Showing posts with label cap and tax. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cap and tax. Show all posts

Friday, January 1, 2010

HAPPY TAX YEAR!

Before we kiss 2009 a fond farewell, with all its horrors, keep in mind what other goodies we leave behind -- tax breaks. We are now entering the tax part of Obama's 'Tax and Spend' plan. You know how he loves to say "My Plan'- we are going to feel the squeeze of the vice he has put our country in. Not that we haven't suffered that pinch already. Now it really starts.

Not extending the exclusion of tax on unemployment compensation benefits will hit hard, with 7 million people (officially) unemployed, along with not reducing estimated tax payments for small businesses. (I guess there is some positive, the other 7 to 11 million no longer employed but out of the system at least won’t have to pay the taxes.)

Whatever happens, we must keep up the momentum. Eleven months in politics is a long time, and the 2010 elections will be critical. Keeping a watchful eye on the machinations in Congress is like keeping the wheels oiled, and letting them know we are now watching how they do their job will also keep the pressure on them.

They are cleaning our clock, and it must be stopped.

The Heritage Foundation writes about these tax hits:

Happy Tax Year!
January 1, 2010
While millions of Americans are more than ready to put 2009 behind them, they should know that Congress failed to reauthorize dozens of tax breaks for individuals and businesses before the Members scurried home for the Holidays. These “expiring provisions” affect every American in one way or another as individuals or businesses. By allowing them to lapse, Congress has enacted tax increases at time when these taxpayers can least afford it.

The House has passed legislation (H.R. 4213) that would have extended 63 current tax provisions, but the Senate failed to bring this bill to a vote. Thus, all of these provisions expired at midnight last night. Notable provisions as reported today by Tax Notes include:

  • Deduction of state and local general sales taxes (section 164) (Personal Tax Incentives)
  • Additional standard deduction, up to $500 for individuals and $1,000 for couples, for state and local property taxes (section 63) (Personal Tax Incentives)
  • Research tax credit and alternative simplified credit (section 41) (General Business Tax Incentives)
  • New markets tax credit (section 45D) (Community Assistance Provisions)
  • Empowerment zone incentives (sections 1391 and 1202) (Community Assistance Provisions)
  • Renewal community tax incentives (sections 1400E, 1400F, 1400I, and 1400J) (Community Assistance Provisions)
  • District of Columbia Investment Incentives (sections 1400, 1400A, 1400B, and 1400C) (Community Assistance Provisions)
  • Net disaster loss designation and $500 limit per casualty for personal casualty losses attributed to federally declared natural disasters (section 165) (General Disaster Relief Provisions)
  • Expensing for qualified disaster expenses (section 198A) (General Disaster Relief Provisions)
  • Biodiesel and renewable diesel incentives (section 40A) (Energy Incentives)
  • Alternative motor vehicle credit for heavy hybrids (section 30B) (Energy Incentives)

Although the House has acted and passed its version of the Tax Extenders Act of 2009, the Senate failed to act on similar legislation, as a result the following additional key tax provisions will expire:
  • Increased exemption levels for the individual alternative minimum tax (section 55) and personal tax credits allowed against the AMT (section 26)
  • Exclusion of unemployment compensation benefits from gross income (section 85)
  • Alternative fuel mixture tax credit (section 6426(e))
  • Reduced estimated tax payments for small businesses (section 6654(d)(1)(D))


The Senate has had a lot on its plate this year. But it is still unacceptable that they have stalled on the chance to extend these tax provisions that affect every American. By allowing these tax provisions to expire, taxes will rise on many individuals and businesses, and for some of these groups, a punitively steep tax hike.

At the very least, we hope for a New Year’s Resolution from Congress that it acts swiftly in 2010 on passing legislation to amend and extend tax laws that assist every American individual and business which will lead to a stronger, robust economy.

Even better, would be if Congress reformed the entire tax code and brought us a tax system based on one rate, applied once to all income, and in a form every taxpayer can understand. However, that may be asking too much in one New Year’s Resolution.

Source: HAPPY TAX YEAR!

Some things we can be thankful for is that God answered our prayers and stopped Obama (at least for now) from signing the Copenhagen Treaty and thereby ceding away our sovereignty through ClimateGate and then emphasizing the cooling trend to those slow learners by creating record snow storms in both Copenhagen and Washington DC on either end of the conference.

And thus far we have avoided the passing of Obamacare… and it can still be avoided. So rest up over the weekend and ready yourself for the continuation of the fight. Many have pressured their representatives and threatened them with loss of their offices, as they returned home for the holidays. So this fight is not over.

Cap and Trade … uh Tax and Gov’t Controlled healthcare will be the largest taxes and loss of freedoms this country has ever seen, making the other taxes listed above look like chump change and make us, the American people, look like the chumps!

Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Graham's endorsement boosts climate bill - Beware the Cap ‘n’ Trade Republicans

The surprise endorsement of climate-change legislation by a leading Senate Republican has jump-started the languishing proposal but also has raised the prospect that it will include two major items that environmentalists dislike: more nuclear power and more offshore oil drilling.

In an op-ed published Sunday, Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina joined with Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, the chamber's leading Democratic advocate of climate legislation, to promote a bipartisan plan to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions.

They proposed a compromise that reduces U.S. carbon-dioxide emissions - which are widely considered to contribute to climate change - through a market-based "cap and trade" system, combined with a "clean energy" program providing incentives for nuclear power, offshore oil and gas drilling, and coal emissions controls.

Analysts from the political left and right expressed optimism that the unexpected alliance will improve the bill's chances of passage. The House narrowly passed its version this summer, but the Senate has long been considered a much tougher sell.

"If Sen. Graham supports action, it's a very important step forward," said Daniel J. Weiss, climate strategy director at the liberal Center for American Progress. "Sen. Graham has good standing on both sides of the aisle and it will help with undecided members of both parties."

Scott Segal, a lawyer at the law firm Bracewell & Giuliani who represents energy companies and manufacturers, said by e-mail that the Kerry-Graham plan faces significant opposition but addresses some of the most vexing issues impeding the bill's progress in the Senate.

"The senators' position is a definite step forward," Mr. Segal said. "They have outlined many of the key issues that need to be resolved in order to achieve political consensus behind a bill, and that's very useful."

Many obstacles remain. Democrats and Republicans from coal-producing states and the Midwest continue to resist the legislation over fears that it would cause huge increases in the cost of energy that would hurt their constituents and businesses.

Sen. Sherrod Brown, Ohio Democrat, has been adamant that a bill will not pass the Senate unless it includes measures to tax imports from countries that do not limit their carbon-dioxide emissions. President Obama has expressed doubts about the provision, saying it appears to be protectionist. Other Democratic senators, including Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana, say they cannot support a bill that drives coal-fired energy prices higher.

Environmental groups tend to oppose nuclear power generation and prefer "green" sources such as wind, solar and geothermal energy. They also routinely oppose offshore oil and gas drilling, saying it threatens the environment without increasing U.S. energy security.

Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman Barbara Boxer, California Democrat, plans to issue a revised version of the bill soon, which she recently introduced with Mr. Kerry late last month. The bill does little for nuclear power beyond new training programs and is silent about offshore drilling.

Mr. Kerry and Mr. Graham were unavailable for comment Monday.

A spokeswoman for Mr. Kerry could not say whether their plan would be the basis for the committee's legislation. She said by e-mail that the joint op-ed "signals Sen. Kerry's and Sen. Graham's commitment to getting 60 votes in the Senate for climate change legislation." She added that the two want to make "substantial, bipartisan" progress leading up to the major U.N. climate summit in Copenhagen starting Dec. 7.

Mr. Obama and environmental groups have called on the Senate to act quickly to strengthen his negotiating position in advance of the summit, where developed and developing nations, including China, will meet to draft a new agreement intended to mitigate the effects of climate change.

Reuters news agency reported Monday that Mrs. Boxer, after meeting with U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, said she wants to pass a bill through her committee before the Copenhagen summit. Separately, Energy Secretary Steven Chu told reporters in London that he remains optimistic that Mr. Obama could sign a bill into law by the time the summit opens, though few observers expect the Senate to act that swiftly.

Stanford U. doesn’t want you to see this video

What did I tell ya? Lindsey Graham signs on to cap-and-tax

Ugh: McCain & Company melting on cap-and-tax

The Boxer-Kerry green boondoggle

Beware the Climate Change Republicans

The Great Man-Made Global Warming Swindle

Green Hell

Red Hot Lies

Wednesday, October 7, 2009

Boxer and Kerry Reintroduce Cap and Trade…

Cap and Trade Rears Its Ugly Head Again…

Senate climate bill tougher than House version

Kerry: "I Don't Know What 'Cap And Trade' Means"

Kerry: "I Don't Know What 'Cap And Trade' Means" Somebody need to tell both Senators John Kerry, whose if a major player in the Corrupt Tide Foundation and Barbara Boxer who is busy selling American parent’s right to ‘parent their own’ children to the United Nations that “We don’t know what ‘Re-Election people who ignore their constituents and work for their own ideals and gains means!”

Time to turn up the heat again against Cap and Trade, but these two (Senators Boxer and Kerry) really have to go!

Inhofe: Boxer using 'corporate prostitutes' to sell climate bill

By Jordan Fabian - 10/07/09 03:15 PM ET

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) is using "corporate prostitutes" to "intimidate" Congress into passing climate change legislation, a key Republican senator said Wednesday.

Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), who is the ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, chided committee chairwoman Boxer's claim that her climate bill would bring billions of dollars in private investments to the economy.

"You can find a few corporate prostitutes out there that stand to make a whole lot of money on this thing," Inhofe told conservative radio host Steve Malzberg today. "What they're trying to do is to intimidate congress into passing it."

The conservative senator argued that Boxer and bill co-sponsor Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) are so intent on passing the bill in order to relieve the inevitable pressure on the White House from people angry about tax increases included in the bill.

"And so the president, Obama, doesn't want people to say 'hey, why did you do this regulation?

You're responsible.' Well, he wants to intimidate us so at that point he can say 'no Congress did it,'" Inhofe said.
Inhofe predicted, however that the bill would not pass Congress.

"It's not going to pass, they don't have the votes," he said, adding that Democratic leaders would unlikely use controversial budget reconciliation tactics to pass cap-and-trade.

Congressional Democratic leaders have threatened to use reconciliation to pass healthcare legislation.

Inhofe predicted that the climate bill would only get 30 votes in the Senate based on his vote count of last year's Warner-Lieberman climate change legislation.

The Hill

-----------

John Kerry: Awesome recession is helping the environment

Democrats’ environmental proposals are an attack on capitalism. That is a fact. But don’t take my word for it. Ask John Kerry.

As often happens when disingenuous people let slip the truth, Kerry admitted in no uncertain terms the other day that he sees economic prosperity as the enemy of the environment, and left no mystery as to which side he takes.

I was for the recession before I was against it.

I was for the recession before I was against it.

Kerry and Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-California) have proposed a new draft for a cap-and-trade bill with exceedingly stringent restrictions on carbon emissions. During a hearing on the bill , Kerry made the astounding statement that the recession has been the environment’s best friend, and he couldn’t be happier about it:

Let me emphasize something very strongly as we begin this discussion. The United States has already this year alone achieved a 6 percent reduction in emissions simply because of the downturn in the economy, so we are effectively saying we need to go another 14 percent.

What did Kerry just unwittingly admit? He admitted that cap-and-trade advocates and like-minded global warming believers see economic prosperity as a huge source of the supposed problem. That’s why they’re proposing the perfect solution – from their perspective – in the form of a massive tax increase directly on industry.

Nothing discourages productive economic activity like confiscatory taxes on said activity. The same people who lament the loss of manufacturing jobs in the United States now seek to multiply these losses many times over by making it economically impossible for manufacturers to operate.

The taxes aren’t designed to encourage manufacturers to run cleaner shops. Taxes don’t do that. Technology does that. If the technology was sufficiently mature and affordable, they would have it now. All things being equal, no onewants to pump dirty emissions into the air if given a reasonable alternative.

So when Democrats propose to pressure them into cleaning up their emissions with crippling taxes, it makes about as much sense as when they suggested the Iraqi government was sitting around eating bon-bons while the U.S. did all the heavy lifting, but would surely get serious if the U.S. threatened to leave.

People want to do things that are in their own best interests. You don’t hammer them into doing these things with taxes. Quite the contrary, you try to remove economic barriers that may be preventing them from doing these things.

But that’s not the goal of cap-and-trade supporters. Kerry has given away the game. The goal is less productive economic activity, because the fact of the matter is that productive economic activity produces carbon, and no arrogant member of Congress or anyone else can change that fact.

But the recession, hey, that’s working like a dream. Carbon emissions are down 6 percent. Damn. How many more big industrial conglomerates do we have to put out of business to get to 20 percent?

If they didn’t know full well they were going to kill jobs, they wouldn’t be peddling this “green jobs” nonsense – a notion thoroughly dismantled on Sunday by Bloomberg’s Kevin Hassett.

Cap and trade means a less productive economy, and that’s by design, because a growing private sector economy is the enemy of the Democrats’ political agenda. Their hope, of course, is that all the taxes they can collect will allow them to bestow more largesse on their constituencies with jobs either in the public sector or publicly funded.

This completely ignores, of course, the fact that you can’t keep taxing companies that you put out of business, but Sen. Kerry has never quite closed the logic loop on that one. You need to generate revenue to pay taxes, and you can only do that by running a company profitably. Where does Sen. Kerry think all these rich industrialists got their money? Does he think they either inherited it or married some rich widow?

Maybe someone needs to tell him those avenues aren’t available to everyone.

But if Sen. Kerry doesn’t have the slightest idea how economic value is created, he certainly seems to know how to destroy it, and as he has just acknowledged, he apparently can’t wait to get right to it.

Update: John Holdren, President Obama’s top advisor on science issues, agrees. Or at least he did in 1977, when he wrote a textbook with fellow traveler Paul Ehrlich titled “Ecoscience,” in which he explicitly called for zero economic growth. CNS News dug this up back in July.

People can change their minds about things in 32 years, of course. Maybe someone should ask Holdren if he’s changed his. If so, perhaps he could go have a talk with John Kerry.

Dan Calabrese – the Northstar

For more news on energy and the environment, visit www.climatewire.net.

See full size imageSee full size image

(Obama) Kerry and Boxer Despair and and Negative Transformation that you can believe in. These radicals need to go!!

The Kerrys are largely involved with the notoriously radical Tides Foundation

Kerry, Boxer and Obama are all pushing the global warming hoax and and Cap and Trade… a huge power grab and tax on America.

Barbara Boxer and Secy Hillary Clinton are leading the charge to pass the global children’s rights treaty, which will help the United Nations Usurp American Parent’s Rights… On Parental Rights

Related Resources:

Gore-Backed Car Firm Gets Large U.S. Loan

Senators to Unveil Draft Climate Bill

HYSTERIA: Exposing the secret agenda behind today's obsession with global warming

Read the book that started it all: Al Gore's "Earth in the Balance"

"Global Warming or Global Governance? What the media refuse to tell you about so-called climate change"

"The Sky's Not Falling! Why it's OK to chill on global warming"

Apollo Alliance Writing Legislation? Stimulus Bill, Cap and Trade Bill, Healthcare Bill? America Needs To Know!

The Goal…

Green Hell

Red Hot Lies

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Cap and Trade Rears Its Ugly Head Again…

Senate climate bill tougher than House version

Boxer, Kerry Set to Introduce Climate Bill in Senate


Kerry: "I Don't Know What 'Cap And Trade' Means"

Kerry: "I Don't Know What 'Cap And Trade' Means"  Somebody need to tell both Senators John Kerry, whose if a major player in the Corrupt Tide Foundation and Barbara Boxer who is busy selling American parent’s right to ‘parent their own’ children to the United Nations that “We don’t know what ‘Re-Election people who ignore their constituents and work for their own ideals and gains means!”

Time to turn up the heat again against Cap and Trade, but these two really have to go!!

Ending some nine months of closed-door deliberations, Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and John Kerry (D-Mass.) will release global warming legislation Wednesday that they hope will be the vehicle for broader Senate negotiations and an eventual conference with the House.

The bill's authors said last week that they expect to start hearings early next month on the bill, with a markup in Boxer's Environment and Public Works Committee to follow soon thereafter. They also acknowledged that their legislation is just a "starting point" in a bid to win over moderate and conservative Democrats, as well as Republicans.

"I hope what we've done is constructive and well-received," Kerry, the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, said Thursday. "I have no pretensions, and neither does Barbara, that this will be the final product. It is a starting point, a commitment, full-fledged, across party lines to do what we need to do to protect the planet for the next century."

The Boxer-Kerry bill will build in large part off H.R. 2454(pdf), legislation approved in June by the House following several marathon months of negotiations that involved lawmakers representing coastal and industry-heavy districts. Exactly what is the same in the two bills remains to be seen. As for differences, Senate Democratic aides say they expect the legislation to divert from the House bill's 17 percent emissions target for 2020 and go with an even more aggressive 20 percent limit. The bill also will stay silent on exactly how the Senate should divide up emission allowances.

At least five other Senate committees are also expected to contribute to the climate debate. The Foreign Relations and Agriculture committees are preparing language without convening a markup.

Commerce Chairman Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) said he will hold votes on his pieces of the global warming bill. And the same goes for Finance Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.), who last week told reporters that provisions on international trade and the allocation of emission allowances would be marked up provided Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) says the bill is "clearly moving."

Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) has already approved legislation (S. 1462 (pdf)) out of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee that includes a nationwide renewable electricity standard and a raft of other energy incentives, including a provision that could bring oil and gas rigs closer to Florida's Gulf Coast. Bingaman is also planning a hearing Thursday on several competing cost estimates associated with the House-passed climate bill. The session, which was postponed once earlier this month, now gives senators an early public forum to sound off on the Boxer-Kerry bill.

Already last week, several Democratic senators working outside of the Boxer-Kerry camp said their ideas would be melded into the legislation at a later date. "It's going to need a lot of work," said Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio).

Brown said he did not expect the Boxer-Kerry bill to include language adopted in the House that tries to assist energy-intensive manufacturing industries, including steel, pulp and paper and cement.

"My understanding is they did not include the House language on manufacturing," Brown added. "But I've been talking to them about it. They are very open to it. They are in no way dismissive."

Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) said she also does not think her concerns will be addressed in the initial draft from Boxer and Kerry. That means further efforts on issues related to agriculture, offsets and energy intensive industries.

"We will have to take a look at the language and then determine it from there," Stabenow said.

Kerry last week sought to change the vernacular surrounding the climate bill and sell its concepts more broadly, insisting it is not a "cap and trade" proposal but a "pollution reduction" bill. "I don't know what 'cap and trade' means. I don't think the average American does," Kerry said. "This is not a cap-and-trade bill, it's a pollution reduction bill" (E&E Daily, Sept. 25).

But a leading GOP opponent to the Senate climate effort quickly pushed back on the Democrat's strategy.

"No matter the semantic games employed, or the extent to which Democrats wish to hide the truth from the American people, cap and trade will mean more job losses, more pain at the pump, and higher food and electricity prices for consumers," said EPW Committee ranking member James Inhofe (R-Okla.)."

Both Brown and Stabenow said they would welcome the release of the Senate bill even though it will give critics something tangible to target.

"It always does," Brown said. "There is always something to shoot at. But I think it is the right step, and then we start working to improve it."

Senate Democratic leaders, including Reid and Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), have said that they do not know if there will be enough time to get to the climate bill on the floor this year. But Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), one of the lead authors of the House bill, said that he is not giving up yet.

"At this stage in the House no one was predicting we could be successful," Markey told reporters. The lawmaker said he expected the Senate to closely follow the House bill's outlines, especially "once people sit down and begin to understand we have dealt with the major interests in the country.

Schedule: The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing is Thursday, Oct. 1, at 9:45 a.m. in 366 Dirksen.

Witnesses: Douglas Elmendorf, director, CBO; Richard Newell, administrator, EIA; Larry Parker, specialist in energy and environmental policy, Congressional Research Service; and Reid Harvey, chief, climate economics branch, climate change division, U.S. EPA.

Reporters Allison Winter and Katherine Ling contributed.

By DARREN SAMUELSOHN of ClimateWire

Published: September 28, 2009

Copyright 2009 E&E Publishing. All Rights Reserved.

For more news on energy and the environment, visit www.climatewire.net

Related Resources:

Gore-Backed Car Firm Gets Large U.S. Loan 

Senators to Unveil Draft Climate Bill 

Apollo Alliance Writing Legislation? Stimulus Bill, Cap and Trade Bill, Healthcare Bill? America Needs To Know!

The Goal…

Green Hell

Red Hot Lies

Monday, August 3, 2009

Pulling No Punches

John McCain is red in the face and hopping mad. I’m sitting in his office in the Senate Russell Office Building, and he’s just rushed in after delivering a speech on the Senate floor where he seethed about the earmarks in the Homeland Security Bill.

“Can you believe they are putting $6 million of pork into Homeland Security?” he asks with his trademark clenched-fists. “They promised they wouldn’t do that. Ben Nelson [the Democratic senator from Nebraska] just inserted a $200,000 museum in Omaha into the legislative branch appropriations bill. These earmarks are a creeping disease. First members condemn them, then they condone, then they embrace them.” Then Mr. McCain adds, “Eight or nine Republican appropriators routinely vote for this pork.” Shaking his head he says, “It’s killing our party.”

If you thought that the senior senator from Arizona would ride off into the political sunset last November, inconsolable after losing his bid for the presidency, think again. He’s over it. And he’s as energized and spry as ever I’ve known him.

I interviewed John McCain for these pages four years ago when he was just launching his presidential campaign. Now I’m here to see how he is coping with defeat, and what his priorities are this year.

Many feared he’d become the Obama administration’s ambassador to the Republican Party, cutting deals to get things done. On the contrary: He’s emerged as one of the lead critics of Obamanomics.

He says he has worked to keep his relations with President Barack Obama “cordial,” but he pulls no punches criticizing the president’s economic policies. “Never. Never have I seen such a transfer from the private enterprise system to the government of such massive scale,” he says. He goes through the list: car companies, banks, insurance firms owned by government, and he especially grimaces when he mentions the $787 billion stimulus package.

wintermoore

Terry Shoffner

Not much has improved because of the stimulus. Mr. McCain scoffs, “And now, the answer is, according to the Obama economists, we didn’t spend enough.” He’s referring to the notion that we should have a second stimulus. This is not something the senator favors.

Asked about the deficits, his response is blunt. “I think it’s the biggest problem we’ve ever faced.”

Ever? “Yep,” he replies. “The only time where we amassed greater debt was during World War II, and that was temporary spending. We won the world war and then cut back. But now . . . the spending is permanent.”

“Look, this is a very popular, attractive, and eloquent president,” he continues. “But I think he was elected to govern in a centrist fashion. And instead,” he says, the administration is “governing from the far left.” Mr. McCain thinks this approach will capsize. “They don’t get that this is a right-of-center nation. Sooner or later, it becomes increasingly clear to the American people that he’s out of sync with the majority.” The latest polls are already showing some of this slippage: Mr. Obama’s favorable rating is now just over 50%, down from 70% his first weeks in office.

Will Mr. Obama ever move to the center as President Clinton did? “He will try to, but he’s got an overwhelmingly liberal Congress and his political instincts are to move to the left. It’s not an accident that he has the most liberal voting record in the United States Senate,” he says, reciting a line from his campaign. On health-care reform, Mr. McCain calls the Pelosi bill “a fish in the sun” that smells more rotten the longer it sits. But he’s worried that this may end badly. The administration has “co-opted the hospitals, he’s co-opted the pharmacists; he’ll co-opt AMA [American Medical Association]. And by the way, if the pharmaceutical companies can save us $100 billion, why don’t they do it now? For the love of God, doesn’t this mean that they’ve been ripping us off?”

In the 2005 interview, Mr. McCain told me rather famously that “I don’t understand economics very well.” The Obama team echoed that phrase throughout the campaign. It’s still stuck in his craw, and it’s one of the first topics he brings up.

“Could I mention, Steve, that I kept hearing during the campaign the stuff about McCain being weak on economics. They obsessed about this in the media. They never said Obama is weak on economics. I came to Washington as a Reaganite limited government tax cutter.” He’s right about the media treatment. Neither candidate had a strong command of economics—certainly not Mr. Obama, as events have shown. Mr. McCain was simply being honest.

He seems perplexed that his pals in the media turned on him in 2008 after years of worshipful press treatment. “In 2000 [when he ran against George W. Bush] I used to go chat with reporters on the back of the bus, and we would have these long, pleasant conversations . . . . I was the underdog clawing my way up. But then in 2008, I noticed that it would be kind of a gotcha session with the press—a totally more hostile attitude.”

Yet conservatives had warned Mr. McCain that he would remain a media darling up until the moment he won the GOP nomination, at which time they would rip him apart. I’m only surprised that he was surprised this happened.

Mr. McCain is initially reluctant to talk about the campaign, but he provides me with snippets of what went right and wrong. He believes that he could have won the election had it not been for the market collapse in mid-September. “We were three points up on September 14. The next day the market lost 700 points and $1.2 trillion in wealth vanished, and by the end of the day we were seven points down. We lost the white college graduate voters, who became profoundly disillusioned with Republicans. And by the way, that was the way it ended up. We lost by seven points.”

He certainly was dealt a lousy hand. But I challenge him on whether he might have played that hand better. During the first days of the financial crisis, Mr. McCain looked indecisive and worse, a creature of Washington insider politics. Why did he suspend his campaign, and why did he vote for the $700 billion bank bailout plan, which was wildly unpopular with voters?

“You have no idea the pressure I was under,” he says. “I remember being on the phone with President Bush, Vice President Cheney, the Treasury secretary and [Fed Chairman Ben] Bernanke. They assure me the world financial system is going to collapse if I don’t vote for the bill. So I do the impetuous and rash thing by saying, look, I have got to go back to Washington and see how I can help. And by the way, so did Obama—but it was McCain that was the impetuous one. Obama came back to Washington.” Mr. McCain grumbles, “He was at the White House with me. But he wasn’t impetuous.” This is the only time in our interview he shows any bitterness about the campaign.

He feels he was misled by the Bush economic team. He wanted the focus of the rescue plan to be on housing and home owners under water—not the lenders or the big banks. “Paulson and Bernanke both told me on the phone, our primary focus is going to be on the housing crisis. That’s our primary focus. And then three days later they switched their whole priorities around.” Instead, the Bush administration got a $700 billion check from Congress to save banks, investment houses and eventually car companies.

Had he been president, Mr. McCain says he would have done things differently. “Small business has been ignored in this whole bailout. You know, I hate to use the word but it seems to me that the philosophy of Tim Geithner and Ben Bernanke is trickle down, you know? Save Wall Street, save these financial institutions and then maybe they’ll have enough money to loan to the small business person. Wall Street seems to be doing okay. The executive salaries are fine.”

He continues: “But I just came from driving down Central Avenue in Phoenix and saw closed up storefronts because they’re too small to save, but these giant banks are too big to fail.” This is vintage John McCain, the economic populist fighting for the little guy.

If the market crash was the low point, I ask him for his best memory from the campaign. “The high point, I think, was the convention, the selection of Sarah Palin, and the enthusiasm that was generated all over the country.” His fondness for Mrs. Palin and her family strikes me as from the heart; he believes she was a net asset for the ticket.

“Let’s face it,” he says, “she galvanized our base in a way that I couldn’t. Everywhere she went she drew enormous and enthusiastic crowds like a rock star.” He says his only regret in selecting the Alaska governor was that no one on the campaign predicted the ferocity of the assaults against her. “To the liberal left, particularly the feminists, she is their worst nightmare.”

Since Mr. McCain was the co-sponsor of the McCain-Lieberman bill last year to limit CO emissions through a cap-and-trade system, I ask him about the climate change bill that passed the House last month and he surprised me with his opposition. “I believe climate change is real . . . but this 1,400-page bill is a farce. They bought every industry off—steel mills, agriculture, utilities,” he says.

So you wouldn’t vote for the House bill? “I would not only not vote for it,” he laughs, “I am opposed to it entirely, because it does damage to those of us who believe that we need to act in a rational fashion about climate change.”

A s Mr. McCain keeps circling our discussion back to fiscal responsibility, I ask him if the trillion dollar deficits are a sign that America is an empire in decline. “I think there’s a risk of that . . . unless we change. I’m a student of history. The shift in power from the British to the United States took place when the economy and the world’s gold reserves shifted and Britain went from the world’s [creditor] to a world debtor. The same thing could be happening now. I emphasize ‘could.’”

My last question is about the possibility for a 2012 rematch against Mr. Obama. “No chance,” he says.

But the good news for those who admire this maverick is that he’s likely to stay in the Senate for years and is focusing single-mindedly on holding back Obamanomics. For now, that means trying to stop budget busters like ObamaCare, but also saving a few million dollars at a time by cancelling museums in Nebraska, turtle crossings in Florida, and the endless flow of dollars to Democratic Rep. John Murtha’s airport to nowhere in Johnstown, Pa.

And then Mr. McCain is out the door—running to vote on another anti-pork amendment.

By STEPHEN MOORE - a senior economics writer for the Wall Street Journal.

Newsmax Poll Shows Strong Support for Sarah Palin in 2012

An Internet poll sponsored by Newsmax.com reveals that nearly 4 out of 5 respondents would support Sarah Palin as the Republican nominee for president in 2012.

A slightly larger majority believe the then-Alaska governor helped John McCain in the 2008 presidential race — while only 31 percent think McCain did a good job running for president.

The poll drew more than 600,000 responses, and Newsmax will provide the results to major media and share them with radio talk-show hosts across the country.

Here are the poll questions and results:

1) What is your opinion of Sarah Palin? Favorable: 83 percent Unfavorable: 17 percent

2) Do you believe Sarah Palin as a running mate helped or hurt John McCain? Helped: 80 percent Hurt: 20 percent

3) In the election between McCain-Palin and Obama-Biden, who did you vote for? McCain-Palin: 81 percent Obama-Biden: 16 percent
Other: 3 percent

4) Would you support Sarah Palin as the Republican nominee for president in 2012? Yes: 78 percent No: 22 percent

5) Do you believe McCain did a good job running for president? Good Job: 31 percent Bad Job: 69 percent

6) Do you believe Barack Obama "bought" the White House by outspending McCain? Yes: 72 percent No: 28 percent

Posted: Daily Thought Pad

Related Resources:

Saturday, July 11, 2009

Stop Cap and Trade - “the biggest tax in American history.”


Only the United States Senate stands in the way of what the Wall Street Journal calls “the biggest tax in American history.”

That’s because the Pelosi-led House of Representatives just strong-armed the so-called American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (also known as “Cap-and-Trade”) through the House of Representatives.

According to the Heritage Foundation, this massive “national energy tax” could cost the average family "nearly 3,000 per household per year."

House Minority Leader John Boehner points out that it will “put millions of Americans out of work” as American jobs are shipped overseas or lost outright.
Even President Obama admitted that under “Cap-and-Trade” legislation, "electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket."

But that’s not all. Apparently, few if any Members of the House of Representatives even bothered to read this massive “national energy tax” before voting on it. Does this sound familiar?

According to Pioneer Press:
"Last week, the American Clean Energy and Security Act (the 'Cap and Trade Energy Bill'), or H.R. 2454, was 946 pages long. Over the weekend, it ballooned to 1,201 pages with no explanation for how or why.”

Then, to add insult to injury, on the day of the vote, the Pelosi-led Congress added another 255 pages to the bill (which no one had read to begin with) at 3:00 AM (EST) and limited debate to three hours before passing this massive “national energy tax” at 7:16 PM (EST).

And when Boehner tried to read some of the provisions of this bill aloud on the floor of the House, liberals in Congress tried to shut him down.

"Democrats tried to shut me down as I read parts of Speaker Pelosi's national energy tax (also known as ‘cap and trade’) out loud on the House floor. For more than an hour I cited provisions that will destroy American jobs, raise prices for gasoline and electricity, and devastate middle-class families and small businesses," said Minority Leader Boehner.

If we are going to beat this horrifying reality… if we are going to defeat "Cap and Trade," the time to act is now.



Use the button below to send your personalized Blast Faxes to Barack Obama and every Republican Member of the United States Senate - or alternatively to President Obama and all 535 Members of Congress.

Tell them that you oppose the “Cap-and-Trade” scam rapidly making its way through Congress. Tell them that the American people do not want higher utility bills, higher prices at the pump and in the grocery store, diminished freedoms and a lower standard of living to help petty politicians achieve greater political power.
Demand they reject the so-called American Clean Energy and Security Act and all other Cap-and-Trade schemes now.


If the button above does not work, please use this hyperlink.


Just What Is Cap-And-Trade?

Essentially, “Cap-and-Trade” is being deceptively peddled as a system to encourage businesses to engage in “environmentally responsible activities.”

But in actuality, it has little to do with the environment and instead is a means to deprive you of your income, control your behavior and repress your liberties.

Remember when President Obama said:
"We can’t drive our SUVs, and eat whatever we want, and keep our homes at 72 [degrees] all the time, whether we live in the desert or the tundra, and keep consuming 25% of the world’s resources with just 4% of the world’s population... That’s not going to happen."

Little did we know that he was deadly serious when he made that radical statement on the campaign trail last year?

Under “Cap-and-Trade,” the government would issue "pollution credits." Once allocated (as the government sees fit) those who use less than their government-imposed allocation can sell them to those who have exceeded their government allocation.
Peter Ferrara, the director of budget and entitlement policy at the Institute for Policy Innovation, writing for The American Spectator explains "Cap-and-Trade" this way:
"Under this policy, every business involving CO2 emissions will have to buy permits from the government for the amount of such emissions, which will be sold in open auctions, where the permit price will be bid up. But the government will limit the number of these permits, and consequently the maximum amount of CO2 emissions allowed. Indeed, over time the government will clamp down on the amount of CO2 emissions allowed by the permits, with the emissions to be reduced by 80 percent by 2050."

And how will “Cap-and-Trade” policies change your standard of living for the worse:

Ferrara explains:

"These increased costs are effectively a new tax on the American people, even though Obama promised in his campaign that there would be no tax increase for the bottom 95 percent of income earners."

Of course, in the strictest sense, “Cap-and-Trade” is not solely a "tax." It’s something much worse.
When the government taxes you, it openly confiscates your income and that income goes directly into government coffers to fund some actual or perceived need.
Under “Cap-and-Trade,” no one in the government reaches directly into your pocket… nothing new is withheld from your paycheck… no new lines appear on your 1040 Form that you send to the IRS.

Instead, the government, which is already taking de facto control of the banking and automotive industry, will have yet another tool in its arsenal to effectively take control of every other company or sector of industry that produces CO2... and that's just about everybody.

And when you complain that your standard of living has gone down, you can be certain that President Obama, Nancy Pelosi and liberals in Congress will simply point the finger at “greedy industry” when they know full well that they were the ones that gave this monster life.

In short, “Cap-and-Trade” has nothing to do with the environment, it is nothing more than a mechanism that the government can now use to force others to pick your pocket, and diminish your standard of living in this already queasy economy.



Use the button below to send your personalized Blast Faxes to Barack Obama and every Republican Member of the United States Senate - or alternatively to President Obama and all 535 Members of Congress.

Tell them that you oppose the “Cap-and-Trade” scam rapidly making its way through Congress. Tell them that the American people do not want higher utility bills, higher prices at the pump and in the grocery store, diminished freedoms and a lower standard of living to help petty politicians achieve greater political power.
Demand they reject the so-called American Clean Energy and Security Act and all other Cap-and-Trade schemes now.


If the button above does not work, please use this hyperlink.



Fewer Jobs And A Lower Standard Of Living....

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, summed up how “Cap-and-Trade” will change your life for the worse when speaking at this year’s Conservative Political Action Conference:

“[L]et me get this straight, we are not going to raise taxes on anyone making less than $250,000 per year, unless you use electricity. And we are not going to raise taxes on anyone under $250,000 per year, unless you buy gasoline… [or] unless you buy heating oil… [or] unless you use natural gas… And I thought to myself how dumb do they think we are that they can pretend that an energy tax is not an energy tax and…that every retired American who uses electricity is not going to pay it, and every person in New Hampshire who uses heating oil is not going to pay it, and every person who drives a car isn’t going to pay it. I just want to report to Attorney General Holder and President Obama that this is a nation of people courageous enough… to insist that we not be governed by people who won’t tell us the truth.”

Here's what Boehner says about recent “Cap-and-Trade” proposals that are on the table:

“Families and small businesses are struggling to get by, but the Democrats… would raise taxes on every American who drives a car, flips on a light switch, or buys a product manufactured in the United States. In fact it would cost every family as much as $3,100 a year in additional energy costs through their ‘cap-and-trade’ energy tax, and will drive millions of good-paying American jobs overseas.”

And the Republican Study Committee echoes those sentiments:

“At a time when families across the country are struggling to make ends meet, the President and his Democrat friends want to take over $3,000 in new taxes from every American family in order to appease extreme political cronies. This is not a solution. It is a recipe for economic disaster.”

Ben Lieberman of the Heritage Foundation says:

“By limiting the supply of fossil fuels... cap and trade means more expensive gasoline and electricity as well as net job losses in energy-dependent sectors. Senator Lieberman himself concedes costs into the hundreds of billions of dollars. And as the Congressional Budget Office has noted, such energy cost increases act as a regressive tax on the poor.”

In other words, as far as Obama's promise to cut taxes for 95% of American wage-earners, forget it. It was nothing more than sleight-of-hand.

But “Cap-and-Trade” is not just a shell game when it comes to your pocketbook. It has the same effect when it comes to jobs.

Remember all those jobs Obama promised to create?

Ferrara puts that illusion in perspective:

"A thorough study on the effects of cap and trade conducted by a leading economics firm, Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), concluded that cap and trade would result in job losses of between 1.2 million and 1.8 million by 2020, and 3 to 4 million by 2030. This is roughly the amount of jobs Obama claims will be produced by his economic stimulus package. Slower growth results in a loss of GDP for the American people of nearly $700 billion per year by 2030, which translates into lost household income of $4,000 to $6,750 per year by then."

Make no mistake; “Cap-and-Trade” is not just a confiscatory income killer… it’s a job-killer as well.

And, just where do you think all those jobs are going to go? They're going to go to China and India, countries that have no intention of crippling their emerging economies with ridiculous “Cap-and-Trade” schemes.



Use the button below to send your personalized Blast Faxes to Barack Obama and every Republican Member of the United States Senate - or alternatively to President Obama and all 535 Members of Congress.

Tell them that you oppose the “Cap-and-Trade” scam rapidly making its way through Congress. Tell them that the American people do not want higher utility bills, higher prices at the pump and in the grocery store, diminished freedoms and a lower standard of living to help petty politicians achieve greater political power.
Demand they reject the so-called American Clean Energy and Security Act and all other Cap-and-Trade schemes now.


If the button above does not work, please use this hyperlink.



Fraud And Abuse... Rewarding Political Cronies On Your Dime.

Ask yourself the following question. If government controls the supply of allowable CO2 emissions, how long do you think it will take for elected officials to use “Cap-and-Trade” as a tool to reward cronies and punish political enemies?

David Frum of the American Enterprise Institute is one of several commentators who see in this legislation a left-wing plot to reward political friends and punish political foes.
“In the name of environmental protection, Democrats are readying just such a transfer on a scale that would have impressed the Pharaohs. Tens of billions of dollars, possibly hundreds of billions, will be shifted from American consumers of electricity to shareholders of favored utility companies in primarily blue states. Under the leadership of uber-liberal Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Democrats are determined to make their plan so complicated that taxpayers will not notice the flocks of dollars migrating from the middle of the country to the coasts.”

Of course, such a dynamic has another implication. “Cap-and-Trade” will be a rich man's game. In fact, one extremely wealthy liberal is already playing the "Cap-and-Trade" game.

That rich liberal is Al Gore, and he lives in a 20-room house with eight bathrooms.
His house - which looks like Tara in Gone With the Wind - burns carbon like you wouldn’t believe. Nashville Electric Service records show that Gore Hall consumes more electricity every month than the average American household uses in an entire year.

To be specific: the Department of Energy says the average American consumes 10,656 kilowatt-hours per year. In 2006, Gore consumed some 221,000 kilowatts hours. That’s more than 20 times the national average.

Of course, in his Academy Award-winning film, Mr. Global Warming told Americans to cut down on their consumption of electricity. So when some folks found him in that enormous house, they thought they detected hypocrisy.

Not so, said Gore, “I’m carbon neutral.”

“Carbon neutral?”

Oh yes. At home, Tipper and Al and the kids can burn as many kilowatts and produce as much carbon dioxide as they please - just so long as they buy carbon offsets.

And what are carbon offsets? They are “verifiable reductions in CO2” that somebody else is willing to sell. If a company has some extra carbon emissions lying around, it can sell them to Al Gore so he can cool every square inch of that monster house in the summer and heat it from basement to attic in the winter – just as carbon neutral as he can be.

And which company sold Gore those carbon offsets? It was a company in Great Britain. And guess who owns a huge chunk of that company? You guessed it… Al Gore.

As blogger Dan Riehl put it: Gore has built a "green money-making machine capable of eventually generating billions of dollars for investors, including himself, but he set it up so that the average Joe can't afford to play on Gore's terms."
Do America a favor. Let's defeat this liberal “Cap-and-Trade” scheme right here and right now.



Use the button below to send your personalized Blast Faxes to Barack Obama and every Republican Member of the United States Senate - or alternatively to President Obama and all 535 Members of Congress.

Tell them that you oppose the “Cap-and-Trade” scam rapidly making its way through Congress. Tell them that the American people do not want higher utility bills, higher prices at the pump and in the grocery store, diminished freedoms and a lower standard of living to help petty politicians achieve greater political power.
Demand they reject the so-called American Clean Energy and Security Act and all other Cap-and-Trade schemes now.


If the button above does not work, please use this hyperlink.


Yours In Freedom,

Jeff Mazzella

President
Center for Individual Freedom

Center for Individual Freedom
917-B King Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
703-535-5836
Fax:703-535-5838


CFIF is a 501(c)(4) not-for-profit constitutional advocacy organization with the mission to protect and defend individual freedoms and individual rights. Contributions to CFIF are not deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes.

Contributions may be deductible as a business expense.

If you choose not to go this route… call and fax your Senator and as many of them on the list yourself, but don’t sit idly by!!

If you choose not to go this route… call and fax your Senator and as many of them on the list yourself, but don’t sit idly by!!

United States Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121

Senators from your State.