Maybe "calm" isn't the right word. Have you seen the photos of the Romney rallies? This one is from Pennsylvania today:
It looks rather like folks in Pennsylvania might have heard about Obama's new EPA agenda.
Certainly everyone in coal country should pay attention to this unleashed EPA. The agenda is just chilling and is certain to doom the American economy for good.
Titled “A Look Ahead to EPA Regulations for 2013: Numerous Obama EPA
Rules Placed on Hold Until After the Election Spell Doom For Jobs and
Economic Growth”, it lists and describes new rules concocted over the
past year ranging from additional restrictions on greenhouse gas
emissions, tougher water guidelines and tightening of the ozone
standard. Taken together, they will further drive up pump prices, impose
construction bans on local communities, and cripple oil, natural gas
and coal production.
Greenhouse gas regulations will be so regulated as to basically eliminate coal. The emissions standards will apply to even the smallest church, school, and farm. "The cow tax" will apply to some 37,000 farms and affect 90% of the livestock population in the United States.
(Think that'll drive up your food and energy prices much?)
There's more:
The EPA is just one of some fourteen bureaucracies working to regulate and eliminate hydraulic fracking. The EPA will dramatically expand the Clean Water Act and increase regulatory burdens on the states. There will also be an expansion of regulations on storm-water systems which will require expensive retrofitting on storm water sewers and severely increase the cost of future development. New gasoline regulations will limit the amount of sulfur in gasoline which Bell says will add at least nine cents per gallon to your gas bill.
EPA’s Boiler MACT (Maximum Achievable Control Technology) standards are
so strict that not even the best-performing sources can meet them, so
many companies will have no choice but to shut their doors and ship
manufacturing jobs overseas. The rule has been projected to reduce U.S.
GDP by as much as 1.2 billion dollars and destroy nearly 800,000 jobs.
Can't wait to see what THAT does to the unemployment numbers.
There's also a "Cement MACT" which could close 18 plants and cost 80,000 jobs.
Read Bell's article because there are many more regulations there including the infamous Farm Dust regulations and cooling tower regulations.
If just half of these kick in we are still in a world of trouble.
Coal miners and coal powered plants already have a big problem, as we have pointed out repeatedly.
But it looks like those problems may grow by several orders of
magnitude in the coming months if the current White House occupant
remains in office. The President has already been seen to bristle at
criticism from his own Left flank over how he hasn’t done enough for the
environmentalists who can’t understand why the oil companies are still
in business four years later. Unrestrained by the need to win another
election – having a lot more “flexibility,” as you might hear from
Vladimir – these folks can really run amok.
Even the most far left liberal has to see that these regulations will be the death of American business and energy development. We must have a strong petroleum industry and this will never happen under these expensive and burdensome regulations. You can't fill your gas tank with wind, and you can't charge your electric car without electricity (which relies, of course, on coal). Our power grid is already strained and in trouble.
As the Obamacare debate rages this week, we need to also keep our eyes on Cap 'n Trade which is still simmering on the back burner.
Gene Hall, Director of Public Relations with the Texas Farm Bureau, has a piece out on the detrimental effects of this bill. I've posted lots on cap and trade, even researching what each Senator has said on the record regarding how they might vote. It will be interesting to see how that stands up.
Remember the letter from Randolph Blackburn? He's the lifelong Louisiana resident who had to move to Texas to keep a job in the oil industry. He wrote a letter published in the Houma Today expressing great fear for the oil industry in both Texas and Louisiana. He said:
I’ve seen both the ups and downs over the years but I’ve never been so fearful for my industry, my home state of Louisiana and my country.
The proposed cap-and-trade legislation will gut well-paying oil and gas jobs in Louisiana. The jobs will be in our refineries, fabrication shops, oilfield-service companies, oil companies, ports and related industries.
Add the income and taxes we will lose and this bill will surely bankrupt the state and its people. What will take the place of all these lost jobs? All of us will be affected.
Remember this awesome dissection of Waxman-Markey by Jimmie Bise at American Issues Project? And my own dissection of the bill where the government will regulate your light bulbs and outdoor lighting, tell you how to plant trees, and inspect your home.
Back to Gene Hall's piece on the Texas Farm Bureau site; Hall points out the detrimental costs cap-and-trade will have on the entire agricultural industry which directly affects every American. In fact, anything that deals with fossil fuels will go up, which is just about everything. Hall explains that the average projected cost increase for each American family is over $1700. The U.S. will "lose economic activity because we will be pricing ourselves out of the market with this tax built into everything we produce."
Hall goes on to point out the fact that farmers won't be able to sell their crops and in the end we will be forced to import our food from other countries. Hall says, "It may take a few years to sort it out, but there is very little question that passing cap-and-trade will eventually make the U.S. an importer of most of its food." Other countries will gladly fill the vacuum.
So, on top of these higher food and energy costs, we'll also be paying lots more for health insurance (for inferior and rationed care), and we'll be dodging Pelosi's VAT, as explained here. And the "best news" is that we're going to do all this in a severe recession. Are you kidding me?!
As the insurance battle rages, remember, they're probably hoping you aren't paying attention to cap-and-trade simmering there on the back burner. Keep the heat on and contact your Senators.
Sarah Palin makes some valid points in her article on Cap and Trade in the Washington Post today. One of them has nothing much to do with Cap and Trade. She says that "many in the national media would rather focus on the personality-driven political gossip of the day than on the gravity of these challenges."
No argument there. The Michael Jackson extravaganza is evidence of that. The media, and our culture in general, as we all know is obsessed with celebrity.
She makes another valid point when she says that "Job losses are so certain" under cap and trade that the bill "includes a provision accommodating newly unemployed workers from the resulting dried-up energy sector." If this bill is to create "jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs" as Nancy Pelosi said, why are we allocating $4.2 billion over eight years to compensate people that will lose their jobs because of it?
And if it's so wonderful and going to do all these great things for energy, why are we going to give lower income families (that would be those making about $35,000 per year for a family of 4) direct deposits each month to offset their energy costs?
As Palin also points, out, everything else will go up in cost besides energy. Farming, grocery prices, manufacturing, warehousing, transportation, and many of those businesses will fold. It's a domino effect.
While Palin is correct to be concerned about this bill, and I certainly am, we also need to be concerned about what "the other hand" is doing, as Glenn Beck might say. We're all focuses on Sotomayor, on Waxman-Markey, and on our celebrity goings-on, but watch out for that health care bill coming at you later today. It's gonna be a doosie.
"I’ve worked in the oil-and-gas industry in New Orleans, Lafayette and now Texas for the last 40 years. I’ve seen both the ups and downs over the years but I’ve never been so fearful for my industry, my home state of Louisiana and my country.
The proposed cap-and-trade legislation will gut well-paying oil and gas jobs in Louisiana. The jobs will be in our refineries, fabrication shops, oilfield-service companies, oil companies, ports and related industries."
Even though the Senate has delayed the vote on Cap and Trade, do NOT back off the campaign to contact your senators! Keep the pressure on. It's working.
Here is one chart from Real Clear Politics on how the Dems in the Senate stack up.
Below is my informal survey of how each Senator would vote and a link to why I think so. If you find one that you know is in error, please comment.
Akaka, Daniel (D- HI) Yes Alexander, Lamar (R-TN) No Barrasso, John (R-WY) No Baucus, Max (D-MT) Yes Bayh, Evan (D-IN) UNSURE Begich, Mark (D-AK) UNSURE Bennet, Michael (D-CO) Probably Yes Bennett, Robert (R-UT) No Bingaman, Jeff (D-NM) Yes Bond, Christopher (R- MO) No Boxer, Barbara (D-CA) Yes Brown, Sherrod (D-OH) UNSURE Brownback, Sam (R-KS) No Buning, Jim (R-KY) No Burr, Richard (R- NC) No Burris, Roland (D- IL) Probably Yes Byrd, Robert (D-WV) No Cantwell, Maria (D-WA) UNSURE Cardin, Benjamin (D-MD) Yes Carper, Thomas (D-DE) Yes Casey, Robert (D-PA) Probably No Chambliss, Saxby (R-GA) No Coburn, Tom (R-OK) No Cochran, Thad (R-MS) No Collins, Susan (R-ME) Yes Conrad, Kent (D-ND) UNSURE Corker, Bob (R-TN) Possible Yes Cornyn, John (R-TX) No Crapo, Mike (R-ID)Probable No DeMint, Jim (R-SC) No Dodd, Chris (D-CT) Yes Dorgan, Byron (D-ND) UNSURE Durbin, Dick (D-IL) Yes Ensign, John (R-NV) No Enzi, Michael (R-WY) No Feingold, Russ (D-WI) Likely yes Feinstein, Dianne (D-CA) Yes Franken, Al (D-MN) Likely Yes Gillibrand, Kirsten (D-NY) Yes Graham, Lindsey (R-SC) No Grassley, Chuck (R-IA) No Gregg, Judd (R-NH) Possibly Yes Hagan, Kay (D-NC) Unsure Harkin, Tom (D-IA) Unsure Hatch, Orrin (R-UT) No Hutchison, Kay Bailey (R-TX) No Inhofe, James (R-OK) No Inouye, Daniel (D-HI) Probably Yes Isakson, Johnny (R-GA) Probably No Johanns, Mike (R-NE) No Kaufman, Edward (D-DE) Yes Kennedy, Ted (D-MA) Yes Kerry, John (D-MA) Yes Klobuchar, Mary (D-MN) Yes Kohl, Herb (D-WI) Unsure Kyl, Jon (R-AZ) Probable No Landrieu, Mary (D-LA) Likely No Lautenberg, Frank (D-NJ) Yes Leahy, Patrick (D-VT) Yes Levin, Carl (D-MI) Possible No Lieberman, Joe (ID - CT) Yes Lincoln, Blanche (D- AR) Likely No Lugar, Richard (R- IN) Likely No Martinez, Mel (R-FL) Yes McCain, John (R-AZ) Possible Yes (and here) McCaskill, Claire (D-MO) No McConnell, Mitch (R-KY) No Menendez, Robert (D-NJ) Yes Merkley, Jeff (D-OR) Yes Mikulski, Barbara (D-MD) Yes Murkowski, Lisa (R-AK) UNSURE Murray, Patty (D-WA) Yes Nelson, Ben (D-NE) Likely No Nelson, William (D-FL) Unsure Pryor, Mark (D-AR) No Reed, Jack (D-RI) Yes Reid, Harry (D-NV) Yes Risch, James (R-ID) Likely No Roberts, Pat (R-KS) No Rockefeller, John (D-WV) Yes Sanders, Bernard (I - VT) Yes Schumer, Chuck (D-NY) Yes Sessions, Jeff (R-AL) No Shaheen, Jeanne (D-NH) Probable Yes Shelby, Richard (R-AL) No Snowe, Olympia (R - ME) Yes Specter, Arlen (D-PA) No Stabenow, Debbie (D- MI) Yes Tester, Jon (D-MT) Probably Yes Thune, John (R-SD) No Udall, Mark (D-CO) Yes Udall, Tom (D-NM) Likely yes Vitter, David (R-LA) NO Voinovich, George (R-OH) Unsure Warner, Mark (D-VA) Yes Webb, Jim (D-VA) Likely yes Whitehouse, Sheldon (D-RI) Yes Wicker, Roger (R-MS) No Wyden, Ron (D-OR) Likely yes
Here is another poll of Senators and a count. They have the count at 30 Yes, 25 No, and 45 undecided.
"I cannot support the House bill in its present form. I continue to believe that clean coal can be a 'green' energy. Those of us who understand coal's great potential in our quest for energy independence must continue to work diligently in shaping a climate bill that will ensure access to affordable energy for West Virginians. I remain bullish about the future of coal, and am so very proud of the miners who labor and toil in the coalfields of West Virginia."
Citizens in West Virginia are mobilizing against Cap and Trade with two July 18 events of protest. Mike Stuart, president of the West Virginia Conservative Foundation, says "Plain and simple, this is an energy tax and a tax on all Americans," he said. "This would be the most devastating bill in the history of our country. It's a bad bill, and it's gotta die." All three of West Virginia's Representatives voted against the bill.
In Kentucky, another coal state, State Rep. Jim Gooch said"If cap-and-trade legislation clears the U.S. Senate, Kentuckians will see a significant increase in the cost of electricity and a loss of jobs in the steel and aluminum industries." Gooch is concerned about the state's steel industry.
"Kentucky has 30 percent of the nation's stainless steel production, and between 30 and 40 percent of the aluminum production. Those plants will go overseas if we lose our cheap electricity," Gooch said. "We're not going to be able to take advantage of solar and wind energy in this state."
Reaction in agricultural states is equall concerned. This from Iowa:
David Miller, of the Iowa Farm Bureau, who also serves as chief science officer for AgraGate Climate Credits Corp., said the bill's carbon policy would substantially affect agriculture in rural America. "Everything we do is carbon-based," he said. "We have no noncarbon alternatives. Plants don't grow without carbon. Livestock don't exist without carbon."
Although agriculture isn't a named cap sector in the bill, Miller said the industry would be affected by indirect costs, including higher fertilizer costs, corn prices and taxes on livestock, resulting in $5 billion in increased costs to agriculture by 2020 and $13 billion to $14 billion by 2050. "If you raise electrical costs, rural America will pay for it, and rural America will pay for it at a higher rate than urban areas," he said.
The Heritage Foundation posted a new article yesterday debunking that whole "cost of one postage stamp a day" meme. An excerpt:
The goal of cap and trade is to drive up the costs of energy in order for people to use less of it. Because just about every business uses energy to produce goods and must pay their own electricity bills, the cost of production for businesses increases, and consumer demand falls for two reasons:
Price hikes on goods reduce demand, and
People have less disposable income due to higher energy prices.
Overall, production cuts and reduced consumer spending destroy jobs and slow economic growth, which further increases unemployment.
Contact your senators, people! Find out how they are going to vote on this bill. Feel free to post what you find out here. I know that Vitter and Landrieu of LA are both on record against it.
And so it begins. Barbara Boxer declaring that there are no new taxes afoot in Cap and Trade:
Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma, the panel's top Republican, [Senate Environment and Public Works Committee] said the cap-and-trade system would amount to the largest tax increase in American history, a statement echoed by many Republicans but shot down by Democrats including Sen. Barbara Boxer of California, who chairs the committee.
"There are no new taxes," Ms. Boxer said Tuesday morning.
What in the world is she thinking?
In addition, the Heritage Foundation points to this statement where even the EPA says Cap and Trade won't work:
EPA Administrator Jackson confirmed an EPA analysis showing that unilateral U.S. action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions would have no effect on climate. Moreover, when presented with an EPA chart depicting that outcome, Energy Secretary Steven Chu said he disagreed with EPA’s analysis.
“I believe the central parts of the [EPA] chart are that U.S. action alone will not impact world CO2 levels,” Administrator Jackson said.
Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) presented the chart to both Jackson and Secretary Chu, which shows that meaningful emissions reductions cannot occur without aggressive action by China, India, and other developing countries. “I am encouraged that Administrator Jackson agrees that unilateral action by the U.S. will be all cost for no climate gain,” Sen. Inhofe said. “With China and India recently issuing statements of defiant opposition to mandatory emissions controls, acting alone through the job-killing Waxman-Markey bill would impose severe economic burdens on American consumers, businesses, and families, all without any impact on climate.
Jimmy Bise at The American Issues Project has a better than awesome take-down of Waxman-Markey. He takes you through some of the more frightening provisions. Go check it out!
In all the Michael Jackson hoopla, I somehow missed this Washington Times article Friday regarding the Cap and Trade legislation. An excerpt:
Adversely affected employees in oil, coal and other fossil-fuel sector jobs would qualify for a weekly check worth 70 percent of their current salary for up to three years. In addition, they would get $1,500 for job-search assistance and $1,500 for moving expenses from the bill's "climate change worker adjustment assistance" program, which is expected to cost $4.2 billion from 2011 to 2019.
Remember Nancy Pelosi standing in front of the House right before the vote? She was shrieking "Jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs!" As it turns out, and as we suspected, this bill will NOT create jobs. It will kill jobs. It will send jobs overseas. It will stop jobs from being created. If this bill was going to create so many jobs, why is there this provision to compensate people who will lose their jobs? There's more:
While the analyses assume displaced workers will eventually find jobs, the liberal-leaning Brookings Institution predicts a net job loss of 0.5 percent over the first 10 years that carbon reduction legislation, called "cap-and-trade," is in effect. The conservative Heritage Foundation found that by 2030 net job losses would top 1.1 million, while the Coalition for Affordable American Energy, an industry group, estimates that more than 3 million jobs would be lost by 2030 as a result of the cap-and-trade system.
The Wall Street Journal has an article today that explains how the Cap and Trade bill will work to kill jobs and will certainly NOT create "energy independence." It also makes clear how jobs will NOT be created under this legislation. Paired with the understanding that the 2010 budget calls for elimination of important tax breaks for energy companies, we have a recipe for disaster. The tax breaks that will be cancelled will discourage domestic exploration and drilling.
An example: In the past couple of years we discovered here in NW Louisiana that we are sitting on a shale formation similar to the Barnett Shale in Texas. There is also a shale formation in Pennsylvania. The WSJ article points out the value of this resource:
An April Department of Energy report estimated that the newly available shale resources total 649 trillion cubic feet of gas. That's the energy equivalent of 118.3 billion barrels of oil, or slightly more than the proven oil reserves of Iraq. Eliminating the tax breaks for drilling will make natural gas more expensive. Tudor, Pickering, Holt & Co., a Houston-based investment-banking firm, estimates that eliminating the intangible drilling cost provision could increase U.S. natural gas prices by 50 cents per thousand cubic feet. Why? Because without the tax break, fewer wells will be drilled and less gas will be produced. The U.S. consumes about 23 trillion cubic feet of gas per year. Simple arithmetic shows that eliminating the drilling subsidies that cost taxpayers less than $2 billion per year could result in an increased cost to consumers of $11.5 billion per year in the form of higher natural gas prices.
So energy prices will go up. But inherent in this is the fact that people that would be working those wells and in the processing of that natural gas, won't be working. Those jobs won't be created because the energy companies won't be able to afford to drill as many wells. Eighteen months or so ago people around here were signing leases and getting royalties and signing bonuses for their mineral rights for this Haynesville Shale development. No more. It dried up. Stopped.
The WSJ points out that this is hardly a recipe for energy independence. We still need oil and gas in this country. Ethanol and wind won't cut it. The cap and trade legislation and the 2010 budget both work against those industries, and in fact, work to create even more entitlements from the government. The government is going to support you because they tanked your job. And don't forget, we're also going to give cash via direct deposit to low-income people to offset these higher energy costs - another entitlement. Even more people will now be dependent on the government to take care of them.
Cap and trade is not going to create jobs. It's going to kill jobs. It's going to increase our dependence on foreign oil.
Michelle Malkin has the info you need to get to work to stop the passage of Cap 'n Tax. The Heritage Foundation has a great video about the cap and trade legislation; take a look.
NRO has a great analysis of Waxman-Markey this morning which means I can now quit my plodding through the bill. They've listed their top fifty reasons why it needs to be stopped saying "it represents a worse abuse of the public trust and purse than the stimulus and the bailouts put together."
While you're at NRO, check out Jonah Goldberg's Letter to Sarah.
Do not let this lull us into complacency! I don't believe it for a minute. If you read the Politico piece yesterday about how Nancy Pelosi whipped up the necessary votes in the House, you would see why we need to be concerned. I expect the same shenanigans in the Senate.
Oh, Inhofe is encouraging, to be sure. He says “They are not going to get more than 35 votes.’’ We can hope. But in the meantime, call your Senators. This is a terrible bill. In fact, Inhofe even suggests the possibility that a criminal investigation should be launched regarding the suppressed EPA report but isn't "qualified" to make that judgment.
And how will this bill affect you? It has regulations on every single aspect of your daily life. There are light bulb restrictions (no more than 60 watts in your candelabra); in fact there's a whole section that deals with lamps. If you decide to build a new home, it must meet new and specific energy requirements. If you decide to sell your existing home, a federal inspector must inspect your home, determine it's energy rating, and if your home is found to be unacceptable then you must retrofit and make changes before you will be able to sell.
There's an entire section on planting trees including guidelines on "scientific based measurements outlining the species and minimum distance required between trees planted...in addition to the minimum required distance to be maintained between such trees and building foundations, air conditioning units, driveways and walkways...". Do we really need the federal government telling us where we can plant trees?
There's a section dealing with outdoor lighting in which you are given instructions about landscape lights, lights in your swimming pool, lights on artwork and other architectural lighting. The federal government is going to tell you what wattage that light can be and how many you can have. In some cases the lights must be capable of producing two different light levels (100 and 60 watt).
There are new government regulations for water dispensers, hot tubs and other appliances. They're going to regulate water usage, and regulate wood stoves. Any wood stove that does not meet regulation must be "destroyed and recycled."
In addition, this article explains how lower income families will get cash via direct deposit to help offset their energy cost (it's in section 432).
I hope Inhofe is correct and this bill is dead meat. I'm not saying that saving energy is a bad thing, but this bill is bad. This bill will chase jobs out of the United States; they might be saying it's a "jobs bill" but it isn't.
And now we have "the clown" from Minnesota coming to the Senate just in time to lend his oh-so-wise voice to the Waxman-Markey debate and the health care debate.
2010 can't come soon enough.
Update: I want to clarify the statement on the housing energy standards. The government is not going to literally tell you that you can't sell your home unless it meets certain energy criteria but it does establish an energy performance labeling system that would rate your home's energy standards and this information would be available to any buyer. A full disclosure sort of thing. If your windows are leaky and your insulation poor, your appliances out of date, this would all affect your rating thus making it more difficult to sell your home. This is optional (at this time).
I was wide awake last night, unable to sleep, thinking about the Waxman-Markey bill, or the cap and trade bill, or H.R. 2454, whatever you want to call it. Most of us are calling it worse things than that.
This bill disgusts me on several levels. It's hard to know where to start. I suppose the fact that Congress voted for this thing without having read it should not surprise me as this is what happened with the Stimulus package. In fact, it's as if the authors were flaunting the fact that nobody was going to read it when they dumped the 300 page amendment on it at 3:00 a.m., just hours before the vote. It was never expected that anyone was going to read this bill. That's a travesty. John Boehner was right when he said that American deserve better representation than that.
The bill disgusts me in that it is based on a phony science. My purpose is not to debate whether or not global warming exists. The point is that there is, in fact, still debate about that, yet this bill assumes that it exists and then goes on to alter every aspect of our private lives based on that assumption. It strips us of our liberties. The fact that the EPA suppressed a 98 page report by EPA senior research analyst Alan Carlin, some assume under pressure by the Obama administration, that draws serious questions about climate change.
Carlin's report found "that global temperatures have declined for 11 years; that new research predicts Atlantic hurricanes will be unaffected; that there’s 'little evidence' that Greenland is shedding ice at expected levels; and that solar radiation has the largest single effect on the earth’s temperature." These findings are not what the administration wanted to get out right before the vote on climate change legislation.
The EPA justified suppressing this report by saying that Carlin is not a scientist. In her weekly column Michelle Malkin points out that "neither is Al Gore. Nor is environmental czar Carol Browner. Nor is cap-and-trade shepherd Nancy Pelosi." Carlin does, however, hold a B.S. in physics and has been with the EPA for 35 years.
At any rate, the report calling global warming into question was suppressed and the vote went on. The report was not read and neither was the bill.
The thing that disgusts me most about this bill is the fact that it knowing and intentionally creates an energy tax during a time when we are in a recession. People are already losing jobs, unemployment is up and is certain to get worse even without the passing of this bill. The only way this bill works is if it makes it painful on citizens to use energy, thereby forcing us to use less.
This bill will force jobs overseas. The Democratic administration will tell you that it's going to create all these wonderful "green jobs," windmill farms, solar panels and so on. Meanwhile, coal plants will be pushed out of business as will refineries and many small businesses. Many jobs will go overseas where these draconian strictures do not apply. This gives economic advantage to other countries. The Heritage Foundation predicts that this bill will "destroy 1,145,000 jobs on average, with peak years seeing unemployment rise by over 2,479,000 jobs."
And how will this bill affect you? It has regulations on every single aspect of your daily life. There are light bulb restrictions (no more than 60 watts in your candelabra); in fact there's a whole section that deals with lamps. If you decide to build a new home, it must meet new and specific energy requirements. If you decide to sell your existing home, a federal inspector must inspect your home, determine it's energy rating, and if your home is found to be unacceptable then you must retrofit and make changes before you will be able to sell.
There's an entire section on planting trees including guidelines on "scientific based measurements outlining the species and minimum distance required between trees planted...in addition to the minimum required distance to be maintained between such trees and building foundations, air conditioning units, driveways and walkways...". Do we really need the federal government telling us where we can plant trees?
There's a section dealing with outdoor lighting in which you are given instructions about landscape lights, lights in your swimming pool, lights on artwork and other architectural lighting. The federal government is going to tell you what wattage that light can be and how many you can have. In some cases the lights must be capable of producing two different light levels (100 and 60 watt).
There are new government regulations for water dispensers, hot tubs and other appliances. They're going to regulate water usage, and regulate wood stoves. Any wood stove that does not meet regulation must be "destroyed and recycled."
It goes on and on to enumerate where plugs for your hybrid cars must be, and deals extensively with transportation.
Do we really need the government dictating all this to us? Is this what we signed on for? If your Congressman had actually read this bill, would he have still voted for it? If the answer to any of those questions is yes, then we have even more serious problems than this bill.
There is still time to stop it. Contact your senators. Tell them how you feel about this legislation. Regardless of how you feel about global warming and whether or not it exists, (this bill does nothing toward elimination or cessation of that) we don't need a nanny state. If I want to use a 100 watt incandescent light bulb in my house, I don't want Big Brother coming after me for it. And I don't think I'm killing any polar bears by doing so.
Update: Don't miss this article which explains how lower income families will get cash by direct deposit to offset their energy costs.
Update 3: I want to clarify the statement on the housing energy standards. The government is not going to literally tell you that you can't sell your home unless it meets certain energy criteria but it does establish an energy performance labeling system that would rate your home's energy standards and this information would be available to any buyer. A full disclosure sort of thing. If your windows are leaky and your insulation poor, your appliances out of date, this would all affect your rating thus making it more difficult to sell your home. This is optional (at this time).
My blogging has been light today; I've been doing life-things like cleaning my carpets, grocery shopping, laundry, you know. Stuff. Went to the bookstore and bought some biographies for my mom. Went to Target and bought a new purse. Important stuff.
Anyway, so I didn't see Fox 'n Friends this morning when Doocy got Carol Browner to admit she hasn't read the Cap ' n Tax bill. Great. Via Hot Air, here's the clip:
As I was driving around (burning FUEL purchased from FOREIGN SOURCES) I was listening to talk radio. Some woman called in to Rush Limbaugh lamenting that the average citizen doesn't even know what is in this bill and what Washington is doing to them. How many people actually WATCHED John Boehner read the amendment on CSPAN on a Friday evening? I'm betting not many.
How many people are going to be shocked when they go to sell their house and can't until the government comes in and does an energy inspection; if your house is leaking energy or doesn't have storm windows, etc. etc., you can't sell it until you fix that. This was in the amendment John Boehner read to Congress. I'm betting they didn't know about it until he told them.
At the very least you'd expect the energy czar, Carol Browner, to have read it.
At what point does this just become treason? Is it too much to ask that your representatives read the legislation that they vote on?
When asked why he read portions of the cap-and-trade bill on the floor Friday night, Boehner told The Hill, "Hey, people deserve to know what's in this pile of s--t."
I wish he would have read the whole thing, sort of like Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. Might not have changed the vote, but who knows.
Word is that the Senate won't deal with the Cap 'n Tax until fall and that it's DOA when it gets there. That doesn't mean we should back off the fight though. It just gives us plenty of time to pound our Senators on the issue as well as the knuckleheads who voted for it - both Democrat AND Republican because the taxes and higher prices on goods that are coming from this bad boy will affect all of us.
In case you missed it, here is Boehner's Republican response from yesterday.
I'm sure you've seen this video by now. Maybe not, if you live outside of Louisiana, but seriously people, this is our Louisiana legislature. It's only two minutes - take a quick look. I don't think you have to watch all of it.
The backstory on this is that this kid, rapper Hurricane Chris, is the godson of Barbara Norton (D-Shreveport) and this occurred on the last day before the session ended. She introduced him as a role model. Hmm. Here are some of the lyrics to the "song":
Well let's get ratchet Let's get ratchet Look at her prettier then Halle and thicker than Janet She say she like all of my club bangers I be jamming Told her to bust it open let me see what's really happnin She the ship and I'm the captain I'm tha captain Booty bigger than the pus
And I'm all the way in your city I'm from louisianna so you gotta show me how your City do it for that camera Make it drop and bring it back to the top You no amateur Girl you can give it to me it ain't nothing I can't handle She just got out of the shower smellin like a scented candle And I'm finna finna? Sliding off tha mattress No moving no acting baby this is real action Beat it up so bad You be scared to walk past me I know your halle berry Baby there's no acting I beat it up so bad You be scared to walk past me for real
It goes on from there for a while, and that's the clean version. The video of his legislative performance (the 9 minute version) has been on The Dead Pelican for days and has been spreading around the internet. Barbara Norton, for her part, is pretty proud of this. She said, "I'm excited to know that Louisiana is putting something on the internet that's positive because there are so many things on the internet and we're on the bottom," whatever that means.
She introduced him on the floor by saying, "I want to introduce to all to a young man who I think is doing great work throughout this country in the area of music." Great work? She goes on, "I'm very proud of Hurricane Chris who is my godson...I'm just sound proud of him...when he was 10 years old he was singin' and was probably singin' before then." "He's gonna come down for just a minute or two and give you all just a second or two of Halle Barry's record, She's Fine, and I know you all like that, mens know about fine because you do it all the time so anyways don't act like you ain't never heard of it."
Then she leads the young wordsmith to the podium, a Proclamation is read, and Chris speaks.
"I 'preciate y'all for bringin' me out today, I wanna gi' y'all a taste of one of my new songs just in case y'all ain't familiar wit' me, I'm gonna getcha familiar wit me." Then he speaks to the legislature about categorizing women, about beautiful women, and about having confidence, which he does not lack.
I'd have paid good money to see the camera pan out to the faces of the legislators as this went on.
Look, I know it takes all kinds. I get it. I know some people like this music - the song is No. 5 right now, so somebody likes it. But I can't help but feel like it's words and lyrics like this that are dragging our culture down today and have helped lead us to the total Godless, amoral, self-centered culture we live in today. I have a teenager that loves this mess
Pundette wrote yesterday about being disgusted. I totally feel her pain. She wrote about Beyonce and how Michelle Obama said she was a great role model for young girls. I don't know a whole lot about Beyonce, and I can't really say if she's a role model or not. My feeling is that she's not as bad as some others but how relative is that? How bad do you have to be to be bad. And hey, now, "bad" means "good." It's a good thing to be "Bad!" As in, "I'm BAD, man." That's good.
*Sigh*
Our celebrity worship culture has led us to this (which is another point Pundette makes). We elected a cool, celebrity president who is in turn leading us into ruin. I'm not being hyperbolic here, I don't think. It's clear to me that he's ramming health care reform, climate reform, financial reform, etc. etc., through as fast as he can because he figures by 2010 the Kool Aid might have worn off and it will be more difficult to do after the mid-term elections. I'm sure immigration reform is next on the agenda.
But hey, he's cool, suave, young and hip. He has a dog and two kids and looks debonairre in a suit (so they say). Like many young liberals, he thinks America needs to be apologized for and we need to be like the Europeans, who are cool. And he was so much better than the old, white guy.
I don't want to insult people - I know some liberals voted for him because they think his policies are valid. Not everyone voted on the cool factor. I was reminded during the campaign when I railed against him daily that some voters have done their research and sincerely believe that his policies are the best. I'm obviously not one of them.
Back to Hurricane Chris. We're down here celebrating a young man who sings about "gettin' ratchet" and ... well, I can't even print the lyrics he sings. I know parents have been protesting the idols of their teenagers since time began (the Beatles and Elvis were going to be the ruination of society, remember?) but seriously, how much lower can we go? How much longer before Hurricane Chris is president?
Our country is in serious trouble. People that read this blog already know that or you wouldn't be here. I'm preaching to the choir. I get the occassional liberal commenter who disagrees with me, but I've given up on changing their views. They are dead set that global warming is ruining the planet, that Obama IS cool, that inviting dictators to tea IS the path to world peace and that we need to be buying bottled water for Africans and stop worrying about about ourselves so much because we are just arrogant and egocentric.
I'm going to quote Bride of Rove here, because she had a great post that summed up how I felt right after the Cap ' n Tax vote.
You think Republicans lie? This guy is the king of all liars. Did you hear his speech the other day on how he was a great believer in Capitalism and a free market system? I damn near wrecked the car I was laughing so hard. He had just taken over two car manufacturers and refused to allow several banks to pay off the TARP money so they could get out from under the Govt’s thumb and announces a pay czar to decide how much everyone will be allowed to earn. It was beautiful....
If I did not have kids or any responsibilities I would be loving every minute of this. I would enjoy what I know is coming down the road because whether you voted for him or not, you’re not escaping this horror. Every idiot who thought he was going to pay their mortgage and buy their gas and they would not have to work and their taxes would not go up - they are in for the shock of their lives. What kind of moron believes a politician’s promises like that? Hey. That Iranian President at least gave everyone a potato - before he shot them.
Enough doom and gloom. Hurricane Chris and all the others can just go rot for all I care. And sitting here in this funk is not going to do anything to turn this train wreck around. I just hope that there's enough of this country left to save after we vote Obama out. The changes he's making are irreversable. It'll be very difficult to undo Obamacare.
Chin up. Remember the words of John Paul Jones who would not accept the British demands for surrender and said, "I have not yet begun to fight!" We've got to keep protesting, contacting legislators, finding strong candidates to put out there, talking about the things that made this country great, and remind people what it could be before we have to remind them about what it was.
Here is my anti-Hurricane Chris song to cheer you up:
The intrepid Chad Rogers at The Dead Pelican has this on the Obama administration's behind-the-scenes maneuvering on Cap 'n Tax (there's more at his site - go look):
The Obama Administration tried to pressure Louisiana Congressman Joseph Cao into supporting "Cap-and-Trade" legislation, THE DEAD PELICAN has learned.
Sources tell THE DEAD PELICAN that Obama personally called the freshman congressman to ask for his support of controversial legislation that will place a tax on carbon emissions!
Sources tell THE DEAD PELICAN that Obama (the Democrat) promised to assist Cao (the Republican) in his re-election in return for his vote!Well-placed insiders tell THE DEAD PELICAN that Congressman Cao has refused Obama's offer and intends to vote in the interest of Louisiana by voting "no."
Here are the turncoat Republicans who voted FOR the cap 'n tax boondoggle. It made a difference. The vote was 219-212. AND they brought Patrick Kennedy in from rehab to vote. Go figure. Desperate times....
I spent the whole day in front of CSPAN twittering my favorite comments and when John Boehner got up and did his Mr. Smith Goes to Washington routine I was cheering! It was a bright spot in an otherwise dim day.
After the vote I went and drank Dos Equis and ate Mexican food, came home and walked my dog and some psycho woman chased me around the block in her SUV because my dog peed in the city property strip in front of her house. Just wait until they start taxing her dog farts.
This is the most recent list on how your Congressman might be leaning on the Cap-and-Trade vote today. If you don't know who your Congressman is, go here, type in your zip code and find out. You'll also find out his/her phone number so you can melt the phones!
Republican List (Unlisted are solid no)
Solid Yes Bono, Mary California
Lean Yes Castle, Michael Delaware Ehlers, Vernon Michigan Lance, Leonard New Jersey McHugh, John New York Reichert, Dave Washington
Undecided Buchanan, Vern Florida Kirk, Mark Illinois Lobiondo, Frank New Jersey Petri, Thomas Wisconsin Smith, Chris New Jersey
Lean No Fortenberry, Jeffrey Nebraska Frelinghuysen, Rod New Jersey Gerlach, Jim Pennsylvania Johnson, Timothy Illinois
Democratic List (Unlisted are solid yes)
Lean No Boswell, Leonard Iowa Edwards, Chat Texas (No "in current form") Etheridge, Bob North Carolina Halvorson, Debbie Illinois Hinojosa, Ruben Texas Kaptur, Marcy Ohio Marshall, Jim Georgia Massa, Eric New York Minnick, Walt Idaho Rahall, Nick West Virginia Salazar, John Colorado
Undecided Arcuri, Michael New York Bishop, Sanford Georgia Boccieri, John Ohio Boyd, Allen Florida Brown, Corrine Florida Carney, Chris Pennsylvania Davis, Lincoln Tennessee Dicks, Norm Washington Donnelly, Joe Indiana Foster, Bill Illinois Green, Al Texas Jackson Lee, Sheila Texas Johnson, Eddie Texas Kind, Ronald Wisconsin Kirkpatrick, Ann Arizona McIntyre, Mike North Carolina Ortiz, Solomon Texas Space, Zach Ohio (voted yes in committee) Teague, Harry New Mexico Tonko, Paul New York
Lean Yes Abercrombie, Neil Hawaii Adler, John New Jersey Baca, Joe California Bean, Melissa Illinois Cardoza, Dennis California Clay, William Missouri Cooper, Jim Tennessee Costa, Jim California Driehaus, Steve Ohio Fudge, Marcia Ohio Grayson, Alan Florida Kagan, Steve Wisconsin Kildee, Dale Michigan Kosmas, Suzanne Florida Kratovil, Frank Maryland Maffei, Dan New York Mary Jo Kilroy Ohio McMahon, Michael New York Meek, Kendrick Florida Meeks, Gregory New York Mitchell, Harry Arizona Murphy, Scott New York Nye, Glenn Virginia Peters, Gary Michigan Rodriguez, Ciro Texas Schauer, Mark Michigan Shuler, Heath North Carolina Skelton, Ike Missouri Thompson, Bennie Mississippi
Solid No - Call to confirm/thank/support! Altmire, Jason Pennsylvania Barrow, John Georgia Berry, Marion Arkansas Boren, Dan Oklahoma Bright, Bobby Alabama Childers, Travis Mississippi Costello, Jerry Illinois Cuellar, Henry Texas Dahlkemper, Kathy Pennsylvania Davis, Artur Alabama Defazio, Peter Oregon Doggett, Lloyd Texas Ellsworth, Brad Indiana Griffith, Parker Alabama Herseth, Stephanie South Dakota Holden, Tim Pennsylvania Kissell, Larry North Carolina Kucinich, Dennis Ohio Matheson, Jim Utah Melancon, Charlie Louisiana Mollohan, Alan West Virginia Pomeroy, Earl North Dakota Ross, Mike Arkansas Scott, David Georgia Tanner, John Tennessee Taylor, Gene Mississippi Wilson, Charlie Ohio
The American Farm Bureau warns that cap and trade would cost the average farmer $175 on every dairy cow and $80 for beef cattle. So farm-state politics trumped climate change.
The EPA has been tasked by a Supreme Court ruling to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from your nostrils to your lawn mower. This even covers the emissions of barnyard animals, including the methane from cows. American taxpayers apparently will be paying companies not to chop down trees. The Washington Times reports that as part of the legislation, the House will also be voting Friday on a plan to pay domestic and international companies around the world not to cut down trees.
Heritage Foundation projects that by 2035 it would reduce aggregate gross domestic product by $7.4 trillion. In an average year, 844,000 jobs would be destroyed, with peak years seeing unemployment rise by almost 2 million.
Inflation-adjusted gasoline prices would rise 74%, residential natural gas prices by 55% and the average family's annual energy bill by $1,500.
This is Representative John Fleming's statement on the Cap and Trade bill; I'm posting it in it's entirety. Fleming represents my district. (All emphasis mine).
“It’s time that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle come clean about the cost of cap-and-trade, more accurately described as ‘cap-and-tax’, which is nothing more than a $646 billion national energy tax. This is a bad energy policy that will cost the average American household more than $3,100 per year -- turning on the light switch will mean a 40% increase in utility costs. Impoverished and low income earners cannot make up this increased cost and will be the hardest hit by this policy.
It is not just monthly budgets that will be negatively affected, but jobs and industry as a whole will suffer. We will likely lose 3 to 4 million American jobs if “cap-and-tax” is enacted. Businesses will take whatever necessary measures to decrease the negative effects of this policy; whether it be passing the cost to the American consumer or laying off workers to compensate for the increased cost. Companies looking to invest in our economy will simply move overseas to escape this enormous tax increase and flee stringent environmental protection laws. “Cap-and-tax” will serve as an economic stimulus for countries like India and China, who stand to receive the benefits of an influx of outsourced American business and jobs.
Just last week I received a letter from hospitals in the 4th District of Louisiana who are gravely concerned about this Administration’s energy policy. As one of the state’s leading consumers of electricity, these hospitals wrote to warn me of the expected effects of such far-reaching radical legislation. They have assured me that, if enacted, these policies will force them to dramatically raise healthcare costs on consumers to make up for their increased utility bills.
I too want to protect our environment, but believe we must do it in a way that keeps energy costs low for working families and protects our jobs and small businesses. Cap-and-tax will do nothing to cap greenhouse gases, but it will set the United States at a global economic disadvantage. Simply said, this tax proposal will cap our growth and trade our jobs.”
Michelle Malkin has the list of those that are undecided or leaning. Find out what your representative thinks and then go here to get his number, talking points, and a feedback form.
If you live near me, in Texas or Mississippi for example, there are some leaning yes. There are also some undecideds. Check the list. Make the calls! This is a BAD bill and god knows they haven't even read it. Hot Air reports that a 300 page amendment was dumped on the 1000 page bill just this morning. You think they're going to read that before they vote?
