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.
Showing posts with label environment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label environment. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Monday, November 14, 2011
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 |
Sunday, September 25, 2011
Hold the Line Against Venture Eco-Socialism in the CR
No wonder Democrats casually disregard our budget crisis. They
have a penchant to drop zeros from government expenditures! Last month,
Democrat congressional candidate Dave Weprin thought that the national
debt stood at $4.0 trillion. Now Harry Reid has filed cloture on his
version of the FY 2012 CR that has a missing zero from some of the disaster aid expenditures. According to CQ Politics,
Reid’s bill, which contains $3.65 billion in emergency disaster aid –
with no offsetting spending – misallocated funding for the Disaster
Relief Fund at “$774,000,00,” and “$226,000,00” for the Army Corps of
Engineers for flood control and coastal emergencies. These guys have a
serious problem with arithmetic.
Senate Republicans must use this error as an opportunity to defeat Reid’s bill, while the House must stand firm on their version of the CR, which contains $1.5 billion in offsets. House leaders have already compromised on the overall discretionary budget authority in this bill; a $24 billion increase from the universally venerated Ryan budget. The only saving grace of this bill from a conservative perspective is that it eliminates a $1.5 billion DOE loan program for manufacturers of $100,000 electric cars and the $100 million solar energy loan grant that was responsible for Solar-gate.
On Friday, Harry Reid tabled the House-passed CR, and filed cloture on his own version, setting up a cloture vote for Monday night. Although Democrats only have 53 votes, several Republicans have already supported an even higher level of disaster spending without offsets. This is where Harry Reid’s math error will play a vital role. Under Senate rules, once a senator has forced a roll call, that senator proposing the amendment cannot change the text without unanimous consent. Harry Reid will need that consent in order to fix his mistake, in the hopes that he can get this done by Monday night and pressure House Republicans to cave, so they can all enjoy their scheduled recess. Senate Republicans must deny that consent.
To that end, Reid would be forced to file a new cloture vote, thereby overshooting their entire recess – for a green program. The longer this ordeal drags out the more Reid will be pressured to adopt the House bill.
Senate Republicans must use this error as an opportunity to defeat Reid’s bill, while the House must stand firm on their version of the CR, which contains $1.5 billion in offsets. House leaders have already compromised on the overall discretionary budget authority in this bill; a $24 billion increase from the universally venerated Ryan budget. The only saving grace of this bill from a conservative perspective is that it eliminates a $1.5 billion DOE loan program for manufacturers of $100,000 electric cars and the $100 million solar energy loan grant that was responsible for Solar-gate.
On Friday, Harry Reid tabled the House-passed CR, and filed cloture on his own version, setting up a cloture vote for Monday night. Although Democrats only have 53 votes, several Republicans have already supported an even higher level of disaster spending without offsets. This is where Harry Reid’s math error will play a vital role. Under Senate rules, once a senator has forced a roll call, that senator proposing the amendment cannot change the text without unanimous consent. Harry Reid will need that consent in order to fix his mistake, in the hopes that he can get this done by Monday night and pressure House Republicans to cave, so they can all enjoy their scheduled recess. Senate Republicans must deny that consent.
To that end, Reid would be forced to file a new cloture vote, thereby overshooting their entire recess – for a green program. The longer this ordeal drags out the more Reid will be pressured to adopt the House bill.
Thursday, September 01, 2011
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.
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.
Tuesday, August 23, 2011
$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:
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.
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.
Friday, August 12, 2011
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.
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.
Wednesday, July 06, 2011
Ben Cardin's Radical Eco Agenda Strikes Again
Nothing exemplifies the out-of-touch supercilious demeanor of progressives more than their eco-fascist views. Due to their radical environmental regulations, which are promulgated at whim, many Americans are forced to suffer from more serious environmental phenomenon. The case in point? Pesticides.
For years, the EPA has hampered the efforts of farmers to deal with crop-killing bugs. They require all sorts of licenses and regulations in order to use basic pesticides that have been in use for many years. Anyone in Maryland can commiserate with the stink bug problem we suffer from, as a result of the bans on pesticides. One of the more onerous regulations promulgated by the EPA is a recent directive requiring all farmers to obtain a permit in addition to a license for the use of a pesticide.
In March, the House voted 292-130 to repeal the permit requirement, garnering overwhelming bi-partisan support. An identical bill was approved unanimously by voice vote in the Senate Agriculture Committee a few weeks ago. Now Ben Cardin plans to filibuster this bi-partisan bill under the false pretenses that the pesticides will….you guessed it, harm the Chesapeake Bay.
Here is the story from the Sun:
For years, the EPA has hampered the efforts of farmers to deal with crop-killing bugs. They require all sorts of licenses and regulations in order to use basic pesticides that have been in use for many years. Anyone in Maryland can commiserate with the stink bug problem we suffer from, as a result of the bans on pesticides. One of the more onerous regulations promulgated by the EPA is a recent directive requiring all farmers to obtain a permit in addition to a license for the use of a pesticide.
In March, the House voted 292-130 to repeal the permit requirement, garnering overwhelming bi-partisan support. An identical bill was approved unanimously by voice vote in the Senate Agriculture Committee a few weeks ago. Now Ben Cardin plans to filibuster this bi-partisan bill under the false pretenses that the pesticides will….you guessed it, harm the Chesapeake Bay.
Here is the story from the Sun:
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
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:
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.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?
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.
Sunday, June 05, 2011
Mitt Romney: Running for Green Party Nomination?
First it was Romeycare, then it was cap and trade and ethanol subsidies; now it's global warming.
“I believe the world is getting warmer, and I believe that humans have contributed to that,” he told a crowd of about 200 at a town hall meeting in Manchester, New Hampshire.
Romney proceeded to extol the virtues of solar and wind power as the next coming of our energy paradise. As much as I fervently hope Obama is defeated, I seriously wonder if it would be counterintuitive to elect a Republican like Romney. Either way, nobody who considers themselves conservative should even give him a second look. Watch the RINO-in-Chief in his on words:
Bottom line: In 2012, we need a choice, not an echo.
“I believe the world is getting warmer, and I believe that humans have contributed to that,” he told a crowd of about 200 at a town hall meeting in Manchester, New Hampshire.
Romney proceeded to extol the virtues of solar and wind power as the next coming of our energy paradise. As much as I fervently hope Obama is defeated, I seriously wonder if it would be counterintuitive to elect a Republican like Romney. Either way, nobody who considers themselves conservative should even give him a second look. Watch the RINO-in-Chief in his on words:
Bottom line: In 2012, we need a choice, not an echo.
Friday, June 03, 2011
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:
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:
Monday, May 30, 2011
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:
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:
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:
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Let's Nail Democrats on Their Duplicity with Energy Subsidies
Close down the DOE and eliminate all energy 'tax cuts' for the (green) rich in one great big compromise.
Harry Reid and Bob Menendez are claiming that profitable oil companies don't need subsidies, and the repeal of those tax credits, which they call subsidies, will save us $20 billion over 10 years. Let's ignore the fact that the $4 billion annual tax credits are near universal deductions which are afforded to almost every other industry. We'll agree to use the spurious "oil subsidies" label for the purpose of comparing similar terms. But if they want to discuss the repeal of energy subsidies, that is a dialogue we should embrace.
If logic dictates that we should cut subsidies to a profitable industry which delivers a product that is the lifeblood of our prosperity, shouldn't we cut the billions in subsidies to industries that produce ineffectual energy that barely registers on our energy consumption map? If it is condign to eliminate $4 billion in tax credits for an industry that brings in hundreds of billions in taxes and royalties, shouldn't we eliminate the subsidies for wind, solar, and ethanol, which are a net loss for the treasury and consumer alike?
Instead of Senate Republicans introducing harmful amendments which accept the Democrats' premise and mandate onerous drilling regulations and liabilities, they should utilize Democrats' hypocrisy and offer real consequential amendments. In that spirit, I propose a quintessential Washington style compromise and call for the Bipartisan Comprehensive Energy Reform Act of 2011. It would end all tax credits for the oil and gas industry. But, you know what? It would eliminate all subsidies, mandates, and (or) tariffs for wind, solar, and ethanol (incorporating the goals of Mike Pompeo's H.Res. 267). In addition, it would completely abolish the Department of Energy (DOE), along with the ethanol programs at the USDA. How's that for a compromise?
"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it."~ President Ronald ReaganDemocrats (and the Maine Republicans ladies) are agog to demonize oil companies and punish them with punitive tax increases. Their effort was defeat yesterday 52-48, but they plan to continue wasting time on it today. Aside for the fact that a punitive tax is unconstitutional, and a tax originating in the Senate is...also unconstitutional, the Democrats are providing Republicans with the ammo to eradicate their green empire of corporate cronyism once and for all.
Harry Reid and Bob Menendez are claiming that profitable oil companies don't need subsidies, and the repeal of those tax credits, which they call subsidies, will save us $20 billion over 10 years. Let's ignore the fact that the $4 billion annual tax credits are near universal deductions which are afforded to almost every other industry. We'll agree to use the spurious "oil subsidies" label for the purpose of comparing similar terms. But if they want to discuss the repeal of energy subsidies, that is a dialogue we should embrace.
If logic dictates that we should cut subsidies to a profitable industry which delivers a product that is the lifeblood of our prosperity, shouldn't we cut the billions in subsidies to industries that produce ineffectual energy that barely registers on our energy consumption map? If it is condign to eliminate $4 billion in tax credits for an industry that brings in hundreds of billions in taxes and royalties, shouldn't we eliminate the subsidies for wind, solar, and ethanol, which are a net loss for the treasury and consumer alike?
Instead of Senate Republicans introducing harmful amendments which accept the Democrats' premise and mandate onerous drilling regulations and liabilities, they should utilize Democrats' hypocrisy and offer real consequential amendments. In that spirit, I propose a quintessential Washington style compromise and call for the Bipartisan Comprehensive Energy Reform Act of 2011. It would end all tax credits for the oil and gas industry. But, you know what? It would eliminate all subsidies, mandates, and (or) tariffs for wind, solar, and ethanol (incorporating the goals of Mike Pompeo's H.Res. 267). In addition, it would completely abolish the Department of Energy (DOE), along with the ethanol programs at the USDA. How's that for a compromise?
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
An Absurd Bag Tax is Still a Threat in Maryland
For those of you who were wondering why we were let off the hook from crushing tax increases during this past legislative session (the alcohol tax hike not withstanding), beware the special session in September. Not only is a gas tax hike on the table, a plastic bag tax is also in the works.
Last week, Montgomery County became the first jurisdiction in Maryland to impose a 5-cent tax on the use of plastic bags in stores. Julie Bykowicz of the Baltimore Sun is reporting that Montgomery County state legislators are trying to propagate their puerile policies to across the rest of the state:
Last week, Montgomery County became the first jurisdiction in Maryland to impose a 5-cent tax on the use of plastic bags in stores. Julie Bykowicz of the Baltimore Sun is reporting that Montgomery County state legislators are trying to propagate their puerile policies to across the rest of the state:
Bag taxes at the local level are spreading across the country, though the National Conference of State Legislatures noted in February that no state had instituted a statewide tax.
The Gazette reported that Del. Alfred C. Carr Jr., a Montgomery County Democrat who championed a bag tax this session, thinks Montgomery's bag tax "continues the momentum."
Carr's statewide plan would have required stores to charge 5 cents for each disposable bag. Stores would be able to keep one cent -- two if they offered a "customer bag credit program."
Most of the revenue raised would have gone to the Chesapeake Bay Trust. The fiscal note doesn't provide a solid estimate of how much money the tax would generate.
Friday, May 06, 2011
Support Bob Latta's Comprehensive Energy Production Bill
The Republican Study Committee has struck again. While Republican House leaders are tepidly tiptoeing around energy policy with an incremental approach, RSC Energy Task Force Chairman Bob Latta (R-OH) is pushing a comprehensive energy production bill. The Consumer Relief for Pain at the Pump Act, H.R. 1777, would open up thousands of acres worth of drilling fields, extirpate onerous regulations from the backs of our energy producers, strike out at the heart of the domestic environmental legal defense fiscal terrorist community, expedite the oil refinery application process, and streamline the land leasing process.
This bill directly addresses all of the obstacles to oil, gas, and shale exploration; it would create thousands of real jobs, and reduce the cost of energy to consumers. Being that oil is the lifeblood of the economy and is used for so many vital products and services, this bill would help reduce production and delivery costs of virtually every durable good, spawning unprecedented economic growth. As an added bonus, it would eliminate many jobs of Democrat environmental agitators and oil rig-chasing attorneys.
Most importantly, this legislation would open up 2,000 acres of ANWR for development of its estimated 10 billion barrels of oil and 35 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. This is something that other Republican leaders have abdicated in the face of visceral opposition from the left. In light of record gas prices and other residual inflationary pains to consumers, this is not a time to go wobbly on ANWR.
Here are some of the key proposals in H.R. 1777 from Congressman Latta's press release:
This bill directly addresses all of the obstacles to oil, gas, and shale exploration; it would create thousands of real jobs, and reduce the cost of energy to consumers. Being that oil is the lifeblood of the economy and is used for so many vital products and services, this bill would help reduce production and delivery costs of virtually every durable good, spawning unprecedented economic growth. As an added bonus, it would eliminate many jobs of Democrat environmental agitators and oil rig-chasing attorneys.
Most importantly, this legislation would open up 2,000 acres of ANWR for development of its estimated 10 billion barrels of oil and 35 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. This is something that other Republican leaders have abdicated in the face of visceral opposition from the left. In light of record gas prices and other residual inflationary pains to consumers, this is not a time to go wobbly on ANWR.
Here are some of the key proposals in H.R. 1777 from Congressman Latta's press release:
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
Beware the Liberal War on Bags
Liberals truly think of everything as they assail the American consumer and producer alike. They ensure that gas prices are high, thereby inflating the cost of driving to the supermarket or mall. They devalue the dollar and subsidize the agriculture sector, ensuring that food prices remain high at the supermarket. Now they are plotting to tax the bags that hold the food on the way back from the store.
Across the country, liberals are working unremittingly to eliminate or tax plastic and paper bags at all stores. The latest battle is in Oregon where the state Senate might vote on a bag tax (SB 536) today or later this week. This bill would levy a 5-cent tax on paper bags and completely ban "single-use" plastic bags from most stores. It would also force retailers to "provide information to ensure compliance."
SB 536, as well as dozens of similar bills in other state legislatures, encapsulates everything that is capricious about modern liberal economic policy. During a time of high unemployment and inflation, bag taxes and bag bans will destroy private sector jobs and regressively punish the consumers of vital needs.
In addition, this bill contains another indelible tenet of socialism; social engineering and means-testing. Anyone on food assistance programs would be exempt from the paper bag tax. Unfortunately, the small business is not accorded the same exemption as the poor consumer. Worse, they will be disproportionately punished with the higher cost of purchasing the more expensive paper bags in lieu of the banned plastic bags.
While the green hippies in Oregon are cheering the proposed elimination of plastic bags, they would be wise to cogitate about the consequences of their actions. The eco-fascists have already infringed upon our choice of light bulbs, toilets, and showers. Eventually, they will eliminate one of their coveted choices as well. After all, a widespread war on plastic bags will invariably decimate their sacrosanct green recycling jobs. If no plastic is sold and disseminated, there will be no plastic to recycle.
Like all inane policy ideas, the bag tax/ban originated in D.C. If we don't stop it from spreading to states like Oregon, it may be coming to a jurisdiction near you. Democrats control the Oregon Senate 18-12 and need 16 votes to pass the bill. Call the state senators in Salem at 1-800-332-2313 and tell them to keep their commitment to consumer choice. Let's see who is really pro-choice.
Across the country, liberals are working unremittingly to eliminate or tax plastic and paper bags at all stores. The latest battle is in Oregon where the state Senate might vote on a bag tax (SB 536) today or later this week. This bill would levy a 5-cent tax on paper bags and completely ban "single-use" plastic bags from most stores. It would also force retailers to "provide information to ensure compliance."
SB 536, as well as dozens of similar bills in other state legislatures, encapsulates everything that is capricious about modern liberal economic policy. During a time of high unemployment and inflation, bag taxes and bag bans will destroy private sector jobs and regressively punish the consumers of vital needs.
In addition, this bill contains another indelible tenet of socialism; social engineering and means-testing. Anyone on food assistance programs would be exempt from the paper bag tax. Unfortunately, the small business is not accorded the same exemption as the poor consumer. Worse, they will be disproportionately punished with the higher cost of purchasing the more expensive paper bags in lieu of the banned plastic bags.
While the green hippies in Oregon are cheering the proposed elimination of plastic bags, they would be wise to cogitate about the consequences of their actions. The eco-fascists have already infringed upon our choice of light bulbs, toilets, and showers. Eventually, they will eliminate one of their coveted choices as well. After all, a widespread war on plastic bags will invariably decimate their sacrosanct green recycling jobs. If no plastic is sold and disseminated, there will be no plastic to recycle.
Like all inane policy ideas, the bag tax/ban originated in D.C. If we don't stop it from spreading to states like Oregon, it may be coming to a jurisdiction near you. Democrats control the Oregon Senate 18-12 and need 16 votes to pass the bill. Call the state senators in Salem at 1-800-332-2313 and tell them to keep their commitment to consumer choice. Let's see who is really pro-choice.
Friday, April 08, 2011
Obama Blocking Canada Oil Pipeline
In addition to locking up our domestic production of oil and gas, Obama, buttressed by environmental extremists, is blocking the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline project. The proposed pipeline would efficiently and economically transport 1.1 million barrels of oil per day from Alberta to Texas. If brought to fruition, it would help transport roughly 10% of our daily oil imports. The proposed pipeline would also create 20,000 jobs and bring in billions of dollars in royalties and tax revenue to cash strapped states. Additionally, it would decrease our dependency on terrorist oil by replacing a substantial share of our imports with oil produced by our friendly ally.
Thomas Donohue, CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce penned an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal along with his Canadian counterpart, Perrin Beatty, detailing Obama's obdurate obstructionism against the pipeline:
Thomas Donohue, CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce penned an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal along with his Canadian counterpart, Perrin Beatty, detailing Obama's obdurate obstructionism against the pipeline:
Unfortunately, this project has been lingering under review by the U.S. State Department since 2008. Despite a thorough environmental review by the State Department last year and an Energy Department study in February of this year—which found that the project should move forward—the Obama administration this month announced another round of environmental studies. They gave no specific reason and set no clear time frame. But more delay only threatens U.S. energy security and postpones the creation of badly needed jobs.....
We should not ignore the economic implications of the Keystone XL pipeline. Building the pipeline will create over 20,000 new American jobs in construction and manufacturing in the short term, and more than 250,000 jobs in the long run, according to estimates by TransCanada. The pipeline would also generate needed revenue for states and local communities, including $585 million in taxes and more than $5 billion in property taxes over the projected 100-year operating life of the pipeline. These jobs and revenue are critically needed as America continues its economic recovery.
Monday, March 28, 2011
Senate Action Alert: Small Business Bill
The major legislative item on the agenda in the Senate this week will be The Small Business Reauthorization Act (S. 493). Republicans plan to use this bill as a platform to promote critical pieces of legislation through the process of non-germane amendments to the bill. Here are some vital amendments that will be debated and voted on throughout the week:
- Senator Mitch McConnell is offering an amendment (S. AMDT 183) to prohibit the EPA from promulgating any regulations on greenhouse gas emissions. There is perhaps no force that is more destructive to our prosperity, consumer freedom of choice, and job creation than onerous cap and trade schemes. There are many red state Democrats who are up for reelection in 2012 and will be hard pressed to go on record as supporting policies that are an imprecation to the interests of their states. Make sure to call Senators Claire McCaskill, Joe Manchin, Ben Nelson, Bill Nelson, and Jon Tester in particular.
- Senator David Vitter is offering an amendment (S.AMDT. 178) forcing the federal government to sell off unused and underused property. This is a serious issue. The federal government owns over half of the land in some western states and has been using it to stifle energy development. Selling unused federal lands would also serve as a prudent means of generating revenue without raising taxes.
- Senator Rand Paul is using the SBA bill as a platform to offer his signature budget bill (S.AMDT 199) which would slash $200 billion in spending for fiscal 2011. Paul's plan slashes funding by 50% to the Departments of Energy, Education, and HUD. This amendment represents real limited government and budget austerity and will separate the men among the boys in the ranks of the Republican Conference.
- Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison is forcing a vote (S. AMDT 197) to delay the implementation of ObamaCare until a final resolution is reached in pending lawsuits. Unlike other bills that are designed to merely ameliorate ObamaCare, this amendment would completely halt it during the ensuing legal battles.
- Senator Tom Coburn has filed an amendment (S.AMDT.184) to force federal agencies to compile comprehensive lists of all of their programs
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
MD-House: No Shale Drilling in Western Maryland
Maryland Democrats continued their inexorable war on the consumer today; this time they are targeting natural gas exploration in western Maryland.
Democrats on the House Environmental Matters Committee voted to ban drilling for natural gas in the Marcellus Shale formation in western Maryland until state agencies conduct a study on "how drilling affects health and the environment". In other words, with the wolves guarding the drilling house, there will be no drilling in western Maryland; there will be no local jobs creates; there will be no reprieve from rising gas and electricity prices.
Earlier today, the HEM Committee tabled an amendment by Delegate Wendell Beitzel (R-Garrett) that would have required the onerous drilling regulations to be approved by a legislative panel. It would have also forced the Maryland Department of the Environment to issue drilling permits immediately. The underlying bill (H.B.852) is being sponsored by Democratic Dels. Heather Mizeur of Montgomery County and Marvin E. Holmes Jr. of Prince George's. How ironic that it is the DC urban area politicians who are limiting drilling in the rural areas of western Maryland, even though the drilling is supported by the local representatives.
It is quite obvious that the proposal of environmental impact studies are simply means to scuttle the shale fracking altogether. Samson Resources and Chief Oil & Gas, a Dallas-based gas company, have signed leases to drill in western Maryland in 2009. The Department of the Environment has already been "studying" the environmental impact since then. North Dakota has welcomed the shale fracking industry into the state and is now enjoying a 3.9% unemployment rate. I guess Maryland will just continue to rely on government jobs to fill its employment roles.
It is reflective of a perverse dichotomy that Governor O'Malley is banning job-creating consumer-friendly shale drilling even as he advocates that Marylanders underwrite the inefficacious wind projects of his political allies.
Call your state legislators in Annapolis and demand that they stop chasing jobs out of Maryland and fleecing energy consumers!
Democrats on the House Environmental Matters Committee voted to ban drilling for natural gas in the Marcellus Shale formation in western Maryland until state agencies conduct a study on "how drilling affects health and the environment". In other words, with the wolves guarding the drilling house, there will be no drilling in western Maryland; there will be no local jobs creates; there will be no reprieve from rising gas and electricity prices.
Earlier today, the HEM Committee tabled an amendment by Delegate Wendell Beitzel (R-Garrett) that would have required the onerous drilling regulations to be approved by a legislative panel. It would have also forced the Maryland Department of the Environment to issue drilling permits immediately. The underlying bill (H.B.852) is being sponsored by Democratic Dels. Heather Mizeur of Montgomery County and Marvin E. Holmes Jr. of Prince George's. How ironic that it is the DC urban area politicians who are limiting drilling in the rural areas of western Maryland, even though the drilling is supported by the local representatives.
It is quite obvious that the proposal of environmental impact studies are simply means to scuttle the shale fracking altogether. Samson Resources and Chief Oil & Gas, a Dallas-based gas company, have signed leases to drill in western Maryland in 2009. The Department of the Environment has already been "studying" the environmental impact since then. North Dakota has welcomed the shale fracking industry into the state and is now enjoying a 3.9% unemployment rate. I guess Maryland will just continue to rely on government jobs to fill its employment roles.
It is reflective of a perverse dichotomy that Governor O'Malley is banning job-creating consumer-friendly shale drilling even as he advocates that Marylanders underwrite the inefficacious wind projects of his political allies.
Call your state legislators in Annapolis and demand that they stop chasing jobs out of Maryland and fleecing energy consumers!
1-800-492-7122
Tell your state reps to oppose HB 852 and your Senator to oppose SB 634
Friday, March 11, 2011
Weekly RINO Roundup
- Dick Lugar announced his opposition to H.R. 1-the GOP spending bill for the rest of the fiscal year. He is really begging to be dethroned. Let's accede his request.
- Scott Brown continues to show that he is indeed occupying "the Ted Kennedy seat". He expressed his dismay with the budget cuts to the Home Energy Assistance Program. Hwy Scott, maybe if you'd stop empowering Democrats we wouldn't need energy assistance programs because we would have an ample supply of our own energy sources.
- Lindsey Grahamnesty is planning to revive the 'Gang of 10' talks with progressives to push for a "Clean Energy Standard". This would amount to a cap and trade bill that would limit our energy production and mandate the use of impotent and inefficacious energy sources. I guess they will not rest until gas prices are at $10 a gallon.
-95 House Republicans join every Democrat in supporting a clandestine suspension bill to promote veterinary health coverage. The bill past 280-138. As a suspension bill, we only needed 146 of the 242 Republicans to oppose the bill. Yet, astoundingly, 95 Republicans supported this minor, yet gratuitous gesture towards ObamaCare. For what purpose did we win back the House again? [full report here]
- Scott Brown continues to show that he is indeed occupying "the Ted Kennedy seat". He expressed his dismay with the budget cuts to the Home Energy Assistance Program. Hwy Scott, maybe if you'd stop empowering Democrats we wouldn't need energy assistance programs because we would have an ample supply of our own energy sources.
- Lindsey Grahamnesty is planning to revive the 'Gang of 10' talks with progressives to push for a "Clean Energy Standard". This would amount to a cap and trade bill that would limit our energy production and mandate the use of impotent and inefficacious energy sources. I guess they will not rest until gas prices are at $10 a gallon.
-95 House Republicans join every Democrat in supporting a clandestine suspension bill to promote veterinary health coverage. The bill past 280-138. As a suspension bill, we only needed 146 of the 242 Republicans to oppose the bill. Yet, astoundingly, 95 Republicans supported this minor, yet gratuitous gesture towards ObamaCare. For what purpose did we win back the House again? [full report here]
Thursday, March 10, 2011
MD-Senate: The Assault on our Freedom Continues
Another day; another assault on our freedoms (and wallets) in Maryland. Yesterday, the state House focused on granting criminals more liberty by easing the parole process for violent criminals. At the same time, a Senate committee was proposing legislation to levy a 5 cent tax on plastic and paper bags. Here is the scoop from WBAL:
The proposed Senate Bill 602 will require stores to charge customers 5 cents for the use of plastic and paper bags. Lawmakers said if the measure passes, Maryland would become the first state to adopt a disposable bag fee...
Lawmakers said a portion of the revenue would go to the Chesapeake Bay Trust and other state environmental projects.
Environmentalist Halle Vandergaag testified in support of the bill, saying that the flimsy plastic bags are major sources of pollution, as well as a public health concern.
“When plastic bags get into the water, they break down," he said. "And as you can imagine, they're made from petroleum, so there's a chemical product that actually breaks down and makes its way into our drinking water and into our fish, crabs and oysters.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)