Info from proprietary newsletter, so link goes to report that spawned this crap (7/17/09 report presently at top of page: "Introducing a Low Carbon Fuel Standard in the Northeast -- Technical and Policy Considerations") (PDF file).
Eleven Eastern governors (Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Maryland)
are expected to approve a blueprint for slashing carbon dioxide emissions from cars -- and perhaps home furnaces -- before January, according to state officials, potentially sparking a widespread shift to residential heaters that burn wood pellets.
Officials in states from Maine to Maryland are preparing the outlines of a regional plan that would limit the amount of greenhouse gases a unit of fuel, like a gallon of gasoline, could emit. That's meant to prompt oil companies, refiners and motorists to use cleaner fuels made from trash and plants and renewable electricity.
Emission reduction targets are not yet established, but officials are basing preliminary calculations on a goal of cutting carbon 10 percent by 2020. That's identical to California's pioneering low-carbon fuel standard. And look where they are now. And they're a mostly-warm-in-winter state.
"We are looking at whether we would be able to meet our goals without including home heating oil," said Rebecca Ohler, a supervisor with the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services and a participant in the plan's design. "I do think it would be difficult."
Another contributor, Ellen Pierce, an analyst with Connecticut's Department of Environmental Protection, said heating oil is "a significant contributor to air emissions."
"It's something we should look at," she added.
The use of woody biomass and electricity as substitutes, combined with increased natural gas use for space heating, provides near-term low carbon fuel options for the Northeast, according to a 233-page analysis released last month by the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management. They mention making people switch to wood pellet stoves. My grandparents heated their house with coal & wood. I don't EVER want to do anything to get heat again except adjust the thermostat. Anyway, doesn't burning wood give off the dreaded CO2?
You political clowns think people are up in arms about the health care debate debacle? Try telling them they have to replace their furnaces and pay probably triple the amount for heat they're paying now - and in the COLD states, too. Try it, and I think more than a few politicians and unelected "regulators" will get introduced to the concept of tar and feathers. Are you people all insane?
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
08/10/2009 14:42 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Pellets aren't too bad for heat, yet certainly not as convenient as a thermostat as Barbara says. Some municipalities ban the use of wood-burners of any type, though (correction of single problem by a 'blanket' reaction). Apparently the smoke may irritate some folks sinuses and some don't like the 'smell'.
Posted by: Mullah Richard ||
08/10/2009 15:24 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I remember back in the late 1970's-early 1980's people were installing wood stoves around here to save money on heating costs. (Don't remember why exactly - I guess the price of oil had gone up. Again.)
Smoke drifted across the city streets at night as I drove to work through residential areas. Yeah, like that's gonna fly today.
I also remember, as a firefighter at the time, the inordinate number of fires due to people not being used to heating a home with wood and doing something stupid....
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
08/10/2009 16:16 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Who can afford heat?
Wood won't work. All the US wood pellet production has been sold on long term contracts to the Germans who burn it place of coal, courtesy of their Enviro nutcases. It also costs several times the price of coal. Looks like a lot of Yankees are going to meet Charles Darwin this winter courtesy of our own reality challenged class.
Posted by: ed ||
08/10/2009 17:09 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I remember back in the late 1970's-early 1980's people were installing wood stoves around here to save money on heating costs.
When corn was $2/bushel, some folks were burning that in their furnaces since it was cheaper than wood pellets. Another consequence of market distorting governmental policies.
Posted by: ed ||
08/10/2009 17:12 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Looks like a lot of Yankees are going to meet Charles Darwin this winter courtesy of our own reality challenged class
The enviro-nutcases view that as a way to further reduce the US carbon footprint.
Posted by: ed ||
08/10/2009 19:14 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Someone (Judicial Watch, Heritage Foundation, etc.) should sue these governors for fraud. Discovery would be a rude awakening for many of these people. It's either that, or as someone mentioned, tar and feathers - or a rope.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
08/10/2009 19:14 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Why doesn't affordability enter the mental picture of legislators?
And don't worry about the CO2 & smoke Barb, they'll just require anyone who wants to heat their home to drill a CO2 sequestration well & install compression & pumping equipment in the back yard. ;)
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton showed a rare flash of public anger on a trip to Africa today as a student asked for her husband's views, putting him in his place by saying she is the United States' top diplomat. At an open forum with young people in Kinshasa, a university student took the microphone and asked about the involvement of China and the World Bank in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
"What does Mr Clinton think about it?" he said to the befuddlement of the crowd.
Ms Clinton replied in a forceful voice: "You want to know what my husband thinks?"
"My husband is not the secretary of state, I am. You ask my opinion, I will tell you my opinion. I'm not going to channel my husband."
Ms Clinton, whose husband Bill Clinton was president from 1993 to 2001, is a forceful advocate for women's rights except when she's a doormat for his philandering behavior and narrowly lost in her own bid to be the first female US president nominee last year.
Bill Clinton has mostly stayed out of the spotlight as his wife represents the United States overseas, although last week he travelled to North Korea to negotiate the release of two detained US journalists.
Former president Clinton, who has actively promoted African development since leaving the White House, is not joining his wife for any part of her seven-nation tour of the continent.
Hillary Clinton has made women's rights a top priority on the Africa trip. Tomorrow she will head to Goma, in the east of the Democratic Republic of Congo, to meet survivors of soaring sexual violence.
Ms Clinton said she would press President Joseph Kabila to take action, noting that some members of the Congolese military were responsible for the mass rape.
"We are now in the 21st century. It is no longer acceptable for there to be violence against women in the home or in the community," she told the students. "People need to stand together against it."
"I hope that here in the DRC there will be a concerted effort to demand justice for women who are violently attacked and to make sure that their attackers are punished."
#1
Forget Bill, I swear to god I'm trying but his terrible policies that affected Africa are haunting. Now we have MRS Clinton, the student was really asking if the madness of the Clintons will ever end!!!!
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
08/10/2009 17:29 Comments ||
Top||
Jim Geraghty, "Capmaign Spot" @ National Review Boldface emphasis added.
It may surprise you to learn that some Democratic members of the House are managing to run into large crowds, full of people who are skeptical of the health-care bill, without fleeing in terror. At least one, Rep. Eric Massa (D., N.Y.), managed to get through pretty much unscathed by making clear he had read the bill, had some signficant concerns, and wanted to make sure his constituents' worries were addressed.
Initially Massa's staff decided to move a health care town hall meeting from Mendon Town Hall to the Mendon Community Center to accommodate more constituents. And that venue, with a capacity of around 100, proved nowhere near big enough either: About 500 people gathered to hear the congressman's thoughts on health care reform, forcing a move to a shelter . . .The meeting focused on health care reform and the bill, with constituents listening to Massa's views and asking questions.
"I actually have read this bill," Massa said, earning cheers from the crowd -- many seemed delighted when he announced, "If I had to vote today on this document, I would not vote for it."
Some wondered why Democrats are in a hurry to get the bill through. "I'm the guy who fought to slow this process down," Massa said....
"Harumph! What's he got that I ain't got?"
"It's called 'maturity,' Nancy."
"I'll send one of my staff over to GNC to get some."
"Uh, Nancy, it doesn't quite work like that."
Posted by: Mike ||
08/10/2009 12:24 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Healt care is a mess, all we are asking is methodical approach to fixing it, a simple plan that Mr. Massa seems to understand.
For some reason I smell Hillary all over this bill and I bet her standing down from the election so quickly has someting to do with it being puched so fast.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
08/10/2009 12:43 Comments ||
Top||
#2
^^ what 49 said.
Plus the fact it gives the dhimocrats vast amounts of power over your life and will use the leash to tug you into voting how they want with the fear of it being taken away (see Welfare).
#3
49 Pan: Much of the health care mess is *caused* by government already. Instead of a government takeover, what is needed is a systemic evaluation.
For example, some doctors, working as independents, have discovered that by refusing insurance, Medicare and Medicaid, they can offer a better quality of care at HALF the going rate. Instead of having to employ half a dozen clerical workers, they can go back to just one.
Another point is that insurance should be limited to contingency, only, not general health care. This eliminates a primary driver of higher costs. But in exchange, insurance companies cannot be coerced into insuring people their underwriters reject.
Yet another problem is that big pharma has for decades been stuck in an industry bubble approach, where the norm is to *expect* a 200% minimum net profit. This is ridiculous. Nobody should have an expectation like that in any stable economy.
It has pushed them to be like movie studios, dependent on a few, very expensive high budget blockbusters, instead of a slew of modest profit products. It has also led to horrific business practices like dumping shiploads of expired or condemned drugs into the African black market.
And far from least, the medical legal environment is still hopelessly out of control. This adds billions in costs and even forces doctors to quit practicing, because they cannot afford nonsensical malpractice insurance costs.
#4
The Feds should not be in Healthcare - except perhaps to insure the quality of certain things like Medications, processes, and/or devices. And even then they should only be a facilitator for the states to agree on national standards.
#5
It has pushed them to be like movie studios, dependent on a few, very expensive high budget blockbusters,
Note when the FTC allowed the companies to directly advertise to the public and the rise in the cost of pharmaceuticals. Just like Hollyweird a lot of money/'piece of the action' goes into advertising and promotion as well.
#6
Moose: a pharmaceutical company spends $500 million and 8 years to get a candidate drug from bench to market. Not every drug that makes to market is a big winner. When the risk is big the payout has to be big. Otherwise, no new drugs.
Bigger problem for the Pharma industry is that Canada, Europe and much of the third-world insists on buying drugs at marginal costs, not including R & D. We Americans pay full freight. There's an obvious solution, but don't expect the Canadians and Europeans to go for it.
Posted by: Steve White ||
08/10/2009 15:07 Comments ||
Top||
#7
They better listen to this guy. Obama said today Government/SEIU takeover of your health care will pass. If it does, talking is over, and I will gaurantee you this, in my neck of the woods the Government and SEIU will feel the some "heat".
#10
a pharmaceutical company spends $500 million and 8 years to get a candidate drug from bench to market. Not every drug that makes to market is a big winner.
Most drug candidates never make it to market for one reason or another, after spending that much money. Then, too, how many years does the developing company have a monopoly on its product before generics are allowed to horn in, taking the majority of sales? The cost of wasted research, always a risky endeavour, is added to the sales price of those drugs that do make it, amortized over the fairly short time the company has before it loses the market. How many Rantburgers, other than me, are currently taking medications that were simply not available a decade or two ago? There are legitimate reasons for the pharmaceutical companies' pricing patterns. You want low priced meds, you'll get the old stuff that's been around for fifty years, and there won't be any new ones in the pipeline.
Members of Congress couldn't control their outrage last year when automobile executives flew to Washington in private jets. Their point was that it was unseemly for executives to travel in such high style while their institutions were strapped for cash. Apparently, the same rules don't apply to Congress. They haven't, for some time now.
Late last month, the House of Representatives approved $197 million to buy three elite Gulfstream jets to fly around members of Congress and administration officials. In an effort to upgrade its service for Congress, the Air Force had requested just one jet, with a price tag of $65 million. That wasn't enough for our public servants. The House Appropriations Committee set aside another $132 million for two more luxury aircraft.
Democrats tried to hide this questionable allocation of taxpayer money. Instead of treating the expenditure as an earmark, which would have required disclosure of the member who requested it, they included the additional planes as an expansion of an existing Defense Department program. No doubt, whilst slicing ammunition, or some other silly thing.
It's hardly a surprise that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi didn't learn her lesson about the political scandal that can result when elected officials demand expensive special travel arrangements. In 2007, she demanded that the Pentagon break its rules and provide a jet that could fly her all the way back to her San Francisco congressional district without having to make a pit stop to refuel. Mrs. Pelosi also has raised eyebrows for the large amounts of money consumed so she can travel in style on international junkets.
In March, Judicial Watch obtained internal Pentagon correspondence in which a Defense Department official expressed concern about Mrs. Pelosi's abuse of government-sponsored travel, which is provided by the Pentagon with military resources.
Regarding her numerous requests for transportation, the official wrote: "Any chance of politely querying [Mrs. Pelosi's staff] if they really intend to do all of these or are they just picking every weekend? ... [T]here's no need to block every weekend 'just in case' ... [Mrs. Pelosi's office has] a history of canceling many of their past requests."
The current era of uncontrolled government expansion has skewed the understanding of what's appropriate in the public and private sectors. In principle, there's nothing wrong with corporate executives flying in executive jets. Private money pays for that, and it can provide an efficient way for busy business leaders to work and travel at the same time. The same rules don't apply to public officials on the public dole.
Sitting in coach with average taxpayers might help Speaker Pelosi understand public outrage at her profligacy at their expense.
Posted by: Bobby ||
08/10/2009 07:02 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
List of United States Air Force aircraft
C-20 Gulfstream 3 and 4 - 10
C-21 Learjet 35 - 57
C-32 Boeing 757 - 6
C-37 Gulfstream 5 and G550 - 10
C-38 Gulfstream G100 - 2
C-40 Boeing 737 - 10
VC-25 Boeing 747 - 2
This list doesn't include Marine VIP Helos.
It must cost the poor (and quickly getting poorer) taxpayers several billion dollars every year to make sure top government officials ride only in the highest status and greatest luxury.
Doesn't include
Posted by: ed ||
08/10/2009 10:02 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Plush Jets Are For Congress, Not Business Executives
One power caste envy of another power caste. Someone in Hollywood is rewriting old Dallas scripts for a new program titled 'DC'.
Tensions are running so high at town hall meetings that Rep. David Scott, a Georgia Democrat, yelled at a local doctor concerned about health care after mistaking him for an "astroturf" political operative looking for a fight.
Mr. Scott became visibly agitated when one of his constituents, a practicing doctor, asked a few questions about health care reform during a town hall meeting. The meeting was held to discuss a road project, but was opened up for questions near the end. That's when Dr. Brian Hill stood up to speak.
Dr. Hill asked Mr. Scott why he was going to vote for a health care plan similar to that implemented in Massachusetts "that is shown not to work" and if he supported a government-provided health care insurance option.
The congressman replied by accusing the doctor of "hijacking" his event.
"I'm listening to my constituents, OK?" Scott said, "These are people who live in the 13th Congressional district, who vote in this district. That's who I've got to respond to ... So what you've got to understand, those of you who are here, who have taken and came and hijacked this event we dealing with here, this is not a health care event."
"You chose to come and to do it on your own," he yelled. "Not a single one of you had the decency to call my office and set up for a meeting." He went on, in a threatening voice, "You want a meeting with me on health care, I'll give it to you!"
The outburst is yet another example of how confrontational town hall meetings have become over recent weeks, as constituents are becoming more forthright in asking their elected representatives challenging questions. These actions and other forms of protest have been encouraged by limited government advocacy groups opposed to the stimulus package, the Democrats favored health care reforms and other big spending government proposals.
The White House has labeled these efforts "astroturf", shorthand for fake grassroots. To combat these efforts, groups supporting these plans -- such as Service Employees International Employees Union -- have been appearing at these town halls as well, effectively creating local "showdowns" between opposing political powers.
Mr. Scott's public tirade against the doctor was filmed by WXIA-TV News, a local NBC affiliate that confirmed the doctor lived in the congressman's district in a follow-up interview.
The doctor told WXIA he wasn't working for any outside causes and had called Mr. Scott's office repeatedly, asking to speak with the congressman. "I did not go to a meeting to create any problems, I went to the meeting to literally ask a question that I thought was very, very important for my patients," he said.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/10/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
In other 13th Congressional District news, Clayton County lies in the southern most sector of Scott's lovely 13th district. They've recently lost public school accreditation which has triggered a flight of families from the district (nomo free cheeze for da kids? We'z movin girl, get the Lexux AC goin). The Clayton County school board is notoriously corrupt, as is it's police force, County Gov't, etc. The Georgia Hope grant college assistance program requires high school accredidation. No ticky - no ride. Enjoy the real estate downturn and your assimiliation into Fulton County. Enjoy, LOSERS!
#2
Tensions are running so high at town hall meetings that Rep. David Scott, a Georgia Democrat, yelled at a local doctor concerned about health care after mistaking him for an "astroturf" political operative looking for a fight.
These Donks continue to ignore Sun Tzu.
If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.
The Donks insist that the Tea Party reps are simply a Trunk reflection of their own astroturfing. For them there is no other understanding of the behavior. Everything else is apostate. They do not know their opponents, or for that matter, themselves.
Poll at his web site: What is your health insurance status?
Satisfied with my current plan 97.96% (7630)
The urgency of Change (and patronage).
Posted by: ed ||
08/10/2009 10:12 Comments ||
Top||
#5
who does this plebe healer think he is? Does he not know that Lord Scott only talks to his own subjects and only after HE tells them they can speak to his lordship.
More than 1,000 people turned out on a steamy Saturday afternoon in Raleigh to voice their opposition to President Barack Obama's efforts to reform health care.
They were there to mark the final stop for the "Hands Off My Health Care" bus that made 30 stops and traveled 1,370 miles across North Carolina over the last six days.
Along the way, organizers said, they collected more than 10,000 signatures on petitions and encouraged more than 25,000 phone calls to Democratic U.S. Sen. Kay Hagan.
Dallas Woodhouse, program director for Americans for Prosperity, the free-market organization that sponsored the bus, said Saturday's crowd was one of the largest on the tour.
Teenagers, young adults and senior citizens cheered and held up signs that denounced socialism, higher taxes and the national deficit. "The people who [House Speaker] Nancy Pelosi calls monsters and fanatics I have found to be some of the most genuine people I've ever met," Woodhouse told the crowd.
Brent Ellmers, a surgeon from Dunn, said protestors oppose proposals being considered in Washington and want to suggest other ways to lower insurance costs. "There is nothing in the current plan about malpractice tort reform or insurance reform to make insurance more affordable," Ellmers said. "There is nothing about tax incentives for employers. The cost for the current plan is tremendous."
Lawmakers are considering several reform plans. "People from all over the world come to the U.S. for care because we have the best in the world," Ellmers said. "We don't need Washington bureaucrats telling us what kind of care we can have and when we can have it."
Posted by: Fred ||
08/10/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
A health care event sponsored U.S. Sen. Tom Harkin erupted into a shouting match Saturday afternoon, when opponents of health-care reform yelled pointed questions and criticisms to the Democratic senator.
It echoed other health care events sponsored by members of Congress around the country in recent days that have been disrupted by protestors, although no one was arrested at Saturday's event.
Uniformed police officers were present as roughly 200 people turned out to see Harkin at an inner-city health care center to voice their opinions or ask questions about health care.
"This is not health reform, this is control, control over our lives," one unidentified man shouted from the audience.
It was only one of several such confrontations during the raucous forum.
Moments before the event began, Harkin told reporters that opponents of health-care reform were using "scare tactics" in an effort to stop it. "There's a lot of people out there making a lot of money on this system, and they don't want to change it," Harkin said. "They just like it just the way it is, so whatever they can do to disrupt it, to stop it, they're money ahead. We can't let them stop us from changing this system."
Jim Stone, a West Des Moines resident who attended the forum, took issue with complaints about government intervention in the health care system, pointing out that Medicare is a government-run program.
He's in favor of the health-care reform proposal in Congress, and said he was disappointed with the behavior of opponents at the event. "There's no correlation between volume and intelligent questions," Stone said. "In fact, there may be a negative correlation."
Marilea David of West Des Moines came to the event to speak out against the health-care reform legislation. She said the federal government should not be involved in health care at all. "I don't believe that it's something that America needs to get into. Something like socialized medicine is way beyond what we are capable of at this point," she said.
Harkin told reporters that he didn't think the average American wanted to spend more on health care or to allow insurance companies to discriminate against people if they have a previous illness. "That's what we're addressing in this health care reform bill is to make sure that we have stable coverage, that we have stable quality and that we have stable prices for what people pay for insurance," Harkin said.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/10/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Tom Harkin introduced an amendment to the senate bill (Baucus' bill is shrouded in secrecy btw - Transparency again) labeling Shamans as "practitioners." Who's next, Granny Clampett?
#2
And, of course, our local versions of Pravda (Iowa City's Press-Citizen and Cedar Rapids' Gazette) have had absolutely no coverage on any of this. Doesn't fit the narrative, you know.
As the Democrat leadership and their media minions dishonestly depict town hall meeting protesters as an angry mob ginned up by conservative organizations, the group that helped get Barack Obama elected president is urging its members to show up at such events to counter dissenting views.
Will this get much press attention in the next 48 hours?
We can only hope the Obama-loving media will take a long look at what ABC's Jake Tapper just reported at his Political Punch blog:
Supporters of President Obama formerly signed up as members of "Obama for America" received an email today from Mitch Stewart, the director of the group's current incarnation, Organizing for America, to show up at town halls and congressional offices as a counter to the protestors against the president's health care reform push.
Painting the protestors as "Insurance companies and partisan attack groups...stirring up fear with false rumors about the President's plan," Stewart's email tells supporters whom their member of Congress is and even provides information about town hall meetings they may be holding.
Writes Stewart: "As you've probably seen in the news, special interest attack groups are stirring up partisan mobs with lies about health reform, and it's getting ugly. Across the country, members of Congress who support reform are being shouted down, physically assaulted, hung in effigy, and receiving death threats. We can't let extremists hijack this debate, or confuse Congress about where the people stand."
As Tapper noted, Party officials quite support this effort:
Democratic National Committee spokesman Brad Woodhouse said "we want OFA supporters - and all Americans - to be part of an informed, intelligent discussion about health insurance reform and the urgency of reigning in unfair insurance industry practices."
Hmmm. So when people stand up to express dissent at town hall meetings, they're part of an angry mob supported by outside sources.
Yet, the group that basically got the President elected, AND the DNC, don't have a problem doing what Democrats and their media minions are complaining about.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/10/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The wheels are falling off. I smell violence about to take place at these events. Then there will be no more amd free speech will be ended.
U.S. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson yesterday denied GOP requests to perform a new economic analysis of the House-passed climate and energy bill, saying the Energy Department has essentially answered any outstanding questions. Sens. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) and George Voinovich (R-Ohio) asked EPA last month to revise its study of the House bill, because it "offers an incomplete account of the bill's major provisions, how they overlap, and how they impact consumers, households, and the economy."
In a letter pdf available at link
to EPA, the top two Republicans on the Environment and Public Works Committee asked the agency to use a reference case including the most recent data from the Energy Information Administration's April 2009 Annual Energy Outlook; insert the economic projections from President Obama's fiscal 2010 budget proposal; and include analysis of a variety of situations in which low-carbon energy sources are constrained.
The EPA analysis also at link
of the House bill found it would cost U.S. households $80 to $111 a year.
Jackson yesterday said EPA won't do a new study because a new analysis same
of the bill from the Energy Information Administration - the statistical arm of the Energy Department - contains many of the attributes the senators requested, including scenarios where low-carbon energy sources prove to be very expensive.
EPA is prepared to conduct an objective and thorough analysis of the climate and energy bill expected from EPW Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) next month, Jackson wrote in her response (pdf), adding the senators should discuss the parameters of the analysis with the chairwoman. The Chairwoman has already made up her mind and does not need to clutter it with so-called facts.
But Inhofe said that EIA's analysis does not cover some of the key issues they raised in their letter, including the availability of international offsets and the effects of the bill on states like Ohio, which rely on manufacturing for jobs and coal for electricity.
"In effect, EPA has refused to provide members of Congress, as they prepare for meetings and events with their constituents over the August recess, with critical information on the Waxman-Markey energy tax and how it will affect jobs in the Midwest, South, and Great Plains, as well as food, gasoline, and electricity prices for all American consumers," Inhofe said in a statement.
Posted by: Bobby ||
08/10/2009 16:56 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The EPA analysis of the House bill found it would cost U.S. households $80 to $111 a year.
Liars. The US produced 6 billion metric tons CO2 last year. At $15/tonne that comes out to $300/person ($1200/family of 4). At $30/tonne, that's $600/person and $2400/family of 4.
That is only the primary cost. The price will increase further as products move through the value chain. And unemployment will further increase and tax collection fall as even more production is moved out of the country.
Posted by: ed ||
08/10/2009 19:11 Comments ||
Top||
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Members of Congress couldn't control their outrage last year when automobile executives flew to Washington in private jets. Their point was that it was unseemly for executives to travel in such high style while their institutions were strapped for cash. Apparently, the same rules don't apply to Congress. 
As the Democrat leadership and their media minions dishonestly depict town hall meeting protesters as an angry mob ginned up by conservative organizations, the group that helped get Barack Obama elected president is urging its members to show up at such events to counter dissenting views.
EPA is prepared to conduct an objective and thorough analysis of the climate and energy bill expected from EPW Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) next month, Jackson wrote in her response (pdf), adding the senators should discuss the parameters of the analysis with the chairwoman.
