The Conservative Reader

Art Smith September 5th, 2008

A lot of you have seen the speech, some have not.  Overall, high marks for contents.  Very high.  I think he brought out the right issues, positions, and comparisons with Obama.  He’s working out the differences, which he needs to continue to do.  Probably the three key areas that he addressed and should continue to address:

1. Key distinctions between Democrats and Republicans on social and economic issues.
2. Demonstrable track record in leading and doing the right thing both in policy and ethical behavior.
3. Bipartisan attitude and effort in pooling ideas and working with all sides to find the best solutions.

Clearly, the convention floor was energized.  I would say (as others have also said) that the presentation was not as strong as the content.  I’d have to give John a B- for presentation.  However, the apex of the speech, the culmination of his message of “fighting”, was well executed and effective.  The key to that was pushing through the speech at that point without stopping despite the applause, cheers, and revelry.

So, some thoughts on key pieces of the speech.

On Sarah Palin:

“I’ve found the right partner to shake up Washington, DC.”

I don’t recall ever seeing so much of a speech by a Presidential nominee devoted to the Vice-Presidential nominee.  Very cool.  Sending the right message right up front that Sarah has John’s 100% support, that they are a team with  common mission, and that the mission is one that Americans have been begging for now for decades.  Clean up the Swamp… obviously, Pelosi is unable to.

“I don’t work for a Party, I don’t work for a special interest, I don’t work for myself.  I work for you.”

This will be one of the key messages of the campaign, from what I can tell.  I’m not 100% behind a message of the President acting as a “representative” of the will of the people.  Sometimes, the President is going to have to do some unpopular things and be okay with the consequences, just as Bush has done.  Regardless, the intended and probably heard message here is that John considers himself beholden to no other men of power than those than elect him, and that is refreshing, contraintuitive (for most politicians), and effective.

“We lost the trust of the American People… we’re going to change that.”

Honesty about the major errors made by members of his own party.  This is probably where “cleaning up Washington” is going to be the most effective message, in declaring that ethical failings have been bipartisan, and that the cleanup will be as well.  This may not make some Republican leaders very happy, and hopefully the American people will get the fact that this is a big risk for McCain.

“Education is the Civil Rights issue of this century.  … Empower parents with choice [in education options].”

One of the distinctions of Republians vs. Democrats: Republicans want options for families and accountability for the educators.  My favorite line:

“… Help bad teachers find another line of work.”

He also stated that he wants to help good educators to be as effective as possible, removing barriers and compensatnig them appropriately.

“I will reach out my hand to anyone to help me get this country moving again.”

If McCain is elected, he may become known as the most bipartisan and effective president in decades.  This will undoubtedly be more difficult than the work he’s done on the House and Senate floors, but he’s willing.

“Get back up and fight again for my country and for the men I had the honor to serve with because every day they fought for me.”

This was a quote from his comrad in the POW camp after John had been broken.  This should become a metafor to challenge America to fight on, and why.  At the end of the speech, John makes that so.

“Nothing brings greater happiness in life than to serve a cause greater than yourself.”

Both candidates are probably going to repeat this kind of rhetoric (I suspect McCain is more likely to speak truthfully of this, but that’s just my opinion) because they know that many in our nation resonate with this statement.  However, I doubt that enough people really do sometimes.  The fact is, so many Americans are focused on themselves and their personal challenges (and granted, many of them are in real need, so that is understandable).  We have had a couple of generations move into voting age these past couple of decades, where the priorities are very “me” centered.  There are some, but few, who truly think of others before themselves.  This is one of the core areas of decay in our society.  If McCain, Obama, or both of them can influence and self-centered electorate to look outside themselves as they consider what is best for America, this will be a profoundly positive and successful election regardless of who wins.

“I’m going to fight for my cause every day as your president. I’m going to fight to make sure every American has every reason to thank God, as I thank him: that I’m an American, a proud citizen of the greatest country on Earth, and with hard work, strong faith and a little courage, great things are always within our reach. Fight with me. Fight with me.

“Fight for what’s right for our country!

“Fight for the ideals and character of a free people!

“Fight for our children’s future!

“Fight for justice and opportunity for all!

“Stand up to defend our country from its enemies!

“Stand up for each other; for beautiful, blessed, bountiful America!

“Stand up, stand up, stand up and fight! Nothing is inevitable here! We’re Americans, and we never give up! We never quit! We never hide from history! We make history!”

This was the high-point of the speech.  The crowd was going nuts through the whole paragraph, and John never faltered… he pushed right through and allowed the crowd to keep building and building to a crescendo that climaxed in my heart, and hopefully many many others as well.

If ever our country and the Republican Party needed this kind of encouragement it is now.  As a country, we have struggled through 18 months or more of growing challenges that have impacted the worlds of so many people with the loss of homes, jobs, financial stability.  Despite the continued success of the action in Iraq (or perhaps because of it), we have not been allowed as a country to stir to a real sense of the victory we are experiencing there.  We don’t understand why so many people around the world hate us.  And we are hurting more and more as our differences in political philosophy create a greater divide than I have ever seen.

As a Party, we are somewhat demoralized because of the losses in 2006.  We are frustrated because the answers to our economic and energy problems seem so clear and yet refuted unendingly in the village square, in the press, in the ears of our representatives in Congress.  We are angry because even when we’ve had control of Congress and the White House, we failed to get our agenda through.  We don’t think we have a chance of winning the US Congress or many of our state legislatures this year.  And we’re still not confident of our prospects of keeping the White House.

And as a result, many, many, many people seem like they are ready to give up.  It’s frustrating to watch.

John says: “Fight!”.  And I agree.

When things appear to be at their worst, we must fight.  We must for the sake of our country, for our children, for future generations.  Else we dishonor the generations past who fought for us.

The rally cry of this campaign needs to be “Fight!”.

Bithead has a great review of the choice now before us.

There is a great deal more that John said in his speech.  You can read the transcript here.

Tags: Bipartisan, Bithead, BitsBlog, broken, Clean the Swamp, Clean Up Washington, Education, Ethics, Fight, Help bad teachers find another line of work, Integrity, Iraq, John McCain, Nancy Pelosi, POW, Republican National Convention, Sarah Palin, Speech, Stand Up, Viet Nam, We make history, we never give up, We never hide from history, We never quit

• 2008 Presidential Election , Barack Obama , Bipartisanship , Corruption , Earmarks , Economy , Featured , Integrity , John McCain , Nancy Pelosi , Sarah Palin , US Congress
• Comments(0)

Art Smith August 25th, 2008

The price of crude is hovering around $115 / bbl.  At this point, I suspect it won’t make much motion, especially not downward, until some real action is finally taken by Congress to open up drilling.  I agree with the refrain of Republicans to do “all of the above”, that is, work the alternative energy agenda while opening update domestic drilling.  The market will continue to laugh at us on the alternative energy options (by the way, we’ve had Ethanol in the US since World War I, so let’s stop acting like alternative fuels are “new”).  But as we engage with definitive action, we will continue to see the impact on commodity prices.

The sad thing is that the market is so clearly expressing it’s ability to react to political events even when there is no tangible change in availability of domestic oil.  Yet the politicians on the Left continue to act like there’s no relationship.  Like the salesmen in the story “The Emporer’s New Clothes”, Democrats believe that as long as they continue to repeat the lies, Americans will believe them.

It’s not working.

Americans are becoming progressively impatient with Congress.  As I’ve been interacting with people in my community and at work, I’m finding more and more just take the foolishness of Congress for granted, and that the truth is in front of everyone’s noses.  I’ve never seen so much exasperation.  Simple message: nobody’s really being fooled by this.

In response to an email I sent to Tom Harkin, there is evidence that Dems really believe that if they ignore the truth and repeat their mantras that everything will work out.  Harkin’s classic response to any input I try to share with him is to basically ignore my comments and then tell me what he’s going to do, why, an essentially feed me the same garbage the Democrats are trying to feed everyone about the availability of  resources in the US to support our country’s needs over time.  Granted, I don’t expect him to just do my bidding, and his response this time is not as bad as some of the prior attempts at treating me like a school boy that needs educating.  But his response is patently lacking credibility, including feeding me insipid suggestions like “inflating tires”.

And I can’t believe he’s getting a bunch of emails from other constituents saying “Please continue doing what you’re doing.  I like paying high prices for oil and can’t wait until we force all Americans to stop using gas powered cars and switch to electric or natural gas powered vehicles.”  And when a Congressman is not listening to his constituents, but rather attempting to change the minds of all of the constituents, that can spell disaster.

We can only hope.

My email to Harkin, Boswell, and Grassley (admittedly, I’m impressed that Harkin replied… I’ve heard nothing from the other two) was this:

Our dependence on foreign powers for sources of key raw materials, especially to provide fuel, is becoming untenable.  I completely understand the concerns of those that want to protect valuable natural habitats and areas of clean untarnished beauty throughout our country.  However, relying on foreign concerns who are intent upon taking advantage of our need for energy resources is simply not working, and in many ways, is starting to make the US seem unintelligent in its dealings and inability to manage its dependence on foreign markets by closing its own internal access to the same resources.  I am anxious to see us build and leverage cleaner solutions for energy, and support any efforts to improve these technologies.  However, we do, and will continue to for a long time, need access to oil, and we need to keep the money spent on this oil within our own economy instead of pouring it out on the rest of the world and diluting its value.

Please support efforts to open up domestic drilling, including off-shore and ANWR.  Please become a leader in a bipartisan effort to make access to domestic oil resources a reality as soon as possible.

Thank you for taking the time to read this, and thank you for your fine work!

Sincerely,

Art Smith

Here is Harkin’s reply:

Dear Arthur:

At a time when Americans are working harder to make ends meet, I share your concern about the high cost of gasoline. Iowans are paying record prices and it’s creating a ripple effect throughout our economy and the problem only seems to be getting worse. These prices make living our daily lives a real challenge. I am fully committed to changing the course of America’s energy policy - to transition America away from our crippling dependence on foreign sources of oil.

These debilitating prices are due in part to a sharp increase in demand over the last few years in places like China and India, an ever weakening dollar, and supply disruptions in volatile places like Nigeria and Iraq - these price pressures are forecast to get worse in the foreseeable future. It is clear that we must chart a new energy course for America - one that aggressively invests in new technologies and pursues energy efficiency that will derive more value from all of our energy resources. And, we must turn to renewable energy sources, a common-sense solution that will help wean us off of foreign oil, stimulate the rural economy, and improve environmental quality. This is a long-term commitment that requires participation at the indi lJidual f corporate, ,and gcverr1rne~~ltal levels ..

In recent weeks, there have been renewed calls to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to drilling and to add more areas to the lands already available for drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) as a solution to high gas prices. But not only will this fail to decrease the cost of gas in the short-term, it does not address our very serious long-term energy needs. For that reason, I will continue to focus my efforts in Washington on a new national energy strategy. As you indicate in your letter, fossil fuels are absolutely an essential component of this energy infrastructure. I have supported and will continue to support appropriate steps to build our supply. I have repeatedly called for construction of the Alaska natural gas pipeline, and I voted for the energy bills in 2005 and 2007, which contained numerous incentives and provisions for the development of fossil fuels. But again, opening up ANWR and new areas of the OCS to drilling will simply not significantly decrease the price of gasoline or diesel, and does not address our very serious long-term energy situation.

According to leading experts, opening ANWR or other regions like the OCS to drilling would have no significant effect on our dependence on foreign oil or on the price of gas at the pump. Indeed, estimates are that drilling in ANWR would produce only the equivalent of a six month supply of oil, starting 10 years from now and continuing over about a 20 year production period. The Energy Information Association forecasts that opening up ANWR would only decrease the cost of gas 1-4 cents at the pump and only after 10-20 years. Under the current GOP proposal on the table, no energy would be produced until 2017 and it would be 2030 before full production comes on line, and when it does, it would have a minimal impact on prices. What the GOP leadership fails to mention is that 79% of America’s recoverable oil reserves are already currently open for drilling, that oil companies have not tapped millions of productive acres already open, and that the areas on the west and east coasts that could be important to drilling have no oil drilling infrastructure- no oil rigs, no pipelines to the shore, and no refineries at the end of those pipelines.

Opening up more areas to leasing will produce too little oil and only after 5 to 10 years or more - and there are no guarantees. There are more enduring options that can be developed just as quickly. In the same amount time, with the right investment and national energy plan, we could develop alternatives that improve efficiencies and create alternatives to secure our energy future. For example, based on the U.S.G.S. projections of the amount of oil in ANWR, an increase in the Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency (CAFE) standards for vehicles by about 2 miles per gallon saves more oil than ANWR could ever provide. Plug-in hybrid vehicles could be widely available within 10 years, and they can both double efficiencies and derive the majority of their fuel from the electric grid which is increasingly supplied by clean wind or geothermal or solar power. We also expect significant and growing production of advanced biofuels made from dedicated biomass energy crops, forest materials, and municipal wastes within10 years. All of these approaches provide a much more enduring approach to addressing our oil dependence problem. These are solutions that will last.

As Chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee in the 107th Congress, I added the first-ever energy title into the Farm Bill and in the 2008 Farm Bill, I included a much more ambitious energy title that will invest in new technologies to help meet our nation’s energy needs for years to come. The 2008 Farm Bill also closed the so-called “Enron loophole,” and restored the critical authority of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to oversee and regulate the trading of futures contracts that affect the price of oil, gasoline and other energy products. I am now

working to enact additional legislation that will further strengthen federal oversight and enforcement to keep energy markets fair, honest, and free of manipulation or price distortion. And I’ve backed legislation and Congressional oversight to make sure that the Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice have all the power they need — and that they use it — to prevent, root out and prosecute collusion, price-fixing or price manipulation in markets for gasoline or other petroleum products.

And last December, Congress we passed the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. This bill increases our Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) focusing on advanced biofuels such as cellulosic ethanol, creating thousands of economic opportunities in our rural communities. It also sets high efficiency standards for our appliances, buildings and utilities and raises mileage standards for our cars and light truck~ to 35 miles per gallon over the next 15 years. Again, it is important to note that by raising the fuel efficiency standards by just 2 mpg, we are saving more oil than would be produced by drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Also, this bill invests heavily in carbon capture and storage methods, which will allow us to capture the greenhouse gases from our coal power plants and it creates safeguards for consumers against price gouging during national emergencies.

There is more that Congress can and should do. I strongly supported a debate about S. 3044, the Consumer First Energy Act of 2008, and am disappointed that this legislation failed to be considered on a party line vote. This Act would amend the Internal Revenue Code to deny major oil producing companies a tax deduction on profits attributable to domestic production of oil, limit the ability of these companies to claim foreign tax credits, and would impose a 25% windfall profit tax on oil companies unless the invested the funds in renewable energy sources. The revenue raised from these actions would be placed in an Energy Independence and Security Trust Fund that would be used to expand the development of renewable energy sources.

Rest assured, I will continue to work on this vital issue to ensure that Iowans pay a fair price at the pump. In the meantime, there are many simple steps that individuals can take to reduce our gasoline bills. Inflating tires, combining trips whenever possible, driving with the speed limits and similar steps can all help to reduce miles or increase miles driven on a gallon of fuel.

Thank you again for your comments and sharing your frustration. Should you have any additional concerns regarding this matter, please feel free to contact my office.

Sincerely,

Tom Harkin

The part that scares me most is when he says “…I will continue to work on this…”.

Tom: Please.  Don’t.

Tags: Alaska, ANWR, Brent Crude, Commodities, Domestic Drilling, Economists, Energy, Energy Journal, Georgia Conservatory, Heritage Foundation, Off-shore Drilling, Oil, OPEC, Patty McIntosh, President Bush, Professor R. Morris Coats, Representative Leanord Boswell, Senator Chuck Grassley, Senator Tom Harkin, US Congress, US Crude

• 2008 Congressional Election , ANWR , Economy , Energy , Featured , Foreign Oil , Markets , US Congress
• Comments(0)

Art Smith August 23rd, 2008

In this weekend’s Wall Street Journal, there is a report of an investment made by Nancy Pelosi and her husband.

They put somewhere between $50,000 and $100,000 into T. Boone Picken’s company, Clean Energy Fuels Corp.

At first blush, the relatively small amount (compared to millions of dollars in assets held by the Pelosis) would make most consider this to be a non-issue.  And by House Rules this is evidently not a conflict of interest. And besides, everyone can see that Natural Gas and Wind Energy are the future of America, right?

That shows you how well our politicians police themselves.

$50,000, $100,000, these are not small sums of money.  Mrs. Pelosi may bandy about billions of our tax dollars with little thought, and she may be a multi-millionaire, but this is still a LOT of money.

For her $50,000 (and who knows how much her friends have invested, or how much Mr. Pickens will be contributing to her campaign), I think we can now see why the San Francisco Democrat is attempting to strangle US citizens.  By continuing to encourage the run-ups in oil prices by locking out the availability of domestic oil resources, she is forcing America to bow to abandoning oil altogether.

It’s one thing to see the future and what is coming.  It’s quite another to be in a position to influence the future and be a financial beneficiary of the outcome.

The Swamp, which she had committed to clean up, has just gotten filthier and mored deadly than it ever was.  This is worse, in my opinion, than any previous acts by politicans to steer money to their own pockets or those of their friends.  It’s not just a no-bid contract.  It’s not just having advanced notice of confidential business deals.  This is an outright job of penning the American People like cattle into her chosen path for our future in order to line her pockets, her friends pockets, and build her power base.

And after all of the years of criticism of Bush and Cheney’s business connections to Haliburton in the earlier days of the Iraq War, I would have thought this kind of behaviour would be beyond Democratic Leaders.  I guess I am naive.

San Francisco, we have a problem.

I cannot imagine having a representative from Iowa who so flagrantly abandons their responsibility to protect the citizens they represent and the American People as a whole, and yet continue to have a political life.  I know that Californians are different, but this is starting to feel like the Twilight Zone.

Or perhaps they will see the light.  Perhaps, Mrs. Pelosi can worry less about the consequences of House Ethics action against her, and more about accountability where it really matters.  At the Ballot Box in November.

And out of the remainder of her portfolio, one must wonder what other connections are influencing her decisions and lining her pockets.  Or helping build her power base.

So much for cleaning out the Swamp.

Tags: 2008 Congressional Election, Clean Energy Fuels, Democratic Party, Dick Cheney, Ethics, George W. Bush, House Rules, house speaker nancy pelosi, Impropriaty, Integrity, Investment, Natural Gas, No-bid contracts, San Francisco, Swamp Stompers, T. Boone Pickens, The Swamp, Wall Street Journal, wind energy

• 2008 Congressional Election , Accountability , Corruption , Economy , Energy , Featured , Foreign Oil , If you won't vote for us we won't vote for you , Integrity , Nancy Pelosi , US Congress
• Comments(0)

Bithead August 14th, 2008

From the Business and Media institute:

There’s a huge concern among conservative talk radio hosts that reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine would all-but destroy the industry due to equal time constraints. But speech limits might not stop at radio. They could even be extended to include the Internet and “government dictating content policy.”

FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell raised that as a possibility after talking with bloggers at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C. McDowell spoke about a recent FCC vote to bar Comcast from engaging in certain Internet practices – expanding the federal agency’s oversight of Internet networks.

The commissioner, a 2006 President Bush appointee, told the Business & Media Institute the Fairness Doctrine could be intertwined with the net neutrality battle. The result might end with the government regulating content on the Web, he warned. McDowell, who was against reprimanding Comcast, said the net neutrality effort could win the support of “a few isolated conservatives” who may not fully realize the long-term effects of government regulation.

“I think the fear is that somehow large corporations will censor their content, their points of view, right,” McDowell said. “I think the bigger concern for them should be if you have government dictating content policy, which by the way would have a big First Amendment problem.”

If there’s anything that’s at all shocking about this, it’s that this particular red flag has not been raised before. The leftards figure that the government will silence the right and leave them to do their thing.

As VodkaPundit observes…

Not that any sane person needs a scare tactic to despise the “fairness” doctrine. And, let’s be honest, a web-controlling FD would hurt the Netroots far more than the libertarian-right where I make my home.

Snce when, however did sanity per se have anytthing to do with the left?  Silly little minions; they actually trust government not to grow into THEIR territory.

Time to raise the black flag, folks. Actually, as someone who still has some roots in the broadcast industry, I’ll say it past time, rather.

Parting shot: Does anyone doubt that if the Democrats maintain their hold on Congress, and/or if Obama gets to the White House, this thing will not become law before the echo dies?

Tags: BitsBlog, Blogging, Civil Rights, Commissioner Robert McDowell, conservative talk radio hosts, Current Events, Democrats, Elections, Fairness Doctrine, fcc commissioner, fcc vote, government regulation, Heritage Foundation, internet networks, internet practices, net neutrality, new media, News and analysis, President Bush, scare tactic, speech limits, Swamp Stompers, Swamp Stompers Ring Traffic, VodkaPundit, Washington

• 2008 Congressional Election , 2008 Presidential Election , Barack Obama , BitsBlog , Democrats , Fairness Doctrine , Featured , First Amendment , Rights , Swamp Stompers , US Congress
• Comments(0)

Art Smith August 8th, 2008

The Republican Protest of the No-Vote Vacation continues today, with no end in sight.  CSPAN showed the following press conference (video courtesy John Boehner’s office) featuring House Minority Leader John Boehner (Ohio), Mike Pence (Indiana), and Jon Porter (Nevada).  Excellent, concise, brought a solid message back from their constituents, and continuing the push forward.  Worth the 13 minutes to watch:

The best part of the message was the encouragement to all of us to call our congressmen.  Call (202)224-2121 and ask to be connected to your congressman/woman. Call and speak to Pelosi as well.  Let your them all know you want them back to work in Washington right now to get this energy legislation voted on.  And let them know that if they don’t vote for you, you won’t vote for them!

More good news (via Ed Morrissey at Hot Air): Fifteen Republican Senators, including Iowa’s own Chuck Grassley, have begun to follow in the steps of their lower house colleagues and released the video below. They also encourage calling Senator Harry Reid and your senator

List of Senators on the video: Lamar Alexander (Tennessee), Sam Brownback (Kansas), Elizabeth Dole (North Carolina),  Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), Pat Roberts (Kansas), Mel Martinez (Florida), Kit Bond (Missouri), Pete Dominici (New Mexico), David Vitter (Lousiana), Wayne Allard (Colorado), John Thune (South Dakota), Chuck Grassley (Iowa), Bob Corker (Tennessee), Richard Burr (North Carolina), Thad Cochran (Mississippi). Let these folks know you appreciate their efforts!!!

Captain Ed also brings us some insights from the latest Chatham House report (31 pages of actual content).  The British think tank is telling us that the price of oil will reach $200/bbl in the next decade if we don’t act to find new sources of oil soon or dramatically reduce the demand.  As Morrissey points out, the problem is a purely man-made one, one of international and domestic politics intended to provide various degrees of flawed protectionism.  One more major piece of evidence that action is required NOW!

From the Wall Street Journal web site this evening:

Oil futures, which climbed $1.44 on Thursday, ended down $4.82, or 4%, to a three-month low $115.20 a barrel in New York amid continuing anxiety about demand and a sharp rebound in the dollar. On the week, the commodity slid 7.9%.

On the radio I keep hearing all this mumbo jumbo about how the current demand for gasoline dropping as if current demand were the ONLY factor impacting oil prices.  I’m convinced that voices of Congressional Republicans and the American People are being heard loud and clear by the markets and foreign interests.

When McCain spoke today at the Iowa State Fair (Radio Iowa covered the story nicely!  Including an audio of the speech!), he hit the energy topic and stated (and I agree) that he wants to see us get on with of-shore drilling, but that we need to eventually build a comprehensive plan using multiple sources of energy, with a special emphasis on nuclear energy (which, he was able to pronounce correctly).

Daring was he to once again come before Iowan’s and tell them something they don’t want to hear.  Several months ago he came to Iowa and professed his opposition to the 2008 Farm Bill (which admittedly had problems).  Today, he restated his position on Federal Ethanol Subsidies (that is, he opposes them).  Iowa farmers, who benefit from these subsidies, have not been happy about his position and amazingly was not heckled about it… he mentioned it in a somewhat conciliatory tone, which I think helped, and admitted that we will not agree on everything, but can agree on most things and that his highest priority remains the American People.

One more thing about this week and energy: I rode my bicycle to work for the first time in over decade.  Total travel distance was, I think, about 25 miles.  Those of you who know me will realize that the exercise I’m getting from this will far outweigh the value of the gas savings (I’m a about 270 lbs., and should be at about 200 or less).  I made the trek on Tuesday, Wednesday morning’s schedule precluded using my bike, and Thursday and Friday were vacation days spent partly at the State Fair (sorry folks, riding my bike THAT far is not an option just yet).  My goal is to use the bike two to three times a week until it is too cold to ride anymore this year.  Total savings per day: $3.00+.

I’ll let you know how the weightloss goes.

Tags: $200/bbl, (202)224-2121, 200 Dollars a barrell, ANWR, Bob Corker, Chatham House report, Chuck Grassley, David Vitter, Drilling, Ed Morrissey, Elizabeth Dole, Energy Plan, Foreign Oil, Gasoline Prices, Hot Air, House Minority Leader, if they don't vote for you you won't vote for them!, If you won’t vote for me I won’t vote for you, Iowa State Fair, John A. Boehner, John Boehner, John McCain, John Thune, Jon Porter, Kit Bond, Lamar Alexander, Lisa Murkowski, Mel Martinez, Mike Pence, MSNBC, Nancy Pelosi, New Gingrich, Oil Prices, oil reserves, Pat Roberts, Pete Dominici, Radio Iowa, Republican Protest, Richard Burr, Ride my bike to work, Sam Brownback, Speaker Of The House, Speech, Thad Cochran, US Congress, US House of Representatives, US Senate, Wayne Allard, weightloss

• 2008 Congressional Election , 2008 Presidential Election , ANWR , Economy , Energy , Featured , Foreign Oil , If you won't vote for us we won't vote for you , Iowa State Fair , John McCain , Nancy Pelosi , US Congress
• Comments(0)

Art Smith August 6th, 2008

The downward pressure on the price of oil continues, although not as strong as the past few trading days.  At the end of the day, it was $117 (down $.22 from yesterday).  Oh, and the Dow was up 40 points.

Meanwhile, Newt Gingrich showed up today at the Capital to show support for the GOP Protest.  During his time in front of the cameras, he said that Republicans may consider shutting down the government by not allowing action on government spending bills required to replace the ones expireing on September 30.  This was done during his tenure as Speaker in 1995 and 1996… and blew up in Newt’s face.  I don’t think this is a particularly healthy maneuver for Republicans to make if they want to maintain the growing constituent support they are enjoying.

Meanwhile, the effort of House Republicans continues.  John Boehner’s office evidently sent out this memo to the rest of the House Republican contingent to advise when they can come back to Capital during the next 2 weeks.

Boehner also extended an invitation today to John McCain to join the protest.  From Captain Ed:

John Boehner extended an invitation to John McCain yesterday to join the House Republican caucus in their rebellion against Democratic stonewalling on a vote on drilling.  McCain had offered to come off the campaign trail if Barack Obama would also agree to do so and join Congress in an open debate and an open vote to rescind the federal moratorium on drilling in the OCS and interior.  The House Minority Leader [told] McCain to come regardless of Obama’s participation.

Clearly it makes sense for McCain to join in this event.  The downside is that it might cause him to miss the Iowa State Fair… us Iowan may not end up appreciating that, but I think it’s worth it.

Today’s updates from Boehner’s web site include this help set of answers to some of the rhetoric that Democrats are promoting:

Washington, Aug 6 - As House Republicans continue their nationwide gas price protest – on the floor of the House and in communities across the nation – the Democratic Majority finds itself in a most uncomfortable position.  Less than a week ago, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) adjourned the House for a five-week break, leaving American families, seniors, small businesses, schools, and charities to suffer more pain at the pump.  But Republicans refused to relent in their fight for more American energy and instead chose to take their strategy for lower gas prices directly to Americans visiting the Capitol, as well as those in congressional districts throughout the country.

Backed into a corner, House Democrats are scrambling in a desperate attempt to look like they have a real plan to lower gas prices on behalf of the American people.  And in order to do that, they’ve taken some liberties with the fact.  Following are just a handful of the myths peddled by Democratic leaders today, along with facts to put these myths to rest:

MYTH: “Republicans only pay ‘lip service’ to alternative energy, but they are not truly interested in it…  If we followed the Republican plan, our nation would continue to be at the mercy of other nations for our energy supply and economic strength.”

FACT: Anyone who can make such a statement clearly has not read the American Energy Act (H.R. 6566), the House Republicans’ plan to lower gas prices by increasing production of American energy, promoting more conservation and efficiency, and encouraging more use of alternative and renewable fuels.  In reality, the American Energy Act includes several provisions to encourage the use of alternative and renewable fuels, including:

• Awarding a monetary prize to the first entrepreneur to develop an economically feasible, super-fuel-efficient vehicle (reaching 100 miles-per-gallon);
• Establishing a renewable energy trust fund using revenues generated by exploration in the deep ocean and on the Arctic coastal plain;
• Eliminating barriers to the expansion of emission-free nuclear power production;
• Permanently extending the tax credit for alternative energy production, including wind, solar and hydrogen;
• Repealing the prohibition on government purchasing of alternative energy; and
• Promoting coal-to-liquids technology.

MYTH: “Democrats agree that we need increased domestic drilling, and we have pushed oil companies to explore the 311 million acres already available to them, especially the 68 million acres, 33 million of which is in the OCS, where they hold leases but are not drilling.”

FACT: This false claim was put to rest weeks ago, though Democrats desperately attempt to revive it again and again in lieu of a real strategy to lower gas prices.  The fact is, the so-called “use it or lose it” rule is already the law of the land, and Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) should know that because they voted for it all the way back in 1992.

When an energy company gets a lease, there is no guarantee that there is oil or natural gas present under the leased lands.  If oil is present, exploration, siting, and development can take up to a decade before any new energy is produced.  So the land Democrats are talking about either has no recoverable energy resources, those resources are currently being developed, or they have already been developed.  The entire process can take years.

MYTH: “[Democrats] have also encouraged increased exploration in Alaska.”

FACT: Democrats like to claim they are for energy production in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska (NPR-A), but the facts just don’t back it up.  To begin, a provision in the Democrats’ energy bill last year – part of the “Six for ‘06” – actually would discourage development in that same area.

But Democrats also refuse to recognize that because of the geological conditions in the NPR-A, a much larger “footprint” is required for energy exploration there compared to an area just east of NPR-A on a small, 2,000 acre patch of the 19 million acre Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.  Energy production and wildlife can safely coexist – in part because it already has for decades, throughout Alaska and across the country.  That is why increased American-made energy exploration is such a key part of the House GOP’s “all of the above” energy strategy.

No amount of empty rhetoric will change the fact that Speaker Pelosi and her Democratic colleagues are on the wrong side of public opinion on the most important issue facing the American people.  As House Republicans continue their nationwide gas prices protest on the House floor and in communities across the country, the American people are asking: How much longer will the Democratic Majority continue to distort the facts in the energy debate?  How much longer will Democratic leaders block a vote on more American-made energy to lower gas prices?

READ MORE:

GOP Leader Blog’s Live-Blogging Coverage of the Historic Floor Revolt

Flashback: Democrats Block GOP Proposal to Ease Energy Squeeze for America’s Charities (8/6/08)

America Speaks Out: Scores of Americans Join the House GOP’s Nationwide Gas Price Protest (8/5/08)

The “If you don’t vote for me, I won’t vote for you!” is getting under way.  I’m hoping to start a groundswell of support for this slogan.  I hope to have t-shirts shortly… stay tuned!

And lastly, there’s a new site devoted to all things related to getting Congress to vote on energy policy.

Tags: ANWR, Barack Obama, Bithead, Deceive, Democrats, Democrats For Drilling, Drilling, Ed Morrissey, Energy Plan, Foreign Oil, Gasoline Prices, Hot Air, House Minority Leader, If you won’t vote for me I won’t vote for you, Iowa State Fair, John A. Boehner, John McCain, MSNBC, Nancy Pelosi, New Gingrich, Oil Prices, oil reserves, Republican Protest, Speaker Of The House, US Congress

• 2008 Congressional Election , 2008 Presidential Election , Barack Obama , Democrats , Economy , Energy , Featured , Foreign Oil , If you won't vote for us we won't vote for you , John McCain , Nancy Pelosi , Republican Party , US Congress
• Comments(0)

Art Smith July 29th, 2008

Just when you thought you couldn’t afford to go on summer vacation, just when you thought the ONLY answer to rising gasoline prices was a “gas tax holiday“, just as various states are complaining they don’t have enough tax money collected to pay for road work, now oil prices fall to a 3 month low of 121.99 for US Crude and 122.71 for Brent Crude (at noon, central time), with no end in sight. 

You heard me, the analysts, the same ones that said we were likely stuck with $4-5 a gallon gasoline or higher by end of summer, are telling us that buying oil commodities is a bad deal right now, and even OPEC anticipates oil prices could fall down to as low as $70 a barrel.  That’s less than HALF the $147.27 high on July 11.

July 11 was a Friday.  The following Monday (July 14), President Bush dropped the presidential ban on off-shore drilling.  Even though dropping the ban had absolutely no impact on reality (no drills running yet), we’ve seen a consistent drop in the price of oil all but one or two days in the last two weeks.  We are now about $25 a barrel down from the high, or about 17%.  The MSM is desperately working at finding other ways to explain the drop in oil prices (I have YET to see a major news outlet attribute it to the emotional impact of Bush’s action), but the fact cannot be ignored… and Bush’s decision is not the only factor here, it’s the overwelming response of US citizens and the beginning of action by Congress to open up drilling domestically. 

People like Patty McIntosh of the Georgia Conseratory would have you believe that off-shore and other domestic drilling is not practical.  According to Patty:

Any hope to boost domestic supply from offshore sources is more than a decade away. And even if the U.S. energy picture looks the same 10 years from now, chances are we will not get much relief from these domestic sources. The estimated oil and gas offshore reserves could meet our current needs for only a matter of months.

Comments like this continue to ignore the facts… current prices on oil, and other commodities (or most any market-based financial product for that matter) are always most heavily impacted by what the future is perceived to be, not by the reality of what can be sold today.  And statements regarding the size and usefulness of any resource without real data (which no one has) is intended to manipulate everyone with the same false message we’ve heard for over a century: “there’s not enough to last us more than a short amount of time”.  Those statements are just baldface lies and anyone repeating them lacks credibility in my book.

The Heritage Foundation published an article today that concurs with our position.  It includes reference to an article that was submitted by Professor R. Morris Coats of Nicholls State University (in Louisiana) to the Energy Journal which appoarently (I have not seen the submitted article) provides demonstrable mathematics to support this conslusion.  The Energy Journal, however, rejected the article because it states what energy economists have known for decades, which is essentially the same message I’ve been hitting you with today.

Again, it’s not about how much domestic oil we can process at the refinery today, it’s how long we’re going to allow ourselves to be pushed around by foreign interests that is going to impact oil prices.  We’ve said this several time before here, and we’ll just keep lather, rinse, repeating it until everyone gets it.

The good news is that McCain is supporting off-shore and domestic drilling, we just need to get him off the dime and support drilling in ANWR.  John, you listening???

And our independent friend Joe Lieberman is now supporting domestic drilling.  We’re making headway, albeit slowly.

I sent the following message to my three congressmen (everyone should have 3 congresswomen/men, 1 representative and 2 senators).  You are welcome to copy and send the same message to yours… I strongly encourage you to contact your congresswomen/men immediately with a message to support domestic drilling.

Our dependence on foreign powers for sources of key raw materials, especially to provide fuel, is becoming untenable.  I completely understand the concerns of those that want to protect valuable natural habitats and areas of clean untarnished beauty throughout our country.  However, relying on foreign concerns who are intent upon taking advantage of our need for energy resources is simply not working, and in many ways, is starting to make the US seem unintelligent in its dealings and inability to manage its dependence on foreign markets by closing its own internal access to the same resources.  I am anxious to see us build and leverage cleaner solutions for energy, and support any efforts to improve these technologies.  However, we do, and will continue to for a long time, need access to oil, and we need to keep the money spent on this oil within our own economy instead of pouring it out on the rest of the world and diluting its value.

Please support efforts to open up domestic drilling, including off-shore and ANWR.  Please become a leader in a bipartisan effort to make access to domestic oil resources a reality as soon as possible.

Thank you for taking the time to read this, and thank you for your fine work!

Sincerely,

Art Smith

Don’t delay.  The sooner Congress knows what we want, the sooner they will act.  Representatives Link.  Senators Link.

Other bloggers speaking to this topic include: BItsBlog (who predicted a mid-summer drop in the price of crude), PowerLine, and hopefully the Sphere link below will have others as well.

Tags: Alaska, ANWR, Brent Crude, Commodities, Domestic Drilling, Economists, Energy, Energy Journal, Georgia Conservatory, Heritage Foundation, Off-shore Drilling, Oil, OPEC, Patty McIntosh, President Bush, Professor R. Morris Coats, US Congress, US Crude

• ANWR , BitsBlog , Business , Conservation , Economy , Energy , Environmentalism , Featured , Foreign Oil , George W. Bush , International Markets , Joe Lieberman , John McCain , Markets , US Congress
• Comments(1)

Art Smith July 26th, 2008

Well, it took almost 3 months, but Congress finally passed the bill today, on older version of which was  passed by the House in May, after some considerable back and forth between the Senate and the House.  The bill is HR 3221 (pdf), titled: “Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008″.

The entire bill is over 600 pages long.  The table of contents is 7 pages.  And technically, this is a bill that began its life over a year ago.  Sponsored by none other than Nancy Pelosi.  And apparently Bush is planning to sign.

He should not.

Touted by most of the media is the section that provides up to a $7,500 tax credit is 1,800 words.  And the  media manage to mention it without explaining that the taxpayer that gets the credit is then taxed (called a “recapture”) an additional 6-2/3% of the amount of the original credit for the next 15 years.  Yeah, that’s a 0% loan, not a tax credit.  As far as I know, there is no precedent for repaying a legitimate tax credit, so this is unique and is probably going to take a LOT of people by surprise.  And not today, not even next year, but you watch in the Spring of 2010 when people actually have to start paying this thing back… an extra $500 in tax that they were not expecting.  Keep your eyes on the shells and tell me where the pea is.

And 5 or 10 years from now when Congress wants to make another sweeping change to the system, these recaptures are going to create more complexity.  And don’t even get me started on the impact of ever getting the Fair Tax passed now.

So, briefly, here’s what the bill does:

1. Establishes a new agency called the Federal Housing Finance Agency.  Yeah, that’s right, yet another agency.  The section is referred to as “Improvement of Safety and Soundness Supervision”.
2. Specifies loan limits, capitalization levels, reporting, availability of some data to the public domain, housing goals.
3. Enforcement requirements, actions, penalties, subpoena authority.
4. Committees, directors, etc. for the new agency.
5. Abolishment of the OFHEO (Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, a sub-agency of HUD), and transfer of everything it does and owns to the new FHFA.
6. Abolishment of the Federal Housing Finance Board and transfer of everything it does and owns to the new FHFA.
7. Some attempts to reduce paperwork (always appreciated).
8. What appears to be sweeping changes in voucher and tax incentive programs.
9. Extending the length of time some programs such as PHA project-based assistance.
10. Updates to Federal Home Loan Bank code.
11. Establishment of HOPE for Homeowners Program.
12. A bunch of rule changes to make it easier for homeowners to avoid foreclosure.  Interestingly, this section includes an “Emergency Declaration”, that appears to allow Congress to break it’s budgetary rules to get this bill passed.  Someone a lot smarter than me is going to have to explain where in this part of the bill there would be substantial costs.
13. Special conditions for manufactured homes.
14. Emergency assistance for foreclosed and abandoned homes.
15. Counseling services.
16. For those of us who hate all the papers we already have to sign to close a mortgage, this disclosure is now added: “You are not required to complete this agreement merely because you have received these disclosures or signed a loan application.’” Unbelievable.
17. Servicemembers and Veterans get some special considerations, for which I cannot possibly disapprove.  As far as I’m concerned, we owe these folks a free and clear home.
18. Adding $30,000,000 to the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (financing programs for Homeless Assisstance).
19. Changes to REIT rules.

Trust me, that was brief.

I’m going to admit that the Revenue Provisions section at the end of the bill is somewhat confusing to me, especially the “Bonus Depreciation” section.

Oh yeah, and the bill also encourages “energy efficient mortgages”, that is, mortgages on homes with energy efficient features and/or improvements.

I’ve skipped a LOT of little details that seem to amount to tweaks (some small, some large) to the system, or to adjustments required to realign the agency responsibilities or other administrative issues.

And this is an interesting item, a section titled: Secure and Fair Enforcement for Mortgage Licensing Act of 2008. The first four word’s initials spell “SAFE”.  Nice.  It states:

In order to increase uniformity, reduce regulatory burden, enhance consumer protection, and reduce fraud, the States, through the Conference of State Bank Supervisors and the American Association of Residential Mortgage Regulators, are hereby encouraged to establish a Nationwide Mortgage Licensing System and Registry for the residential mortgage industry that accomplishes all of the following objectives:

1. Provides uniform license applications and reporting requirements for State-licensed loan originators.
2. Provides a comprehensive licensing and supervisory database.
3. Aggregates and improves the flow of information to and between regulators.
4. Provides increased accountability and tracking of loan originators.
5. Streamlines the licensing process and reduces the regulatory burden.
6. Enhances consumer protections and supports anti-fraud measures.
7. Provides consumers with easily accessible information, offered at no charge, utilizing electronic media, including the Internet, regarding the employment history of, and publicly adjudicated disciplinary and enforcement actions against, loan originators.
8. Establishes a means by which residential mortgage loan originators would, to the greatest extent possible, be required to act in the best interests of the consumer.
9. Facilitates responsible behavior in the subprime mortgage market place and provides comprehensive training and examination requirements related to subprime mortgage lending.
10. Facilitates the collection and disbursement of consumer complaints on behalf of State and Federal mortgage regulators.

So, the bill attempts to modernize some of the technology, some of the dollar values, and elevate the accountability of the Financing arm of HUD.  Plus hand out some money.

This is going to cost quite a bit.

Maybe some of it is needed.  I doubt Bush really understands all of the implications of the bill, but then, I know I don’t either.  It would be interesting to hear some feedback from someone that is well versed in the law.

Of all the content I see here, the $7,500 tax credit (text of this section here) is the most disturbing.

1. It will cost us money, both in interest expense to disperse it (since the pay back is interest free) and and the conditions that appear to allow for reduction of the repayment.  Such as if you sell the property and the gain is less than the amount still owed to the government, you only have to repay the amount of the gain.  Other exceptions to repayment include death and involuntary conversion.
2. It will promote the same kind of over-extentions by homebuyers that led to the mess we’re in to begin with.  Homebuyers will either convince themselves or be convinced by realtors or bankers that they can borrow up to $7,500 more than they really should because they’ll get it back on their tax return.  Without telling them about the $500 per year tax hit.
3. It will create substantial frustration in 2010 when people go to pay their 2009 taxes, the first year they would experience the “recapture”.  Because they won’t understand it, and it will increase their tax burder by $500.  That can be enough to create a huge backlash and economic impact that may force Congress to give out more money.  Just what we need.
4. The IRS is bound to mess up the forms and the rules.  Tax preparers may be ill-prepared to handle this.  Tax payers will be confused.  Chaos will grow and cause Congress to have to create yet another agency to oversee tax preparation for homeowners that used this tax credit.  (okay, maybe not, but I never thought I’d see this kind of credit before either).

I don’t want to see people suffer.  It’s hard to question all of this bill as there are probably some very appropriate adjustments to caps and other details to accomodate inflation and other changes in the market, technologies, etc since 1992.

But bad law is still bad law.  Fix the big problems, the $7,500 tax credit and the new agency, and I might be willing to work with this.  Helping the people that are hurting right now by no fault of their own is all well and good.  Helping the people that were pushing the envelope or simply gaming the system and lost, that’s just stupid.  And encouraging more first-time homebuyers to enter the market when they’re really not ready is just wrong.

My previous comments (in May), cover some of my thoughts here in more detail, but we just have to stop coddling people.  Please.

Tags: $500 Tax, $7500 Tax Credit, 15 Year Recapture Period, Bonus Depreciation, Emergency Declaration, Energy Efficient Mortgage, Fair Tax, Federal Housing Finance Agency, Federal Housing Finance Board, Homeless Assisstance, Hope, Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008, Housing Bill, HR 3221, HR 5720, HUD, McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, Military, Nancy Pelosi, Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, President Bush, REIT, SAFE, Servicemembers, US Congress, Veterans

• Economy , Energy , FairTax , Featured , George W. Bush , Housing , IRS , Military , Mortgages , Nancy Pelosi , Swamp Stompers , TAXES , US Congress
• Comments(1)

Art Smith July 4th, 2008

This is going to be a great day! I liked Sister Toldjah’s emphatic “What a great day it is to be an American!”. I woke up with a sense of anticipation at what the next year in our nation’s history will be like. What kinds of decisions will we make? How will we improve our standing among other nations? How will we make the lives of people in our country more secure, more joyful, more free?

In years past, we have had a quiz in the local newspaper about the history around this day… it did not show up today. Perhaps it will tomorrow.

They did reprint the Declaration of Independence. I hope people are reading it today and recalling why we formed a new nation, how we made our case for breaking away from England, and how seriously we took this responsibility.

In rereading the text today, I caught sight of something that I thought worthy of mention.

The signers of the Declaration were convinced that the despotism of the King had become so great, that their only choices were continued and deepening subjugation under Great Britain, or willful rebellion and forming of a new nation, and a new form of government.

They were clear that this was not only the right of the people, but truly an obligation.

So, one would wonder why there are not attempts to overthrow our government by those who think it is in need of dramatic change. You’d think we still think that’s is an appropriate model and that we would accept such an event as inevitable.

First of all, there have been attempts. There have been numerous uprisings over the years. Shay’s Rebellion, which occurred during the years of operation under the Articles of Confederation, is one example driven by an economic crisis and the punishments that existed at the time. The American Civil War almost succeeded in destroying the integrity of the establish legal republic, again mostly driven by economics, and to some degree, a correct ideal to ensure freedom was extended to all people.

The Civil War could have ended the United States for good. I believe that it was the grace of God that prevented that. However, if it had, it certainly had more right to than Shay’s Rebellion. The point being, if a small group of people don’t like what the government is doing, that does not necessitate overthrowing a government. But if a large enough part of the population is operating under duress, it may be appropriate to seek change.

Part of the reason we don’t find ourselves in a constant state of internal war is that we have created and continue to maintain a form of government that is always in flux. The entire people’s representative legislature (House of Representatives) is elected every 2 years. The Senate, which essentially provides representation for the state governments (although the 17th Amendment causes the people to elect them instead of the state legislatures). 1/3 of the Senate is elected every 2 years, each Senator getting a 6 year term. And the President of the United States, who most closely aligns in concept to the Monarch of England, is elected every 4 years and can only hold 2 terms of office.

This should create ample opportunity to dramatically change the government without firing a shot… and many times, we have. With this much change and voice from the people, there is little hope of the government becoming despotic. Or if it does, it would have the consent of the people.

There certainly is sufficient cause for concern as we become more apathetic. So much energy goes into the Presidential election, and so little attention remains on the other offices. The Presidential campaign itself still garners little real time and attention from the majority of people who will be voting in the election. That’s why the 30 second sound-bites are so carefully crafted… it may be all most voters bother to listen to.

And voters seem to pay just as little attention to the other races. The malaise hangs around all levels of government, and the result may well be a form of despotism that looks like freedom to the electorate, but in reality could be a carefully designed structure to keep people from being too concerned about looking under the covers and seeing what the elected officials are doing with the power and money we’ve bestowed upon them.

Ultimately, our form of government allows for the voters to be unconcerned about the actions of the government, and if we maintain the malaise, we have no one to blame but ourselves if we wake up one day and discover our freedoms have been more tightly constrained. Such as in Iowa, where the new smoking law, the most aggressive in the country at this time, went into effect Tuesday. Smoking is not permitted in any restaurants, bars, public places, places of business, and in homes where day-care services are provided. Smoking is allowed on casino floors at the betting tables and slot machines. I don’t smoke (I did at one time), and I don’t like being around smokers in restaurants, but I don’t think the government should impose these rules on private business owners… I’m fine with the constraints on public property, it’s the private property I have issues with, and I see this as another step toward excessive constraint on freedom. Next it will be another shot at our guns, our faiths, and our right to speak out against the government.

But a large majority of the population would need to be significantly disenfranchised, or more importantly, far more severely constrained, to justify an unscheduled change in the government, or more importantly, its structure. We should not take this type of action lightly.

Which leads me to the part of the Declaration that caught my eye this morning.

In the midst of arguing that the people have a right to abolish their government, the 2nd Continental Congress also said (emphasis mine):

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

We should have a substantially good reason, one that has broad support, and can be well defended in the court of international opinion, to abolish a perfectly good and functioning government structure even if we have elected bad apples. If the government takes the power to consistently and harshly abuse its power, its citizens, its integrity, then the people do need to deal with it. Clearly, the late 18th century American Colonies fit this category.

I hope we all continue to appreciate the bravery of the 56 men who signed this document and placed their lives on the line. We should today honor them, those who fought bravely throughout that war and those that followed, to secure freedom for us today. May we never forget their sacrifices.

We should, within the framework of our existing government, do all we can to engage our representatives and the voting public with the same vigor and enthusiasm our founders had, on topics that really matter. Topics that impact our freedom, our unity as a nation, our ability to grow and succeed as a people for generations to come. Such is the legacy our founders created for us.

And we can do it without violence, and I would hope without acrimony.

So, what will this next year of our country’s history bring?

(Today, BitHead reprinted a piece by Rush Limbaugh’s father. Definitely worth a read. )

Tags: 2nd Continental Congress, American Civil War, Declaration of Independence, Founders, Great Britain, July 4 1776, POTUS, Shay's Rebellion, US Congress

• Declaration of Independence , Featured , POTUS , US Congress