Amy Ridenour's National Center Blog

Outrage of the Day: Obama's Unkept Tax Promise

2009-07-10T06:04:00.000-04:00

Although I don't endorse every sentiment in every sentence of this Associated Press article "PROMISES, PROMISES: Obama's Unkept Tax Pledge" by Stephen Ohlemacher, it's well worth reading.

The piece begins:

President Barack Obama promised to fix health care and trim the federal budget deficit, all without raising taxes on anyone but the wealthiest Americans. It's a promise he's already broken and will likely have to break again.

Obama and the Democratic-controlled Congress have already increased tobacco taxes — which disproportionately hit the poor — to pay for extending health coverage to 4 million children in working low-income families.

Now, lawmakers are looking for more revenues to help pay for providing medical insurance to millions more who lack it at a projected cost of $1 trillion over the next decade.
The floated proposals include increasing taxes on alcohol, which could raise $62 billion over the next decade, and a new tax on sugary drinks such as soda, which could raise $52 billion...

I recommend reading the whole thing.

E-mail any comments to the National Center for Public Policy Research at info@nationalcenter.org.
Subscribe to this blog's feed.

Carol Browner's Hijinks: They Call This Open Government?

2009-07-09T11:47:00.001-04:00

Mark Tapscott is on the case of White House "climate czar" Carol Browner, who appears to be continuing her wily Clinton Administration pattern of dodging and weaving whenever legal niceties interfere with her left-wing agenda.

As Mark writes in his piece entitled "'Put Nothing In Writing,' Browner Told Auto Execs on Secret White House CAFE Talks; Sensenbrenner Wants Investigation":

Carol Browner, former Clinton administration EPA head and current Obama White House climate czar, instructed auto industry execs "to put nothing in writing, ever" regarding secret negotiations she orchestrated regarding a deal to increase federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards.

Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-WI, is demanding a congressional investigation of Browner's conduct in the CAFE talks, saying in a letter to Rep. Henry Waxman, D-CA, that Browner "intended to leave little or no documentation of the deliberations that lead to stringent new CAFE standards."

Federal law requires officials to preserve documents concerning significant policy decisions, so instructing participants in a policy negotation concerning a major federal policy change could be viewed as a criminal act...

Browner should answer these charges and very specifically, too, but President Obama must be held to account as well. It's not as though he didn't know what he was getting when he appointed Browner. As my husband David Ridenour pointed out in an op-ed published around the U.S. early this year, when Browner was head of the Environmental Protection Agency during the Clinton Administration, it made a practice of skirting the law.

David wrote, in part:

Throughout [Carol Browner's] years as administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency in the Clinton administration, EPA officials routinely violated the Anti-Lobbying Act - a law prohibiting federal employees from using agency money for 'telephone, letter, printed or written matter, or other device intended or designed to influence in any manner a Member of Congress.'

In 1995, the EPA flagrantly violated that law when it lobbied against the Job Creation and Wage Enhancement Act, a bill that would have curbed some of the EPA's worst abuses.

As James Hinchman, comptroller general of the United States, noted, EPA officials 'distributed EPA fact sheets to various organizations' and 'directly lobbied the Congress.' Not only that, but an EPA regional administrator wrote a strong op-ed designed to stop the bill's passage.

Four years later, Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., accused the EPA of violating the Anti-Lobbying Act again. Byrd - who has made a career of steering pork to his state - complained that the EPA's Transportation Partners Program was coordinating and funding anti-road lobbyists against the law and his state's interests. Browner was forced to terminate the program.
The following year, Browner was at it yet again. This time, her agency was accused of allowing special interests to improperly influence last-minute - so-called midnight - environmental regulations.

U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth ordered the EPA to preserve communications with such groups. Instead, Browner had her computer hard drive re-initialized, wiping it clean. Lamberth then held the EPA in contempt for 'contumacious conduct.'
As little respect as she's shown for the law, Browner has shown even less for science. During her years at the EPA, agency scientists who didn't toe the party line were subjected to relentless harassment.

David Lewis, an EPA Science Achievement Award recipient, publicly criticized the quality of science used in crafting regulations. In response, the EPA charged Lewis with ethics violations and repeatedly denied him promotion. Although he won whistle-blower judgments against the EPA, he was eventually forced into retirement.

I recommend reading both Mark's full editorial on Browner's CAFE shenanigans and David's full op-ed on Carol Browner's ideology and ethics, as well as a second commentary by Mark, "Browner Has History of Deceit on Government Files" in today's Washington Examiner.

E-mail any comments to the National Center for Public Policy Research at info@nationalcenter.org.
Subscribe to this blog's feed.

Obama's Risky Energy Policy

2009-07-08T11:41:00.001-04:00

National Center Senior Fellow Bonner Cohen has an op-ed running in newspapers nationwide saying President Obama is playing "Russian roulette" with our energy future.

The piece begins:

President Barack Obama is playing Russian roulette with America's quest for energy independence by rushing to replace fossil fuels with unreliable and expensive renewable energy.

The global balance of power is already shifting away from the United States toward China and Russia in the critical area of strategic natural resources...

You can read the full piece on the website of the McClatchy-Tribune News Service, which distributed the piece nationally, on the Baltimore Sun website, or find it elsewhere via search engines.

E-mail any comments to the National Center for Public Policy Research at info@nationalcenter.org.
Subscribe to this blog's feed.

It's Even Worse When It's The Majority Leader

2009-07-08T11:31:00.001-04:00

It is not a very good thing when a Congressman laughs at the notion that Congressmen should read the text of legislation before voting on it.

CNSNews.com's Monica Gabriel and Marie Magleby report today that Majority Leader Steny Hoyer actually laughed when asked by CNSNews.com if Members of Congress should read a government health care "reform" bill before voting on it.

"If every member pledged to not vote for it if they hadn't read it in its entirety, I think we would have very few votes," Hoyer told CNSNews.com.

If the bill is so unimportant it's not worth the trouble to read (by people who are paid well to read it, no less!), maybe we should just do without.

E-mail any comments to the National Center for Public Policy Research at info@nationalcenter.org.
Subscribe to this blog's feed.

If The Average of 25 and 75 Is 50, Does That Make Us All Middle-Aged?'

2009-07-07T20:41:00.001-04:00

Would you buy a used climate model from a man who could say this?

The average age of scientists in the space center control room was 26, which means they were 18 when they heard President Kennedy say he wanted to put a man on the Moon in ten years.

P.S. The high temperature yesterday in the Oxford, England area, where Al Gore spoke, was 64 degrees F. According to weather.com, the average high for that date is 8 degrees F higher.

E-mail any comments to the National Center for Public Policy Research at info@nationalcenter.org.
Subscribe to this blog's feed.

Russia and America's Energy Future

2009-07-07T09:24:00.001-04:00

In light of President Obama's trip to Russia, National Center for Public Policy Research Senior Fellow Bonner Cohen and Dow Jones Newswire Journalist Alexander Kolyandr discussed Russia's energy resources and U.S. energy policy on the Fox Business Channel this morning.

Among other things, Bonner addressed the conundrum that Russia has extensive oil resources that are difficult to get to, while U.S. oil companies have the technology to get to it. Yet Russia's legal structure is, as Bonner put it, a "kleptocracy," which makes it difficult for any U.S. company to do business there.

Bonner also discussed the limitations of the Obama Administration's reliance on renewable fuels.

E-mail any comments to the National Center for Public Policy Research at info@nationalcenter.org.
Subscribe to this blog's feed.

Quote of Note: Big Government's Ultimate Impact

2009-07-06T05:20:00.000-04:00

"A society of children cannot survive, no matter how all-embracing the government nanny."

-Mark Steyn, "Being Taken Care of Weakens Us," Washington Times, June 15, 2009

E-mail any comments to the National Center for Public Policy Research at info@nationalcenter.org.
Subscribe to this blog's feed.

Honduras

2009-07-05T22:56:00.001-04:00

If you're looking for a quick summary of what the issues are regarding the ousted Honduran president, this recap by Hans Bader will suite your purposes well.

E-mail any comments to the National Center for Public Policy Research at info@nationalcenter.org.
Subscribe to this blog's feed.

Photos of the Washington DC Tea Party

2009-07-05T00:38:00.001-04:00

Continuing my post about the Tea Parties in New York City and Washington, D.C. attended by National Center staff, here are photos of the July 4 Tea Party in Washington.

I estimate approximately 4,000 people attended the Tea Party in Washington D.C.

This post was written by David Almasi, executive director of the National Center for Public Policy Research. Write the author at info@nationalcenter.org. As we occasionally reprint letters on the blog, please note if you prefer that your correspondence be kept private, or only published anonymously.

National Center Staff Engages in Tea Party-Mania

2009-07-05T00:18:00.001-04:00

A second round of "tea parties" took place across America this week. According to one organizer's web site, there were almost 1,500 scheduled events across America to protest the unabated growth of government, particularly since Obama took office.

On July 1, Project 21 fellow Deneen Borelli and her husband - National Center Free Enterprise Project Director Tom Borelli - attended the tea party in Times Square in New York City.

On July 4, National Center executive director David W. Almasi and his wife Nancy attended the tea party in Washington just steps from the Capitol.

Below are some photos from the New York City tea party. The next post will contain photos from the Washington D.C. tea party.

Deneen Borelli

Something Odd to Be Grateful For

2009-07-04T08:00:00.000-04:00

Next time you are having a bad day, you can console yourself that at least you're not naked in public with a clothes dryer on your head.

(Assuming you're not.)

Dave Chapman of New Zealand learned to appreciate this the hard way.

E-mail any comments to the National Center for Public Policy Research at info@nationalcenter.org.
Subscribe to this blog's feed.

Climate Policy: No Gain, No Pain

2009-07-03T06:43:00.000-04:00

Thanks to a head's up from Climate Depot, I read with interest the following on the weakness of the computer models used to predict climate from the Britsh Number Watch website:

Most computer models are nonsense. This does not include those used by engineers in designing airplanes, bridges etc., which are based on detailed experiments on the systems involved and tested in a variety of real conditions before being used.

The reason they are nonsense is that they tend to be based on guesses of the value of coefficients assumed, particularly and disastrously feedback coefficients. There are few, however, that are quite as bad as climate models, where the physics of the interactions between variables and parameters is virtually unknown to mankind.

...Imagine you settled down in your seat in a jumbo jet and noticed a plaque on the back of the seat in front which reads 'This machine was designed with the aid of a super-computer. We did not know the values of all the parameters, so had to guess most of them.' You would get off in a hurry. Yet the world's political and media establishment are asking you to gamble the economic future of yourself and your descendants on just such a proposition.

Yes, that really is what the global warming debate comes down to. Shall we believe computer models that are at best based on educated guesses (and which disagree with one another), and enact policies that significantly harm the economy based upon them, even knowing that the policies themselves wouldn't affect the climate noticeably?

I say no; it's wrong to hurt people based on a theory you have no idea is correct, especially if you know the solution won't fix the problem even if your theory IS correct.

You've heard of "no pain, no gain" with regard to weight training? The cap-and-trade climate debate is the reverse: "no gain, no pain." That is, as there isn't going to be any noticeable gain from Waxman-Markey and its ilk, why inflict the pain?

Hat tip: Climate Depot.

E-mail any comments to the National Center for Public Policy Research at info@nationalcenter.org.
Subscribe to this blog's feed.

Quote of Note: Do We Now Need Government for Big Ticket Items?

2009-07-03T06:01:00.000-04:00

"Health is potentially a big-ticket item, but so is a house and a car, and most folks manage to handle those without a Government Accommodation Plan or a Government Motor Vehicles System -- or, at any rate, they did in pre-bailout America."

-Mark Steyn, "Being Taken Care of Weakens Us," Washington Times, June 15, 2009

E-mail any comments to the National Center for Public Policy Research at info@nationalcenter.org.
Subscribe to this blog's feed.

National Center's Tom Borelli Discusses Cap-and-Trade on Glenn Beck

2009-07-02T07:11:00.000-04:00

In case you missed it, here's the segment of Glenn Beck's Fox TV show from Wednesday night featuring Tom Borelli of the National Center for Public Policy Research and David Kreutzer of the Heritage Foundation.

The topic is cap and trade, USCAP, corporations doing the bidding of the left, the Waxman-Markey global warming bill and the use of last minute amendments filled with goodies (amendments Congress wasn't given time to read, of course) by the House leadership to get the legislation approved by the House.

E-mail any comments to the National Center for Public Policy Research at info@nationalcenter.org.
Subscribe to this blog's feed.

Naughty Conservatives Shouldn't Mind Votes for Waxman-Markey (Or So We're Told)

2009-07-02T01:16:00.001-04:00

In an error-riddled column posted Wednesday on TownHall.com, the supposedly conservative Michael Gerson has a novel take on the Republican Congressmen who voted for the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill: He blames conservatives for minding.

One of his reasons: "It is typical that we praise independent judgment and political nerve in our elected officials -- until they actually show those qualities."

If any conservatives and/or others dedicated to limiting government called on our elected representatives to show "independent judgement and political nerve" in service of anything other than principle, they were wrong to do so.

Gerson doesn't quote anybody, though, and I can see why: There are a lot more quotes available of conservatives calling upon their elected representatives to govern conservatively.

Gerson's try to tar the conservative movement with a hypocrisy tag doesn't work.

Gerson is honest, though, in saying he likes the bill (I find it difficult to believe this man is a conservative).

He likes it because, he says, the global warming theory is the dominant view of the "scientific community" (a brush broad enough to include gynecologists), because "some scientists" warn of "possible 'tipping points'," and because, supposedly, mankind's carbon dioxide emissions have reduced crop yields and driven some species to extinction. How he could possibly know this is not mentioned, possibly because what he claims is beyond the current ability of modern science to prove or disprove.

Gerson says "global warming since the 19th century is undeniable," which is another way of saying the planet warmed as the Little Ice Age ended, though Gerson does not mention that there even was a Little Ice Age (and before it, warmer temperatures, though no SUVs).

Gerson doesn't mention, either, that if concern for crop yields is paramount, a little more CO2 in the atmosphere might be just the thing.

And then there's his comment that warming since the end of the Little Ice Age is "closely correlated with increases in the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide," which by itself would prove nothing if it were true, but it isn't.

There's more, such as Gerson's ludicrious comment that in failing to appreciate cap-and-trade, "conservatives seem strangely intent on ignoring the power of markets to encourage... innovation," as if Waxman-Markey had anything whatsoever to do with free markets (oops, Gerson left the word "free" out, so there goes the innovation).

I could go on, but there's really no need. I linked to the version of this column on TownHall with comments. The column is impossible to appreciate, but some of the comments are superlative.

E-mail any comments to the National Center for Public Policy Research at info@nationalcenter.org.
Subscribe to this blog's feed.

We're Not Traitors, But Is Paul Krugman?

2009-07-01T05:55:00.000-04:00

Many readers will be aware that New York Times opinion writer Paul Krugman wrote in his Monday column that individuals who did not support the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill when it came up in the House for a vote last Friday are guilty of "a form of treason" against the planet.

A thought experiment: If two doctors were to disagree on a patient's diagnosis, and Krugman agreed with one of them, would the one Krugman disagrees with be guilty of a form of treason?

Even that analogy is too generous to Krugman, as doctors take an oath to (essentially) be loyal to their patients' welfare, but it is not at all common for people with opinions (of any kind) on cap-and-trade or even global warming to first take an oath of loyalty to the planet.

What many of us have done is take oaths of loyalty to the United States. The Waxman-Markey bill would ship American jobs overseas, raise energy prices, shovel money to special interests corruptly, drag down economic growth and impose regressive regulatory taxes on consumers. It would not have a measurable effect on temperature. As it does bad without doing good, the Waxman-Markey bill is bad for the United States of America.

Thus, by Paul Krugman's definition, anyone who supports Waxman-Markey is guilty of "a form of treason" against the United States.

Fortunately for Krugman, his definition of treason is even more silly than it is offensive, which is saying a great deal.

P.S. Climate Skeptic has very good commentary about Krugman's treason charge, going into different areas than I did. (I read it after seeing a link on Coyote Blog.) Interesting that neither Krugman nor his editors knew that you can't write "degrees" with meaning without specifying the temperature scale being used.

E-mail any comments to the National Center for Public Policy Research at info@nationalcenter.org.
Subscribe to this blog's feed.

Quote of Note: How to Control Health Care Costs

2009-06-30T06:12:00.000-04:00

"When President Obama tells you he's 'reforming' health care to 'control costs,' the point to remember is that the only way to control costs in health care is to have less of it."

-Mark Steyn, "Being Taken Care of Weakens Us," Washington Times, June 15, 2009

E-mail any comments to the National Center for Public Policy Research at info@nationalcenter.org.
Subscribe to this blog's feed.

Look, Everybody, I Have a Hybrid!

2009-06-30T00:14:00.001-04:00

Not me; I don't, but when I saw this car in a parking lot, I thought, "Gee, do you suppose car companies believe hybrid buyers want the world to know they drive a hybrid?"

I think I'll get a big sticker for the back window of my vehicle. It will say: GASOLINE.

I'm sure everybody's very interested.

E-mail any comments to the National Center for Public Policy Research at info@nationalcenter.org.
Subscribe to this blog's feed.

Black Activists Praise Supreme Court

2009-06-29T13:15:00.001-04:00

Project 21 has issued a press release on the Supreme Court's affirmative action decision today:

Black Activists Praise Supreme Court's Affirmative Action Decision

Justices' Ruling Throws Sotomayor Nomination into Serious Question

For Release: June 29, 2009
Contact: David Almasi at 202/543-4110 x11 or Project21@nationalcenter.org

With the U.S. Supreme Court dealing a stinging blow to race-based employment practices, members of the Project 21 black leadership network are praising the Ricci v. DeStefano decision as a step toward removing the racial trappings of a by-gone era and putting all Americans on equal footing.

"It was clear to this Court that barring people from promotion because of the color of their skin is wrong. The only downside is that four justices still cling to an outmoded and discriminatory line of thought," said Project 21 chairman Mychal Massie. "True equality allows people to rise and fall on their merits. That's what this decision protects. How can one oppose such fairness?"

In a 5-4 decision, the Court reversed the lower court ruling, barring the use of race as the sole factor in promotions. In his majority opinion, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote, "Fear of litigation alone cannot justify the City's reliance on race to the detriment of individuals who passed the examinations and qualified for promotions."

The decision also casts serious doubt on the Supreme Court nomination of Sonia Sotomayor. She was a member of the appeals court panel that issued the one-paragraph opinion overturned today. Now, she must explain to senators how she could be so much at odds with her potential future colleagues.

"Justice is supposed to be blind, but the opinion she joined in the Ricci case - now overturned by the Supreme Court - shows Sonia Sotomayor believes justice should be based on ethnicity," added Project 21's Massie. "Her ruling in Ricci is an unambiguous example of her placing her feelings and personal prejudices above what the law dictates or allows."

The Ricci case revolves around a 2003 promotions exam given to firefighters in New Haven, Connecticut. After the tests were scored, only two Hispanics and no blacks scored high enough to qualify for promotion. After black and Hispanic activists pushed to have the test results thrown out, the city's Civil Service Commission effectively did so by deadlocking 2-2 on the decision to certify the exam.

After the results of the exam were set aside by the city, 20 New Haven firefighters - one Hispanic and 19 white - sued based on the claim of reverse discrimination. The city was granted summary judgment at the district court level, and a panel of judges that included current U.S. Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor sided with the lower court in a eight-sentence opinion that called the previous opinion allowing the city to throw out the test scores based on race "thorough, thoughtful and well-reasoned."

In a concurring opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote of the question of empathy for those passed over: "But 'sympathy' is not what petitioners have a right to demand. What they have a right to demand is evenhanded enforcement of the law... And that is what, until today's decision, has been denied them."

The release is online here.

E-mail any comments to the National Center for Public Policy Research at info@nationalcenter.org.
Subscribe to this blog's feed.

Subjects of Congressional Ethics Probe Fight Back

2009-06-29T08:16:00.000-04:00

Project 21 just issued a press release criticizing the Congressional Black Caucus's apparent plans to retaliate against the House Office of Congressional Ethics, which concluded that several CBC members should be investigated by the full Ethics Committee for alleged violations of gift rules.

The release says:

Project 21 Critical of Members of Congress Under Ethics Investigation for Retaliating Against House Ethics Office and for Playing 'Race Card'

For Release: June 29, 2009
Contact: David Almasi at 202/543-4110 x11 or Project21@nationalcenter.org

An apparent effort by the Congressional Black Caucus to deter ethics investigations of its membership is drawing sharp criticism from members of the black leadership group Project 21.

CBC members reportedly are considering changes to the law authorizing the House Office of Congressional Ethics, or OCE, in retaliation for the OCE referring allegations against several CBC members to the House Ethics Committee.

CBC members reportedly also have complained that the OCE does not have enough minority staffers, adding a racial element to the apparent retaliation.

"What does the racial or ethnic makeup of the Office of Congressional Ethics have to do with the fact that these members of the Congressional Black Caucus may have violated ethics laws? It has absolutely no bearing on the charge, and to claim that is a lack of diversity at the OCE is playing the race card plain and simple," said Project 21 member Joe Hicks, also a commentator for Pajamas Television. "It is laughable that CBC members are charging the OCE with some sort of racial targeting. The OCE was created by Speaker Pelosi, someone who shamelessly bends over backwards to be politically correct."

Of the three investigative counsels hired by the OCE, one is black. The chairman of the formal Ethics Committee investigation sparked by the OCE referral is a black Member of Congress, Rep. G.K. Butterfield (D-NC), a CBC member.

"A legitimate complaint has been filed and an investigation has begun, but political pressure is now being applied to cover up the allegations and brush everything under the rug," said Project 21 member Bishop Council Nedd II. "So much for those promises to 'drain the swamp' and root out the 'culture of corruption.' It seems that swamp has turned into a hot tub for them rather quickly."

"President Obama has long proclaimed that it is special interest lobbyists who are the root of what is wrong with our federal government. This latest lapse in congressional sensibilities exposes the fact that it is wayward members of Congress themselves, whether Republican or Democrat, who pose the greatest threat to good government for the citizens of this country," said Project 21 member John Meredith. "The idea of disbanding the one avenue the citizens of this great nation have to track congressional malfeasance is an affront to the pledge of transparency in government and the use of the race card to facilitate the closing of the Office of Congressional Ethics is insulting not only to black people but to people of every color."

The controversy was sparked by an ethics complaint (PDF) filed with the OCE by National Legal and Policy Center President Peter Flaherty.

In November 2008, Flaherty attended the "Caribbean Multi-Cultural Business Conference" on the Caribbean island of St. Maarten. Although the conference officially was sponsored by the Carib News Foundation, according to Flaherty, signs and materials present indicate the event was funded by Citigroup, Pfizer, American Airlines, Verizon, IBM and other large corporations with business before Congress. CBC members Charles Rangel (D-NY), Carolyn Kilpatrick (D-MI), Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX), Donald Payne (D-NJ), Bennie Thompson (D-MS) and Delegate Donna Christensen (D-Virgin Islands) attended the event.

Members of Congress have been prohibited since 2007 from taking funded trips of over two days if those trips are paid for or coordinated by companies that "employ or retain a registered lobbyist."

Flaherty alerted the OCE. In his letter to the OCE, Flaherty noted: "My characterization of the trip as a 'junket' is based on my observation that the sessions were lightly attended. Most attendees spent significant time at the beach or the pool. Members of Congress attended the sessions when they had a speaking role." Flaherty also said any suggestion that attendees could not see evidence of corporate involvement was "implausible."

The press release can be found online at http://www.nationalcenter.org/P21PR-Congressional_Ethics_062909.html.

Quote of Note: Does Preventative Care Save Money?

2009-06-29T07:34:00.000-04:00

"Prevention of a disease, we all assume, should save us money, right? An ounce of prevention...? Alas, If only such aphorisms were true we’d hand out apples each day and our problems would be over.

It is true that if the prevention strategies we are talking about are behavioral things—eat better, lose weight, exercise more, smoke less, wear a seat belt—then they cost very little and they do save money by keeping people healthy.

But if your preventive strategy is medical, if it involves us, if it consists of screening, finding medical conditions early, shaking the bushes for high cholesterols, or abnormal EKGs, markers for prostate cancer such as PSA, then more often than not you don’t save anything and you might generate more medical costs. Prevention is a good thing to do, but why equate it with saving money when it won’t?"

-Abraham Verghese, "The Myth of Prevention," Wall Street Journal, June 20, 2009

E-mail any comments to the National Center for Public Policy Research at info@nationalcenter.org.
Subscribe to this blog's feed.

What Killed GM

2009-06-29T00:04:00.000-04:00

In this CNBC interview, Peter Flaherty of the National Legal and Policy Center argues that government regulation killed GM.

Peter includes the role of government-backed unions in his analysis:

...[GM's management's] biggest shortcoming... was the failure to take on the unions. No executive in Detroit would dare take on the unions or build a non-union plant in a southern state. Now, there is a reason for that... That’s because of the government, because of the power of the United Auto Workers on our government. If one of them tried, they would have been run out of town. And now we have the ultimate manifestation of it where the UAW has an equity stake in the company and I predict the results are just going to be worse and worse.

Dittos to Peter on that one.

E-mail any comments to the National Center for Public Policy Research at info@nationalcenter.org.
Subscribe to this blog's feed.

Quote of Note: CBS Anchor Osgood on Global Warming

2009-06-28T06:57:00.000-04:00

"The sun normally undergoes an 11-year cycle of activity—and last year, it was supposed to have heated up—and at its peak would have a tumultuous, boiling atmosphere, spitting out flares and huge chunks of superhot gas. Instead, it hit a 50-year low in solar wind pressure, a 55-year low in radio emissions, and a 100-year low in sunspot activity. Right now, the sun is the dimmest it’s been in nearly a century.

In the mid-seventeenth century, there was a quiet spell on the sun, known as the Maunder Minimum, which lasted 70 years and led to a mini-Ice Age here on Earth. Right now, global warming is a given to so many, it raises the question: Could another minimum activity period on the sun counteract, in any way, the effects of global warming?

Hush, child! You’re not even supposed to suggest that."

-CBS's Charles Osgood, April 21, 2009, as cited by Krystle Russin, "CBS Anchor Osgood Takes Skeptical Stand, Environment & Climate News, July 2009

E-mail any comments to the National Center for Public Policy Research at info@nationalcenter.org.
Subscribe to this blog's feed.

There's Money to Be Made

2009-06-28T06:26:00.000-04:00

Al Gore reportedly has billions of reasons to be glad the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill was approved by the House in a squeaker Friday.

E-mail any comments to the National Center for Public Policy Research at info@nationalcenter.org.
Subscribe to this blog's feed.

American Spectator Covers African-American Energy Poll

2009-06-27T23:46:00.001-04:00

Thanks to W. James Antle for his story "Lights Out," in the American Spectator, which mentioned The National Center's poll of the African-American community on energy issues.

The article appeared on Rush Limbaugh's "Stack of Stuff" Thursday.

E-mail any comments to the National Center for Public Policy Research at info@nationalcenter.org.
Subscribe to this blog's feed.

Amy Ridenour's National Center Blog

Outrage of the Day: Obama's Unkept Tax Promise

Carol Browner's Hijinks: They Call This Open Government?

Obama's Risky Energy Policy

It's Even Worse When It's The Majority Leader

If The Average of 25 and 75 Is 50, Does That Make Us All Middle-Aged?'

Russia and America's Energy Future

Quote of Note: Big Government's Ultimate Impact

Honduras

Photos of the Washington DC Tea Party

National Center Staff Engages in Tea Party-Mania

Something Odd to Be Grateful For

Climate Policy: No Gain, No Pain

Quote of Note: Do We Now Need Government for Big Ticket Items?

National Center's Tom Borelli Discusses Cap-and-Trade on Glenn Beck

Naughty Conservatives Shouldn't Mind Votes for Waxman-Markey (Or So We're Told)

We're Not Traitors, But Is Paul Krugman?

Quote of Note: How to Control Health Care Costs

Look, Everybody, I Have a Hybrid!

Black Activists Praise Supreme Court

For Release: June 29, 2009
Contact: David Almasi at 202/543-4110 x11 or Project21@nationalcenter.org

Subjects of Congressional Ethics Probe Fight Back

For Release: June 29, 2009
Contact: David Almasi at 202/543-4110 x11 or Project21@nationalcenter.org

Quote of Note: Does Preventative Care Save Money?

What Killed GM

Quote of Note: CBS Anchor Osgood on Global Warming

There's Money to Be Made

American Spectator Covers African-American Energy Poll

Amy Ridenour's National Center Blog

Outrage of the Day: Obama's Unkept Tax Promise

Carol Browner's Hijinks: They Call This Open Government?

Obama's Risky Energy Policy

It's Even Worse When It's The Majority Leader

If The Average of 25 and 75 Is 50, Does That Make Us All Middle-Aged?'

Russia and America's Energy Future

Quote of Note: Big Government's Ultimate Impact

Honduras

Photos of the Washington DC Tea Party

National Center Staff Engages in Tea Party-Mania

Something Odd to Be Grateful For

Climate Policy: No Gain, No Pain

Quote of Note: Do We Now Need Government for Big Ticket Items?

National Center's Tom Borelli Discusses Cap-and-Trade on Glenn Beck

Naughty Conservatives Shouldn't Mind Votes for Waxman-Markey (Or So We're Told)

We're Not Traitors, But Is Paul Krugman?

Quote of Note: How to Control Health Care Costs

Look, Everybody, I Have a Hybrid!

Black Activists Praise Supreme Court

For Release: June 29, 2009Contact: David Almasi at 202/543-4110 x11 or Project21@nationalcenter.org

Subjects of Congressional Ethics Probe Fight Back

For Release: June 29, 2009Contact: David Almasi at 202/543-4110 x11 or Project21@nationalcenter.org

Quote of Note: Does Preventative Care Save Money?

What Killed GM

Quote of Note: CBS Anchor Osgood on Global Warming

There's Money to Be Made

American Spectator Covers African-American Energy Poll

For Release: June 29, 2009
Contact: David Almasi at 202/543-4110 x11 or Project21@nationalcenter.org

For Release: June 29, 2009
Contact: David Almasi at 202/543-4110 x11 or Project21@nationalcenter.org