Quick Hits & 1 Long Hit 5/6/08

The Climate Security Act needs to be strengthened. You can use the League of Conservation Voter’s action page to request your Senators to do so.

Oil hit $122 per barrel in trading today. That’s double what it was one year ago. That’s more pressure exerted on families’ budgets.

Buyout billionaire Henry Kravis saved $96 million through tax loopholes in 2006 alone. That’s just one buyout billionaire, in one year, making use of one loophole (tax evasion scheme)! Just think how much these private equity crooks are costing taxpayers who are already battling financial hardships and home foreclosures. BraveNewFilms has a video about this and a request for the presidential candidates to close the buyout industry’s tax evasion scheme.

The Bush “administration” has lost 400 employee laptops that conduct delicate, often secret, diplomatic relations with foreign countries, an internal audit has found.

Ironically, the Anti-Terrorism Assistance Program is administered by the State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security (DS), which is responsible for the security of the department’s computer networks and sensitive equipment, including laptops, among other duties.

These are the same idiots who want to convince Americans they can responsibly handle access to information about the lives of Americans while demanding no Congressional oversight. HAHAHAHAHA! I don’t know what’s worse though: the above or the fact that Rep. Steny Hoyer and others are still willing to grant retroactive immunity to proven lawbreaking telecommunications corporations.

Analysts are reportedly torn over what an energy windfall profits tax would do. A few things here: corporations were given tax breaks by President Bush and Congress. Now that Democrats want the breaks to expire, what are Republicans and corporations calling the action? That’s correct: a tax increase. They’re spinning it like the tax was never before applied and woe to the poor corporations that are earning profits in the billions every quarter.

Re-applying fair taxes on the oil corporations could provide long-overdue dollars to renewable energy research and development. There needs to be a much larger focus on the development side of things. Technologies exist to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions - we need to help drive them into the marketplace more efficiently.

If oil corporations raise gas prices to regenerate their ridiculous profits, a majority of consumers will not blame the government. It would be clear at that point which entity was really responsible for excessive prices.

Pro-corporate analysts in the article bring up the fact that Google has a profit margin of 25% while oil corporations have profit margins closer to 10% and nobody is recommending a windfall profits tax on Google. Can you point to an example of how you or your family is paying more for goods because of Google? Oil corporations are directing more of their profits to buying back their stock, enriching stock holders. They should be directing that money to developing refining capacity. They’ve ignored refineries for decades and we’re paying the price for that short-sightedness at the pump.

Of course, the ultimate ideological argument has to be presented: government shouldn’t force movement of monies to R&D, the “free-market” should. The Heritage Foundation gets a nod in the article, with David Kreutzer asking if the government could take this capital and do a better job investing it than shareholders can. David and others aren’t willing to recognize that shareholders haven’t been able to make the correct decisions in the past generation. They’re only interested in further enriching themselves and the rest of us get to suffer for it: high gas prices, geopolitical instability and occupying the Middle East are only a few examples.

I, for one, have no more patience for these greedy vampires. The “free-market” has been unable to act in the interests of our society’s citizens. Taxes need to be reapplied to oil corporations and the richest Americans. They need to invest their fair share into our nation’s infrastructure and long-term interests.

Energy Regulations & Republican Values

Oil and gas companies in Colorado whine that there’s not enough time to study and respond to rules proposed to take effect this year. They want some rules to apply this summer and others later. Let’s see: energy corporations are enjoying record profits quarter after quarter and are enjoying record claims and development quarter after quarter. Yup, I can definitely see why they need more time to study updated regulations: delay their implementation and the good times keep on rollin’! Shameful.

In the still developing Bob Schaffer - Jack Abramoff scandal, a nonpartisan group has put out an ad calling on Bob Schaffer to apologize for a controversial trip he took to the Mariana Islands and to donate a portion of his campaign funds to charities there. You can watch the ad at SchafferFacts.com. Schaffer’s campaign manager, Dick Wadhams, took the opportunity to attack the nonpartisan group instead. Ah, Republican values - gotta’ love ‘em! Schaffer’s ethics problems will prevent him from winning the Colorado Senate race.

Republican ne’er-do-well Douglas Bruce has been charged with sexually harassing a female staffer at the Colorado state Capitol. In just a few short weeks, Bruce has been censured for kicking a photographer and was removed from discussing a bill after making a disgusting, racist comment about guest workers. Bruce has refused to comment on the charges, which is certainly his perogative. A similar situation occurred earlier this session with a Democrat being accused of harassment. You know what he did? The morally correct thing: apologized and resigned. Instead, Bruce and his supporters work to make him the victim. What is it with Republicans and their “values” anyway?

Government to Release Fuel Economy Rules

The Bush administration released preliminary plans establishing fuel economy standards for vehicles sold within the U.S.  One initial goal would establish a fleet average of 31.6 miles per gallon by 2015.  By 2020, the standard would be 35mpg.  Some details per manufacturer include:

Among individual manufacturers, passenger cars built in 2015 by General Motors will need to average 34.7 mpg, Ford’s cars will need to reach 35.5 mpg and Toyota’s cars will have to achieve 34.6 mpg.

For light trucks, GM will need to reach 27.4 mpg by 2015, while Ford will have to average 28.8 mpg and Toyota will need to hit 28 mpg.

In terms of climate change and energy security:

The plan is expected to save nearly 55 billion gallons of oil and reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 521 million metric tons over the life of the new vehicles built between 2011-2015. It will add an average cost of $650 per passenger car and $979 per truck by 2015.

$650 per car should be easily handled by consumers.  We’re already choosing add-on features that cost that much and more.  If achieved, the 521 million metric tons that wouldn’t be released is good news.

The plans are scheduled to be finalized by the end of Bush’s term later this year.  Let’s hope the final standards are at least this strong.

Mike Rosen’s Global Warming Disinformation Mouthpiece: Maureen Martin

He’s done it before, but this will mark the first time I’ve covered Mike Rosen’s efforts to spread global warming disinformation by hosting denyers on his radio program on 850 KOA (via Colorado Media Matters). Amy Oliver, another radio host in the market, has hosted plenty of her own denyers, so Mike has company. The thing that is similar between the two hosts is their utilization of “free marketeers” as “experts” on climate change. This episode builds on the right-wing’s attempt to scare people into thinking discussion about climate change is secretly hiding an anti-economy viewpoint. It’s nonsense of course, but they will fight tooth and nail to maintain their lock on our economic system, no matter how much it strengthens the disparity between classes.

Mike Rosen introduced Maureen Martin as a “senior fellow for legal affairs at the Heartland Institute”. That’s sounds impressive, doesn’t it? The Heartland Institute is only one think tank among many that focus on “free market” approaches. It has become more clear to Coloradans recently what kind of “free market” these advocates would like to move toward: indentured servitude, human trafficking, child prostitution and compulsory abortions, via the Schaffer-Abramoff proposal. No thanks, Bob, Mike, Maureen and Co. I actually support workers’ rights - they’re what created and what sustain the middle class.

Accepting a Proposal

A conservative Colorado blog called for a 20% annual reduction in climate change research, citing waste and abuse. (I’m not going to link to said blog. I have no intention of driving up traffic to those who knowingly bury their heads in the sand.) The premise was based on a hypothetical acceptance that if the ’science is in’, government funds shouldn’t be expended on additional computing resources, etc.

I don’t think conservatives would be well served by investigations into fraud and abuse of taxpayer monies. How many billions have gone completely missing by administration flunkies in Iraq? How many cost-plus contracts (that were no-bid, BTW) were signed by this administration, both in Iraq and in Louisiana following Hurricane Katrina? How many illegal surveillance programs have been continued in secret by this administration, despite having their existence ended by acts of Congress? How many faith-based programs and abstinence programs have been paid for with taxpayer dollars, despite the evidence that they actually don’t improve public health?

To be clear: climate research hasn’t and doesn’t waste taxpayer money, especially not in the quantities described by this over-zealous blogger. I’ll accept this blogger’s call to reduce taxpayer funded climate research if they and other conservatives would likewise propose cutting Iraq funding, contracts with the likes of Halliburton, surveillance programs, faith-based initiatives or abstinence programs. But I know how likely that will be: there is zero chance of it ever occurring. So to all the delayers/denyers who will want to follow suit in calling for such a ridiculous cutback in our science research funding: spare me your fake rage. It’s not the money that bothers you, it’s your hatred of all things scientific.

*****

Update 4/7/08:

I just read a story that supports my contention that abstinence-only education doesn’t work: Florida Teens Believe Drinking Bleach Will Prevent HIV; Some Teens Also Believe Mountain Dew Will Stop Pregnancy. Further, Florida teens are under the ridiculous impression that smoking marijuana will prevent pregnancy.

Are Republicans serious when they say that these programs aren’t a gross misuse of taxpayer dollars? That climate research should be cut while these programs survive?

Bush: We Built Too Many Houses

Something short and sweet this morning. While perusing the headlines, I came across this CNN article, with the headline “Poll: 71 percent think Iraq spending hurts economy”.

This is like saying 7 out of 10 Americans can count. If we’re borrowing money at the rate of billions per month to occupy Iraq, that’s billions we don’t have to spend on climate change or education or health care or investment firm bailouts.

But the quote of the day from Bush is this: “I think actually the spending in the war might help with jobs … because we’re buying equipment and people are working. I think this economy is down because we built too many houses and the economy’s adjusting.”