Thursday, June 11, 2009

Morning Bell; Heritage Foundation

A Pro-Growth, Pro-Nuclear, Energy Alternative
Last month the Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis released a study of the Waxman-Markey energy tax bill showing that by 2035 it would raise electricity rates 90 percent, reduce aggregate gross domestic product (GDP) by $7.4 trillion, and destroy over 1,900,000 jobs. The Natural Resources Defense Council recently responded with a critique of our analysis claiming we “concealed” the fact that GDP would actually grow under the Waxman-Markey bill.

This is just plain false. Of course the U.S. economy would still grow under Waxman-Markey … it will just grow a lot slower (and produce a lots less jobs) than it would have otherwise. The question decision makers must face when considering any change in policy is: What are we sacrificing when we choose one action over its alternative? In economics, this basic concept is called “opportunity cost.” But the NRDC explicitly urges readers to ignore fundamental economic thinking: “Do not accept a ‘how much less GDP is relative to no policy’ answer.”

That is not even the most galling aspect of their critique. The NRDC then goes on to cite the Environmental Protection Agency’s lower cost estimates as evidence that the CDA’s estimates are too high. But to keep their cost estimates so low, the EPA study assumes a doubling of nuclear power by 2035 … an assumption the NRDC has previously attacked! Apparently, audacity is contagious on the left.The Waxman-Markey bill is nothing more than an anti-growth bailout for corporations and a huge tax on consumers.

Fortunately, there is an alternative.

Yesterday House conservatives unveiled the American Energy Act which unshackles America’s energy producers by allowing energy exploration in Alaska’s North Slope, leasing of oil and natural gas fields in the outer continental shelf, and expediting legal challenges to energy development projects. Most importantly, it makes key policy changes that will revive our domestic nuclear industry, including:

Providing an efficient, predictable, and expedited pathway to permitting new reactors;
Suspending tariffs on imported reactor components;
Providing the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) the authority to complete its review of the Yucca Mountain repository;
Repealing the artificial limitations on Yucca Mountain’s capacity; and
Providing an avenue to start recycling spent nuclear fuel in the U.S.

Unlike the massive new energy tax that President Barack Obama has personally admitted would lead energy prices to skyrocket, creating a regulatory framework that will revive our domestic nuclear industry will create thousands of high paying construction and engineering jobs as well as produce cleaner, cheaper energy for the rest of our economy.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

|

Thursday, August 21, 2008

A Gusher of Hypocrisy

From the NRCC Newsletter:

PELOSI AND THE DEMOCRATS PROMOTE SHAM ENERGY PROPOSAL

"While Nancy Pelosi is off on her cross-country tour trying to get her book moved off the New York Times' worst-seller list, voters are wondering why she and her fellow Democrats can't be bothered to address the issue of out of control fuel costs," said Ken Spain, a spokesman for the NRCC. (www.PolitickerCA.com)

Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the Democrat Majority are well into the third week of their paid five week vacation right now. And no, they aren't showing any signs of getting back to work before September to vote on an energy package that would increase the supply of American oil.

Meanwhile, the Associated Press reports that kids are about to head back to school where they'll be paying more for lunch, studying from old textbooks and walking further to the bus stop - assuming their bus schedule hasn't been cancelled altogether - thanks to higher fuel prices.

This past Sunday, Pelosi proposed a sham of an energy proposal during her weekly radio address. And it was nothing short of an insult to the American people. Madam Speaker, who hails from California, refuses to allow Congress to vote on - or even debate - legislation that would open the Golden State to offshore drilling.But listen to this - even George Skelton, a left-of-center columnist for the Los Angeles Times, advocates opening up California to more drilling.

He writes:"California is the nation's biggest consumer of gasoline - 45 million gallons a day, plus 10 million gallons of diesel. That makes us the third-biggest petroleum-consuming entity in the world, behind on the United States and China. ... So there's a gusher of hypocrisy here: The state that is the biggest consumer of gasoline in the nation - but produces less than 40% of what it uses - is opposed to drilling for more oil off its shores. We're slackers not pulling our weight."

The long and short of it is that our nation is being held hostage by one woman from San Francisco, Nancy Pelosi, who opposes drilling for American oil off the shores of California.

REPUBLICANS WINNING THE DEBATE ON ENERGY

The good news is that Republicans are winning the debate on energy. A recent Rasmussen Poll finds that 61% of Americans want Congress to get back to work immediately and lift the ban on offshore drilling. In terms of how they'll vote for Congress this year, 77% say offshore oil drilling is important.
And 67% of Americans recognize Republicans - not Democrats - are pushing the drilling issue.

OUR CANDIDATES' ADS

Our candidates across the country are doing a great job of getting out the message that we must increase the supply of American energy. This week, we're highlighting a fantastic new television ad by John Gard, who's running against Democrat incumbent Steve Kagen in Wisconsin-08.Republicans are on the right side of the energy debate. Meanwhile, a lot of vulnerable Democrats risk getting swept away by Speaker Pelosi's gusher of hypocrisy.

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

|

Tuesday, August 19, 2008

Take The Poll Tell 'Em What You Think

|

Thursday, August 14, 2008

Pelosi's Investment With T-Bone Picken Your Pocket

The United States may be the most free, stable and meritocratic nation in the world, but its resources and patience are not unlimited. Currently, it pays more than a half trillion dollars per year to import $115-a-barrel oil that is often pumped at a cost of about $5.
Victor Davis Hanson

Dear Ms. Nancy Pelosi,

T. Boone Pickens says we're spending $700 billion a year to import oil, about the same as the entire cost of the Iraq war, every year. But the Nancy Pelosi Congress obstructs drilling for American oil and goes on vacation, doing nothing about it for another five weeks while Nancy Pelosi goes on a book tour.


Meanwhile, 2007 disclosure forms indicate that SanFranNan has invested in T-Bones company. Schedule III lists “assets and ‘unearned income’” of between $100,001-$250,000 from Clean Energy Fuels Corp. - Public Common Stock.” Clean Energy Fuels Corp. is a natural gas provider founded by T. Boone Pickens. Yep, that T. Boone Pickens– former oilman-turned-wind power evangelist whose ads touting a national wind campaign are now as ubiquitous as Viagra promos.

At $50,000 a job, that $700 billion means 14,000,000 American jobs are being exported to OPEC and other countries we're buying oil from. If we produced all our own oil, that would mean $700 billion a year re-invested in the U.S., a pretty good stimulus package, and 14 million more American jobs for Americans.

That's enough new jobs to slash our unemployment rate to zero, slash our trade deficit to zero, and eliminate the strategic threat of oil embargos from OPEC, Iran, or Russia.

We aren't "addicted to oil," we're "addicted to energy," just as we're "addicted" to food and water. Without food, we die. Without water, we die. Food and water are energy for people. Oil is energy for transportation and industry. Without energy, economies die. If you want to use less coal and oil, then why don't you support nuclear power with zero CO2 emissions?

Why did Bill Clinton and Al Gore and John Kerry collude to shut down the Integral Fast Reactor project in 1993 (Argonne National Laboratory, led by physicist Charles Tell Ph.D.), that would have produced 100 times as much nuclear energy from a pound of uranium as the old reactors do, and by reprocessing spent fuel, would have produced no high level nuclear "waste?" Why don't you ask Bill, Al, and John, and let us know?

When you took office as Speaker you promised to have a National Energy Policy in 100 days. Well, it's been almost two years, and what do we have?

A national "no-energy non-policy." Why is the Nancy Pelosi Congress stuck on stupid?

Raymond S Kraft
Loomis, Placer
County
California

P.S. - The Nancy Pelosi Book is now up to # 1,850 on the Amazon best seller list. Buy it by Christmas at Dollar Tree for a buck.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

|

Tuesday, June 17, 2008

From Our Friends At Freedom's Watch

Rising oil prices are playing havoc with our economy. Continental Airlines just announced it's laying off 3,000 workers; Ford is considering slashing about 2,000 jobs. And now what you pay for electricity is going up as much as 29 percent. If you've had enough, please sign our petition and email your representative.
Since the new majority took control of Congress in January 2007 on a pledge to bring down gas prices, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have not sent a single bill that would lower fuel costs to the President. Just the opposite. Reid tried to get the Senate to pass a "cap and trade" bill that could have actually raised the cost of gasoline by as much as $1.10/gal.
Meanwhile, Senator Chuck Schumer's solution to skyrocketing gas prices is to bully Saudi Arabia into increasing production and lowering their price of oil.
It doesn't have to be this way. Believe it or not, America may hold more oil than Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, and Venezuela - but it is closed off to exploration by our own government. So why bully Saudi Arabia when, in terms of oil production, we could become Saudi Arabia?
The good news is that Congressman Mac Thornberry has introduced the No More Excuses Energy Act (H.R. 3089), which would allow for more oil drilling here at home, increase wind energy, encourage the construction of new refineries, and expand clean nuclear power. If 218 House members sign the discharge petition on the bill, it will be brought to the floor for a vote.
Freedom's Watch will tomorrow begin calling residents in selected congressional districts urging members to support H.R.3089. You can help, too.
First, sign our petition supporting this bill that we can deliver to the House leadership on your behalf. Second, click here to send your representatives an email telling them to sign the discharge petition for H.R. 3089.
Congress is all that stands in the way of energy independence and lower fuel costs for America. Let them know where you stand!

Labels: , , , , , ,

|