets for non-universal carve-outs for green energy.  The 2010 tax extenders bill also included extension of the Bush tax cuts, the annual Medicare 'doc fix,' a payroll tax cut, and an unprecedented extension of unemployment benefits.  Most of these provisions are set to expire next month, and will consume the lion's share of the debate and media coverage.  This will give the green industry the opportunity to surreptitiously slip in their handouts as part of a grand bargain revolving around the bigger issues and legitimate, universal tax deductions.  They must be stopped.

Obama's Eco-Fascism Will Eliminate 2.6 Million Jobs

While Obama is wrought to fib about the number of jobs he "saved," he fails to disclose the number of jobs lost as a result of his inane environmental policies.  Fortunately, some are keeping score.  Doug Ross has a terrific blog post detailing Obama's jobs record by the numbers.  Here is the tally of jobs lost, or slated to be eliminated, as a result of radical environmentalism:

Description	Jobs Destroyed	Source
Delaying the Keystone XL Pipeline until after the 2012 election	20,000	LA Times
Forcing lignite coal plants in Texas to close (EPA)	14,000	Heritage
Gulf Drilling Moratorium (Interior)	72,000	LA Times
EPA's Cross-State Air Pollution Rule	1,440,000	Daily Caller
EPA's determination that coal ash is a "hazardous waste"	250,000	Western Caucus
EPA's shutdown of AEP plants	5,000	CAPPS Online
EPA's commercial and industrial boiler regulations	800,000	Clatskanie Chief
Interior Department's protection of lizards and smelt fish	75,000	Human Events
Jobs killed by the Obama environmental machine	2,676,000

Maryland's Costly Green Tax Credits

We hear a lot of feigned outrage from the left concerning tax credits and deductions for upper-income earners.  Unfortunately, their antipathy for tax "loopholes" are nowhere to be seen when they are being disseminated to green special interests.

Last year, Maryland began awarding tax credits to purchasers of electric cars.  It turns out that the first few beneficiaries of the credit actually gain more in tax credits than they save in energy expenses.  Here is the report from the Washington Examiner: 

Maryland's tax incentives for electric vehicles cost the state almost twice as much as the cars saved in energy expenses last year, according to a report from the Maryland Energy Administration.
Sixty-four drivers who bought an electric vehicle in fiscal 2011 cashed in on the state's tax credit, which cost Maryland $126,387. Those drivers saved an estimated $71,300 total in petroleum costs, according to the energy agency.
The savings from the electric vehicles are ongoing, however, estimated to reduce gas purchases annually by more than $1,100 per car for at least eight years -- the expected life span of the car batteries. The tax credit, implemented on Oct. 1, 2010, provides $2,000 in savings from the state's excise tax for the purchase of a plug-in vehicle. 

And which county was the biggest beneficiary?  You guessed it; the people's republic of Montgomery County:

Of the 64 tax credits the state awarded in fiscal 2011, 39 credits worth $76,388 went to Montgomery County drivers, while the remaining 25 credits were divided among drivers in seven counties and Baltimore City.

The RSC Jobs Plan: Jobs Through Growth

One of the more positive ancillary benefits of this presidential primary season is the newfound focus on taxation, regulation, and energy production.  The prominence of the presidential election has helped jumpstart a vital discourse on long-term reforms for those three policies.

The RSC, which is the most respected conservative group within Congress, has proposed a jobs growth plan today, which seeks to achieve those reforms, albeit in a more inclusive way than some of the proposals from presidential candidates, like Rick Perry, Newt Gingrich, and Herman Cain.  It appears that they are seeking changes to the tax and regulatory system that have already received broad support within the Republican party (and some lip service from Democrats, in regard to certain provisions), and are bundling them into one package, “The Jobs Through Growth Act.”

Here are some of the major provisions of the proposal:

The Myth that Oil Companies Pay No Taxes

The media has widely disseminated a fallacious notion that oil companies use so many loopholes that they barely pay any taxes.  Well, Investor's Business Daily has a nice graphic showing the effective tax rates of some major companies in the U.S.  It turns out that it is Obama's cronies at General Electric that get away with all of the loopholes.

As you can see, ExxonMobile pays an effective rate of 45%, while GE enjoys a paltry 7.4% rate.  This is why we must flatten out the corporate tax rate to one low and fair number.

Oil Will be the Future of Our Energy Production

While our government is pouring billions of dollars into impotent energy sources of corrupt Solar venture socialists, there are real enturopaners that are working on making American the Saudi Arabia of both oil and natural gas.  They are developing and revolutionizing fracking on the vast Bakken fields in North Dakota.  Stephen Moore put out a great article in the Weekend edition of the WSJ, detailing the success of Harald Hamm in developing the Bakken fields.

In the article, he references a conversation Mr. Hamm had with the president.  Here is how it went:

When it was Mr. Hamm's turn to talk briefly with President Obama, "I told him of the revolution in the oil and gas industry and how we have the capacity to produce enough oil to enable America to replace OPEC. I wanted to make sure he knew about this."
The president's reaction? "He turned to me and said, 'Oil and gas will be important for the next few years. But we need to go on to green and alternative energy. [Energy] Secretary [Steven] Chu has assured me that within five years, we can have a battery developed that will make a car with the equivalent of 130 miles per gallon.'" Mr. Hamm holds his head in his hands and says, "Even if you believed that, why would you want to stop oil and gas development? It was pretty disappointing."
Washington keeps "sticking a regulatory boot at our necks and then turns around and asks: 'Why aren't you creating more jobs,'" he says. He roils at the Interior Department delays of months and sometimes years to get permits for drilling. "These delays kill projects," he says. Even the Securities and Exchange Commission is now tightening the screws on the oil industry, requiring companies like Continental to report their production and federal royalties on thousands of individual leases under the Sarbanes-Oxley accounting rules. "I could go to jail because a local operator misreported the production in the field," he says.

It is men like Harold Hamm who truly embody the American spirit.  They don't receive any venture socialism monies from the government, yet the produce more than any of the corporate cronies could ever wish to accomplish.  Imagine how much more they could do if government would stop obstructing oil production.

Nebraska Gov. Heineman to the Left of Obama Administration on Keystone Pipeline

Nebraska Republicans repeating talking points from Al Gore and Hollywood airheads

After three years of cumbersome red tape, environmental impact studies, and endless litigation, the Canadian Keystone KL Pipeline extension project is close to obtaining final approval from the State Department.  This $7 billion pipeline project, when completed, would transport over 700,000 barrels of oil per day from the Canadian tar sands in northeast Alberta to the hungry oil refineries on the Texas Gulf coast.  This project, along with current imports, would deliver 10% of our energy needs from our most friendly ally, by using the safest, most efficient means of transportation; a pipeline.

Due to the international scope of this project, the State Department was required to sign off on its final approval.  Despite the issuance of two favorable impact studies from the State Department, the EPA had refused to issue the requisite permits for this 1,800-mile pipeline – an endeavor that would create close to 120,000 primary and secondary jobs and generate $5.2 billion in property tax revenue for Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas.

Finally, amidst growing pressure from House Republicans, and the threat from TransCanada Corp. to take their business to – you guessed it – China, the administration appeared to be backing down.  Last Friday, the State Department published their revised environmental impact study to satisfy the EPA’s new demands for even more scrutiny.  The report concluded once again that the pipeline would have “no significant impact” on local environmental resources.  They also astutely observed that “if the proposed Project is not implemented, Canadian producers would seek alternative transportation systems to move oil to markets other than the U.S.”  Even ultra-greenie Energy Secretary Steven Chu appeared to support the project, noting that “it’s certainly true that having Canada as a supplier of our oil is much more comforting than to have other countries supply our oil,”  and that the technology for oil sand extraction is “improving dramatically.” [video here]

Now, as the public ways in during the final 90 days prior to the project’s approval, environmental groups and Hollywood figures are having a meltdown.  Sadly, it appears that Republican Governor Dave Heineman and several other Nebraska GOPers are throwing in with them.

$500,000 of Green for Green Jobs, Red for the Rest of Us

It certainly pays to go green.  Well, at least until the greenbacks stop flowing – and bankruptcy kicks in.

Last year, the Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Chris Horner estimated that the $30 billion green handout in the stimulus bill cost taxpayers roughly $475,000 per job created.  According to the Wall Street Journal, that’s quadruple the cost of creating a job in a nonsubsidized private firm.  It turns out that Horner was right on the money, even for non-energy related “green” jobs.

Yesterday, Fox News reported on the results of a tree planting stimulus program in Nevada – and it’s not pretty:

In 2009, the U.S. Forest Service awarded $490,000 of stimulus money to Nevada’s Clark County Urban Forestry Revitalization Project, aimed at revitalizing urban neighborhoods in the county with trees, plants, and green-industry training.
According to Recovery.gov, the U.S. government’s official website related to Recovery Act spending, the project created 1.72 permanent jobs.  In addition, the Nevada state Division of Forestry reported the federal grant generated one full-time temporary job and 11 short-term project-oriented jobs.

Supporters of the program claim that there was an unspecified amount of jobs created from “Spanish-language training for Hispanics in the landscaping and tree care industry.”  After all, these are probably jobs that Americans won’t do anyway.

The Food Stamp Party is Stimulating Poverty

The loss of jobs is only half of the result of the government interventionist equation.  The other casualty of an economy driven by taxation, regulation, litigation, subsidization, monetary intervention, and debt is the crippling cost of living for all Americans.  [Yes, I was about to say middle class, but we would be wise to eradicate that sort of socialist innuendo from our vernacular.]

Earlier today, the latest wholesale inflationary numbers were released.  The core PPI rose 0.4% in July, while year over year PPI is now close to a three year high at 7.2%.  Additionally, food prices rose another 0.6% in July.  These numbers are quite disconcerting, given the sharp slowdown in economic activity.  The higher wholesale costs are inevitably passed down to consumers, forcing them to pay more for basic products, such as energy, food, and transportation.

While there are many cyclical factors that affect the price of food and fuel, and by extension, everything else; nonetheless, clearly central planning from the government has kept prices artificially high.

Let's Replace EPA With Employment Protection Agency

We must link the budget crisis with job creation and the cost of living.

When members of Congress return to Washington in September, they must confront the next budget challenge; a Continuing Resolution for FY 2012.  While the top line discretionary spending level has already been agreed upon through the debt ceiling agreement, the specific levels of funding for each department and agency are still up for debate (or closed-door negotiations, in this case).  Unfortunately, instead of prudently analyzing each line item of the budget through individual appropriations bills, as prescribed by the 1974 budget act, Congress will be forced to impetuously consider the entire federal budget in one bill.  There is one line item that should not be disregarded throughout the process; cutting down the EPA.

Obama and his socialist minions at the EPA intuitively understand that energy production in general, and fossil fuels, in particular, serve as the lifeblood of a free and prosperous economy.  This is why they have launched an inexorable war against our energy producers.  By disrupting our energy productivity, and replacing it with no-growth, impotent green energy sources, Obama plans not only to destroy thousands of jobs within the energy sector, but millions of jobs throughout every facet of the economy – jobs that are so reliant on reliable and cheap energy. The only jobs that will be sparred are the ones of his green corporate cronies, such as Johnson Controls, the electric car battery manufacturer in Michigan that was paid a visit by Obama on Thursday.

Let's review some of the most recent sinister attempts by the EPA to discomfit our energy producers, kill jobs, and raise the cost of living on the very objects of their reprehensible class warfare.

The EPA has considerably diminished the volume of oil production in Alaska over the past view years.  They are refusing to issue permits for drilling on and offshore, while encumbering the process with unrealistic regulations.  These actions have triggered an alarming decrease in the flow of oil through the Alaska pipeline, threatening its future sustainability.  Additionally, the EPA has delayed the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline for years, costing us thousands of jobs, cheap imports of oil-sands oil from our Canadian friends, and much-needed revenue to some heartland states.

What about natural gas?  Even though shale fracking for natural gas has produced an unprecedented amount of jobs in North Dakota and Texas, while producing cheap energy for our hungry markets, EPA Director Lisa Jackson is seeking to destroy it.  She is now collaborating with environmental extremists to terminate this revolutionary means of energy exploration indefinitely.

It’s Time for a Balanced Approach to Deficits and Green Energy

We should raise revenue from green energy - to the extent that it exists.

The Democrats think the American people are stupid.  Throughout the debt ceiling imbroglio, Obama and every single elected Democrat have regurgitated their talking points about a balanced solution to the debt crisis.  They have insulted the intelligence of every voter by intimating that the budget can be balanced by eliminating a few tax credits.  No, they don’t want to talk about the tens of trillions in unfunded liabilities to Medicare and Social Security.  They refuse to confront the ballooning cost of all the welfare programs.  The only thing they want to discuss is eliminating a few tax credits for oil companies and corporate jets.

In May, the Senate took up a bill to eliminate $2 billion worth of tax credits for the gas and oil industry.  Let’s overlook their fallacious charges that these are unique handouts to the industry – and treat them as if they are expenditures.  We are slated to spend over $3.7 trillion this year, yet the Democrats are obsessing over $2 billion in tax credits.  Here are some of the major expenditures for this fiscal year, including the so-called handouts to big oil (in billions):


Yes, these tax credits barely register among our major expenses.

During the debate over the oil tax credits, Democrats tossed around the $21 billion figure that we will supposedly gain from increased revenues, if these credits are eliminated.  Again, let’s assume they are correct.  Using a 10-year budget frame, we are expected to spend another $46 trillion.  Democrats claim that their bill would have saved us $21 billion over 10 years.  That amounts to .00045% of our estimated outlays.

What about the much beleaguered corporate jet tax deduction?  That would save $3 billion over ten years!
So in the spirit of bipartisanship, let’s forge a deficit reduction deal that will truly achieve balance.  Since the Democrats hold these tax loopholes on the same level as the largest expenditures, let’s agree to terminate them.  In return for our acquiescence to “revenue increases,” they must accede to our demands for free market healthcare reform, private Social Security accounts, and welfare reform.

Nothing Evinces Hypocrisy More than Obama's Oil Policy

President Obama has asserted ad nauseam that expanding oil drilling would not affect the price of oil and generate price relief at the gas pump.  He has scoffed at the 'drill, baby, drill' plan, denouncing it as insufficient in dealing with our "long-term" energy needs.  Now that his reelection prospects are beginning to wither, Obama is undergoing a foxhole conversion and easing his aversion to that "addictive" black substance.  Or, so it seems.

Last Thursday, after several weeks of steady decline in the price of oil, and following secret meetings with the Saudis, Obama had an epiphany.  Did he suddenly accede to calls for expediting drilling in the Gulf and in Alaska?  Did he agree to lift the permitorium on drilling in 97% of the Outer Continental Shelf?  Not a chance.  Instead, his Energy Secretary announced the release of 30 million barrels of oil from our Strategic Petroleum Reserves (SPR), in conjunction with a 30-million-barrel release from other countries within the International Energy Agency (IEA).  The total release will be 60 million barrels, proceeding at a rate of 2 million barrels per day (bpd) for a month.

The administration cited the loss of 1.5 million bpd from cessation of production in Libya as rationale for this unprecedented move.  The problem is that the Libyan disruption occurred four months ago, inducing a sharp spike in the price of oil at the time.  Obama categorically rejected the idea of tapping the SPR to mitigate the upward trajectory in oil prices, even as the price of gasoline soared over the dreaded $4 mark.  Now that gas prices have declined over 40 cents and are trending down, due in part to the end of QE2, Obama decided that we are in an energy crisis to the degree that it warrants a release of the SPR!

While the steady drop in oil prices should clearly preclude any justification for the release, Obama felt that the precipitous drop in his approval ratings is tantamount to a national emergency.  What he lacks in perspicacity of judgment regarding economics, he compensates with cognizance of polling reports.

It's Official: You Must be an Eco-Socialist to Graduate in Maryland

Getting control of school boards before they groom the next generation of Democrats and green parasites

It's not like Maryland Democrats haven't worked assiduously to earn the distinction of 'least free state in the country' for their beloved Free State.

Maryland high school students will now be required to pass green proficiency requirements in order to graduate.  The Maryland state board of education will  require public schools within the state to weave in eco-socialist propaganda to the general science curriculum.  Sadly, due to flaccid opposition and complacency on the part of all of us, public schools across the country have already been doing this for quite some time.  Maryland is merely the first state to consummate those requirements as part of the "official curriculum."  The Baltimore Sun reports:

State officials and environmental activists called the vote "historic" and said Maryland has become the first state in the nation to require environmental literacy to graduate from high school. Under the rule, public schools will be required to work lessons about conservation, smart growth and the health of our natural world into their core subjects like science and social studies.

The requirement applies to students entering high school this fall.  Local school systems will be able to shape those lessons to be relevant to their communities, but all will have to meet standards set by the state. School systems will have to report to the state every five years on what they're doing to meet the requirements. 

Somehow I don't think the 'environmental literacy' science courses will include the best hits from Climategate.  Will they present these impressionable minds with dissenting opinions within the meteorological field?  Does anyone think the social studies courses will teach them about the trail of green corporate cronyism between the government and the likes of Jeff Immelt or Al Gore?  Or, will they teach Al Gore's science of population control instead?

Ben Cardin's Ethanol Treachery

The unique characteristic of Ben Cardin is not his pertinacious liberalism; it is his slavish devotion to Democrat leadership.  And yes, there is a distinction.

Although Cardin is one of the most liberal members of the Senate, he actually co-sponsored a good piece of legislation for the first time in his career.  Several months ago, Cardin co-sponsored Senator Coburn's bill (S. 520) to repeal the ethanol subsidies and tariffs.  After years of ethanol wreaking havoc on our economy and consumers, even Al Gore and Bill Clinton conceded that the ethanol revolution was a lousy idea.  Accordingly, although I was quite befuddled over Cardin's newfound appreciation for the free market, opposition to ethanol had become almost universal.

Well, on Tuesday, Cardin had an opportunity to vouch for his unaccountable behavior by voting for Senator Tom Coburn's amendment to repeal ethanol subsidies and tariffs.  Coburn's amendment (attached to a spending bill) was identical to the bill which Cardin co-sponsored last March.  Yet, he voted against it!

Why the change of heart?

In the Senate, any member can offer an amendment to all non-budgetary bills even if it is not germane to the underlying bill.  The catch is that if the Majority Leader doesn't agree to hold a vote, the member must call for a suspension vote, requiring 67 affirmative votes to pass the bill.  Coburn used the Cloture process to bring up the amendment instead of asking King Harry Reid permission to schedule a vote.  As such, he secured the requisite 16 signatures to petition a cloture vote; a procedure which requires only 60 votes to pass the bill.  Democrat leadership was livid that Coburn circumvented them because they wanted the higher threshold so they could defeat the bill.  Consequently, Ben Cardin voted down the amendment, even though he purported to support, and even co-sponsored, a similar bill.

Cardin put out the following statement after voting down the exact bill that he supported three months ago:

"We voted against the Coburn amendment today because of the manner this issue was brought to the Senate floor. We have been assured by the Democratic Leadership that the Senate will vote on this issue later this week, allowing us to consider and debate the substance of this important policy decision." (emphasis added)

This is yet another example that Cardin is an unprincipled shill for his party leadership.  He will genuflect before his masters, even if that means opposing something that he intuitively views as the right thing to do.

Obama Administration Continues its Anti-Drilling Chicanery in Alaska

A case of good cop/bad cop between unaccountable bureaucrats.

Last month, during his weekly radio address, Barack Obama announced his plans to drill in NPR-A.  No-he wasn't planning to eviscerate his genuflecting media outlet; he was promising to issue more land leases in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska.

Like most of his capricious gestures to conservative policy initiatives, this promise was vapid of substance and lacking accountability.  He knew all along that his unelected bureaucrats at the DOI and EPA would filibuster every step of the leasing process indefinitely.  It was essentially an administrative pocket veto to preempt any drilling proposals in Alaska.  As such, it is not surprising to hear that his cohorts in these departments are bailing him out of his duplicitous promise. 

This 23-million-acre reserve lies to the west of the smaller Arctic National Wildlife Reserve (ANWR) on the Alaska North Slope.  Although this wilderness, owned by the Interior Department's Bureau of Land Management, was designated in 1976 for the expressed purpose of exploring for oil and gas, it was ostensibly closed to drilling until 1998.  Moreover, environmental lawsuits and bureaucratic obduracy have prevented a single oil well from being developed for the past 13 years.

Accordingly, there was no reason to believe that Obama, the most anti-energy president of all time, would turn NPR-A into a catalyst for drill, baby, drill.  When Obama announced his new leasing policies, I noted that Obama's promise to drill in Alaska was yet "another attempt at subterfuge for the purpose of tamping down the outrage toward his job-killing, anti-growth policies", and that he would rely on his minions at the EPA to "encumber any meaningful drilling policies with endless environmental impact studies."

Well, the Wall Street Journal is reporting that this is exactly what is now occurring in the NPR-A.  The EPA and the Army Corp of Engineers are denying ConocoPhilips a permit to build a bridge, a gravel road, and a pipeline from their proposed drilling sight in the NPR.  To make matters worse, any drilling project in the Arctic requires approval by the EPA.  This has created bureaucratic friction, impelling multiple agencies to impose competing mandates on the drilling applicants:

Sarah Palin Opposes All Energy Subsidies

Another vote against corporate 'cornyism'

As the presidential election heats up, we will continue to track where the candidates stand on ethanol and energy subsidies.  The issue of ethanol subsidies is vital to conservatives for several reasons.  First, ethanol epitomizes everything that is wrong with onerous government interventions; corporate cronyism, market distortions, higher prices for vital goods and services, and government dependency.  Also, with food and energy prices at an all time high, ethanol subsidies will provide the eventual Republican nominee with a unique opportunity to use bread and butter issues to educate voters about the virtues of the free market.

Finally, and most importantly, if the Republican nominee lacks the temerity to rebuff a handful of corn welfare recipients in Iowa, he/she will certainly lack the moxie to cut trillions from the millions of dependents on the welfare state.

Last week, Mitt Romney embraced ethanol, Tim Pawlenty disavowed his support for ethanol (while speaking in Iowa), and Newt Gingrich....well, he is Professor Cornpone.  Today, Sarah Palin rejected all energy subsidies in a brief interview with reporters in Gettysburg.  Scott Conroy of Real Clear Politics reports from Gettysburg:

Shale Boom in Texas Providing Thousands of Jobs

Everything is bigger in Texas, including job growth and energy production.  Unlike in Maryland, where the liberal politicians capriciously impound our natural resources, Texans embrace their shale reserves.  Over the past year, oil exploration has discovered gargantuan reserves of oil shale in the south Texas formation known as Eagle Ford.  Drilling experts believe that hydraulic fracturing will allow the oil companies to drill up to 3,000 wells this year, unleashing enough oil flow to raise our national output in a meaningful way.  Additionally, the Houston Chronicle reports that last year, the Eagle Ford shale generated 6,800 jobs and paid $311 million in jobs and salaries.  That's real job creation; Texas style.

Unfortunately, we must be vigilante of the ever intrusive eco-marxists at the EPA.  They already have a vendetta against Texas and would certainly jump at the opportunity to find fault in the drilling technology.  The New York Times is already peddling the unfounded allegations that shale fracking causes water pollution:

"As evidence mounts that fracking poses risks to water supplies, the federal government and regulators in various states are considering tighter regulations on it." 

There is only one problem with this supposition; evidence of water pollution simply doesn't exist.  The writers at the NYT ought to watch this video of the EPA Director admitting at a congressional hearing that there is no evidence that hydraulic fracking is inimical to our water supplies:

Pollution Claims About Fracking False, Says ...EPA!

One of the most effective and revolutionary ways of meeting our energy needs is the extraction of oil from shale rocks through a process called hydraulic fracking.  A massive landmass cutting through western Pennsylvania, Maryland, and West Virginia, called the Marcellus Formation, is home to one of the riches reserves of oil shale in the country.  Unfortunately, the Maryland Democrat politicians have done everything in their power to scuttle attempts to extract oil through shale fracturing in western Maryland.

To make matters worse, Attorney General Doug Gansler filed a lawsuit against a shale company in Pennsylvania, accusing the oil exploration company of polluting Maryland's waterways through the use of chemicals during the fracking procedure.  The allegation of water pollution has been used throughout the country in order to preclude any chance that shale will succeed as a viable energy source.

Well, it turns out that even the consummate eco-fascist, EPA Director Lisa Jackson, agrees that the environmental perils of shale fracking are completely contrived.  At a Government Oversight Committee hearing, Jackson said, “I’m not aware of any proven case where the fracking process itself has affected water, although there are investigations ongoing.” (Hat Tip: Hot Air)

Keep destroying our energy, prosperity, and liberty-liberals!