Last week the House of Representatives approved HR 2454, the “American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009,” by a vote of 219 to 212. If the Senate agrees, this proposed new law will create a huge slush fund of billions of dollars by jacking up every gas and electric bill in America. The money would then be “redistributed” to selected businesses, unions and other groups who are “friends” of Obama and the Democrats.

The House almost rejected the bill when 45 Democrats with principle voted no. The bill passed only because eight unprincipled Republican Congressmen sold out to vote yes.

Three of those “traitors within the gates” are from New Jersey – Frank LoBiondo (Salem, Cumberland, Cape May Gloucester, and Atlantic counties), Chris Smith (Mercer, Burlington, Monmouth and Ocean counties), and Leonard Lance (Hunterdon, Middlesex, Somerset and Union counties). All three were strong backers of Chris Christie for governor over Steve Lonegan during last month’s primary election.

Left-wing Democrat Henry Waxman of California introduced the bill as a 1,200-page proposed law just six weeks before it was brought to a vote. Hundreds of pages with special “earmarks” were later added to buy enough congressmen to win passage. One amendment of more than 300 pages was added at 3 a.m. the morning of the vote. Nobody knows exactly what is in it.

Supporters say these new taxes are needed to stop global warming. Ridiculous! The Earth has been warming, and cooling, for billions of years – long before we humans arrived. The sand on our New Jersey beaches was created when giant ice sheets ground up rocks from the Catskills and Poconos, and then melted during the global warming that began 12,000 years ago. Most real scientists who weren’t bought off with big government grants and contracts agree that storms on the surface of the sun (sunspots) cause climate change. We humans, including Noah, adapted to several global ice ages and global warmings with rising sea levels. Unlike woolly mammoths and saber-toothed tigers, we can do it again.

But HR 2454 is not about science. It is about power, money and control. It would allow Obama and Congress to raise our taxes and pay off friends whenever they want, without getting voted out of office. H.R. 2454 will let unelected boards and commissions do their dirty work – just like in New Jersey.

To see how this works, dig out your old electric bills. Until the 1990s, when Governor Christie Todd Whitman and Republican majorities in the State Senate and Assembly brought their own version of HR 2454 to New Jersey, your electric bill only charged a fair price for the electricity you used.

Now our state Board of Public Utilities gives us 11 separate charges every month. Seven of them are hidden taxes that have nothing to do with the electricity you use. You are billed for “basic generation” and “transmission service” charges to generate the electricity and bring it to your neighborhood. You are also billed for “customer” and “distribution” charges to bring the electricity into your house.

The other seven charges are hidden government taxes that reward politicians and their friends. The “market transition” and “transition bond” make sure electric and gas companies make big profits on bad investments that lose money. Often, these bad, money-losing investments were only done to please politicians in the first place.

The “societal benefits charge” guarantees big profits to people who build solar panels and windmills, even though those devices are so inefficient, the token amounts of electricity they produce don’t even come close to covering the cost of making and installing them. It also gives free service to people (including illegal immigrants) who usually vote Democrat. The gas company does the same thing, but does not itemize this charge on your bill.

The societal benefits charge also pays for slick ad campaigns on TV, radio, and in our public schools – brainwashing us and our kids as to how great these programs are – and buying “friends” in the media.

The societal benefits charge alone went up almost 10 percent this year. But nobody noticed, and Republicans (other than Steve Lonegan) did nothing to make it an election issue.

Each of the five BPU members gets salary of $130,000 per year, generous pensions and health benefits, and free cars with free gas, insurance, and EZ Pass. Former Republican State Sen. Nick Asselta was appointed to the BPU after voting for key Democratic tax and spending hikes throughout his career.

With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats?

For more information visit www.libertyandprosperity.org or contact Somers Point attorney Seth Grossman at grossman@snip.net or (609) 927-7333. Starting July 11, Grossman’s talk radio program will be heard 8 to 9 a.m. Saturdays on 92.1 FM. No breakfast discussion Saturday, July 4. He and members of Liberty and Prosperity will march in Galloway parade at Smithville instead.

And this doesn’t even take into account how much cash AlGore will be awash in if this bill actually becomes law.

All the more reason to keep the heat on so this doesn’t pass the Senate.

With this in mind, as well as the upcoming tea party protests on April 15th, this the Institute for Policy Innovation gives us these facts. (h/t Gateway Pundit).

#1 .Under the Obama budget, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that the national debt will double over the next five years; and it will triple over the next 10 years to $17.3 trillion.

#2. Under the Obama budget, CBO projects that the national debt will soar over the next 10 years from 40 percent of GDP today to a shocking 82.4 percent. (Ronald Reagan left office with the national debt at 42 percent of GDP).

#3. The president’s budget also states that total federal borrowing will grow by $2.7 trillion this year alone, an increase of 27 percent in one year!

#4. The budget President Obama proposes for this year increases federal spending by an incredible 34 percent over the previous year, with a total of $4 trillion in federal spending, the highest ever.

#5. The federal budget deficit (not the national debt) would reach $1.845 trillion this year, according to the CBO, the highest ever. That would be more than seven times Reagan’s largest budget deficit of $221 billion, which caused so much consternation among Reagan’s critics.

#6. The CBO estimates that this Obama budget deficit will total an astounding 13.1 percent of GDP, more than one-eighth of the entire U.S. economy, for the federal budget deficit alone! Under George Bush, the federal deficit for 2008 was 3.2 percent of GDP. The deficit for fiscal year 2007, in the last budget adopted when Congress was controlled by Republican majorities, was $162 billion, or 1.2 percent of GDP.

#7. The Obama budget also includes $1 trillion in tax increases on the upper 5 percent of income earners, mostly tax rate increases. But the top 5 percent of income earners already pays 60 percent of all income taxes.

#8. The Obama budget projects that revenues from the corporate income tax will more than double in 3 years, increasing, in fact, by more than 124 percent.

#9. Another $645 billion tax increase comes from President Obama’s anti-global warming cap and trade system, which is essentially an energy tax on the production and use of carbon energy, such as oil, natural gas, and coal.

#10. While the Obama administration claims to have cut $2 trillion from the budget over 10 years, fully $1.5 trillion of those “cuts” actually represents the troop drawdown in Iraq, which was already scheduled to occur under the Bush administration. Of the remaining $500 billion in budget “savings,” fully $311 billion is categorized as “interest savings” but is actually an additional tax increase on upper income earners.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Part 2 contains the meatiest part of the speech. To see the entire speech, here are the links for Part 1 and Part 3.

Let me be very clear on the economics of President Obama’s State of the Union speech and his budget.

He is declaring war on investors, entrepreneurs, small businesses, large corporations, and private-equity and venture-capital funds.

That is the meaning of his anti-growth tax-hike proposals, which make absolutely no sense at all — either for this recession or from the standpoint of expanding our economy’s long-run potential to grow.

Raising the marginal tax rate on successful earners, capital, dividends, and all the private funds is a function of Obama’s left-wing social vision, and a repudiation of his economic-recovery statements. Ditto for his sweeping government-planning-and-spending program, which will wind up raising federal outlays as a share of GDP to at least 30 percent, if not more, over the next 10 years.

This is nearly double the government-spending low-point reached during the late 1990s by the Gingrich Congress and the Clinton administration. While not quite as high as spending levels in Western Europe, we regrettably will be gaining on this statist-planning approach.

Study after study over the past several decades has shown how countries that spend more produce less, while nations that tax less produce more. Obama is doing it wrong on both counts. [emphasis added]

And as far as middle-class tax cuts are concerned, Obama’s cap-and-trade program will be a huge across-the-board tax increase on blue-collar workers, including unionized workers. Industrial production is plunging, but new carbon taxes will prevent production from ever recovering. While the country wants more fuel and power, cap-and-trade will deliver less.

The tax hikes will generate lower growth and fewer revenues. Yes, the economy will recover. But Obama’s rosy scenario of 4 percent recovery growth in the out years of his budget is not likely to occur. The combination of easy money from the Fed and below-potential economic growth is a prescription for stagflation. That’s one of the messages of the falling stock market.

Essentially, the Obama economic policies represent a major Democratic party relapse into Great Society social spending and taxing. It is a return to the LBJ/Nixon era, and a move away from the Reagan/Clinton period. House Republicans, fortunately, are 90 days sober, as they are putting up a valiant fight to stop the big-government onslaught and move the GOP back to first principles.

Noteworthy up here on Wall Street, a great many Obama supporters — especially hedge-fund types who voted for “change” — are becoming disillusioned with the performances of Obama and Treasury man Geithner.

There is a growing sense of buyer’s remorse.

Well then, do conservatives dare say: We told you so?

For all the complaining about Bush era spending, the new administration has already spent more than the entire Iraq War.

And they are..not…done!!

Obama also wants $634B for a health care reserve fund (read: socializing healthcare). And Bank Bailout II which could be as much as $750B! Then there’s the cap and trade debacle that will just cripple this economy by causing energy costs to skyrocket.

This is no longer Bush’s mess. The deficit and debt being racked up by Obama and the Democrats is now THEIR MESS.

Of course, we all know where this is leading to. Taxes that will inevitably go through the roof. Obama wants us to believe that he can do this by letting the Bush tax cuts expire and just taxing the ‘rich’ who make over $250k. But even the ‘rich’ won’t be able to subsidize all of this. An article today in the Wall Street Journal, which I highly recommend reading, explains:

Consider the IRS data for 2006, the most recent year that such tax data are available and a good year for the economy and “the wealthiest 2%.” Roughly 3.8 million filers had adjusted gross incomes above $200,000 in 2006. (That’s about 7% of all returns; the data aren’t broken down at the $250,000 point.) These people paid about $522 billion in income taxes, or roughly 62% of all federal individual income receipts. The richest 1% — about 1.65 million filers making above $388,806 — paid some $408 billion, or 39.9% of all income tax revenues, while earning about 22% of all reported U.S. income.

Note that federal income taxes are already “progressive” with a 35% top marginal rate, and that Mr. Obama is (so far) proposing to raise it only to 39.6%, plus another two percentage points in hidden deduction phase-outs. He’d also raise capital gains and dividend rates, but those both yield far less revenue than the income tax. These combined increases won’t come close to raising the hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue that Mr. Obama is going to need.

Bottom line: the money isn’t there and the middle class will have to eventually bear the burden.  There’s no way around it.

It’s only taken a month and this Congress and Administration are already the most reckless and irresponsible we’ve ever seen.

Cross-posted at Conservatives with Attitude!

Don’t believe me? Well Obama and Al Gore say so – and the AP ran a story on it – so it must be true.  

“The time for delay is over; the time for denial is over,” he [Obama] said on Tuesday after meeting with former Vice President Al Gore, who won a Nobel Peace Prize for his work on global warming. “We all believe what the scientists have been telling us for years now that this is a matter of urgency and national security and it has to be dealt with in a serious way.”

Gore goes on…

“We need to start in January making significant changes,” Gore said in a recent telephone interview with The Associated Press. “This year coming up is the most important opportunity the world has ever had to make progress in really solving the climate crisis.”

Scientists are increasingly anxious, talking more often and more urgently about exceeding “tipping points.”

“We’re out of time,” Stanford University biologist Terry Root said. “Things are going extinct.”

Scientists are increasingly anxious? Well, apparently only those in Gore’s circle of friends because apparently these credible scientists must all be frauds (Hat tip to Conservatives with Attitude!).

“I am a skeptic…Global warming has become a new religion.” – Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.

“Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly….As a scientist I remain skeptical.” – Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.”

Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” – UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.

“The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds… I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists,” – Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet.

The models and forecasts of the UN IPCC “are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity.” – Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico

“For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go on?” – Geologist Dr. David Gee the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in Sweden.

“Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp…Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.” - Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee.

“Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined.” – Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh.

“Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense…The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology, which is concerning.” – Environmental Scientist Professor Delgado Domingos of Portugal, the founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast group, has more than 150 published articles.

“CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or another….Every scientist knows this, but it doesn’t pay to say so…Global warming, as a political vehicle, keeps Europeans in the driver’s seat and developing nations walking barefoot.” – Dr. Takeda Kunihiko, vice-chancellor of the Institute of Science and Technology Research at Chubu University in Japan.

“The [global warming] scaremongering has its justification in the fact that it is something that generates funds.” – Award-winning Paleontologist Dr. Eduardo Tonni, of the Committee for Scientific Research in Buenos Aires and head of the Paleontology Department at the University of La Plata.

But what is the global warming alarmists’ solution to stopping this pending environmental catastrophe, you might ask?

Obama is stacking his Cabinet and inner circle with advocates who have pushed for deep mandatory cuts in greenhouse gas pollution and even with government officials who have achieved results at the local level.

The President-elect has said that one of the first things he will do when he gets to Washington is grant California and other states permission to control car tailpipe emissions, something the Bush administration denied.

And though congressional action may take time, the incoming Congress will be more inclined to act on global warming. In the House, liberal California Democrat Henry Waxman’s unseating of Michigan Rep. John Dingell – a staunch defender of Detroit automakers – as head of the House Energy and Commerce Committee was a sign that global warming will be on the fast track.

Senate Environment and Public Works Chairman Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., vowed to push two global warming bills starting in January: one to promote energy efficiency as an economic stimulus and the other to create a cap-and-trade system to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from utilities. “The time is now,” she wrote in a Dec. 8 letter to Obama.

Sounds reasonable, right? It’s the least we can do you might think. Just stop spewing so much of that bad old CO2 stuff – you know that pesky gas that comes from things like trees and plants - into the air and everything will be just dandy. And I’m sure it won’t affect our economy much, right?

Well, wrong.

Most econometric studies agree that restricting greenhouse-gas emissions would slow our already sluggish economy.

A study by the National Association of Manufacturers projected that emissions caps similar to those rejected earlier this year by the U.S. Senate calling for a 63-percent cut in emissions by 2050, would reduce U.S. gross domestic product by up to $269 billion and cost 850,000 jobs by 2014.

The Heritage Foundation estimated such restrictions would result in cumulative GDP losses of up to $4.8 trillion and employment losses of more than 500,000 a year by 2030.

Other studies suggest smaller economic costs: Duke University’s Nicholas Institute estimates a GDP loss of $245 billion by 2030 while the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimates a GDP drop of $238 billion to $983 billion.

Sharp emissions restrictions would also push the costs of energy and other consumer products higher. According to a study conducted by researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the restrictions could raise gasoline prices 29 percent, electricity prices 55 percent and natural-gas prices 15 percent by 2015.

Further…

And it appears that all this economic pain would be an utterly meaningless gesture. Patrick Michaels, former president of the American Association of State Climatologists, who is now with the Cato Institute, says reducing U.S. emissions 63 percent would prevent a mere 0.013 degrees Celsius in warming. With emissions from China, India and other developing nations growing at breakneck speed, even this modest benefit would be completely erased.

In the meantime, there’s just one other little thing. Temeratures are actually starting to cool.

Mother Nature, of course, is oblivious to the federal government’s machinations. Ironically, 2008 is on pace to be a slightly cooler year in a steadily rising temperature trend line. Experts say it’s thanks to a La Nina weather variation. While skeptics are already using it as evidence of some kind of cooling trend, it actually illustrates how fast the world is warming.

Yes, you see cooling actually means warming. Got that?

Well, I don’t know about you but I think I won’t be suckered in by all this fear-mongering and global warming hot air. I’d much prefer that we let Mother Nature do her thing and not interfere – and not have politicians sticking their hands in our pockets and lowering our standard of living all in the name of some made-up environmental crisis.

How the McCain campaign did not discover this before is beyond me. But it just gets right to the heart of it with Obama: say anything to get elected, conceal what you really believe. And what he really believes in is socialism.

By the way, “Cap and Trade” is a topic I will need to re-visit in coming months. If Obama gets elected this will be part of the liberal agenda. And what it will mean is more taxes, more government power, more infingements on our liberty, and less economic growth all in the name of the hoax of global warming.